Mary Rowlandson's narrative about her captive life showed her Puritan values. She quotes the Bible frequently which shows how much her faith is intertwined in her life. When her baby was sick and died, Mrs. Rowlandson took comfort in the fact that God was with her and "preserving" her which allowed Mrs. Rowlandson to have the faith and courage to continue on (Rowlandson 83). In the writing she also showed a Puritan belief of the "elect" helping out the rest of the Puritans and leading them in their faith. Mary Rowlandson was concerned for her son as he did not have any Christians with him to help him keep his faith and offer any "office of love" to him in his time of need (Rowlandson 84). Mrs. Rowlandson also took heart in Psalm verse that stated, "Cast thy burden upon the Lord, and he shall sustain thee" (Rowlandson 85). The Puritan belief that everyone's faith is predetermined is supported in Rowlandson's use of the quote as she knew that she was destined to move forward, but was comforted by the knowledge that to get through today, God was with her and her children.
Anne Bradstreet broke the mold on traditional Puritan poetry by firstly, being a female author, and secondly writing using her emotions and her own style. She used metaphors and other figures of speech that were traditionally left out of Colonial Puritan writings. "Framed by the mighty Architect" is one example of Bradstreet comparing God to an architect (Bradstreet 91). Bradstreet showed her firm Puritan beliefs through the lines, "I blest His name that gave and took/That laid my goods now in the dust" (Bradstreet 91). Puritans believed their fate was predetermined by God. By saying that even though all of her belongings were burned in the fire, Bradstreet was thankful to God. She was a very good Puritan, as I wouldn't be thanking anyone if all of my belongings and house were burned up in a fire. At the end of the poem, Bradstreet writes, "The world no longer let me love/My hope and treasure lies above" reiterating the belief that their fate is predetermined and no matter what they own on Earth or what their status is, if they are the "Elect" then they will see the riches of Heaven (Bradstreet 91).
The Puritans may have been very religious, but as Mary Rowlandson exhibited, were very business like. She traded her sewing goods for food (Rowlandson 85). She used her skills to barter for food that she wasn't getting enough of. Rowlandson's narrative also showed how even though they would be punish and prosecuted for showing their religious beliefs, Rowlandson's son still prayed in disguise (Rowlandson 84). Both Mary Rowlandson and Anne Bradstreet's writings were in a diary or journal format. Rowlandson told her story by organizing it by "removes" or every time the Indians moved camp. Bradstreet told her poem through a journal entry relating the events of that day. Both authors reflect Puritan values in their writing and life.
Bradstreet, Anne. "Upon the Burning House." Comp. Jeffrey D. Wilhelm, Ph.D. and Douglas Fisher, Ph.D. Glencoe Literature. American Literature ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2009. 91. Print.
Rowlandson, Mary. "A Narrative of Captivity and Restoration of Mrs. Mary Rowlandson." Comp. Jeffrey D. Wilhelm, Ph.D. and Douglas Fisher, Ph.D. Glencoe Literature. American Literature ed. Columbus: McGraw-Hill Companies, 2009. 82-85. Print.
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Journal 2 - Animal Hospitality
The once was two best friends, the Little Fox and the Little Labrador. The two animals always played together in the woods and would stay and play until dark when the Labrador would go home to the Red House and the Fox would go home to the burrow in the meadow. One day the Labrador invited the Fox to go to his house and spend the night. The Little Fox was very excited at the prospect of going to the Red House with the Humans and all of the farm animals. But being the responsible animal he is, the Fox told the Labrador that he had to go tell his Mom that he was going to spend the night at the Red House. Together the two friends raced off to the Fox burrow. When the burrow was in sight the two friends slowed down and caught their breath. The Fox told the Labrador that he had water inside and while he was asking his mom, the Labrador can help himself. The Fox approached the burrow and jumped through the opening. The Labrador hesitantly approached the opening, wiped his feet, and softly stepped inside. The Little Fox has four little siblings and they were watching the Labrador's entrance and murmured among themselves. "Look at Little Fox's friend!" "What is he doing?" "Why is he going so slow?" "Look! He cleaned off his feet!" The Labrador didn't hear any of the remarks, and walked to the kitchen. Inside he found a large bowl of water. Instead of putting his head in the bowl and lapping up water like he would do at home, the Little Labrador found a smaller bowl and poured some of the water into it. Then the Labrador drank up the water in his smaller bowl. Little Fox's siblings watched him drink are wondered among themselves why he was doing that, instead of just drinking from the large bowl, but then remembered that they were supposed to be nice and polite to guest no matter what they do. Mama Fox raised her children well. None of the young Foxes commented on the Little Labrador's strange behavior. The Labrador exhibited what he knew to be polite and courteous. Even though his family customs are different then the Foxes, the smaller Foxes showed their polite behavior by not saying or making fun of the Labrador for his different ways. The Mama Fox gave her permission to the Little Fox to spend the night at the Red House. Then the Labrador and the Fox ran off through the woods to the Red House where Little Fox was polite and said please and thank you when Mama Labrador gave him some food. Both friends may have been raised differently, but are polite when in someone else's home or in an unfamiliar place.
Friday, August 26, 2011
Journal 1 - Native American Story
When our world was new, the Earth was governed by two Gods, the Sky God and the Earth God. The brothers were each given a domain of the Earth by their father, the Supreme God to prove themselves worthy of their Godly responsibilities. The Sky God kept his skies blue and clean and full of stars at night. The Earth God groomed his domain to be lush and fertile, with an abundance of growing vegetation. Both of the Gods impressed their Father when he visited on his rounds of the Heavens. The Supreme God took a mental note to reward his sons next visit by populating the Earth with Animals and Man. He kept his sons in the dark about it though, and bid them farewell as he continued his never-ending journey.
In the period that the Supreme God was absent from the Earth the two brothers came across a disagreement. There was a void of space in between the two domains. The air between the Sky and the Earth did not belong to either, therefore both claimed it belonged to them. Neither God could think of a solution that would make the other happy. They resorted to physical violence. The Sky God struck the fertile land with lightning and bombarded the land with winds and storms. In retaliation the Earth God sent ash and smoke up to the Sky to cloud and dirty his brother's domain. The sky turned black with disease and the land became scarred and brown with sickness. The feud over the territorial dispute went on for many moons until the Supreme God returned back to the Earth. What he saw greatly displeased him and disappointed him greatly. He told his sons what his feeling were and told then to resolve the problem and stop punishing their domain with a trivial argument. The brothers realized that in their anger, they had hurt their planet and compromised to solve their disagreement. The compromise was for the Earth God to send up sections of the land up toward the Sky forming mountains, and the Sky God created white clouds that reached down toward the land. The brothers shared the space and their quick compromise and rush to action showed the Supreme God that they were willing to look past mistakes and learn from misunderstandings. He then populated the Earth with Man and Animals in the hope that his sons will have no need to argue to that extreme anymore. During large severe storms or volcanic eruptions the People know that the Earth and Sky Gods are fighting, but are reassured that it will never get to the extreme that happened many moons ago as the brothers have learned how to compromise and share.
In the period that the Supreme God was absent from the Earth the two brothers came across a disagreement. There was a void of space in between the two domains. The air between the Sky and the Earth did not belong to either, therefore both claimed it belonged to them. Neither God could think of a solution that would make the other happy. They resorted to physical violence. The Sky God struck the fertile land with lightning and bombarded the land with winds and storms. In retaliation the Earth God sent ash and smoke up to the Sky to cloud and dirty his brother's domain. The sky turned black with disease and the land became scarred and brown with sickness. The feud over the territorial dispute went on for many moons until the Supreme God returned back to the Earth. What he saw greatly displeased him and disappointed him greatly. He told his sons what his feeling were and told then to resolve the problem and stop punishing their domain with a trivial argument. The brothers realized that in their anger, they had hurt their planet and compromised to solve their disagreement. The compromise was for the Earth God to send up sections of the land up toward the Sky forming mountains, and the Sky God created white clouds that reached down toward the land. The brothers shared the space and their quick compromise and rush to action showed the Supreme God that they were willing to look past mistakes and learn from misunderstandings. He then populated the Earth with Man and Animals in the hope that his sons will have no need to argue to that extreme anymore. During large severe storms or volcanic eruptions the People know that the Earth and Sky Gods are fighting, but are reassured that it will never get to the extreme that happened many moons ago as the brothers have learned how to compromise and share.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Final Thoughts/Leftover Awesome Quotes from Fahrenheit 451
Okay I had three quotes that I had marked in Fahrenheit 451 that I didn't talk about in my question responses, but they are really cool/interesting/possible symbolism, so I will make the quotes there own post. First quote really isn't a quote, its the whole page. Clarisse and Montag are chatting on page 8 and many weird and wonderful things are said. First is the firefighters' official slogan of "Monday burn Millay, Wednesday Whitman, Friday Faulkner, burn 'em to ashes, then burn the ashes." (Bradbury 8) That was funny. The irony is that firefighters should try to save the burning books, not burn them twice over. The slogan is missing four days and when I has initially read the book I came up with a list of authors that could be paired with days. Sunday Shakespeare, Tuesday Twain, Thursday Thoreau, Saturday Stevenson. Other alternatives are Shelley, Sophocles, Stoker, Swift, and Tolkien. Personally I would have picked Melville for Monday and Flemming for another choice for Friday, but that is just my opinion. The other quote from that page comes from when Montag laughed after Clarisse had asked if it was true that, "long ago firemen used to put fires out instead of going to start them? ... and they need firemen to stop the flames?"(Bradbury 8). The quote showed how brainwashed he is. He didn't even think about what Clarisse had said, just laughed on instinct. Clarisse is right, but Montag has been drilled into thinking that firemen have always burned book and is closed minded and can't even imagine the possibility of firemen putting out fires.
