Blog Post #11

Prompt: 1990. Choose a novel or play that depicts a conflict between a parent (or a parental figure) and a son or daughter. Write an essay in which you analyze the sources of the conflict and explain how the conflict contributes to the meaning of the work. Avoid plot summary.

Thesis: In Tennessee William’s The Glass Menagerie, Amanda’s desire to prevent Tom from becoming like his father and her desire to force Laura to become more like Amanda creates conflict, illuminating the fact that the more Amanda tries to shape the lives of her children, the more they deviate from what she wants, exemplifying that only a shattering of an individual's “glass menagerie” - their idealized perception of reality - is enough to create a change in a character’s personality.


Script
SCENE 1 (Scene opens in the dining room, Amanda Laura and Tom are seated at the table eating dinner)
AMANDA: One Sunday afternoon in Blue Mountain, your mother received seventeen! gentlemen callers! Why, sometimes there weren't chairs enough to accommodate them all. We had to send the servants over to bring in folding chairs from the parish house.
TOM [Standing by the wall] : How did you entertain those gentleman callers?
A M A N D A: I understood the art of conversation !
TOM: I bet you could talk.
AMANDA: Girls in those days knew how to talk, I can tell you.
TOM: Yes?
AMANDA: They knew how to entertain their gentlemen callers. It wasn't enough for a girl to be possessed of a pretty face and a graceful figure although I wasn't alighted in either respect. She also needed to have a nimble wit and a tongue to meet all occasions.
TOM: What did you talk about?
AMANDA: Things of importance going on in the world! Never anything coarse or common or vulgar. [She addresses Tom as though he were seated in the vacant chair at the table though he remains byw wall. He is holding a newspaper.] My callers were gentleman -all! Among my callers were some of the most prominent young planters of the Mississippi Delta - planters and sons of planters!
LAURA [rising]: Mother, let me clear the table.
AMANDA: No, dear, you go in front and study your typewriter chart. Or practise your shorthand a little. Stay fresh and pretty! It's almost time for our gentlemen callers to start arriving. [She flounces girlishly toward the kitchenette.] How many do you suppose we're going to entertain this afternoon? [Tom throws down the paper and jumps up with a groan.]
LAURA [alone in the dining-room]: I don't believe we're going to receive any, Mother.
AMANDA [reappearing, airily ] What? Not one - not one? You must be joking!
AMANDA: Not one gentleman caller? It can't be true! There must be a flood, there must have been a tornado!
LAURA: It isn't a flood, it's not a tornado, Mother. I'm just not popular like you were in Blue Mountain. ...

