A Rose for Emily

Page 404, "When the next generation, with its more modern ideas, became mayors and alderman, this arrangement created some little dissatisfaction."

I think a lot of this story is a comment on old world vs. new world and old money vs. new money. We see this immediately in part 1 when the new council demands taxes from Emily. She represents the old world and old money. She refuses to keep up with the times, even refusing to acknowledge in her own mind that the world around her is changing. Her house is a symbol of this, growing old and decaying, while the life around it continues to change and grow. The house was once nice, her family was once prestigious, but now they have all fallen into shambles. Emily is doomed if she does not change with the times and she does not, so she suffers a sad life.

Faulkner published this story in 1930. This story is perhaps a comment on what he saw or was experiencing himself. A lot of people around him were probably going through this difficult transition from old to new, just like older people are today experiencing with technology (especially computers, my dad is horrible with them). Some people make a conscience effort to change and learn the new ways, while others who are more stubborn refuse to accept that the times are changing. I think this story reflects a lot of that sentiment.

Philip Dick

Page 357, "Is an extra-factual memory that convincing?" Quail asked. "More than the real thing, sir. Had you really gone to Mars as an Interplan agent, you would by now have forgotten a great deal; our analysis of true-mem-systems--authentic recollections of major events in a person's life--shows that a variety of details are very quickly lost to the person. Forever."

For me, this brought to mind the debate over things like stem cell research or using prosthetic parts. Or even robotic workers over human workers. Philip Dick brings up a really modern topic for our day--he is way ahead of his time. Mr. McClane is trying to convince Mr. Quail that the real thing is not as good as the simulation or made up version. I don't know why, but I just thought this was a big deal! It was kind of outrageous to me. To think that a fake memory could be better than the real thing, but maybe it's true. That's scary. It is scary how far we have come with technology and I think it's amazing that Philip Dick wrote this in 1966!

"This tower was a giant, standing with its back to the plight of the ants. It represented in a degree, to the correspondent, the serenity of nature amid the struggles of the individual...She did not seem cruel to him then, nor beneficent, nor treacherous, nor wise. But she was indifferent, flatly indifferent. It is, perhaps, plausible that a man in this situation, impressed with the unconcern of the universe, should see the innumerable flaws of his life, and have them taste wickedly in his mind, and wish for another chance. A distinction between right and wrong seems absurdly clear to him, then, in this new ignorance of the grave-edge, and he understand that if he were given another opportunity he would mend his conduct and his words, and be better and brighter during an introduction or at a tea" (Crane, 352).

This is a passage I marked in my book and found to be the best and most important. That is to say, I got the most out of it. I think it is the most direct attempt by Crane to voice his thoughts directly to the reader, in a manner that is straightforward and true.

This tower can be interpreted as representing nature or some all-powerful being or God, which is an embodiment of nature. Nature is refered to as "She," and most importantly is niether cruel nor wise, but "flatly indifferent." Looking at it this way, it is as if no one cares. The God of nature does not care. The correspondent, or Crane, however you wish to look at it, then states that in this situation, a man should want to be a better person.

At first this assertion made sense to me, but now I'm not sure I understand why, "the unconcern of the universe," the Gods, and nature, should make you want to be a better person. If anything why wouldn't it make you not care as well? If you are a mere ant to the Gods, or whomever, wouldn't this make you angry? It is sad to think they do not care about us at all, and that they would discard us, or let us die so easily.

On the other hand, maybe because the correspondent is face to face with death, or close to it, he is looking back on his life--a life that could have been better. I understand this making someone want to change and be a better person.

The Story of an Hour

"He stood amazed at Josephine's piercing cry; at Richard's quick motion to screen him from the view of his wife...When the doctors came they said she had died of heart disease--of joy that kills" (Chopin, 268).

After my first reading of, "The Story of an Hour" I did not understand the last line of the story completely. I assumed Louise had died from the shock of seeing her husband alive. But now I'm not sure that she ever even saw her husband at the door. If it is true that she died of joy, then I think she died on the way down the stairs from the excitement and joy of being a free woman.

