Pockets Worn & Pockets Torn

Alice Walker when she wrote the book in 1982. She is 75 years old now! 

Pockets worn and pockets torn - a perfect summary of The Color Purple by Alice Walker when given some background and explanation - which don't worry, I plan to give you. A lot of characters, especially the women, wear different sets of pockets (a metaphor for facades) based on their circumstances. For example, in the pink section of my notes, I made out Sofia to usually be very tough, feisty, outspoken, and sassy. But when faced with real societal and institutional racism, she becomes compliant and weak because she is outnumbered in her fight. Sofia meets her match when the police beat her up and take her to jail because she tells the mayor's wife that "hell no" she won't be her maid. Shug Avery also seems to wear different pockets depending on her circumstances. She is much more reserved and short with Albert (who she still likes) as opposed to her husband - whom she is much more flirty and silly with. 

Additionally, there are a lot of pockets of societies or families that are torn apart in the book. One of the most interesting and unusual things that I think Walker is trying to reveal, is that whites aren't always the bullies or the predators of the blacks. Sometimes the victimization of the blacks comes from within their own racial community. In The Color Purple, there is a very broken and distorted family dynamic. Men rape their own daughters and nieces. Married couples have affairs on each other. A father even kills one of his own children had by his daughter! Evidently, the main character Celie starts developing feelings for women because she has never been treated respectfully and/or lovingly by a man. She loses trust in men altogether and turns to women for pleasure. It is in this way that Celie reminded me of Meena Alexander in Fault Lines. They both harbor the burden of a fragmented identity; the only difference is that Meena is fragmented from migrating so much (places), and Celie is fragmented by the people that have hurt her. All the men that have abused Celie have stolen a small part of her identity by making her feel worthless and inferior. With each incident of abuse she started to believe that she was really what people wanted her to be and used her for. For example, Celie tells Sofia that she told her husband Harpo to beat because "[she's] a fool... cause [Sofia] do what she can't" and that's fight back. Her whole life, she has been abused into thinking that she has no power or rights. If there was ever a time she did try to fight back, she quickly learned that she was not in the position of dominance, and she was better off being compliant. Celie believes she is a fool because she has been forced to do many "foolish" things, but she doesn't realize that those things weren't her fault because they were just that - forced. She wasn't given a choice, but she was brainwashed into thinking that she liked those things and they were her choice. The abusers tried to make up her mind for her - and in her case... they succeeded. This results in Celie closing herself off to the world, and as I noted in my notes in the first purple section, causes her to have a lack of feeling. When you are taught or repeatedly made to feel like you are worthless, you stop caring about anything because you think your opinion or presence doesn't matter anyway. Due to her deeply instilled fear from being abused since she was young, as noted in the takeaway section of my notes, Celie is the only female character in the story that doesn't go against or fight the stereotypes imposed upon women in some way. 

One last thing worth analyzing is a metaphorical/symbolical message that Walker is slowly developing. We learn early on in the story that Celie's mom is sick, and she dies a page later. Later in the story, we learn that Shug Avery is also sick. Metaphorically, Celie is also sick - sick of her wretched life. There is an aura of longing surrounding her, and as the reader, I get the impression that she has a lot of bottled up feelings just waiting to burst and explode. Between these three characters I noticed a pattern - they don't fight back. They had or have become compliant with the men in their lives and societal stereotypes. In response to that, they were or are not very successful. This led to the questions in my notes "What is the significance of Shug's illness?" (in the bottom right corner), and "Is there a correlation between fighting, success, and illness?" (top of the second page). I think that illness is symbol for weakness or the lack of perseverance, and having all the compliant women become ill is Walker's way of conveying the message that giving up or becoming compliant is wrong or a "sick" thing to do. She obviously believes the opposite must be done in order to gain any success in life. I just think it is no coincidence that Celie's mother was weak in her protests or refusals to sex, and kind of turned a blind eye to her husband's abuse; Shug Avery was sick when she left her husband and came to satisfy Albert, all while her career was dwindling; and Celie is the definition of compliant - constantly giving in to her father's and then later her husband's demands, and they all ended up sick (or even dead in the case of Celie's mom) in one way or another. 

The Government's Disguised Pocket of Corruption

First, let's get one thing straight: today while writing my eminent domain essay, I realized how corrupt the government is, and how much it is capable of hiding from us. Eminent domain is a perfect example of so many things - so many ways in which the government has wronged us: corruption, false promises, greed, and lies. Everyone knows the government is somewhat corrupt, but eminent domain takes it to a whole other level.

The fact that eminent domain provides the government with the ability and the power to just kick people to the curb is still so unfathomable to me! I mean that's as crazy as if someone claimed that once upon a time, pink elephants walked the earth! What annoys me the most though, is how the government just makes its own rules and hypocritically contradicts what our country stands for! How can these politicians claim that they work for a country founded on a democracy that stands for equality, when they - the leaders of our country - use things like eminent domain to prey upon racial minorities, the underprivileged, uneducated, and poor?! There is nothing I hate more than a good hypocrite!