Beatty said in a rant to Montag, "Not everyone born free and equal, as the Constitution says, but everyone made equal" (Bradbury 58). In this futuristic America at least they have something right. Everyone should be equal, no matter who they are, where they're from, or what they did (oohhh man, bringing the Backstreet Boys to the English blogs), or what they look like. I know that I took this out of context as the censorship thing made everyone equal as there wasn't any media that made a group look bad, but as a stand alone quote everyone should be equal, if they are "made" then in the long run its okay since they have the same rights as everyone else.
The last thing is something that bothers me. I am sure it is some sort of symbol, but nothing that I could think of. All the cars mentioned in Fahrenheit 451 are Beetles! The police have "glittering beetle cars" (Bradbury 36), Mildred drives a Beetle (Bradbury 64), Beatty drives a yellow beetle (Bradbury 63), Mildred got a "beetle-taxi" (Bradbury 114) to take her from her soon to be burned house, Montag almost got hit by a Beetle (Bradbury 128) after running by a gas station full of Beetles (Bradbury 126). Why are all the cars Beetles? Also Montag has a "black beetle-colored helmet" (Bradbury 4). What's up with all the beetle references? There has to be a hidden or symbolic meaning in that! Or I could just be paranoid...
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Beatty said in a rant to Montag, "Not everyone born free and equal, as the Constitution says, but everyone made equal" (Bradbury 58). In this futuristic America at least they have something right. Everyone should be equal, no matter who they are, where they're from, or what they did (oohhh man, bringing the Backstreet Boys to the English blogs), or what they look like. I know that I took this out of context as the censorship thing made everyone equal as there wasn't any media that made a group look bad, but as a stand alone quote everyone should be equal, if they are "made" then in the long run its okay since they have the same rights as everyone else.
The last thing is something that bothers me. I am sure it is some sort of symbol, but nothing that I could think of. All the cars mentioned in Fahrenheit 451 are Beetles! The police have "glittering beetle cars" (Bradbury 36), Mildred drives a Beetle (Bradbury 64), Beatty drives a yellow beetle (Bradbury 63), Mildred got a "beetle-taxi" (Bradbury 114) to take her from her soon to be burned house, Montag almost got hit by a Beetle (Bradbury 128) after running by a gas station full of Beetles (Bradbury 126). Why are all the cars Beetles? Also Montag has a "black beetle-colored helmet" (Bradbury 4). What's up with all the beetle references? There has to be a hidden or symbolic meaning in that! Or I could just be paranoid...
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Fahrenheit 451 Opinion
I enjoyed Fahrenheit 451. As a science fiction reader, I have to say that this was my favorite book that I have read over the three summers as a Honors English student. The originality of it as well as the shock of firemen, traditionally the good guys, burning down houses, and even people, intentionally, was a very nice change in pace from the depressing Grapes of Wrath. The future world was backed up without too many plot holes in a way that even 50 years after it was published, the future America could still come to be. Ray Bradbury really made an effective story that is very stimulating and thought provoking (oh the irony) after half a century. The only thing that I disliked was the fact that the main character, Montag, couldn't stand up for himself. When he tried he either failed (with the women reading poetry [Bradbury 100]) or he couldn't do it without someone in his ear (Faber telling him how to respond to Beatty's verbal bombarded assault [Bradbury 107]). Montag is the main character and should be a good moral character and one with good heroic qualities. But not Montag. He is not even an anti-hero because he can't do anything for himself. He is just the character used to narrate from.
As a trio of books, this summer was the best, followed close by sophomore year, and lagging in the back is freshman year. Old Man and the Sea was really nice and easy to write about. The plot was clean and simple, there was only four characters and it was short. There was the symbolic Christianity references but I caught on to those at the end. Grapes of Wrath was a slow read, but gave me a lot of insight into the Great Depression era. Fahrenheit 451 was a little bit longer than Old Man and the Sea, but went into more detail with pretty much everything but the character development. Santiago is my favorite character from this summer's required reading. Ma is a close second, and although she was only really in the first 47 pages (as that is when Mildred remembers to tell Guy that Clarisse is dead) is Clarisse.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
As a trio of books, this summer was the best, followed close by sophomore year, and lagging in the back is freshman year. Old Man and the Sea was really nice and easy to write about. The plot was clean and simple, there was only four characters and it was short. There was the symbolic Christianity references but I caught on to those at the end. Grapes of Wrath was a slow read, but gave me a lot of insight into the Great Depression era. Fahrenheit 451 was a little bit longer than Old Man and the Sea, but went into more detail with pretty much everything but the character development. Santiago is my favorite character from this summer's required reading. Ma is a close second, and although she was only really in the first 47 pages (as that is when Mildred remembers to tell Guy that Clarisse is dead) is Clarisse.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Monday, August 15, 2011
Eighth Discussion Question for Fahrenheit 451
Considering Fahrenheit 451 takes place in the future (the third atomic war is starting, and in the present world there has only been one. So depending on how long it takes is the amount of time in the future), I can't really answer how the novel reflects events in history. Also this book is fantasy which normally means the world is made up and fictional. Another example that applies to the future, but most likely fictional, America is Hunger Games. That fictional America occurred after a nuclear war where civilization had to restart and the government had to remind the citizens who was boss. Both futures are not very happy, but both are possible. The authors created a world that the government took over and dictated the people's lives. Both futures are bleak and undesirable, but Bradbury and Collins backed up their future with events and a solid story on how the world was transformed from what it is today to what it became in the books.
Ray Bradbury showed the relationship between citizens and the government. This particular relationship that was represented was different then the relationship between the people and the banks in Grapes of Wrath because the people initiated the censorship problems in Fahreheit 451, as opposed to the banks starting the problem of the people's misery in Grapes of Wrath. The citizens stopped reading books and the reflection and deep thought that comes with it (Bradbury 181). The government then started to censor the information and ban and burn books (Bradbury 181). Very few people were bothered by it because they weren't reading the books anyway. But the scholars, teachers, and enthusiastic readers were upset and that is they cause the conflict between the government and citizens. The people were not in agreement regarding the censoring of information, but the majority are fine with it so nothing can be done about it.
In the interview in the back of the book Bradbury said, "I was considering the whole social atmosphere: the impact of TV and radio and the lack of education. I could see the coming event of schoolteachers not teaching reading anymore. The less they taught, the more you wouldn't need books." (Bradbury 182) So obviously his inspiration came from the idea of uneducated, illiterate young people growing up to have little stimulation and deep thought and function in the world.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Collins, Suzanne. The Hunger Games. New York: Scholastic, 2008. Print.
Ray Bradbury showed the relationship between citizens and the government. This particular relationship that was represented was different then the relationship between the people and the banks in Grapes of Wrath because the people initiated the censorship problems in Fahreheit 451, as opposed to the banks starting the problem of the people's misery in Grapes of Wrath. The citizens stopped reading books and the reflection and deep thought that comes with it (Bradbury 181). The government then started to censor the information and ban and burn books (Bradbury 181). Very few people were bothered by it because they weren't reading the books anyway. But the scholars, teachers, and enthusiastic readers were upset and that is they cause the conflict between the government and citizens. The people were not in agreement regarding the censoring of information, but the majority are fine with it so nothing can be done about it.
In the interview in the back of the book Bradbury said, "I was considering the whole social atmosphere: the impact of TV and radio and the lack of education. I could see the coming event of schoolteachers not teaching reading anymore. The less they taught, the more you wouldn't need books." (Bradbury 182) So obviously his inspiration came from the idea of uneducated, illiterate young people growing up to have little stimulation and deep thought and function in the world.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Collins, Suzanne. The Hunger Games. New York: Scholastic, 2008. Print.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Seventh Discussion Question for Fahrenheit 451
Ray Bradbury uses a couple of different techniques to lure in readers in Fahrenheit 451. The first and main technique is mystery. I had no idea what was going to happen. Maybe Beatty was on Montag's side when he was telling him about the books, maybe he was some sort of double agent, or an undercover firefighter (like undercover cops doing drug busts) whose goal was to arrest Montag. Bradbury kept me guessing the whole time. Was Montag going to convert to be an illegal reader? Was Mildred going to turn him in? Or would it be one of her friends? Is the Hound going to kill Montag? Was Montag talking to and observing the Hound a foreshadow (Bradbury 25)? The book brought about many questions. Keeping the reader guessing what would happen next is a very good technique to hold interest in the story. I guess that technique is also called suspense, but any good mystery has to have suspense in the story, otherwise what is the point in reading the mystery?