SCENE 4: Scene opens in the kitchen- Amanda is preparing breakfast as Tom is getting ready to leave for work
AMANDA: I worry so much, don't sleep, it makes me nervous!
TOM [gently]: I understand that.
AMANDA: I've had to put up a solitary battle all these years. But you're my right-hand bower ! Don't fall down, don't fail !
TOM [gently]: I try, Mother.
AMANDA [with great enthusiasm]: Try and you will suCCEED! Promise me one thing, Son!
TOM: What, Mother?
AMANDA: Promise, Son, you'll - never be a drunkard !
TOM [turns to her grinning]: I will never be a drunkard, Mother.
AMANDA: That's what frightened me so, that you'd be drinking ! Eat a bowl of Purina !
TOM: Just Coffee, Mother..
AMANDA: We have to do all that we can to build ourselves up. In these trying times we live in, all that we have to cling to is - each other. . . . That's why it's so important to - Tom, ! - I sent out your sister so I could discuss something with you. If you hadn't spoken I would have spoken to you.
TOM [gently]: What is it, Mother, that you want to discuss?
AMANDA: Laura!
TOM: - Oh. - Laura ...
AMANDA [touching his sleeve] You know how Laura is. So quiet but - still water runs deep ! She notices things and I think she - broods about them. [Tom looks up.] A few days ago I came in and she was crying.
TOM: What about?
AMANDA: YOU.
TOM: Me?
AMANDA: She has an idea that you're not happy here
TOM: What gave her that idea?
AMANDA: What gives her any idea? I know your ambitions do not lie in the warehouse, that like everybody in the whole wide world - you've had to make sacrifices, but - Tom - Tom - life's not easy, it calls for - Spartan endurance ! There's so many things in my heart that I cannot describe to you ! I've never told you but - I loved your father. . . .
TOM [gently] : I know that, Mother.
AMANDA: And you - when I see you taking after his ways ! Staying out late - and - well, you had been drinking the night you were in that - terrifying condition ! Laura says that you hate the apartment and that you go out nights to get away from it! Is that true, Tom?
TOM: No. You say there's so much in your heart that you can't describe to me. That's true of me, too. There's so much in my heart that I can't describe to"you! So let's respect each other's -
AMANDA: But, why - why, Tom - are you always so restless? Where do you go to, nights?
TOM: I - go to the movies.
AMANDA: Why do you go to the movies so much, Tom?
TO M: I go to the movies because - I like adventure Adventure is something I don't have much of at work, so I go to the movies.
AMANDA: But, Tom, you go to the movies entirely too much !
TOM: I like a lot of adventure.
AMANDA: Most young men find adventure in their careers.
TOM: Then most young men are not employed in a warehouse.
AMANDA: The world is full of young men employed in warehouses and offices and factories.
TOM: Do all of them find adventure in their careers?
AMANDA: They do or they do without it! Not everybody has a craze for adventure.
TOM: You want me to punch in red at the warehouse, Mother?
AMANDA: You have five minutes. I want to talk about Laura.
TOM: All right! What about Laura?
AMANDA: We have to be making some plans and provisions for her. She's older than you, two years, and nothing has happened. She just drifts along doing nothing. It frightens me terribly how she just drifts along.
TOM: I guess she's the type that people call home girls.
AMANDA: There's no such type, and if there is, it's a pity ! That is unless the home is hers, with a husband !
TOM: What?
AMANDA: Oh, I can see the handwriting on the wall as plain as I see the nose in front of my face ! It's terrifying ! More and more you remind me of your father ! He was out all hours without explanation ! - Then left ! Good-bye ! And me with the bag to hold. I saw that letter you got from the Merchant Marine. I know what you're dreaming of. I'm not standing here blindfolded. Very well, then. Then, do it ! But not till there's somebody to take your place.
TOM: What do you mean?
AMANDA: I mean that as soon as Laura has got somebody to take care of her, married, a home of her own, independent ?- why, then you'll be free to go wherever you please, on land, on sea, whichever way the wind blows you !But until that time you've got to look out for your sister. I don't say me because I'm old and don't matter - I say for your sister because she's young and dependent. I put her in business college - a dismal failure ! Frightened her so it made her sick at the stomach.I took her over to the Young Peoples League at the church. Another fiasco. She spoke to nobody, nobody spoke to her. Now all she does is fool with those pieces of glass and play those worn-out records. What kind of a life is that for a girl to lead?
TOM: What can I do about it?
AMANDA: Overcome Selfishness ! Self, self, self is all that you ever think of ! [Tom crosses to get his coat and opens door]
AMANDA: Tom ! I haven't said what I had in mind to ask you.
TOM: I'm too late to-
AMANDA [catching his arm - very importunately. Then shyly]: Down at the warehouse, aren't there some - nice young men?
TOM: No !
AMANDA: There must be - some
TOM: Mother [Gesture.]
AMANDA: Find out one that's clean-living - doesn't drink and - ask him out for sister !
AMANDA: Will you? [Tom walks out and Amanda calls after him] Will you? [He starts down.] Will you? Will you, dear?
TOM [calling back]: YES !