I used to wonder how this could all happen, and then I realized: Jesus, these politicians and business people must be really good at using rhetoric to cover up their true intentions from the public - persuading people that they have their best interests at heart. They even convince each other that what they're doing is for good reason and with good intention. I mean I'd like to believe that at least some of them took office with some sanity and morals, and they all weren't originally greedy liars.

Just recently, I also had my eyes opened to how the government makes promises so outrageous, they might as well be saying that one day they can make pink elephants walk the earth! They make promises that they know are impossible - that they don't have the power to keep - just to appeal to the public, get elected, and/or make a quick buck. That's right, if I had absolutely any doubt in my mind before, I certainly don't anymore: everything is about money - especially the government! It doesn't matter the cost of livelihoods that will be taken away from innocent people, it only matters how many zeros come with that land's deal. How ironic that the moral of this story lacks morals! Jesus, that's immoral! 

Who Ever Said Women Don't Need Pockets?!

An Exploration of Gender Roles Utilizing A Raisin in the Sun  

In A Raisin in the Sun, the female characters really reflect the gender roles of the time period. Ruth represents how women would succumb and submit to those society assigned roles, whereas Beneatha represents how women would try to break the mold. 

During the 1950s, the mass media was very "whitewashed" and African American women were hardly portrayed at all. But just like Walter wanted what whiteness represented for men, (because he saw all the successful business men were white), Ruth wanted the same thing... but for women. 

Rich white women were most often and most commonly portrayed in the media as wives and mothers, because that was actually the reality for the majority of them. This led to African American women desiring that life too - the one that Ruth is desperately trying to emulate in any way possible - the latest attempt being the action of moving into a bigger house. To Ruth, that is one small step towards achieving the American Dream and becoming more like a wealthy white family. Maybe if she has a bigger house she will be able to raise her kids better, maybe the role of "stay at home mom" will become slightly easier with more space. But the reality is that Ruth can never have the life of a rich white woman and '[pack] up [her] suitcases and [pile] on one of them big steamships" (Hansberry 44), because she doesn't have the money to do that. Societal racism has trapped her in a box, and the economical factors of that box hinder her from having the freedom of stereotypical white women. She can't just be a stay at home mom and a wife; she is forced to sacrifice every day of her life to work to provide for her family. The way in which she conforms to her societal imposed gender and race biased role though, is believing that she can only do domestic work. During her desperate plea to Mama she says, "I'll work twenty hours a day in all the kitchens in Chicago... and scrub all the floors in America and wash all the sheets in America if I have to..." (Hansberry 140). This is all domestic housework - which she automatically goes to - assuming she can't do anything else. We don't know for sure that Ruth can't do anything else because we don't know if she got an education that allows her to get another job, but if she doesn't have a good education, would it be that far fetched to think that she doesn't due to the segregation of schools? 

The other thing worth noticing is that Ruth announces to Mama that those are the sacrifices that she will make so that her family can still move and pay for the house, even without the rest of the insurance money. Yet Walter - the one who actually lost the insurance money, never announces what he will sacrifice to fix his mistake. The only argument that could be made, is that Walter was willing to sacrifice his pride in order to get the money for the house back. But by doing that he was also taking away his family's dreams. His idea to sell back the house and collect the money... still had selfish intent behind it. He wanted to fix his mistake, rid himself of his humiliation, regain the pride he would be sacrificing in the act by fixing it, and then use that money for his own investments. In this way, it is just assumed that "when the world gets ugly enough – a woman will do anything for her family" (Hansberry 75). Who decided that it was a woman's role to sacrifice everything for the family?! What is Walter going to do?! Wasn't it his mistake?! Isn't it his family too?!

There are still gender bias roles that society has assigned today. More minor and a stretch for the sake of the title of this post, but still very irritating to almost any woman out there, is the fact that fashion designers still don't think that women need pockets - or should I say BIG ENOUGH pockets! Why does society believe that it is a woman's "role" to carry a purse - maybe full of the childcare products she is supposed to have because she is supposed to be a stay at home mom?! A woman should be able to wear a pantsuit (yes I said a pantsuit) with big enough pockets to fit... maybe her phone!? At least her phone would be nice! See, I got the idea for this post and its premise (OH, there I go using vocab) while sitting in my chem class and watching my chem teacher take at least five dry erase markers out of his pocket! In the process of watching this, I saw his hand reach a FOOT down his leg as he reached into HUGE DEEP pockets that he could fit a puppy in, and I realized; not only do men have pockets, but they are WAY bigger than any women's pockets that I've ever seen! I mean they still make leggings with little tiny pockets for iPods - which are so outdated now, that it's just comical! No one takes their iPod nano on their run anymore Under Armour and Nike, so can you please make your pockets big enough to fit five dry erase markers, a puppy, and my iPhone 11 Pro Max please?! Gah-leee, where is Beneatha when you need her feistiness to help your cause?  

 

"In Light of" Ponderings

In light of World Kindness Day just passing and Thanksgiving coming up, I wanted to take a moment to write about why it's important to be kind, and talk about what I'm thankful for.