The other technique is originality. I have read many fantasty, science fiction books but not about a futuristic world where books are burned, televisions are four dimension on all four walls, firefighters burned down houses, and the "good" guys memorize books then burn them too. Using the Harry Potter analogy again, there are so many wizards going to magic school knock offs its ridiculous. And very few of them are good. Also there is an onslaught of vampire books and movies. Nothing is original these days. Ray Bradbury wrote an original novel that fifty years later is still remembered and read by a lot of people. Fifty years from now no one is going to know what Twilight is. The future people will know the original vampire though, Dracula. Instead of remaking and rewriting things, people today need to stimulate their brains and produce some original material. We are losing that ability and headed toward a Fahrenheit future as more people watch TV then read books. The originality aspect of the book made it interesting since the whole concept was new and I didn't know what to think of it all.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
The other technique is originality. I have read many fantasty, science fiction books but not about a futuristic world where books are burned, televisions are four dimension on all four walls, firefighters burned down houses, and the "good" guys memorize books then burn them too. Using the Harry Potter analogy again, there are so many wizards going to magic school knock offs its ridiculous. And very few of them are good. Also there is an onslaught of vampire books and movies. Nothing is original these days. Ray Bradbury wrote an original novel that fifty years later is still remembered and read by a lot of people. Fifty years from now no one is going to know what Twilight is. The future people will know the original vampire though, Dracula. Instead of remaking and rewriting things, people today need to stimulate their brains and produce some original material. We are losing that ability and headed toward a Fahrenheit future as more people watch TV then read books. The originality aspect of the book made it interesting since the whole concept was new and I didn't know what to think of it all.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Sixth Discussion Question for Fahrenheit 451
Fahrenheit 451 has been around for 58 years! And high school students and all sorts of people still read this book. For being around for a half of a century, Fahrenheit's future is more of a possibility today then back in the 1953 because of the censorship issue. I understand that when this book was written books were the main entertainment and there wasn't as much technology as there is today. But because the present time has such a great amount of technology, books are growing unpopular as more people read ebooks and just don't have the time to sit down and read a good book. This book makes the issue of censorship and ignorance of knowledge more profound in today's time.
The message of this book is timeless because there will always be unhappy and offended people when it goes to literature no matter what the time period is. The timeless aspect comes from the story of what could happen of the critics and offended take it a step too far. The book serves as a warning to the present day people of what they could become in the future if they allow censorship to become a dominant part of society. Another timeless aspect is the burning of the books. That idea was new at the time as a punishment, weapon, law satisfying thing. Burning things has always been part of man's nature ever since fire was discovered. Food is cooked through fire, witches were burned, angry mobs burn everything, etc. So the concept of burning outlaw books wasn't knew, just in the context that Bradbury used.
We can learn two main things from Fahrenheit 451. The first is that too much censorship is bad. While everyone is entitled to their own opinion, that doesn't mean people can change a body of writing produced by one man/woman just because they don't agree with it. The author is entitled to their own viewpoint too! The other thing is to take the time to look at the little things like grass and flowers and even the cows on the side of the road (Bradbury 9). Without the deeper sense of comprehension and observation we will turn into brainwashed mushy zombie like people. Thought provoking stimulation doesn't sound all that important, but without it we would turn into the aforementioned zombie people.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
The message of this book is timeless because there will always be unhappy and offended people when it goes to literature no matter what the time period is. The timeless aspect comes from the story of what could happen of the critics and offended take it a step too far. The book serves as a warning to the present day people of what they could become in the future if they allow censorship to become a dominant part of society. Another timeless aspect is the burning of the books. That idea was new at the time as a punishment, weapon, law satisfying thing. Burning things has always been part of man's nature ever since fire was discovered. Food is cooked through fire, witches were burned, angry mobs burn everything, etc. So the concept of burning outlaw books wasn't knew, just in the context that Bradbury used.
We can learn two main things from Fahrenheit 451. The first is that too much censorship is bad. While everyone is entitled to their own opinion, that doesn't mean people can change a body of writing produced by one man/woman just because they don't agree with it. The author is entitled to their own viewpoint too! The other thing is to take the time to look at the little things like grass and flowers and even the cows on the side of the road (Bradbury 9). Without the deeper sense of comprehension and observation we will turn into brainwashed mushy zombie like people. Thought provoking stimulation doesn't sound all that important, but without it we would turn into the aforementioned zombie people.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Fifth Discussion Question for Fahrenheit 451
Well in order to answer the question "How does this novel reflect the history, behavior, and social issues of the time period and setting?" I first have to say that this is a futuristic fantasy novel (my kind of book!). Because of the whole future setting and the fact that the place is fictional America, I can not correctly judge if the history, behavior, and social issues are correctly represented. Instead from what I understand of Bradbury's world, he created a twist in history with the censorship of books and all entertainment. He also eliminated all behavior and social issues by all of the citizens being mellow, nonthinking, and unstimulated. The only issues the world has is the people who break the law and read and collect books. Those people, their houses, and most importantly their books are eliminated through fire (Bradbury 35). The futuristic world for everyday normal citizens is calm and there isn't a need for any strenuous thoughts or activities. A third atomic war started (Bradbury 125), but the citizens feel that it is okay because the bombs wouldn't fall where they live and the government will take care of it. They don't have any explicative opinions on the war because they have been brainwashed to not be observant or to care enough to take control and do things for themselves. That is a scary future for me to think about. I enjoy my free will and my First Amendment rights and would like to retain them, and forget about the idea of not being able to read books and burning all of my Star Trek books! I couldn't live in a kind of world like that (well, unless I was brainwashed, because then I wouldn't know any better).
The book's symbolic significance is the fact that our future could turn out like Bradbury's. The readers of Fahrenheit 451 realize the amount of censorship in the present day. While it definitely not as bad as the world in Fahrenheit, but we still have too much censorship considering Americans are supposed to have the freedom of speech. See the theme post for more on censorship. This book allows the issue of censorship to be a real thing in the public eye, even fifty years after it was published.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
The book's symbolic significance is the fact that our future could turn out like Bradbury's. The readers of Fahrenheit 451 realize the amount of censorship in the present day. While it definitely not as bad as the world in Fahrenheit, but we still have too much censorship considering Americans are supposed to have the freedom of speech. See the theme post for more on censorship. This book allows the issue of censorship to be a real thing in the public eye, even fifty years after it was published.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Fourth Discussion Question for Fahrenheit 451
Guy Montag is the unquestionable protagonist of the book. I guess he is also the hero, but once again not by my books. Montag is a Post Modernism hero though. He has to deal with real life issues (breaking a law and becoming an outlaw for something that he believes in) and doesn't make the right decisions (reading poetry to the ladies in the parlor [Bradbury 100]), but they do work out in the end. Montag undergoes a transformation during the book. He starts off as an obedient firefighter and ends up as an independent, yet accepted member of a group of other people who believe in books and the power of knowledge. Montag is kind of a gullible person in the sense that he takes commands from Beatty, Faber, and indirectly from Clarisse. She gave him the seed that sprouted into Montag being the subject of a police chase. He listened to her, a teenage girl, and acted upon what she told him (Bradbury 11). Beatty pushed Montag around and mentally abused him. Montag never stood up for himself (except for that one time... you know when he burned Beatty alive...). Faber talked into Montag's ear to give him things to say because Montag couldn't think of things himself. Montag listened to Faber's opinions and made them his own.
Montag accomplished breaking the censorship and "becoming" a book (Bradbury 151). That is a big step from having a profession of burning books to preserving a book by committing it to memory. I think the idea of each person being a "living book" is great! That way they don't have the actual book and won't be persecuted by the police and government because they can't prove what the "living books" have in their heads. That is an ingenious system. Being the future, I hope their "method to recall anything that's been read once" (Bradbury 151) is more high tech than hypnotism, but having whatever method ensures that the book is forever ingrained in someone's memory and can be passed down through the generations.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Montag accomplished breaking the censorship and "becoming" a book (Bradbury 151). That is a big step from having a profession of burning books to preserving a book by committing it to memory. I think the idea of each person being a "living book" is great! That way they don't have the actual book and won't be persecuted by the police and government because they can't prove what the "living books" have in their heads. That is an ingenious system. Being the future, I hope their "method to recall anything that's been read once" (Bradbury 151) is more high tech than hypnotism, but having whatever method ensures that the book is forever ingrained in someone's memory and can be passed down through the generations.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Third Discussion Question for Fahrenheit 451
The universal theme in Fahrenheit 451 is censorship and how it can change society. Bradbury is firmly against censorship in the real world and in the afterword of my copy of the book is very clear where he stands. In response to all the letters he gets from people asking for more women rights to be added, God references to be edited out, novels being shorted to novellas or short stories to be put in a collection; Bradbury said, "How do I react to all of the above? By 'firing' the whole lot. By sending rejection slips to each and every one. By ticketing the assembly of idiots to the far reaches of hell. The point is obvious. There is more than one way to burn a book. And the world is full of people running about with lit matches." (Bradbury 176) The world today is on a path toward the censored future of Ray Bradbury's imagination. Our society is already censoring books. Harry Potter is one of my favorite book series. Mrs. Yuill gave me the first book to read when I was in first grade. I thought that it was the best thing ever, and I still have a very high opinion of it. But many people haven't read the series because the book are "bad and demonic" (my religious Aunt after she found out I read Harry Potter). The series isn't allowed at some schools because of the witchcraft and magic. Censoring is already happening in today's time. Time Magazine's website has an article about the top 10 censored books, and number four on the list is Harry Potter. Apparently a group of parents in Lewiston, Maine tried to burn the books in 2001 (the year I first read The Sorcerer's Stone) (Time Staff). That is exactly what set up the futuristic book burning and outlawing of Fahrenheit 451! Bradbury denies it (Bradbuty 182) but America is slowly, but surely approaching a future similar to what he laid out in his novel.
Another example of censorship today is (number 8 on Time's list) Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. I read that last year for English and didn't think it had a need to be censored. But apparently the rest of the world does (Time Staff). The book offends to many people and is banned in some schools (Time Staff). By banning books and writing them so they are less offensive to various groups we are putting ourselves on the path of book burning and loss of observation, deep thinking, and stimulation.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Time Staff. "Removing the N Word from Huck Finn: Top 10 Censored Books." TIME.com. Time, 07 Jan. 2011. Web. 13 Aug. 2011.