SCENE 7: *In living room, Laura and Jim are sitting on the couch in a dimly lit room
J I M [laughs gently.]: What are you doing now?
LAURA: I don't do anything - much. Oh, please don't think I sit around doing nothing! My glass collection takes up a good deal of time. Glass is something you have to take good care of
JIM: What did you say - about glass?
LAURA: Collection I said - I have one - [she clears her throat and turns away, acutely shy.]
JIM: [abruptly]: You know what I judge to be the trouble with you? Inferiority complex I Know what that is? That's what they call it when someone low-rates himself ! Yep - that's what I judge to be your principal trouble. A lack of amount of faith in yourself as a person. You don't have the proper amount of faith in yourself. I'm basing that fact on a number of your remarks and also on certain observations I've made. For instance that clumping you thought was so awful in high school. You say that you even dreaded to walk into class. You see what you did? You dropped out of school, you gave up an education because of a clump, which as far as I know was practically non-existent! A little physical defect is what you have. Hardly noticeable even! Magnified thousands of times by imagination ! You know what my strong advice to you is? Think of yourself as superior in some way!
LAURA: In what way would I think?
JIM: Why, man alive, Laura! just look about you a little. What do you see? A world full of common people! All of 'em born and all of 'em going to die ! Everybody excels in some one thing. Some in many !
JIM: Now how about you? Isn't there something you, take more interest in than anything else?
LAURA: Well, I do - as I said - have my - glass collection
JIM: I'm not right sure I know what you're talking about What kind of glass is it?
LAURA: Little articles of it, they're ornaments mostly. Most of them are little animals made out of glass, the tiniest little animals in the world. Mother calls them A glass menagerie ! Here's an example of one, if you'd like to see it. This one is one of the oldest. It's nearly thirteen. [He stretches out his hand.]
LAURA: Oh, be careful - if you breathe, it breaks !
JIM: I'd better not take it. I'm pretty clumsy with things.
LAURA: Go on, I trust you with him ! [Places it in his palm.]
LAURA: There now - you're holding him gently ! Hold him over the light, he loves the light! You see how the light shines through him?
JIM: It sure does shine!
LAURA: I shouldn't be partial, but he is my favourite one.
JIM: What kind of a thing is this one supposed to be?
LAURA: Haven't you noticed the single horn on his forehead head?
JIM: A unicorn, huh?
LAURA: Mmmm-hmmm!
JIM: Unicorns, aren't they extinct in the modern world?
LAURA: I know !
JIM: Poor little fellow, he must feel sort of lonesome.
LAURA [smiling]: Well, if he does he doesn't complain about it. He stays on a shelf with some horses that don't have horns and all of them seem to get along nicely together.
JIM: How do you know?
LAURA [Iightly]: I haven't heard any arguments among them!
JIM: [grinning]: No arguments, huh? Well, that's a pretty good sign ! Where shall I set him?
LAURA: Put him on the table. They all like a change of scenery once in a while !
JIM: How about cutting the rug a little, Miss Wingfield?
LAURA [breathlessly]: I - can't dance !
JIM: There you go, that inferiority stuff ! Come on, try !
LAURA: Oh, but I'd step on you !
JIM: I'm not made out of glass.
LAURA: How - how - how do we start?
J IM: just leave it to me. You hold your arms out a little.
LAURA: Like this?
JIM: A little bit higher. Right. Now don't tighten up, that's the main thing about it - relax.
LAURA [laughs breathlessly]: It's hard not to. I'm afraid you can't budge me.
JIM: What do you bet I can't? [He swings her into motion.]
LAURA: Goodness, yes, you can!
JIM: Let yourself go, now, Laura, just let yourself go. [He moves her about the room in a clumsy dance] [They suddenly bump into the table. JIM stops] What did we hit on?
LAURA: Table.
JIM: Did something fall off it? I think-
LAURA: Yes.
JIM: I hope that it wasn't the little glass horse with the horn !
LAURA: Yes.
JIM: Aw aw aw- Is it broken?
LAURA: Now it is just like all the other horses.
JIM: It's lost its -
LAURA: Horn! It doesn't matter. Maybe it's a blessing in disguise.
JIM: You'll never forgive me. I bet that that was your Favourite piece of glass.
LAURA: I don't have favourites much. It's no tragedy, Freckles. Glass breaks so easily. No matter how careful you are. The traffic jars the shelves and things fall off them.
JIM: Still I'm awfully sorry that I was the cause.
LAURA [smiling] I'll just imagine he had an operation. The horn was removed to make him feel less - freakish ! [They both laugh.] Now he will feel more at home with the other horses, the ones that don't have horns. .
JIM: Ha-ha, that's very funny !
JIM: The only trouble is that in my case I’m not in a situation to do the right thing. The thing is I’ve got strings on me. Laura, I’ve been going steady! I go out all the time with a girl named Betty.
JIM: The fact of the matter is, I’ve got to be going.


The Glass Menagerie Synopsis

A General Synopsis: The Glass Menagerie by Tennessee Williams is an autobiographical "memory play," , anchored by the aging southern belle Amanda Wingfield, who hopes for her son Tom to fulfill her dreams of finding the perfect “gentleman caller” for her shy and damaged daughter Laura.

Playwright Background Information Playwright Tennessee Williams was born on March 26, 1911, in Columbus, Mississippi. After college, he moved to New Orleans, a city that would inspire much of his writing. On March 31, 1945, his play, The Glass Menagerie, debuted on Broadway. Williams described his childhood in Mississippi as pleasant and happy, but life changed for him when his family moved to St. Louis, Missouri. His new urban home forced him to leave his carefree boyhood, and as a result Williams turned inward and started to write. His parent’s marriage was often strained and his home, at times, was a tense place to live. This situation, however, did offer fuel for the playwright's art. His mother became the model for the foolish but strong Amanda Wingfield in The Glass Menagerie.
Primary characters:
• Amanda - The mother of the family, a southern belle with a bubbly personality. Amanda is paranoid and often lives in her past.
• Tom - Son of Amanda and narrator of the piece. Tom craves “adventure,” and goes to the movies every night. He wants to run away because he is fed up with his family’s oppressive dependence on him
• Laura - Daughter of Amanda. She has one leg shorter than the other (disability) and is painfully shy. She dropped out of high school and business college and is obsessive about playing her “victrola” and with her glass collection.
-Jim - The “gentleman caller” set up by Tom for Laura. A high school hero who is ambitious. However, he turns out to be engaged to “Betty.”
• The Father: Never actually appears, but is talked about. His portrait hangs in the apartment and he left the family years ago because he “fell in love with long distances”.