In high school there is a lot of pressure. In life there is a lot of pressure. In some way, big or small, we all suffer from anxiety. We are all imperfect and make mistakes. We all have flaws, some that we can control, and some that we can't. We all have obstacles to overcome. We all have challenges that we have to face. We all sometimes have to deal with loss or disappointment. The point is, life is HARD. Especially as a teenager when the whole pressure of what our future will be like and all the decisions that come with figuring that out, are weighing down on us. That is why it is important to be kind to each other.

We live in such a fragile, broken, messed up world, so the least we can do is keep kindness abundant in it. Everyone is capable of being kind, and it can have a much bigger impact than you might think or expect. Even just a smile can make someone's day. A compliment can reaffirm someone's self worth and make them feel confident. A helping hand can inspire someone to help someone else.

I remember in elementary school in my fourth grade class we had this jar that people could put compliments in, and the teacher would read them every Friday, and pass them out to their rightful owners. I always got ones that said "I love that Brenna always brings a smile to school every day" (in fact I still have that one and just came across it today) and ones that said "Brenna always lets everyone play." Those were the two most common ones I got. Still to this day, people tell me that I smile a lot, and I can't help it. I am usually happy at school because I love talking to my friends in all my classes, and I love participating in class discussions (in case you haven't noticed by now, I do love to talk when I'm comfortable and know what I'm going to say). Literally talk-show host Kelly Clarkson is my alter ego.

Anyway, I never knew until my fourth grade class made it known to me, that my smile made that much of a difference, but apparently it was a bight spot in a lot of my classmates' days. Now that I've had orthodontic work done to me teeth, my smile must be blinding (just kidding). But this proves that the smallest of things can really impact people and make them feel special, loved, or important. I challenge everyone reading this to try to be a little bit kinder. Don't ignore the person that drops something in the hallway on Monday, pick it up for them. Don't post a mean, sarcastic comment on your social media, instead tag your friend and tell them how thankful you are for them. There are a myriad of small, easy ways to be kind, so no more excuses! Be kind.

Putting World Kindness Day aside for a moment (but not kindness itself), Thanksgiving is coming up. I love Thanksgiving for the food, but I also love Thanksgiving because I love telling people how much they mean to me and how thankful I am for them! Last year I made two Thanksgiving cards for two of my past teachers and it was so much fun to do! This year I don't know if I will make cards or have a project but, I'm thankful for these blogs honestly! I love that they give us a creative outlet in AP English! They are so much fun to write in your authentic voice using your own creativity! I also love that we all get to connect through the comments and hear each other's different perspectives. I am really thankful that overall so far, this year has been much better than last year, because unlike Daisy, Tom, and Braddock Washington think, it doesn't matter how much money or how many diamonds you have. I don't care about that for myself either. I'm rich because I go to an amazing school where I get a great education, I have amazing friends and family, I have a house, I have a dog, and I have all the necessities of life. Now that is something to be truly thankful for! Happy Thanksgiving to everyone!

Be kind. Be thankful. It's the right state of mind. - Brenna (cheesy I know, but I like cheese - and mediocre rhymes)

"If I were a superhero, I would want my superpowers to be cloning and teleportation so that I could be everywhere at the same time and help everyone." - Brenna (I literally said this to my mom as I was sitting on the couch writing this blog post, because it's true - I LOVE helping people!) You can ask my mom, I say that all the time, and I truly mean it! I try to help as many people as I can because it's FUN TO BE KIND!!

My Ponderings and I Peeking Out of Our Pocket

"After a moment the proprietor emerged from the interior of his establishment and gazed hollow-eyed at the car" (Fitzgerald 130), is the quote that led to the subject of this post. From this quote alone, it is evident that F. Scott Fitzgerald (who I will refer to as Fitz from now on) has a way with words. His vocabulary is impeccable, and his diction and syntaxes are unparalleled! During my first read through of that quote (yes I have read it several times since then), I literally squealed (for lack of a better word) with delight at the diction, because being a total word nerd, that kind of thing excites me.

Speaking of word nerds, I must take this opportunity to plug my favorite tv show in the whole entire world - Signed Sealed Delivered. It aired as a series of tv episodes and then two hour movie installments on Hallmark Movies and Mysteries, and has now moved to Hallmark Drama. I became more of a word nerd through watching the show because one of the main characters, Oliver O'Toole, is a major word nerd! He is constantly quoting old-fashioned laureates such as Marcus Aurelius and Shakespeare. Half of my vocabulary such as words like; effervescence, abhor, ablutions, incommunicado (which is so much fun to say), provenance (not providence), and unparalleled (which I used at the beginning of this post and use a lot) all come from his dialogue in the show. I have even adopted some of his phrases into my everyday speech such as; "self-terminating", "red letter day", and "brazenly manipulative." So if you want to be touched, inspired, and even healed in the deepest way, you should definitely get ahold of the show on Amazon, DVD, or on Hallmark's streaming service - Hallmark Movies Now. Not only is it wholesome, captivating, funny, and unique entertainment, but the vocabulary and history it teaches you just might be the difference you need to bump up your next in-class essay grade.

Marcus Aurelius

Here is the general synopsis according to Hallmark Channel:

A group of postal detectives work to solve the mysteries behind undeliverable letters and packages from the past, delivering them when they are needed most.