Another example of censorship today is (number 8 on Time's list) Brave New World by Aldous Huxley. I read that last year for English and didn't think it had a need to be censored. But apparently the rest of the world does (Time Staff). The book offends to many people and is banned in some schools (Time Staff). By banning books and writing them so they are less offensive to various groups we are putting ourselves on the path of book burning and loss of observation, deep thinking, and stimulation.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Time Staff. "Removing the N Word from Huck Finn: Top 10 Censored Books." TIME.com. Time, 07 Jan. 2011. Web. 13 Aug. 2011.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Second Discussion Question for Fahrenheit 451
The conflict that I am going to write about is Montag vs the government. Montag keeps books that he is supposed to burn and therefore breaks the laws and the government sends out a search party complete with a new Mechanical Hound to find and kill him. The cause of the conflict is Montag not following the law and reading books. The thing that set him off was Clarisse asking if he was happy (Bradbury 10) and Montag realizing that he wasn't happy.
The gain of the conflict is Montag realizing that he was ignorant and only knew what other people had told him was correct. He started to act spontaneous (reading poetry to Mildred and her friends [Bradbury 100]) with the new knowledge that he possessed. Also Montag realized that maybe he didn't love his wife like he previously had thought. That realization won't have happened if Montag didn't pick up that book because of Clarisse's thought provoking ideas.
The loss of the conflict is Montag losing his self-control. He sets Black's house on fire (Bradbury 130) and kills Beatty (Bradbury 119). The knowledge that Montag gained caused him to overload and he made lots of wrong choices. His hands also had a mind of their own (Bradbury 88) which tells that his subconscious was still brainwashed and Montag hadn't convinced his whole mind that the books are good and reading is a powerful thing.
The government, while they didn't originally come up with the idea to stop reading books (Bradbury 183), they did organize the burning of books and censoring information. They started brainwashing the citizens so they don't have to actually comprehend or draw deep meaning from anything. No one observed anything anymore. Everything they needed to know was told through the long billboards or through their jobs. Their entertainment was televisions on all four walls that immersed them into the show. The show was very simpleton and didn't have a complex plot, characters, or anything. They don't want people to think to hard, after all. Also observation skills were gone. Clarisse pointed it out when she told a story about her uncle going to jail because he went 40 miles per hour on a highway so he could watch the flowers and grass (Bradbury 9).
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
The gain of the conflict is Montag realizing that he was ignorant and only knew what other people had told him was correct. He started to act spontaneous (reading poetry to Mildred and her friends [Bradbury 100]) with the new knowledge that he possessed. Also Montag realized that maybe he didn't love his wife like he previously had thought. That realization won't have happened if Montag didn't pick up that book because of Clarisse's thought provoking ideas.
The loss of the conflict is Montag losing his self-control. He sets Black's house on fire (Bradbury 130) and kills Beatty (Bradbury 119). The knowledge that Montag gained caused him to overload and he made lots of wrong choices. His hands also had a mind of their own (Bradbury 88) which tells that his subconscious was still brainwashed and Montag hadn't convinced his whole mind that the books are good and reading is a powerful thing.
The government, while they didn't originally come up with the idea to stop reading books (Bradbury 183), they did organize the burning of books and censoring information. They started brainwashing the citizens so they don't have to actually comprehend or draw deep meaning from anything. No one observed anything anymore. Everything they needed to know was told through the long billboards or through their jobs. Their entertainment was televisions on all four walls that immersed them into the show. The show was very simpleton and didn't have a complex plot, characters, or anything. They don't want people to think to hard, after all. Also observation skills were gone. Clarisse pointed it out when she told a story about her uncle going to jail because he went 40 miles per hour on a highway so he could watch the flowers and grass (Bradbury 9).
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Thursday, August 11, 2011
First Discussion Question for Fahrenheit 451
Fahrenheit 451 is very similar in story to 1984 which I read last summer for English. The sense of foreshadowing the possibly not to distant future and the knowledge of the main characters that not everything is how it should, both happen in the books. I like Fahrenheit 451 because of Bradbury's style of writing and the whole concept of the novel. I am an avid reader and the thought of a future when not only was it illegal to read books, but that action got yourself, your house, and your books burnt.
The novel reveals many of Ray Bradbury's values and attitudes about life and where the future is headed. I own the 50th anniversary edition with an interview with Bradbury at the end of the book. In the interview he states in response of if he thinks America is headed toward a future similar to what he wrote about, "Not for a moment. The main problem is education, not politics."(Bradbury 182). I know that he is the creator of the world when fire is the solution to anything that doesn't promote equality and serenity, but I think that the problem of education is pushing America toward a Fahrenheit like future. If less people can read and write, that is fewer people who read and appreciate books. The people are the ones who stopped reading books, then that is when the government took over and started burning them (Bradbury 183). If the average Joes of America stop caring about books, which many people already do, then we are on the path to Bradbury's future of Mechanical Hounds and Seashell ear radios.
Bradbury writes from the perspective of Guy Montag. He is the protagonist of the story and is the "hero". As Montag goes though changes in his opinion and faith in society and his job, the reader sees the world through new eyes instead of the brainwashed ones of the majority of the people in the future America. By becoming an outlaw, Montag is a great person to read about because then we get to see the government try to cover up what Montag has discovered.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
The novel reveals many of Ray Bradbury's values and attitudes about life and where the future is headed. I own the 50th anniversary edition with an interview with Bradbury at the end of the book. In the interview he states in response of if he thinks America is headed toward a future similar to what he wrote about, "Not for a moment. The main problem is education, not politics."(Bradbury 182). I know that he is the creator of the world when fire is the solution to anything that doesn't promote equality and serenity, but I think that the problem of education is pushing America toward a Fahrenheit like future. If less people can read and write, that is fewer people who read and appreciate books. The people are the ones who stopped reading books, then that is when the government took over and started burning them (Bradbury 183). If the average Joes of America stop caring about books, which many people already do, then we are on the path to Bradbury's future of Mechanical Hounds and Seashell ear radios.
Bradbury writes from the perspective of Guy Montag. He is the protagonist of the story and is the "hero". As Montag goes though changes in his opinion and faith in society and his job, the reader sees the world through new eyes instead of the brainwashed ones of the majority of the people in the future America. By becoming an outlaw, Montag is a great person to read about because then we get to see the government try to cover up what Montag has discovered.
Bradbury, Ray. Fahrenheit 451. New York: Ballantine, 2003. Print.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
Post Webinar Thoughts
I still stand by my opinion that the ending was bad. I do enjoy the freedom that Steinbeck gave me to imagine my own ending (and I can think of many endings; most of them sad, depressing endings, but the book was about the Great Depression and not everybody had a happy ending), but even after hearing some of my classmates opinions I still do not like the ending. It was not what I was expecting, which I normally enjoy, but this ending was random and did not give me any closure on the characters.
The whole common man hero from the Modernism period is not my favorite type of hero. I prefer epic heroes to average Joe heroes, as I stated during the book chat. In my mind and in my reckoning Tom Joad is not a hero. He made morally correct choices, was in the right place at the right time, and put his family in mind when he made decisions, not just himself. Those characteristics are for any character that is a good person. Everyone should think of others before themselves and choose not to fight first, talk later. Those characteristics shouldn't make Tom a hero. If I lived during the Great Depression I might think differently, and endorse Tom as a hero. But as that is not the case, I think that Ma is more of a hero than Tom. She led the family when Pa wasn't up to it (and she pushed him to lead the family, not just take all of his former glory and run with it) and was proud of them for their accomplishments and tried to make sure everyone was presentable and proud of themselves. That to me are heroic characteristics.
I thought that this web chat was the best out of the two because of the amount of discussion and differing opinions that everyone brought to the table. The first time there was less people, but I still learned some different things and was exposed to differing thoughts than what I had previously had. I enjoyed both web chats and am happy that you hosted them Mr. Langley as I took many new thoughts and facts away from both.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
The whole common man hero from the Modernism period is not my favorite type of hero. I prefer epic heroes to average Joe heroes, as I stated during the book chat. In my mind and in my reckoning Tom Joad is not a hero. He made morally correct choices, was in the right place at the right time, and put his family in mind when he made decisions, not just himself. Those characteristics are for any character that is a good person. Everyone should think of others before themselves and choose not to fight first, talk later. Those characteristics shouldn't make Tom a hero. If I lived during the Great Depression I might think differently, and endorse Tom as a hero. But as that is not the case, I think that Ma is more of a hero than Tom. She led the family when Pa wasn't up to it (and she pushed him to lead the family, not just take all of his former glory and run with it) and was proud of them for their accomplishments and tried to make sure everyone was presentable and proud of themselves. That to me are heroic characteristics.
I thought that this web chat was the best out of the two because of the amount of discussion and differing opinions that everyone brought to the table. The first time there was less people, but I still learned some different things and was exposed to differing thoughts than what I had previously had. I enjoyed both web chats and am happy that you hosted them Mr. Langley as I took many new thoughts and facts away from both.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Opinion on The Grapes of Wrath
Overall The Grapes of Wrath was an okay book. Not super good, but not bad. I do enjoy historical fiction type books, but this wasn't as good as some other books in that genre that I have read. There was some points that I enjoyed and some points that I greatly disliked, but all and all, if Steinbeck would have written a different ending my opinion on the book might have been higher.
If the ending was more conclusive or gave some closure on the fates of various members of the Joad family, that would have been so much better instead of Rose of Sharon saving a random man from certain death. That had nothing to do with the story, just the character development of Rose of Sharon. The book is called Grapes of Wrath, not Rose of Sharon. If anything, Ma had a stronger character than Rose of Sharon, although Rose of Sharon did have a more symbolic character. Regardless, the ending was still disappointing and now I will just have to draw my own conclusions and infer that half of the Joads died of pneumonia, a quarter died from starvation, and the last quarter drowned.