Setting
• The family currently lives in a cramped apartment in a lower-class part of St. Louis in the years 1930s, the time of Depression. Tom, from an indefinite point in the future, remembers the winter and spring of 1937.
• Fire Escape: Used as a way of escaping life in the apartment. Key Plot Moments.
• Family resides in St. Louis with Tom working at a warehouse and Amanda, who never states where she works, involved in different organizations and activities such as DAR. Laura, who secretly dropped out of school, helps her mother around the house and plays with glass figurines.
• Amanda confronts Tom about him being too much like his father. She confesses she is worried about him, while Tom states that he is out late at night at the movies because he craves adventure. Amanda then pleads Tom to find Laura a “gentleman caller” or future husband.
• Tom brings a “gentleman caller” named Jim for dinner one night. Jim went to high school with Laura and was her secret crush.
• Jim and Laura dance after dinner in the living room, but breaks Laura’s glass unicorn horn that was part of her figurine collection. Jim confesses to Laura that he is engaged, abruptly gets up and leaves.
• Amanda blames Tom for bringing Jim over to dinner despite Tom not knowing Jim was engaged. Tom becomes very upset and reaches his breaking point. He packs up his stuff and leaves the house to end the play.

Key Quotes
• "I'm going to the movies" - Tom (7.135)
• "Blow out your candles Laura - and so goodbye..." (7.137)
• “Poor little fellow, he must feel sort of lonesome.” (7.122)
• “Well, if he does, he doesn’t complain about it. He stays on a shelf with some horses that don’t have horns and all of them seem to get along nicely together.” (7.122)

Symbols/Motifs
• Abandonment; the words and images on the screen; music. Picture of the father.
• Laura’s Glass Menagerie-Laura’s collection of glass animal figurines represents her personality. Like the glass figures Laura is delicate, fanciful, and somehow old-fashioned.The menagerie also represents the imaginative world to which Laura devotes herself—a world that is colorful and enticing but based on fragile illusions.
• The Glass Unicorn-represents Laura’s peculiarity. The fate of the unicon’s fate foreshadows Laura’s fate in Scene Seven. Laura cannot become normal without somehow shattering.
• “Blue Roses”- Jim’s high school nickname for Laura, symbolizes Laura’s unusualness yet allure. Associated with Laura’s attraction to Jim and the memory of their unusual acquaintan. Also, recalls Tennessee Williams’s sister, Rose, on whom the character of Laura is based.
• The Fire Escape- an escape from the frustration and dysfunction in the Wingfield household. Laura slips on the fire escape in Scene Four which highlights her inability to escape from her situation. Tom, on the other hand, frequently steps out,foreshadowing his eventual getaway.

Themes
• The difficulty of accepting reality--Laura hides behind her glass in an attempt to block out the world she lives in.
• The impossibility of true escape--Tom cannot fully escape from his family troubles.
• The unrelenting power of memory--Amanda spends her time trying to make sure Tom does not follow in the footsteps of her husband, now just a memory.

Stylistic Devices
• Williams found realism to be a flat, outdated, and insufficient way of approaching emotional experience.
• The Glass Menagerie is fundamentally a non realistic play.
• Distortion, illusion, dream, symbol, and myth are the tools by which the action onstage is unraveled. • A screen displays words and images relevant to the action for example “[Screen Image: Blue Roses.]” (2.44)
• Music intrudes with melodramatic timing
• The lights rise or dim according to the mood onstage, not the time of day
• The play’s style is expressionistic—underlying meaning is emphasized at the expense of realism.
• The play’s lack of stylistic realism—Tom’s memory, yet it still has some elements of reality to make it relatable.
• Emotions like Tom’s boredom, Amanda’s nostalgia,Laura’s terror, the tension between Tom and Amanda and the quiet love between Tom and Laura are conveyed realistically. • Similarly, the lower-middle-class life of the Wingfield family is portrayed with a great deal of truth to historical and social realities.