Here is the synopsis of the pilot movie according to Hallmark Channel:

Tech-savvy Shane joins traditional mail enthusiast Oliver and his small team in the Dead Letters Office, a group of postal detectives whose determination to deliver the seemingly undeliverable takes them out of the post office into an unpredictable world where letters and packages from the past save lives, solve crimes, reunite old loves and change futures by arriving late but always miraculously on time. This motley crew investigates a lost love letter from a sick woman, growing deeply invested in her love story in so doing. When the search leads the team to a falsely imprisoned man, they realize that both love and a man's life are at stake. Taking their investigation outside the boundaries of the postal system, the Dead Letters Office works to clear the name of the wrongfully accused man and reunite him with the love of his life.

Each dead letter story is different, but the stories of the four main characters develop further with each installment.

Here is the Amazon link to the series of episodes that came directly after the pilot, which is unfortunately, currently unavailable on Amazon:

https://www.amazon.com/Signed-Sealed-Delivered-Complete-Hallmark/dp/B00S4YGWAQ/ref=sr_1_19?crid=P33UXB74MYO8&keywords=signed+sealed&qid=1573868081&sprefix=signed+selaed%2Caps%2C213&sr=8-19

If you ever watched Ugly Betty with Eric Mabius, he stars as Oliver O'Toole - the word nerd himself! And if you ever watched Touched By an Angel, the same executive producer of that - Martha Williamson - created Signed Sealed Delivered, which she also executive produces as well as writes. I'd like to point out though, that I myself have not watched Ugly Betty nor Touched By an Angel, but I still love Signed Sealed Delivered!

Eric Mabius as Daniel Meade in Ugly Betty

Eric Mabius as Oliver O'Toole in SSD

Long plug aside, after reading that Great Gatsby quote, I was immediately taken back to my eighth grade days, when in honors English we were required to read Charles Dickens' Oliver Twist. Hating history and therefore classic novels, I thought I would hate the book, but I loved it! Dickens had me entranced, and broke the "classics" mold for me. My stereotypical idea of a classic novel completely changed after reading Oliver Twist. I was in awe of his language, and thoroughly amazed at how the novel came full circle and every character was connected! If there is anything you should know about me, it's that the littlest of things can make me happy. One of the things I love, is when things come full circle, because as a writer myself, I am far from a master at the skill of making my stories come full circle in an intriguing and surprising way. Dickens basically blew my mind! He's another writer that is on my long list of geniuses.

Brenna's List of Geniuses (as Mentioned in Previous Blog Posts)

 

1. Shakespeare 

2. Toni Morrison 

3. F. Scott Fitzgerald 

4. Charles Dickens 

5. Taylor Swift (Cuz duh - and that was implied when I mentioned her song lyric - plus I had to throw another woman on the list - cuz girl power!)  

 

Reminding me of Dickens due to his impeccable use of the English language, I decided to look into Dickens' background to see if there were any commonalities between him and Fitz that may have caused them to write in similar styles. I'm sorry to say that my research turned up very little of anything worth mentioning, besides very general and most likely coincidental facts. Both Dickens and Fitz didn't have great marriages, wrote a lot based on personal experiences, did a little acting, and lived in Europe for a time, but other than that they were from completely different times and backgrounds. Dickens was very academic and career oriented, taking several menial jobs to make ends meet before he made it as a writer. Then, when he did make it, he was obsessed with doing professional readings and reading tours. He only missed a deadline once in his career, making him pretty much the complete opposite of the wild, partying, and crazy Fitzgerald. What I did find interesting though is that when I googled "Do F. Scott Fitzgerald and Charles Dickens have anything in common?", I found a bunch of articles and essays comparing and contrasting Dickens' Great Expectations with The Great Gatsby. Not only do the titles share a common word, but apparently the novels in their entirety share much more in common, such as characterizations, themes, etc. I didn't want to read too in depth due to my suspicions that I will one day be forced to read Great Expectations - or I will choose to read it, and I didn't want to spoil for it myself. But whether Dickens and Fitz writing extremely similar novels was the case or not, they will always have in common the title of "genius" in my mind. They both wrote amazing novels, that at certain points I couldn't even put down... but didn't even expect to like!

Finding Gatsby's Pocket of Society

Before I started reading The Great Gatsby, I thought that "gatsby" referred to an era or a feeling. I thought a "gatsby" was this fancy party or gala, or even an era of parties. I didn't know that in the book, Gatsby is actually a person and a character. But I wasn't far off, because the book still does include lots of parties; and that is how the 1920s era - when the book takes place - is partially defined. Parties, drinking, women, and wealth all define either the book, the 1920s, or both. So I got to wondering how or why I would've thought that "Gatsby" refers to an era or a feeling, and then I realized it's because "Gatsby" is Fitzgerald's and The Great Gatsby's legacy. The book is so well-known, that the word "gatsby" has been adapted into mainstream society and accepted a new definition - one that makes it widely used and alluded to in everyday speech.