If the ending was more conclusive or gave some closure on the fates of various members of the Joad family, that would have been so much better instead of Rose of Sharon saving a random man from certain death. That had nothing to do with the story, just the character development of Rose of Sharon. The book is called Grapes of Wrath, not Rose of Sharon. If anything, Ma had a stronger character than Rose of Sharon, although Rose of Sharon did have a more symbolic character. Regardless, the ending was still disappointing and now I will just have to draw my own conclusions and infer that half of the Joads died of pneumonia, a quarter died from starvation, and the last quarter drowned.
I liked the humor in the book. The J.P. Morgan joke (Steinbeck 377) and the "screwed" business man joke (Steinbeck 121) was a nice change to the dry depressing things that are happening to the Joads and to the poor people of the era. The humor helped relive the pressure of the overwhelming sense of depression and defeat that the Joads faced alongside starvation and brutality.
I disliked the ending (if you couldn't tell) and lack of conclusion. Also I wasn't a fan of the depressing tone of the book. That can't be helped as it is a period piece, but I prefer a little more uplifting type of book. Also I was not impressed with the lack of action and fast paced-ness. If it wasn't an interesting story, when I wanted to know the outcome, then I don't know if I would have been able to finish it.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
I disliked the ending (if you couldn't tell) and lack of conclusion. Also I wasn't a fan of the depressing tone of the book. That can't be helped as it is a period piece, but I prefer a little more uplifting type of book. Also I was not impressed with the lack of action and fast paced-ness. If it wasn't an interesting story, when I wanted to know the outcome, then I don't know if I would have been able to finish it.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Friday, August 5, 2011
Rose of Sharon
First I want to talk about Rose of Sharon (or as her family calls her Rosasharn) and her name. Ma and Pa have six kids: Noah, Tom, Rose of Sharon, Al, Ruthie, and Winfield. Rose of Sharon has the only odd name. The other siblings have normal "name" (as opposed to adjectives like Patience, Chastity; places like Dallas, Atlanta, Aurora [one of the kids I taught lessons too was named Aurora B., like the Aurora Borealis ]; or things like Satchel, Sunday, Violet, Orchid) kind of names. I figured that Rose of Sharon had to be something because that is a weird name to randomly come up with. After a quick Google search, I found that a Rose of Sharon is flower found throughout the world (Myers). The flower is a type of hibiscus and Japanese Beetles apparently love the Rose of Sharon shrub (Myers). So there is a little bit of information that I found about Rose of Sharon, the shrub.
The person Rose of Sharon undergoes a transformation in the book Grapes of Wrath. She starts off as a pregnant married woman with the idea that her and her husband are going to have a perfect life in California after giving birth to her baby with a doctor and even in a "hospiddle" (Steinbeck 164-165). She is also a complainer and needs her man who leaves her (who by the way was a crappy husband. He abandoned his pregnant wife without a word to her or her family. The other Joads thought he was "no guts, jus' too big for his overalls [Steinbeck 272], but Rosasharn didn't think so). But after she has her baby, Rose of Sharon is mature, maternal, and saves a man's life. She is a "mysterious" (Steinbeck 455) woman.
The end of the book is all about Rose of Sharon. She breast feeds a man back to help. A complete stranger dying in a barn. Breastfeeds him. He needs nourishment as he is dying, so instead of giving him some food she breastfeeds him. Okay now that I've gotten that out of my system, what kind of ending was that? What happened to the Joads? Do they die of starvation? Do they drown? Does Winfield catch pneumonia and Ruthie catch measles and between the two of them they kill their entire family? We will never know because Rose of Sharon had to breastfeed that man.
Myers, Vanessa Richins. "Rose of Sharon - Hibiscus Syriacus." Trees and Shrubs. About.com. Web. 05 Aug. 2011.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
The person Rose of Sharon undergoes a transformation in the book Grapes of Wrath. She starts off as a pregnant married woman with the idea that her and her husband are going to have a perfect life in California after giving birth to her baby with a doctor and even in a "hospiddle" (Steinbeck 164-165). She is also a complainer and needs her man who leaves her (who by the way was a crappy husband. He abandoned his pregnant wife without a word to her or her family. The other Joads thought he was "no guts, jus' too big for his overalls [Steinbeck 272], but Rosasharn didn't think so). But after she has her baby, Rose of Sharon is mature, maternal, and saves a man's life. She is a "mysterious" (Steinbeck 455) woman.
The end of the book is all about Rose of Sharon. She breast feeds a man back to help. A complete stranger dying in a barn. Breastfeeds him. He needs nourishment as he is dying, so instead of giving him some food she breastfeeds him. Okay now that I've gotten that out of my system, what kind of ending was that? What happened to the Joads? Do they die of starvation? Do they drown? Does Winfield catch pneumonia and Ruthie catch measles and between the two of them they kill their entire family? We will never know because Rose of Sharon had to breastfeed that man.
Myers, Vanessa Richins. "Rose of Sharon - Hibiscus Syriacus." Trees and Shrubs. About.com. Web. 05 Aug. 2011.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Eighth Discussion Question for Grapes of Wrath
The novel reflects upon events in history very well. Steinbeck visited migrant camps in California (Naylor) which riled him up him up to write this novel. I feel like it was an accomplishment, as I would imagine the other owners of the 15 million other copies of Grapes of Wrath also felt (Steinbeck xi). Also The Grapes of Wrath ranks seven spots ahead of The Old Man and the Sea in the top 50 bestselling classic British and American novels (Steinbeck xi). Anyways... Steinbeck put in the time and in return his novel was a bestselling book and the source of much controversy, which should be the goal for a book. If there isn't any controversy that means either not very many people know about the book, or no one cares enough to argue about it. The more discussion about a book, the more people care enough to put for the effort to argue points of a book and analyze it to the point of double and implied meanings and all sorts of crazy stuff that critics talk about.
The responsibility of respect and kindness from one man to another is and the responsibility between the rich and the poor are two of the groups in society that Steinbeck addresses. At the diner on Route 66 Mae helps out a poor father by selling him candy for his children two for a penny, when really they should be one for a nickel (Steinbeck 160-161). She is kind to her fellow man. She has steady work and makes enough money to buy herself food and I assume she has some kind of house that she lives in. The man and his family are living in their truck and whatever camps they find as they look for work. Mae is a great example of helping out her fellow man. But in the book, the relationship between poor and rich men is not the same happy and kind one as Mae and the family. The corporations and the land owners are cheating the migrants out of pay (Steinbeck 384) and lowering and raising the prices at their whim. Instead of aiding the starving people and helping them find their footing, the rich are allowing the poor to die when they could have been helped.
Naylor, Brian. "The Grapes of Wrath." National Public Radio. NPR, 25 Feb. 2002. Web. 05 Aug. 2011.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
The responsibility of respect and kindness from one man to another is and the responsibility between the rich and the poor are two of the groups in society that Steinbeck addresses. At the diner on Route 66 Mae helps out a poor father by selling him candy for his children two for a penny, when really they should be one for a nickel (Steinbeck 160-161). She is kind to her fellow man. She has steady work and makes enough money to buy herself food and I assume she has some kind of house that she lives in. The man and his family are living in their truck and whatever camps they find as they look for work. Mae is a great example of helping out her fellow man. But in the book, the relationship between poor and rich men is not the same happy and kind one as Mae and the family. The corporations and the land owners are cheating the migrants out of pay (Steinbeck 384) and lowering and raising the prices at their whim. Instead of aiding the starving people and helping them find their footing, the rich are allowing the poor to die when they could have been helped.
Naylor, Brian. "The Grapes of Wrath." National Public Radio. NPR, 25 Feb. 2002. Web. 05 Aug. 2011.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Seventh Discussion Question for Grapes of Wrath
John Steinbeck uses details and dialogue to engage readers. Through details the reader can imagine the landscape of America during the 30s as well as the various places the Joads went through tout the book. The first chapter was just description of Oklahoma and its "grey country" with "dry little streams" and dust as "high as his waist" (Steinbeck 1-2). Imagining the dry and inhospitable land helped me connect with the farmers through their frustration at the skies that won't produce rain and the land for not producing crops. Chapter 29 also described the land, but this time the California land being drenched with rain. "The dry sucked the moisture down and blackeded" (Steinbeck 432) and then the "rain fell steadily, and the water flowed over the highways" (Steinbeck 433). The rain was too much and the people suffered from sickness and the lack of any work, which meant more people dying of starvation as well as pneumonia and measles. The description about the never ending rain and the despair it brought people, when rain would have once been met with celebration, was a nice connection to realizing that situations change. One great thing can easily turn into a horrible thing if the timing, conditions, and perspective change.