Rationale for AP Prompt selection, scene selection, and stylistic choices. (1 page, double-spaced)
The 1990 Open Question AP prompt was fitting for Tennessee Williams’ The Glass Menagerie because one of the unifying themes of the text was the conflict between Amanda Wingfield and her children to illustrate that only a shattering of an individual's “glass menagerie” - their idealized perception of reality - is enough to create a change in a character’s personality. Amanda is constantly nagging Laura to be more outgoing, more like she herself was as a young woman in Blue Mountain. With Tom, Amanda’s main worry is that he will turn out like his father - a drunkard who abandons his family - so she constantly tries to keep him at home. However, despite having a modicum of success with Laura by showing her that there is more to life than old records and glass, Amanda fails to break Tom’s idealization of a life of adventure, and he ends up leaving the family out to dry when he joins the Merchant Marine. Another point in favor of choosing this prompt that it addresses the complexity of the relationship between the characters in the text. Although Laura did become more outgoing, it was not a direct result of Amanda’s constant nagging, but rather a consequence of Jim (the “Gentleman Caller”) kissing her, and breaking her “glass menagerie.” Prior to this occurrence, Amanda’s attempts to change Laura (signing her up for business school and sending her to the church’s “Young People’s League”) backfired by causing Laura to lose confidence in herself and close herself off to socialization even more. Also, the more Amanda tries to control Tom, the more he tries to gain independence by staying out late at the movies, and eventually not paying the bills and leaving the family entirely. In choosing the scenes to use for the video presentation, we tried to choose scenes that would exemplify the familial conflict and explore the complexity of the play. Scene 1 introduces the conflict between Amanda and Laura by showing Amanda’s fear of Laura becoming an “old maid” and the conflict between Amanda to Tom when she micromanages Tom’s every move. Scene 4 further develops the conflict between Amanda and Laura as Amanda expresses her concerns about Laura’s lifestyle to Tom. By expressing her concerns about Tom’s night-owl habits and tendency to drink, the scene adds more tension to the relationship. This scene was chosen because it is the main turning point for family, with Tom agreeing to find Laura a “gentleman caller,” and the revelation that Tom is unhappy in the apartment and has plans to leave. Scene 7, contrary to expectations, does not resolve the conflict, but brings it to its logical conclusion. Laura’s gentleman caller is revealed to be engaged to marry somebody else, and Tom leaves the family in the dark (literally - he neglects to pay the electric bill). The encounter with Jim was not a complete failure, as the symbolism of the glass menagerie is brought full circle, with the breaking of the unicorn coinciding with the breaking of Laura’s perceptions of herself (that her “clump” is horrible and she is inferior to others). The portrayal of the selected scenes was made doubly important by the time constraints, so stylistic choices had to be very deliberate and effective. Some of the more important choices were camera angle, lighting, and the modern lens through which we reenacted the play. A common camera angle we used was the over the shoulder shot. This angle allows the viewers to focus on a specific character, allowing for a greater degree of acting and plot interpretation by the actor. Similar to this angle, the point of view shot allows the audience to “become” a character, in that they can experience a conversation from the point of view of the character. Once in scene 7, the point of view is that of the glass unicorn lying broken on the ground, allowing the audience to more closely feel and understand the conversation between Jim and Laura. The basic, mid-range shot is frequently used to accurately and objectively convey the goings-on of the play. When the camera is below the characters, looking up, the characters become more powerful, as seen once when Tom and Amanda are arguing in scene 4. The effect on the interpretation of this sequence is that the audience can see two strong-willed characters in conflict, and feel the tension the way a little kid feels the tension when their parents are arguing. For most of the play, the lighting is natural, and the camera angles are relied upon to explore the nuances of the plot and theme. Scene 7, however, is an important outlier. In scene 7, the lighting is dimmer, almost like mood lighting, to emphasize the intense emotional battle going on within Laura - she is terrified by Jim because of her shyness, but she likes him. Then, once out of her shell, she is crushed to find out he is engaged to another girl. Similarly, in the sequence on the floor around the broken glass unicorn, the lighting is from below, illuminating Jim’s and Laura’s faces. This difference is important in that it draws more attention to an important part of the play, and highlights Laura’s realization that she is not inferior to others. She sympathizes strongly with the unicorn because its horn sets it apart from other horses, while her clump sets her apart from other people. The breaking of the horn symbolizes her acceptance of her difference. The modern lens through which we reenacted and interpreted the play was the reality show Keeping Up with the Kardashians. This was fitting because of the family conflict that appears in both the play and the show, and the fatherless families in both. In addition, the mother of both families is a strong character that tries to control her children, perhaps illuminating an effect of a missing paternal presence.


Works Cited
Posthuma, Johnathon. The Glass Menagerie. Cond. Teresa Ter Haar. Perf. Brian De Young. Dordt College. Dordt College, 2011. Youtue. Youtube. Web. 29 Oct. 2013. "The Glass Menagerie." SparkNotes. SparkNotes, n.d. Web. 29 Oct. 2013. West, Kanye. Graduation. Kanye West. Jon Brion, Warryn Campbell, Mike Dean, DJ Toomp, Eric Hudson, Brian Miller, Nottz, Patrick Reynolds, Gee Robertson, Kanye West (also Exec.), Kyambo "Hip Hop" Joshua (also Exec.), 2007. Youtube. Youtube. Web. 29 Oct. 2013. West, Kanye. Late Registration. Kanye West. Kanye West, Jon Brion, Devo Springsteen, Just Blaze, Warryn Campbell, 2005. Youtube. Youtube. Web. 29 Oct. 2013. Williams, Tennessee. The Glass Menagerie: A Play. [New York]: New Directions, 1949. Print.

Blog Post #10

Blog #9

 

1972. In retrospect, the reader often discovers that the first chapter of a novel or the opening scene of a drama introduces some of the major themes of the work. Write an essay about the opening scene of a drama or the first chapter of a novel in which you explain how it functions in this way.

Yann Martel’s Life of Pi was “born when [the author] was hungry” (VII), and Pi achieves a spiritual rebirth as a result of the persuasiveness of hunger. This theme of hunger, embodied through Pi’s storytelling, reinforces the assertion that the rational and animalistic sides of a person co-exist to balance physical and spiritual needs.

Quotes/Explanation:

Pi’s envious attitude toward Richard Parker portrays the animalistic side of himself as something he must come to grips with to survive.