Every time I hear the word "gatsby", I immediately think of the most recent use of the word (in present day society's context for it) that I am familiar with; and that is Taylor Swift's song "This is Why We Can't Have Nice Things", in which there is a lyric that goes "Feeling so gatsby for that whole year." In that context Taylor refers to "gatsby" as a feeling. So up until I actually read The Great Gatsby, I had only heard "gatsby" used in such contexts like Taylor's song lyric. Society today does in fact use "gatsby" to describe a feeling, or as an adjective to describe someone or something that is lavish or extravagant. In fact the Urban Dictionary (which sort of happens to be the dictionary of modern day speech) displays the following when you look up the definition of "Gatsby", and actually credits the book and Fitzgerald with being the origin of the concept.

I think this definition of "gatsby" really does describe Gatsby himself perfectly. After all, "there was something gorgeous about him..."(Fitzgerald 2). Fitzgerald even used the word extravagant in adverb form to describe Gatsby once, saying he was, "extravagantly ambitious" (Fitzgerald 100). Clearly Gatsby truly is extravagant and cool, so not only is he the epitome of this definition, but he created this definition!

This also got me thinking about how you know you're a successful author when society takes a concept, character, or word from your book, and alludes to it for decades/centuries and generations to come in everyday speech. Two other popular examples are Scrooge, courtesy of Charles Dickens' A Christmas Carol, and Romeo, courtesy of William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet.

In just about every Christmas movie that is made today, one character calls the grouchy character that lacks Christmas spirit a "Scrooge" - and we all know what that means. You also always hear girls and women calling the super handsome guy they like, a "Romeo". "He's my Romeo" or "he's such a Romeo", are not uncommon phrases to hear uttered out of a smitten woman's mouth in 2019.

All that being said, I think it is safe to say that Fitzgerald, Dickens, and Shakespeare were all obviously geniuses in their own right, whose legacies are still living on today. They are somehow so good, that they are dead and still contributing to society!

Fitzgerald 

Dickens 

Shakespeare 

Ponderings of a Self-Loathing Woman On An Unsent Postcard

Doesn't he know "black women want your whole self"?! "Why [doesn't] he understand me"?! I don't want him to "go anywhere I ain't "or love anything on earth but me" - is that too much to ask?! He hasn't given me anything but fake love for sex and pleasure. He doesn't know who I am or understand me. He does not truly love me - he left me. Dumped me with a letter that said "thank you"! He thanked me for making him happy?! He's grateful?!

Don't you see? That's why I had to stalk him and try to kill him. He dumped me! He used me! He was the only thing I had in my life that made me feel like I was loved, special, and wanted. When he left me, I realized just how worthless I am. I realized how ugly and unwanted I am. I realized that no man could ever want me, and I shall die alone. Milkman has the same hair as me, but he doesn't like mine. He wants to escape that kind of hair. "He likes silky hair." He likes "curly, wavy, silky hair. He doesn't like mine." That has to be why he left me right? I'm not beautiful enough? Or maybe I'm not white enough. I thought mango tango, sunny glow, and jungle red could fix this. I thought they would make me prettier - and lighter. But they just highlighted my flaws. I saw myself in Pilate and Reba's eyes. They thought I looked foolish, heartbroken, and desperate. Well that's because I am! I just want Milkman to love me! How can he not love his own cousin?! I gave myself to him and he tossed me to the curb like a bag of trash!

But as angry as I was and still am, I couldn't kill him. His face is still so beautiful. The killing attempts are simply an excuse to get close to him and pretend like I hate him for what he did. I do hate him, but even more than that, I just don't want to let him go. I want him to to be mine! I want to scare him, yes, but I could never hurt my baby. I own him. I consume his thoughts and his nightmares, and that was my plan all along. That is what I want. If he doesn't want me, he surely won't forget me.

Every time I hold that knife inches from his body, I own him. I have him wrapped around my finger. He can't do anything but be close to me and hold his breath in my presence. And that is always enough for me.

But Milkman still hates the way I look. He likes "lemon-colored skin" and "penny colored hair." I am right for him, but I hate myself for not being right for him! If he can't see how right I am, then he can't have me. I will leave this world - dead from a broken heart. I will die with the mango tango, sunny glow, and jungle red on my face so maybe God will think I'm beautiful. 

~ Hagar

Attempting to Read the Inner Pockets of Toni Morrison's Mind

As indicated by the title of this post, I am going to attempt to analyze one of the big decisions Toni Morrison had to make in the writing of The Song of Solomon. The reason I want to analyze this decision, is because the decision she made strayed from the *stereotypical definition of a novel and what most authors choose to do.* But let's face it, if anyone were to stray from the norm, it'd be her since she's pretty much a genius. It worked for her too, because she won every award possible for the novel, and English classes around the world read her book. This "decision" that I'm referring to is her decision to make the main character (Milkman) somewhat annoying, extremely oblivious, profoundly stupid, and quite unlikable to the reader. Being the main character, the reader encounters Milkman the most, so why would Toni (yes we are totally on a first name basis with each other) make Milkman so annoying and unlikable to read about? If she wasn't thee Toni Morrison, no one would read the book then... right? Milkman would immediately annoy readers and deter them from the book, causing them to eventually abandon it altogether. So why does Milkman as a main character work in The Song of Solomon for Toni Morrison? Is it just because of Toni Morrison's acclaim? Do people just trick their minds into thinking the book has to be good because it was written by her? We may never know for sure, but some theorizing never hurt anyone, in fact I hope it serves to satisfy some curiosity.