The dialogue helped the reader connect with the characters, therefore become interested in their story. The Oklahoma accent and the drawls of the other characters allow the reader to feel like they know the characters and be more comfortable with them. Having good dialogue between characters and writing in a style that the reader is comfortable with (I will take southern accents over Shakespearean, old English accents any day) makes the book a more pleasant read and not a forced book that has to be read for class. The conversation between Tom, Ma, Al, and Floyd (Steinbeck 259-261) showcase some of the different accents in the book. Steinbeck doesn't say where Floyd is from but he is not from Oklahoma. All of the people that the Joads meet in their journey talk in different ways. That shows the diversity among migrants in California. Even though they are all from different places, they bond together in the pursuit of work and food.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
The dialogue helped the reader connect with the characters, therefore become interested in their story. The Oklahoma accent and the drawls of the other characters allow the reader to feel like they know the characters and be more comfortable with them. Having good dialogue between characters and writing in a style that the reader is comfortable with (I will take southern accents over Shakespearean, old English accents any day) makes the book a more pleasant read and not a forced book that has to be read for class. The conversation between Tom, Ma, Al, and Floyd (Steinbeck 259-261) showcase some of the different accents in the book. Steinbeck doesn't say where Floyd is from but he is not from Oklahoma. All of the people that the Joads meet in their journey talk in different ways. That shows the diversity among migrants in California. Even though they are all from different places, they bond together in the pursuit of work and food.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Sixth Discussion Question for Grapes of Wrath
High school students, as well as adults, read and reread The Grapes of Wrath because it is a classic time period novel about the struggle to overcome challenges and survive through hard times. The Joads don't overcome poverty, as they are still starving and unemployed at the end of the novel (plus their belongings and vehicle are underwater, and they hopefully won't also drown), but their story is still memorable.
Any story about a group of people working together to try to accomplish something that seems impossible is a good read. Plus when you throw in a cup of bravery in the face of danger and a pinch of heroism and self sacrifice, a classic novel should ensue (see Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Old Man and the Sea, etc). If a book is a classic, it is (hopefully) not boring and is interesting to read. The theme of man being cruel to man helps new readers realize that not only were African Americans and Native Americans treated cruelly in the United States' past, but white men were also treated unequally. In history class the Great Depression is not everyone's favorite subject, and this book was interesting enough to keep my interest and not bore me with too many details about the dry land and the economic woes.
The Grapes of Wrath is a classic because the reader can connect to the characters and watch them grow and develop. Other than Rose of Sharon and the creepy ending (although it does allow her character to grow from a naive girl to a mature saintlike woman saving people, but is still creepy), the book is easy to read and to follow. The reader also learns about the Great Depression while reading the novel so that is an added bonus for teachers to have their students read Grapes of Wrath. The reader can learn from Tom Joad who went to jail and came out as someone who just wanted to stay out of trouble and help his family. Then he wanted to help out everyone in a situation similar to his family and reformed to become a preacher of sorts to make the upper class, police, and government aware of how the poor were being treated. That sort of transformation gives the reader hope that change is possible and being the better person is always what you should strive to be.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Any story about a group of people working together to try to accomplish something that seems impossible is a good read. Plus when you throw in a cup of bravery in the face of danger and a pinch of heroism and self sacrifice, a classic novel should ensue (see Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Old Man and the Sea, etc). If a book is a classic, it is (hopefully) not boring and is interesting to read. The theme of man being cruel to man helps new readers realize that not only were African Americans and Native Americans treated cruelly in the United States' past, but white men were also treated unequally. In history class the Great Depression is not everyone's favorite subject, and this book was interesting enough to keep my interest and not bore me with too many details about the dry land and the economic woes.
The Grapes of Wrath is a classic because the reader can connect to the characters and watch them grow and develop. Other than Rose of Sharon and the creepy ending (although it does allow her character to grow from a naive girl to a mature saintlike woman saving people, but is still creepy), the book is easy to read and to follow. The reader also learns about the Great Depression while reading the novel so that is an added bonus for teachers to have their students read Grapes of Wrath. The reader can learn from Tom Joad who went to jail and came out as someone who just wanted to stay out of trouble and help his family. Then he wanted to help out everyone in a situation similar to his family and reformed to become a preacher of sorts to make the upper class, police, and government aware of how the poor were being treated. That sort of transformation gives the reader hope that change is possible and being the better person is always what you should strive to be.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Fifth Discussion Question for Grapes of Wrath
Finally a book when the history and social issues of the time period is obvious and not implied or the events of the book have a double meaning referencing an event in history! The Grapes of Wrath represents the Great Depression era poverty stricken family and how they survive through the rough economic woes of the time. The novel reflected on the effects of the time on the lower class of America.
The Great Depression lasted 10 years (Nelson) and alongside the Dust Bowl caused thousands of people to move west in search for jobs. By 1933 "millions of Americans were out of work" (Nelson) and there wasn't any jobs to help out the unemployed. Steinbeck's novel followed one family's journey to find work and a new home. Coupled with the chapters telling about different scenarios and descriptions of life during the Depression, Steinbeck informed the reader of the history of the Depression in a historical fiction work.
Steinbeck addressed the social issues of the time through the Joad family. The Joads were treated as human beings at the government camp, then treated awfully at other camps where the people in charge cheated them out of money and knowingly raised food prices so that the families couldn't live off of their earnings. The upper class acted as if the "Okies" were going to steal their land and ruin their perfect town with the "scum" (Steinbeck 206) that are invading the country. All men might be created equal in the Declaration of Independence, but not all men are treated equally.
The behavior of the people who lived during the Great Depression wasn't always ideal. Because there were millions of unemployed people who couldn't feed their starving families, many had to steal to survive. Also the police and some of the townsfolk went looking for fights with the Okies, which resulted in the Okies being killed or sent to jail. Some of the deputies have to bring in prisoners to be paid and feed their own families (Steinbeck 271). The times were different then and the safety of citizens was not always ensured by the police if the citizen was poor or looking for work.
The symbolic significance of the novel is for later generations to know about the hardship and endurance that American people were forced into when the rain didn't come and the stock market crashed. One out of every four Americans were unemployed (Nelson). Reading about what the Joads had to go through makes me appreciate what I have and be thankful that I have food and a home and a job.
Nelson, Cary. "The Great Depression." English Department - Modern American Poetry. University of Illinois. Web. 03 Aug. 2011.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
The Great Depression lasted 10 years (Nelson) and alongside the Dust Bowl caused thousands of people to move west in search for jobs. By 1933 "millions of Americans were out of work" (Nelson) and there wasn't any jobs to help out the unemployed. Steinbeck's novel followed one family's journey to find work and a new home. Coupled with the chapters telling about different scenarios and descriptions of life during the Depression, Steinbeck informed the reader of the history of the Depression in a historical fiction work.
Steinbeck addressed the social issues of the time through the Joad family. The Joads were treated as human beings at the government camp, then treated awfully at other camps where the people in charge cheated them out of money and knowingly raised food prices so that the families couldn't live off of their earnings. The upper class acted as if the "Okies" were going to steal their land and ruin their perfect town with the "scum" (Steinbeck 206) that are invading the country. All men might be created equal in the Declaration of Independence, but not all men are treated equally.
The behavior of the people who lived during the Great Depression wasn't always ideal. Because there were millions of unemployed people who couldn't feed their starving families, many had to steal to survive. Also the police and some of the townsfolk went looking for fights with the Okies, which resulted in the Okies being killed or sent to jail. Some of the deputies have to bring in prisoners to be paid and feed their own families (Steinbeck 271). The times were different then and the safety of citizens was not always ensured by the police if the citizen was poor or looking for work.
The symbolic significance of the novel is for later generations to know about the hardship and endurance that American people were forced into when the rain didn't come and the stock market crashed. One out of every four Americans were unemployed (Nelson). Reading about what the Joads had to go through makes me appreciate what I have and be thankful that I have food and a home and a job.
Nelson, Cary. "The Great Depression." English Department - Modern American Poetry. University of Illinois. Web. 03 Aug. 2011.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Fourth Discussion Question for Grapes of Wrath (Ma)
As opposed to The Old Man and the Sea, picking a "hero" to write about from Grapes of Wrath was hard. Tom was the main protagonist, but Ma held the family together and was my hero in the book. Also Rose of Sharon did save a man by nursing him back to life, and if that isn't something that doesn't make her a hero, then I don't know what does. I will write about Ma Joad because I think of her as the main hero in this book (Tom is a hero in his own right, so I will have a post for him at a later date).
Ma is strong, proud, and brave. She is strong because she holds the family together. She is the one who doesn't break and makes sure that everyone is taken care of. Ma is the rock that everyone leans against in hard times. She is proud of her family that is still together and of the fact that they are surviving (Steinbeck 304). Ma is one of the bravest people that I have read about (she is beat out by Captain Kathryn Janeway, Bilbo Baggins, and Gregor from Gregor the Overlander). She laid next to a dead body for a whole night in order to help her family cross the border in to California (Steinbeck 228).
Ma represents the idea of strength and of hope. She represents strength because she had to take over as head of the family in all but title because Pa couldn't hold up under the stressful conditions that he was thrust into. Ma made sure everyone knew that they could succeed and that if they stayed together as a family everything would be alright. She kept repeating that and it reassured the other family members to carry on. Ma is a symbol of hope because she never broke down the whole entire journey. She came close the night Granma died (Steinbeck 229), but she pulled herself together and returned to the position of strength in the family.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Ma is strong, proud, and brave. She is strong because she holds the family together. She is the one who doesn't break and makes sure that everyone is taken care of. Ma is the rock that everyone leans against in hard times. She is proud of her family that is still together and of the fact that they are surviving (Steinbeck 304). Ma is one of the bravest people that I have read about (she is beat out by Captain Kathryn Janeway, Bilbo Baggins, and Gregor from Gregor the Overlander). She laid next to a dead body for a whole night in order to help her family cross the border in to California (Steinbeck 228).