In the beginning of chapter 57 Pi says that “it was Richard Parker who calmed [him] down” (162). Pi describes Richard Parker as “contented” and that he “had eaten his fill” (162). He discusses the contrast between his rational self and Richard Parker’s untamed personality, saying that his “animal toughness” would “outlast [Pi’s] human frailty” (164).

-Much like the chocolate in the brownie-cookie is an enticing (yet guilty) cure to hunger, so is becoming more like Richard Parker, as it promises physical contentment but requires a spiritual readjustment.

Eating meat: This spiritual adjustment begins with Pi’s decision to eat the biscuits even though they contain animal fat. It was a “pity about the fat,” but of Pi would just “pinch [his] nose and bear it” (143). A practice that Pi held dearly became merely something of “the vegetarian part” of his personality, and the seductive “chocolate” of animal products began to sway Pi towards a more animalistic mode of survival.

Eating with Richard Parker: According to How to Read Literature Like a Professor, every time a meal is shared in a story it is communion, and thus Pi’s description of eating with Richard Parker develops the unity between the two emerging personalities of Pi.

As Pi has become hungrier, he has become more accustomed to killing animals to satisfy his physical need and, as a result, is more in touch with his animalistic self. This growing connection between the tiger and Pi is embodied through the sharing of a dorado on page 186. Pi, who has killed the fish with “no problem” decides to drop half of the dorado “into the boat” for Richard Parker to eat (186).

Pi sees this killing as something awful, but necessary when he “include[s] this fish in [his] prayers” (183). This cross between Pi’s spiritual and physical need, realized through the communion between the tiger and Pi, is represented in the combination of brownie and cookie in the dessert I made. The communion helps Pi realize that he is both a fish-killing animal and a spiritual human, which leads to the way he tells the story to others.

Storytelling: In order to come to grips with the reality of humans’ barbaric tendencies, Pi tweaks the story of his survival, demonstrating his animalistic actions through the actions of Richard Parker. The interview at the end of the book boils down to Pi telling two separate stories of his survival: one with animals and one without.

After telling the version of the story containing the zoo animals, Pi tells the skeptical interviewers that “the world isn’t just the way it is” (302). Pi is no longer the purely spiritual being he was before the ordeal, but is now a compilation of Richard Parker and Piscine Patel (just as his story is a compilation of what literally happened and his rationalization of the events). Pi understands that the world is not black and white, and uses this understanding to tell a story that indirectly presents the spiritual rebirth that he endured. This is represented in the brownie-cookies. If I were to tell you that they are brownies, I would not be lying, just as Pi was not lying about spending more than 200 days on a boat with a tiger (even though both are not literally true). On the other hand, Pi spent time with his animalistic self as hunger drove him to stray from the rational part of his being towards an interconnected understanding of his own personality, exemplified by the story he tells the interviewers at the end of the book.

 

 

 

Blog #8

Comparison and Contrast of The Namesake Novel and Film

 

AP Open Question Prompt: 1997. Novels and plays often include scenes of weddings, funerals, parties, and other social occasions. Such scenes may reveal the values of the characters and the society in which they live. Select a novel or play that includes such a scene and, in a focused essay, discuss the contribution the scene makes to the meaning of the work as a whole.

 

I, Nicholas Martin, have read and understand the sections in the Student Handbook regarding Mason High School's Honesty/Cheating Policy. By affixing this statement to the title page of my paper, I am certifying that I have not cheated or plagiarized in the process of completing this assignment. If it is found that cheating and/or plagiarism did take place in the writing of this paper, I understand the possible consequences of the act, which could include a "0" on the paper, as well as an "F" as a final grade in the course.

 

Namesake Prose Essay

 

In The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahiri, Gogol’s father finally reveals the real meaning behind Gogol’s name, strengthening the themes of identity and self-awareness in the novel through a specific moment of realization. Lahiri carefully constructs the dialogue around large paragraphs of description and parallels Gogol’s attitude about his identity with his attitude about his name to show the dynamic change he experiences during the conversation. This effectively begins Gogol’s discovery that no matter how hard he tries, he will never be able to truly escape his roots.

 

When Gogol’s dad brings up his name, he is understandably “puzzled” (122). Gogol has done his best to distance himself from his family and even changed his name to break free from the unfitting, comical utterance that was his name. Plus, “he is called Gogol so seldom” (122) and does not understand why his dad would bring it up. He already thinks he knows the reason behind his name and effortlessly blows off the subject whenever it comes up, which is so easy to do because, in Gogol’s mind, his name is connected to him only by the fact that his father enjoys the writing of the famous author, Gogol. Lahiri reminds us of Gogol’s detached approach to the meaning behind his name in order to embody Gogol’s attitude towards his identity in general, before she sends the character through a shift in mindset. Paralleling the uncertainty of the conversation with his uncertain sense of self, she brings the passage full circle at the end by paralleling Gogol’s response to the conversation with his renewed appreciation of his heritage.