Before I begin to analyze, I must clarify and explain. You may be wondering how I thought to even analyze this. How did this particular thought even enter my mind? Well it goes back to the *stereotypical definition of a novel. In the process of planning to write a novel in my creative writing class, we had to learn about what makes a "good novel" good and a "bad novel" bad. We had to think about novels we'd previously read and what we liked and disliked about them. Then, in groups we had to create two lists; one list consisting of the elements of a good novel, and one list consisting of the elements of a bad novel. As you can probably guess by now, one of the main elements that the majority of the groups included on the "Elements of Good Novels List" was a likable main character! I came into AP English the next day, and my group started recapping the chapter we read the night before for homework. I can't remember the exact chapter, (mind you this happened a few times in my group) but they immediately stated how much they disliked Milkman, and POOF - this idea came to me. Milkman doesn't fit the stereotype for main characters and I intend to theorize about why.

First, let me remind you how annoying Milkman can be in case you forgot. Here are just a few examples of some really stupid things Milkman has done throughout the course of the novel.

1. Milkman breaks up with Hagar through a letter! This is equivalent at this time to being "dumped by text"! He also includes money in the letter as if he's trying to buy her tranquility and ignornace over the fact that he just dumped her through a letter.

Let me include a specific excerpt of the letter that was included in the book to show how ridiculous this really was. Milkman ENDED the letter with this; Also, I want to thank you. Thank you for all you have meant to me. For making me happy all these years. I am signing this letter with love, of course but more than that, with gratitude. This of course was followed by a wad of cash stuck at the bottom - because duh, Milkman is GRATEFUL!

2. Another more minor example is this quote that really just speaks for itself.

Example of Pure Stupidity #107

"There he saw a crude footpath he might have found earlier if he had not been so hasty."

3. The next example is when Milkman receives the message left for him by Guitar at the general store. He goes in circles thinking about what Guitar could've meant by "good luck" and "your day was sure coming" and concludes with the LEAST PLAUSIBLE possibility. He concludes that "Guitar needed to find [him] and he needed help" indicating that Guitar is in some sort of trouble. Yeah right. Guitar does need to find you Milkman, but only so you can help him kill you!

4. Don't forget the little fact that Milkman decided to go hunting with a group of men that were angry with him, teasing him, picking fights with him, and trying to KILL him! He then puts himself in the position where he is surrounded by these men while they have GUNS! He has never shot a gun in his life, but he thinks this is a good idea?! Not to mention that Guitar is still out there, and we all know what happens with that.

So hopefully you at least somewhat agree that compared to most main characters, Milkman is so annoying, extremely oblivious, profoundly stupid, and quite unlikable to the reader. Now the question is... why?

Here is my first thought. In a good novel, the main character should come to some realizations and/or show some growth. Therefore, by making Milkman so extremely oblivious, Toni allows him to have extensive room for growth and a huge potential to come to realizations. Some authors pull this off without making the main character extremely oblivious or annoying, but Toni had a vision for Milkman and she chose to make him that way in the novel. But not only does Milkman have a lot of room for growth, but everything else in the story stems from his bad or stupid decisions because he is the main character. He stirs up conflict with almost every other character in the novel, and conflict is also an element of a good novel. If you have no conflict, you have no story, or you have a really boring story. So somehow, Toni took out the element of a likable main character, but inserted twice the element of conflict to balance it out, and it worked!

Another reason I think Toni might've chosen to make Milkman well... Milkman is that I think she was  trying to use reverse psychology on us readers. If you think about it, it's kind of worked. We get so annoyed by Milkman and so confused as to why he does the things he does, that we actually begin to root for him and want to see him change. This intrigue is what causes us to keep reading despite our confusion and annoyance. Toni has written it so the potential happy ending of this book becomes Milkman finding who he is, understanding society, hopefully becoming more mature, and learning to be thoughtful and rational. Since human nature naturally wants a happy ending, we subconsciously (yes I just tied back to subliminal messaging) keep reading without knowing why.

Hopefully these theories and insights make you feel a little more sympathetic towards Milkman. It not, hopefully they help you understand our friend Toni's decision a little bit better, satisfying the curiosity I raised by my questions.

Pickpocketed Identities

What I find the most interesting in Song of Solomon is how the characters are named and the meanings behind their names. As a writer myself, I love considering every little detail (like the meaning of a name) when I write my own characters. Just recently I was trying to come up with a name for a character in my novel that I'm writing for my creative writing class, and I literally searched for names that had the meaning I was looking for. This is so fun to do as an author, because you hope eventually, you will have some smart readers that discover your secret. You hope that they figure out that the characters' names mean something and tell about who the character is. What is interesting with Song of Solomon though, is that Toni Morrison outright tells us how the characters are named, saying all their names "come from the bible" and sometimes even by "blind selection" if the namers were illiterate for instance. So Morrison doesn't hide the fact that all the characters' names are names that can be found in the bible (with a few exceptions), and the people of the bible's identities have been

pick-pocketed and given to her characters from the reader. What she doesn't say though, is if as the author, she gave certain characters their specific names from the bible for specific reasons. Somehow I have a hunch that she did. We already learned the story behind Guitar's name since his doesn't come from the bible, and we learned the significance of Pilate's name this past week in class. Some implied foreshadowing on our parts led us to believe that Pilate's name will have even more meaning, in addition to the irony it already contains, as we read further. This got me to wondering if all the other character names extracted from the bible shape the character's roles in the story according to their meanings as well. Let's take a look at Hagar, Reba, First Corinthians and Magdalene.