Ma represents the idea of strength and of hope. She represents strength because she had to take over as head of the family in all but title because Pa couldn't hold up under the stressful conditions that he was thrust into. Ma made sure everyone knew that they could succeed and that if they stayed together as a family everything would be alright. She kept repeating that and it reassured the other family members to carry on. Ma is a symbol of hope because she never broke down the whole entire journey. She came close the night Granma died (Steinbeck 229), but she pulled herself together and returned to the position of strength in the family.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Third discussion question for Grapes of Wrath
The universal theme of Grapes of Wrath is how even though everyone shares the same homo sapiens DNA, not everyone is treated the same. The Okie migrant farmer lower class people (whoa, that was three labels for these people strategically placed so they can be adjectives describing the farmers and I can cover all the stages of the decline of the lower class people) cannot get out of poverty because the rich upper class continues to keep their land and profits to themselves and keep wages below a livable standard. Those inhumane acts caused the death of many starved men, women, and children across the West.
The salesmen operated their business with a firm grip of mercilessness and constantly cheated the poor, poverty stricken people who can barely even afford the honest original price (Steinbeck 61). I understand that they also have a family to feed, but the salesmen already have a steady job and a roof above their families head. These displaced people don't have either one. The salesmen could cut them some slack instead of "screwing" (Steinbeck 121) them over, if you pardon the language. Instead of selling overpriced bread and meat (Steinbeck 374) and replacing the newer car batteries with old ones after a car has been bought (Steinbeck 62), the salesmen could raise the price a little (they have to feed their family too) but give the people what they paid for, not some cheap imitation of something that is doubled in price.
The land owners (and in the hierarchy of things the uncompassionate and unsympathetic banks for imposing this on the land owners) also are very unkind toward the poverty class people. They are making enough profit as it is to spare a penny or a nickel to raise wages. Their "employees" (I don't really think they count as employees because they work for a short amount of time without benefits [maybe a camp is provided, but other than that, free peaches!] and move on when the work is done) are starving and dying because they are not making enough money to buy food for their equally starving family. If the land owners would raise the wages then people won't starve and the land owners could still make a profit.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
The salesmen operated their business with a firm grip of mercilessness and constantly cheated the poor, poverty stricken people who can barely even afford the honest original price (Steinbeck 61). I understand that they also have a family to feed, but the salesmen already have a steady job and a roof above their families head. These displaced people don't have either one. The salesmen could cut them some slack instead of "screwing" (Steinbeck 121) them over, if you pardon the language. Instead of selling overpriced bread and meat (Steinbeck 374) and replacing the newer car batteries with old ones after a car has been bought (Steinbeck 62), the salesmen could raise the price a little (they have to feed their family too) but give the people what they paid for, not some cheap imitation of something that is doubled in price.
The land owners (and in the hierarchy of things the uncompassionate and unsympathetic banks for imposing this on the land owners) also are very unkind toward the poverty class people. They are making enough profit as it is to spare a penny or a nickel to raise wages. Their "employees" (I don't really think they count as employees because they work for a short amount of time without benefits [maybe a camp is provided, but other than that, free peaches!] and move on when the work is done) are starving and dying because they are not making enough money to buy food for their equally starving family. If the land owners would raise the wages then people won't starve and the land owners could still make a profit.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Second discussion question for Grapes of Wrath
The question of "What are the causes, gains, and losses of the conflict dealt with in the book?" could be answered by many of the conflicts in the book, but I am going to address the conflict of the Joads having to move to California in order to find work. The past summer was one with extreme heat and a drought, causing the land to be unusable and no money was raised in which to pay the loans owed to the bank. The cause of the conflict is the bank repossessing the Joad's family farm. The bank kicks them off their land because they are unable to pay their loans, forcing the family to find somewhere new to live and to find a new job.
The losses involved in the journey to a new life in California were substantial. Grampa, Granma, Casy, Rose of Sharon's baby, all perish before the goal of steady work and housing was accomplished. The journey is a hard one because the only people who try to help the Joads are in the same situation and can only offer morale support. The government has a nice camp, but there are not enough of those to go around. Noah, Connie (not really because he wasn't really mentioned in the book), Al, and Tom all abandon the family in hopes for better prospects for themselves. Ma and the rest of the Joads suffer the loss of the family breaking apart.
The gains on the other hand are few and far between. Al finds a wife, Casy finds a new calling in life (before he dies for the calling), and Winfield and Ruthie have an adventure into real life and the West. The Joads are starving and their belongings are flooded when the book ends. There was no happy ending, and nothing was gained to the trip to California. They are still homeless and without work. Basically they are worse off then they were back in Oklahoma when they had to leave their farm.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
The losses involved in the journey to a new life in California were substantial. Grampa, Granma, Casy, Rose of Sharon's baby, all perish before the goal of steady work and housing was accomplished. The journey is a hard one because the only people who try to help the Joads are in the same situation and can only offer morale support. The government has a nice camp, but there are not enough of those to go around. Noah, Connie (not really because he wasn't really mentioned in the book), Al, and Tom all abandon the family in hopes for better prospects for themselves. Ma and the rest of the Joads suffer the loss of the family breaking apart.
The gains on the other hand are few and far between. Al finds a wife, Casy finds a new calling in life (before he dies for the calling), and Winfield and Ruthie have an adventure into real life and the West. The Joads are starving and their belongings are flooded when the book ends. There was no happy ending, and nothing was gained to the trip to California. They are still homeless and without work. Basically they are worse off then they were back in Oklahoma when they had to leave their farm.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
First Discussion Question for Grapes of Wrath
The Grapes of Wrath novel revealed a couple of things about John Steinbeck. The first is that Steinbeck sticks up for the poor people in America, and that is evident in his writing. The whole story highlights the misfortune and the journey into poverty that one family endures. Steinbeck doesn't cut the rich people, the banks, the corporations, and the government any slack. He takes the side of the displaced farmers and through writing this novel shows the American people how life was like in the very recent past. Writers only write about what they know and how they feel about things, so taking that into consideration I am going to assume that Steinbeck has strong opinions about the Great Depression. The novel goes in depth about each type of camp and Steinbeck researched a lot of information for the short historical chapters that tell about life during the thirties for the lower class.
Steinbeck showed what he valued when he wrote this novel. Steinbeck valued family and the responsibility that comes with being a part of a family. Everyone has to play their part and aid the family in times of need and day to day. Ma wanted to keep the family together and was an avid in making that clear to everyone (Steinbeck 420). Steinbeck exemplified the value through Ma. Another value that Steinbeck shows through his writing is never giving up. All of the migrant Okies went through periods of starvation, but they continued on and never stopped believing (do I have to pay Journey royalties for using that line?).
Grapes of Wrath is told from two perspectives: one being the all knowing, all seeing, omnipresent narrator and the third person narrator that follows the Joad family. With an original party of twelve (and a half since Rose of Sharon is pregnant) having a third person narrator makes it slightly easier to develop more of the characters. There are twelve people, plus everyone that the Joads meet on the way, so regardless not all the characters will be in depth (cough Connie cough). The omnipresent narrator from the historical chapters gave a personal history lesson by including emotional people in the telling of different scenarios that showed the cruel and wrong things done to the workers and poor people.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Steinbeck showed what he valued when he wrote this novel. Steinbeck valued family and the responsibility that comes with being a part of a family. Everyone has to play their part and aid the family in times of need and day to day. Ma wanted to keep the family together and was an avid in making that clear to everyone (Steinbeck 420). Steinbeck exemplified the value through Ma. Another value that Steinbeck shows through his writing is never giving up. All of the migrant Okies went through periods of starvation, but they continued on and never stopped believing (do I have to pay Journey royalties for using that line?).
Grapes of Wrath is told from two perspectives: one being the all knowing, all seeing, omnipresent narrator and the third person narrator that follows the Joad family. With an original party of twelve (and a half since Rose of Sharon is pregnant) having a third person narrator makes it slightly easier to develop more of the characters. There are twelve people, plus everyone that the Joads meet on the way, so regardless not all the characters will be in depth (cough Connie cough). The omnipresent narrator from the historical chapters gave a personal history lesson by including emotional people in the telling of different scenarios that showed the cruel and wrong things done to the workers and poor people.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Monday, August 1, 2011
Grapes of Wrath Chapter 30
Rain is a good thing if you live in Springfield and it is 110 degrees out. Rain is also a good thing in California when there are wild fires. But rain is not a good thing for the Joads when they are looking for jobs, but the rain means there is not any work that day. Also it is bad for the Joads because they parked their truck next to a stream. Rose of Sharon (who, by the way, went into premature labor because she picked cotton and caught a chill) then goes into labor in the boxcar with Ma and Mrs. Wainwright as midwives as opposed to with doctors in a hospital that she had planned with her AWOL husband, Connie. But unfortunately for Rose of Sharon, her baby is a stillborn (but I guess that is kind of good because that would have been an extra mouth to feed for the Joads who don't have any money or food). Uncle John got to bury the baby, but instead he floated the baby down the stream hoping that someone will see it and know of the ill fortune that is happening to the Okies because the banks are greedy and the farmers have to listen to them, which causes the workers to suffer.