For example, after his father explains why he is named the way he is, Lahiri states that Gogol is “struggling,” and feels “awkward” and “ashamed” (124), finally realizing the implications of his name change and the effect on his identity. Lahiri also alludes to their Indian culture when she mentions “the sound of his pet name” (124), in order to depict how deeply the conversation affected Gogol. It brings him all the way back to his birth, to the time when he was closest with his family. Rather than a label that could be swiftly removed, Gogol’s name is now “something completely new, bound up with a catastrophe he has unwittingly embodied for years” (124).

Interestingly, Lahiri decides not to show the conversation between Gogol and his father with dialogue. Rather, she explains that Ashoke tells the story, and Gogol listens. This large gap of description between dialogues allows Lahiri to give the reader a chance to see exactly how Gogol reacts to the conversation. The uninterrupted description allows us to see that Gogol is “stunned” (123). Paradoxically, Gogol feels “for an instant” that “his father is a stranger” (123). In the moment of utmost clarity about his ties with his father and his name, Gogol feels that his father is not someone he knows, but rather someone describing something unrelated to Gogol’s life. After nearly succeeding in cutting the ties with his family, Gogol is again submerged into the identity of his family, experiencing a brief culture shock. Lahiri’s diction clearly describes the first time Gogol feels regret for his separation from family, saying he feels “oddly ashamed” (124).

 

There is a complexity to be noted in the name “Gogol” itself. It is not an Indian name, yet it connects Gogol so strongly with his past because it was derived from an important experience, which creates a stronger tie than any cultural label could produce. This complexity isn’t completely realized until the conversation in this passage occurs, and through this Lahiri effectively opens the eyes of both Gogol and the audience about just how much his old name and family affect his identity, no matter how badly he tries to escape it.

Before the conversation, Gogol writes off his old name and identity as worthless and therefore has no trouble creating a new, Americanized identity for himself. Through a lengthy interjection of description between chunks of dialogue, Lahiri maps Gogol’s reversal back to his Indian heritage through his understanding of the very thing he thought would never define him: his name.

 

 

Mise en Scene Essay

In the movie The Namesake, Mira Nair utilizes close-up framing, specific costume choices, and scene cuts with non-diegetic sound when portraying Gogol’s realization of the meaning of his name and the effect this had on his character change. These techniques help structure his change from a man trying to escape his family to one that eventually gets drawn back to his culture, showing that no matter how badly one wants to cut cultural or family ties, one will always have a connection with them.

In this scene, Gogol’s father tells him the story of how he got his name and through close-up framing on both of the characters’ faces, the director accurately portrays the newly established connection between father and son. As the story begins, close-ups of Gogol’s face reveal confusion: a disconnect. This contrasts with the close, intimate shot, creating complexity, because Gogol is feeling distant from his father, the only tie existing between them being the fact that Gogol shares his name with his father’s favorite author. In the beginning of the scene, both characters have contrasting facial expressions: Gogol showing uninterested confusion and his father portraying emotional thoughtfulness. As the scene progresses and the story is told through a flashback, close-up cuts to both of their faces reveal that Gogol is beginning to understand the tie between his name and his father, and thus adopts a similar look of thoughtfulness and realization. Just as the intimate connotations that come with a close-up shot of a character begin to parallel the now mutual feelings between them, so does the costume choice of both characters.

Although it seems like an insignificant detail at first, the similar wardrobe choice of

Gogol and his father in this scene adds to the characterization of each character and reinforces the idea that Gogol will always have a connection with his family. Both characters wear a button down and a sweater. It is one small detail that highlights the fact that little nuances of his personality (i.e. the way he dresses), mirror his upbringing and diminish the effects of Gogol’s attempts to separate himself from his family and culture.

This scene is composed mostly of a flashback, used to intensify the reality and drama of the story, and Gogol’s father’s voice is a non-diegetic voiceover in the flashback to illustrate the close connection between the past event and his current self. The director could have easily just cut to a flashback and let the story tell itself, but she didn’t. Instead, Ashoke’s voice narrates the event to reiterate to the viewer how closely the happenings are tied to him, how deeply personal the event was. Gogol makes the same realization and thus his eyes are opened to the monumental importance of his name to his father.

Gogol’s ashamed face in the close-up shot in between cuts of narrated flashback and specific wardrobe decisions portray to the viewer that although Gogol has tried his best to separate from his family, he will always be drawn back by the deep emotional connection created by his name.

, while other times there may be specific details about the plot that differ to appeal to the audience of the individual types of media, all the while preserving the idea that the conversation revealed a truth about Gogol’s identity: no matter how hard he has tried to cut his ties with his heritage, he will always be bound to his family.