Starting with Hagar, I didn't even have to do much digging, and I was shocked at what I uncovered! Hagar from the bible lived with a couple named Abraham and Sarah and acted as Abraham's concubine - a woman that has sex with someone that she in not legally married to and possibly cannot get married to. This is precisely what Hagar is to Milkman in the novel! In Hagar from the bible's case, she could not marry Abraham because he was already married to Sarah. In Hagar from the novel's case, she cannot marry Milkman because they are technically cousins. Hagar from the bible also longed for a relationship like what we have seen Hagar from the novel seem to do. In the bible though, it turns out that Hagar's most intimate relationship is with God. Will we see Hagar and Pilate's relationship develop more? Hagar from the bible also got pregnant with Abraham because she was acting as a surrogate for Sarah who could not conceive, but desperately wanted a kid. Please tell me that Milkman doesn't get Hagar pregnant.

Next we have Reba (short for Rebekah). I skimmed several super long articles about Rebekah in the bible, and really couldn't find anything to connect her to Reba in the novel. Her time in the bible is rather extensive, as evidenced by the long articles about her, so she must've been important and influential, but how does this connect to Reba - if it does at all? Reba is one of the main characters in the book since she is part of the Dead family, so I think it is safe to say a lot more is to come from her. The only thing I found is that Rebekah saves one of her son's lives in the bible. Will Reba have to save Hagar's life? So far in the novel, we haven't been given any indication that Hagar will die. Grasping at straws here, I looked up the literal definition of Rebekah and it literally means "to captivate." So far I haven't found Reba's role in the novel super captivating, but like I said, I think we can expect a lot more from her. In the bible Rebekah is captivating with her beauty. All the articles I read about Rebekah made a point to emphasize that she was this gorgeous woman. I don't feel like it is emphasized in the novel that Reba is beautiful, but I assume she is because she is the daughter of Pilate who we know a little bit more about. We also know that Hagar is beautiful (at least to Milkman) and Reba is her mother.

First Corinthians is a little different because she is named after a book in the bible, rather than an individual. Could this alone somehow be significant? In thinking about that question, I was immediately taken back to when Freddie told Milkman to "ask Corinthians" about the recent murders. We are given the impression that Corinthians knows a lot more than the rest of the characters. So could her name imply that she knows a large, book-size amount of knowledge compared to the other characters? She does seem to be very smart, even informing her father that "negroes don't like water." Additionally, the book of First Corinthians addresses many issues such as lawsuits, sexual immortality, and arguments among the different people and groups in the bible. This further confirms the theory that Corinthians seems to know "the town gossip" if you will, that includes issues such as the book of First Corinthians in the bible does. The overall community in the bible actually had a negative impact on the Corinthian church, which leads me to believe that Corinthians may be negatively impacted by all that she knows. There is something quite eerie and disturbing about the fact that she knows something about murders and she's just a young child. That can't be good for her young mind. 

All I am really able to provide about Magdalene is some insightful foreshadowing because she hasn't played a very big role in the novel thus far, and therefore we don't know much about her. Could this be because her role will be huge later? Mary Magdalene in the bible was one of Jesus' most devoted and loyal followers. She was the first one to see Jesus' empty tomb, and therefore the first to know of His resurrection. She was then able to share that news with everyone. If Pilate is still acting as God in the novel, will Magdalene become closer with her? Will Pilate die like we have inferred and Magdalene be the first to find her and share the news?

Some of these are purely inferences or speculations, but I do think they help make the future reading we have ahead of us seem much more interesting. Toni Morrison is just amazingly good at developing the novel slowly and keeping the readers intrigued by not giving away too much information. 

Tucked in My Mind's Back Pocket

Tucked in my mind's back pocket, there is one last afterthought about Maus that I didn't get to share in the socratic seminar... so here it is.

Some may claim that Maus ended because Vladek died, and while that is true, Art could've added more. Art could've made up a bunch more and never told us when Vladek died in relationship to the story. Or, Art could've ended the story where he did, but added a bunch of his own commentary and afterthoughts.


Instead, Art shows a gravestone with the name Spiegelman at the top and the name Vladek underneath. This serves to remind the remind the readers that Vladek was a Spiegelman too - so technically his name is also on the cover of the book. Underneath the gravestone is Art's name and the years that make up the time in which he worked on and completed Maus. Art includes the dates after the gravestone to show that Vladek died, and immediately after, he ended the story.