The ending of this book was really weird. It almost seems as if a different author wrote the last couple of pages. The book was depressing and and full of events that always had a negative side. Now here comes the ending with Rose of Sharon breastfeeding a dying man back to health, which in a twisted kind of way is a happy ending (for the man in the barn at least). That does not fit with the rest of the book. It was kind of anticlimactic too. After all of the struggles the rest of the family went through, we never find out what happened to them. The rest of the Joads could have starved to death while the guy in the barn lived. What happened to Tom or to Noah? I will never know because Steinbeck thinks it is okay to end a book with a character (not a main character even, but a supporting character [although since her scene ended the book, I guess that made her a main character]) nursing a man back to life that the reader met a page ago.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
The ending of this book was really weird. It almost seems as if a different author wrote the last couple of pages. The book was depressing and and full of events that always had a negative side. Now here comes the ending with Rose of Sharon breastfeeding a dying man back to health, which in a twisted kind of way is a happy ending (for the man in the barn at least). That does not fit with the rest of the book. It was kind of anticlimactic too. After all of the struggles the rest of the family went through, we never find out what happened to them. The rest of the Joads could have starved to death while the guy in the barn lived. What happened to Tom or to Noah? I will never know because Steinbeck thinks it is okay to end a book with a character (not a main character even, but a supporting character [although since her scene ended the book, I guess that made her a main character]) nursing a man back to life that the reader met a page ago.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Grapes of Wrath Chapters 27, 28, and 29
The cotton weighing dilemma of Chapter 27 is a very hard one to solve without trust and faith in people. The scale man fixes his scale, but the worker puts rocks in his bag. Both are trying to gain something for themselves, but really cancel each other out in the long run. If the scale men and the workers had faith in each other to do the right thing and and be truthful and honest about their jobs, then the accusations and the anger will stop and everyone can be happy and enjoy their jobs. I know that will never happen, but it is a nice thought to have.
In the next chapter a bad thing happens. It was only a matter of time too, but regardless it happened. Tom was ratted out by his youngest sister. Ruthie didn't to it intentionally and I believe that, but she still told. Now Tom has to separate from the family (58% of the original party remaining now) in order to protect them. When Ma asked what was he going to do, Tom replied, "What Casy done." (Steinbeck 419) So I guess Tom is going to try his hand at being a rebellious priest. Then a decision set the scene for a bad event. Rose of Sharon is very pregnant and wants to pick cotton, which is hard labor. That has to mess up the baby, especially when she won't have a doctor at the delivery. After they come back from cotton picking Rosasharn develops a chill with "violent shivers" (Steinbeck 430) which proves that she should have listen to her mother and stayed at home and rested.
The last little bit of Chapter 29 when the women sigh in relief when the men haven't broke because their "fear could always turn to wrath" (Steinbeck 435) was a very nice homage to the title. The little grapes that continue growing in the mens' souls are fed by wrath, and fuel the fire that keeps them going. Without someone to direct the fury at, the men would have gone crazy, but the banks and corporations aren't going anywhere. The men will never break as long as someone exists to have anger directed at.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
In the next chapter a bad thing happens. It was only a matter of time too, but regardless it happened. Tom was ratted out by his youngest sister. Ruthie didn't to it intentionally and I believe that, but she still told. Now Tom has to separate from the family (58% of the original party remaining now) in order to protect them. When Ma asked what was he going to do, Tom replied, "What Casy done." (Steinbeck 419) So I guess Tom is going to try his hand at being a rebellious priest. Then a decision set the scene for a bad event. Rose of Sharon is very pregnant and wants to pick cotton, which is hard labor. That has to mess up the baby, especially when she won't have a doctor at the delivery. After they come back from cotton picking Rosasharn develops a chill with "violent shivers" (Steinbeck 430) which proves that she should have listen to her mother and stayed at home and rested.
The last little bit of Chapter 29 when the women sigh in relief when the men haven't broke because their "fear could always turn to wrath" (Steinbeck 435) was a very nice homage to the title. The little grapes that continue growing in the mens' souls are fed by wrath, and fuel the fire that keeps them going. Without someone to direct the fury at, the men would have gone crazy, but the banks and corporations aren't going anywhere. The men will never break as long as someone exists to have anger directed at.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Grapes of Wrath Chapter 26
Once again Ma has to whip her family back into something she can be proud of. Ma demands that the men "get busy" (Steinbeck 350) and find work because Winfield and Rose of Sharon don't look too well and everyone could use some more food. When Ma "proudly" says to Tom, "He ain't beat." (Steinbeck 352) that shows that all of the ribbing she is doing to Pa is worth it to make sure that he can continue on. She still has a family to be proud of and that is what motivates her to continue doing her job. But when the Joads have to find work and leave the nice government camp to go to a peach farm that underpays them. Their new house is greasy and is very small. Then the work is bogus because they only get a nickel for every unbruised peach box they fill. So even though the Joads are working, they are barely feeding themselves because the grocery store in the camp sells overpriced food even with the knowledge that the workers aren't being paid much. The system is rigged to always favor the rich and the poor always get the short end of the stick.
"Say, who in hell you think you are, J. P. Morgan?" (Steinbeck 377) That quote cracked me up. I read about J. P. Morgan in my AP US History summer book and with that knowledge I very much appreciate the reference. That is the first time in the book that I laughed (the other quote about the salesmen screwing people made me smile, but the Morgan quote made me laugh). Tom was asking if their was a sanitation unit or somewhere to get tidy up when the guard laughed and uttered the line. I think that J. P. Morgan would have asked for something more fancy then a "bath" (Steinbeck 377), but regardless that was still funny.
Casy is back! He is rebellious and somehow got out of jail (the book doesn't clarify, but I assume either the offense wasn't that bad on go got out on good behavior). But Casy isn't here for long because he was arguing with a guard and the guard killed him with a pick handle. I, for one, don't think that is the best way to go, but Casy was preaching about what he believed in, and I am sure he was happy. I would rather die happy then upset or angry.
Winfield becomes very sick and I figured he was going to die. He ended up recovering, but I still believe in the Oregon Trail game, and I never made it to Sacramento with more than half of my starting party. Right now the Joads are 8 for 12, or 66.7%. That is why I figured Winfield would die. The death would drop the percentage to close to 50 and then Ruthie could have some character development regarding loss and loneliness.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
"Say, who in hell you think you are, J. P. Morgan?" (Steinbeck 377) That quote cracked me up. I read about J. P. Morgan in my AP US History summer book and with that knowledge I very much appreciate the reference. That is the first time in the book that I laughed (the other quote about the salesmen screwing people made me smile, but the Morgan quote made me laugh). Tom was asking if their was a sanitation unit or somewhere to get tidy up when the guard laughed and uttered the line. I think that J. P. Morgan would have asked for something more fancy then a "bath" (Steinbeck 377), but regardless that was still funny.
Casy is back! He is rebellious and somehow got out of jail (the book doesn't clarify, but I assume either the offense wasn't that bad on go got out on good behavior). But Casy isn't here for long because he was arguing with a guard and the guard killed him with a pick handle. I, for one, don't think that is the best way to go, but Casy was preaching about what he believed in, and I am sure he was happy. I would rather die happy then upset or angry.
Winfield becomes very sick and I figured he was going to die. He ended up recovering, but I still believe in the Oregon Trail game, and I never made it to Sacramento with more than half of my starting party. Right now the Joads are 8 for 12, or 66.7%. That is why I figured Winfield would die. The death would drop the percentage to close to 50 and then Ruthie could have some character development regarding loss and loneliness.
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Grapes of Wrath Chapters 24 and 25
Chapter 24 was a very happy chapter (that's three good feeling inducing chapters in a row!) in which the camp put on a dance. Rose of Sharon had many admirers that asked her to dance, but because of crazy lady Mrs. Sandry, Rosasharn has the idea in her head that if she dances her baby will die and she will go to hell. I thought that the boys asking Rose of Sharon to dance (Steinbeck 341) were very kind and that helped boost her self confidence. After Connie left her and the whole going to hell incident with the crazy Christian lady, Rosasharn was feeling slightly depressed and that wasn't good for the baby. Giving her the attention and esteem boost was a nice thing to for Steinbeck to do, and that gave me hope that everything will turn out okay for her.
Chapter 25 broke the happiness spell and went back to the usual sad and depressing tone. The geneticists and chemists create perfect seeds that will produce the best fruit and prevent disease and sickness in the plant (Steinbeck 346). Then because the banks and corporations only care about themselves (see post on chapter 23), the fruit doesn't get harvested because the selling price of fruit is too low to hire labor. Then the farmers don't want people to eat their fruit, so it is destroyed or made inedible. That makes me so mad! If the banks could have worked something out with the farmers and the workers, there wouldn't be this problem! Urg! So much suffering could have been prevented and everyone would be happy!
Also in that chapter the Okies and everyone who doesn't have a job have "grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage" (Steinbeck 349) in their souls. So that is why the book is called Grapes of Wrath! The metaphorical grapes symbolize the great anger that the people have toward the banks, corporations, and police. As the grapes grow and become fertile and ready to be picked, the anger level grows. That makes a lot more sense then the wrath of the fruit being left on the trees instead of harvest is causing all of this disrupt (although if grapes were not inanimate objects, I am sure that they would be very displeased with how they are being treated).
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Chapter 25 broke the happiness spell and went back to the usual sad and depressing tone. The geneticists and chemists create perfect seeds that will produce the best fruit and prevent disease and sickness in the plant (Steinbeck 346). Then because the banks and corporations only care about themselves (see post on chapter 23), the fruit doesn't get harvested because the selling price of fruit is too low to hire labor. Then the farmers don't want people to eat their fruit, so it is destroyed or made inedible. That makes me so mad! If the banks could have worked something out with the farmers and the workers, there wouldn't be this problem! Urg! So much suffering could have been prevented and everyone would be happy!
Also in that chapter the Okies and everyone who doesn't have a job have "grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage" (Steinbeck 349) in their souls. So that is why the book is called Grapes of Wrath! The metaphorical grapes symbolize the great anger that the people have toward the banks, corporations, and police. As the grapes grow and become fertile and ready to be picked, the anger level grows. That makes a lot more sense then the wrath of the fruit being left on the trees instead of harvest is causing all of this disrupt (although if grapes were not inanimate objects, I am sure that they would be very displeased with how they are being treated).
Steinbeck, John. The Grapes of Wrath. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)