Comparison/Contrast Essay

Sometimes a wake-up call can completely alter the way one lives life. In this scene of The Namesake, Ashoke explains to Gogol the real meaning behind his name, describing the events that had changed Ashoke’s life forever and, consequently, had led to Gogol’s name. Simply uttering the word “Gogol” is enough to remind Ashoke of the gift of life offered to him after the train accident, a connection between father and son that Gogol does not understand until it is revealed to him in this scene. Since it occurs near the middle of the story (at a point in the plot where Gogol is especially distant from his family in an attempt to forget his past), this scene is a major turning point, a moment in the book and movie when Gogol’s eyes are opened to the thoughts and feelings of his parents.

During this scene of The Namesake, the book and the movie utilize different techniques to convey the theme by utilizing contrasting settings. Although the settings differ in the details they put forth similar auras of serenity and isolation. Gogol’s reaction to the story is the same in the book and the movie, but it is portrayed with differing approaches to support the idea that it is impossible to completely escape family ties, which marks the beginning of his shift back towards his heritage.

 

Occasionally, the movie and book use different techniques, like close-up camera angles and descriptive diction, to portray Gogol’s astonishment at the deep connection he unwittingly shares with his father and his shame for pushing his parents away. Page 124 of the book states that after the revealing conversation, Gogol was “still struggling to absorb the information” and felt “oddly ashamed.” Jhumpa Lahiri chose to include these descriptive words when describing Gogol’s reaction, writing that his eyes began to “well with tears” (123) in order to portray the genuine feeling of guilt that Gogol experiences. On the other hand, the movie takes advantage of close-up camera shots to illustrate Gogol’s reaction. While Gogol’s father is telling the story of his name, the camera alternates between the flashback and close-ups of Gogol’s face in the present. The close-up shot is a very intimate shot, mostly because it allows for in-depth examination of facial expressions without much background interference. This reveals Gogol’s emotions of shame during the story, but through a much different method than in the book. This guilt does not necessarily inspire him to go running back to his family, but it initiates a change within him to realize his multicultural identity. Ironically, the very thing that drags him back to this multicultural identity is his name, which is completely unrelated to anything Indian. This complexity is not revealed to Gogol until his dad tells him the real meaning behind his name, transforming an irrelevant Russian label to a powerful link between Gogol and his Indian family.

Gogol’s realization of his identity is crafted in both the movie and the book partly through the serenity and isolation of the setting (although the setting is different in each). The specific approaches showcased in each, lack of diegetic sound in the movie and the imagery of the book, help create the sensation of isolation, heightening the focus on the conversation and strengthening the one on one bonding of father and son. This reinforces the assertion that Gogol is drifting back towards his family’s culture, showing that no matter what, one can never fully escape one’s heritage. In the book, Gogol and his father are on their way home from the train station at night while “brown leaves…fly across the road in the headlights’ glare” (122). The car is “silent” and Ashoke doenot speak until “the piece” playing on the radio ends, ensuring complete silence (122). The image of leaves blowing across a road is similar to that of tumbleweed bouncing along a desert terrain, which inevitably summons connotations of isolation. The fact that the headlights are on emphasizes the fact that it is dark out, further displaying the isolation of the characters. This imagery and the fact that it is completely silent reinforce the idea that Gogol and his father are shut away from the outside world, from the American culture that has swayed Gogol so far from his Indian heritage This allows greater attention to be paid by Gogol to his father’s story and thus allows a deeper understanding by Gogol of the connection between his name and his background. Naturally, movies are made to be aesthetically appealing, so the nighttime car ride with Gogol and Ashoke, although effective in creating a peaceful, quiet setting shown in the book, isn’t as plausible for a visually entertaining scene. Because of this, the director chose to keep part of the setting the same and change other parts of it. The conversation still occurs in Ashoke’s car (because this offers a quiet, closed space) but it is during the daytime. Colorful flora and fauna can be seen in the background from inside the car which is visually appealing to the audience, but the car is not moving. Gogol’s father parked the car before the conversation started to reduce distracting movement in the background and to separate the characters from the rest of the world much like the image of darkness did in the book. In the scene, there is almost no diegetic sound whatsoever, except for the voices of the two characters speaking. The scene in the movie creates a setting of isolated serenity without sacrificing visual entertainment, which creates the same effect on the scene as in the book. While the silence must be described in the book, the director of the movie has the ability to create actual silence, which drives home the one on one intensity of the conversation which allowed for Gogol to finally be introduced to an unbreakable tie with his father.

            In the book and movie versions of The Namesake, the setting supports Gogol’s reaction in order to accurately encompass the wake-up call that Gogol experienced in this scene. Although the book and movie achieve this goal in different ways through different techniques, they both illustrate the newly found bond between Gogol and his past, showing that it is not possible to create an identity completely separate from deeply rooted culture. Because movies have the responsibility to entertain, they may change certain things about a story, but the main theme remains unscathed. I enjoyed the book much more than the movie because Jhumpa Lahiri’s ability to both concisely report information and beautifully articulate ideas with imagery outdo any image a movie could offer. One item that I would change about the movie is the plot differences. Although it didn’t affect this scene much, there are major differences elsewhere that take away from the general effect of the story.