I find this really touching and honorable on Art's part. Even though Art and Vladek didn't have the best father-son relationship, Art took every single measure possible to make sure his father's story was told accurately and honored properly. He even went through all the trouble of recording Vladek to include what he said verbatim. But the most important measure was this ending, because it truly represents the notion that Art believed he was just the middle man between Vladek's words and the page. It wasn't Art's story to tell - it was Vladek's, and Art shows that he knew that full well and believed that wholeheartedly through the ending he chose. When Vladek's story ended (literally), so did the book, because Art knew that adding his own commentary or afterthoughts would've tarnished Vladek's story.

This could also be why, in the book, Artie is uncomfortable with all the press for Maus. It is precisely because he feels guilty for essentially building his career off of dead bodies, but also off of his father's story and not his own.

That is why I think that the ending is so important - it gives credit where credit is due. Art literally puts his name under Vladek's to not only represent the fact that Vladek was a Spiegelman, but to represent the fact that he was the superior Spiegelman in the project that was Maus. This not only honors Vladek, but probably also gave Art some closure in knowing that the world is now privy to the true author of Maus.

Packed Pocket-Size Panels

Everything in Maus has meaning. Spiegelman uses a variety of literary techniques to symbolically yet powerfully tell the story of the Holocaust. Specifically, through the strategic placements, sizes, and representations of symbols, Spiegelman emphasizes their importance and creates a relationship between the characters and the readers.  

Let's unpack all the hidden meanings in the panels on pages 32-33 in chapter 2 of volume 1. The chapter is titled The Honeymoon and starts with an image of a line of mice looking at a flag with a swastika on it, but the flag is folded. Because of the folds, you can't see the the full swastika, which represents that at this point, the Jews don't yet know their fate. They are still not privy to the full picture that awaits them. The title is also a symbolic way of saying that this was still a good time, or rather a time where the Jews were still blindsided by awe and the sense of elation at the unfamiliarity of change in the treatment of Jews now occurring in the war. A honeymoon, or even more so the honeymoon phase, is a lot like that because the marriage or relationship is still new and unfamiliar, thus making it exciting, and yet when each person gets settled in and comfortable, it can often become tragic or toxic and fall apart.

Turn to page 32, and the first thing the reader sees is a train seemingly in the distance, which simply represents the fact that the Jews are traveling so they are now further away. The odd thing though is that the train is going in the opposite direction of the way the reader reads. This makes it seem like the train is going backwards, but of more importance is the fact that because the train is oriented this way, the smoke is going forward. This is a symbol for the smoke and gas from the gas chambers in which Jews were killed, representing that by being on the train, the Jews are getting closer to their final destination... death. The bridge that the train rides on also looks like gravestones if you look at the dark negative space. 

The next panels underneath the train show the mice within looking out the windows, while the panels themselves act like windows for the readers. Therefore, the reader is an onlooking observer looking in at the mice, while the mice simultaneously look out. This relationship created between the narrative and the real world is something Spiegelman constantly uses throughout the book to include the reader in the story and make it seem more real.  

Next comes the central and biggest panel on page 32, in which the reader sees the mice looking at a flag with a swastika on it, mirroring the opening picture of the chapter. I find two things about this panel very interesting: 

1. In the previous panel, it says "Every Jew from the train got very excited and frightened." 
2. In the central panel we are told that the swastika flag was "...hanging high in the center of town..."  

Number one is interesting because why would Jews be excited to see a Nazi flag? That just means Nazis are present there, and they are the enemy of the Jews. Instead, the purpose of this remark is to reiterate what the folded swastika flag in the opening picture of the chapter was supposed to represent - the fact that the Jews can't see the whole picture yet. Even in the central panel there is still a fold in the flag, continuing to partly obscure it from the Jews, which explains why they don't know whether to feel excited or frightened at the sight of it. They may know what the flag is even when slightly obscured, but a lot more of reality is still very obscure to them. 

Number 2 is interesting because it re-establishes the relationship created between the reader and the characters. By putting the swastika in the center of the page, Spielgelman lets the readers see the swastika from the same point of view as the mice, just on a smaller scale. The smaller scale may represent that to the reader, this is far away (or from a long time ago) and may have little meaning to them... but my next point describes what Spiegleman may have done in spite of a reader attempting to think that way.  

Take note that throughout the entirety of page 32, the mice's faces all point to the swastika, symbolically emphasizing that the swastika is the center of the war, and at or soon to be at the center of every Jews mind. Spielgelman may do this to emphasize the haunting presence of the swastika, justifying its importance to the reader.
 

Finally, on page 33 in four out of the six panels, the swastika seems to be in a spotlight, again reiterating how predominate it is. It is also always in the background of those panels, a symbolic way of representing that the Nazis were always there in the background, lurking and waiting to catch Jews. 

As you can see, even on just two pages, the panels are packed with symbols that are placed, sized, and represented in such ways that their importance is emphasized and they connect to the reader. The folds in the swastika flag, the way the mice's noses point towards the swastika, the way the swastika is in the background, all play a part in subtly and symbolically showing the reader what is important through their repeated messages. They all also involve the reader and place them in the story by making them see the story as if they are looking into windows or standing from afar.