This made me think of the question of whether she was weak or not. I think she was mentally strong and physically weak. I think she was mentally strong for a few reasons. Most likely she was married off to Mr. Mallard by her father. Because of the way she feels about her marriage, like the fact that she only sometimes loved Brently and felt controlled or trapped, points to this. Being in an unhappy marriage took a toll on her, but she did it. Also when confronted with the death of someone so close, even if you didn't fully love them, is startling. She survived that shock. So I would say she is mentally strong.

I think she is physically weak only because of her heart problem, which we do not know the cause of. It could just be something she was born with, and no fault of her own. This problem of a weak heart and her over excitement ultimately kills her.

I also think that Chopin is making a commentary on how great it is for a woman to be free. How important it is that women be allowed the rights of men. From what I have heard about times overs 100 years ago (since this was written in 1894), women were rather subservient to the men. Women had a set place in the relationship, they took care of the house and did not work. (I think this drove a lot of women mad). Louise' reaction to her husbands death is ironic, because one would think, as the other characters did, that she would be crying in sadness over his death. But the tragedy of his death is quickly replaced with her realization that being able to make decision for herself and live for herself is what she has always secretly wanted.

Pauls Case

"The carnations in his coat were drooping with cold...their red glory over...It was only one splendid breath they had, in spite of their brave mockery at the winter outside the glass. It was a losing game in the end, it seemed, this revolt against the homilies by which the world is run" (Cather, 214).

Like the red carnation, Paul has his, "one splendid breath," his spending spree. I believe what we saw of Paul's life leading up to this point was his revolt against "normal" life. He was always an outsider, maybe because of his appearance, or maybe by his choice of actions. Paul cannot live in their world--he has a need for the high fashion of the theatre life, and his tastes are more suited for the wealthy, elitist class that can weekly afford to go to the theatre. Paul's refusal to accept his ordinary life is what ultimately leads to his suicide.

I think many of us have been guilty of being bored in school, or have wished we had money and fancy things. However, we do not let our desires rule us; we do not let our imaginations become our lives. There is a line between fantasy and reality that Paul cannot grasp. Maybe the world was not fair to Paul because they did not understand them. I think it is certainly possible that, had Paul been living in our time, he would have been diagnosed with a variety of conditions. He would have been treated differently. But in this story, real life is too much for Paul. His father, teachers, and classmates do not understand him. I think Paul needed help, but because no one understood him, he was treated like everyone else, which in Paul's case, was a mistreatment. The normal rules and punishments were the wrong thing for Paul and they pushed him further away from reality.

I came into class thinking that this was a fun story, but one without a point, which bothered me. I was hoping there would be something enlightening to learn about this story; something I missed. However, I left class feeling the same way as when I entered.

What I did gain was the sense that Mark Twain (I will always call him Mark Twain because of the fond memories I have of reading Huck Finn and Tom Sawyer as a child and thinking the author's name was Mark Twain) was an amazing story teller; his use of specific dialect and story style are enthralling.

I love the frame tale or story within a story set up. I have read many books like this and it always leaves me amazed when I realize that the story is really about someone telling a story. For me this happened at a certain point in "The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County."

Just as Wheeler is telling his story, he gets cut off, "And-- [Here Simon Wheeler heard his name called from the front yard, and got up to see what was wanted.] And turning to me as he moved away, he said: 'Just set where you are, stranger, and rest easy--I ain't going to be gone a second" (Clemens, 275). It was at this point that I realized I'd forgotten I was reading a story within a story. The use of this device by Twain captures the reader, in the same way a twist ending might in a mystery story. For me, this and the dialect made the story worth reading, even though I was unsure of the whole point of the story.

Opinions/Thoughts on, "An Occurence at Owl Creek Bridge" by Ambrose Bierce

I'm not sure how much I can add to this discussion, but I will try. Most of what I think has already been said, but I will state my opinions/thoughts.

Against my personal interests, I awkwardly found myself rooting for Peyton. I was happy for him when he made it back to his wife; I like happy endings. It was a rude, yet interesting surprise when I found he had actually died, and was imagining the whole thing right before his death.

Bierce creates a crafty story by using his three part set up. The time shifting element is a favorite of mine. I am a big fan of Pulp Fiction, and got excited when it was brought up in class. I think telling stories out of sequence adds an element of surprise, which can only increase the readers fascination, respect for the author, and desire to continue reading.