Keeping a Blog

For me, this semester of blogging has generally been a productive, idea-nurturing task. By maintaining a blog, I was able to explore the books I read in a more formal, in-depth manner. I feel more driven to read the novels more carefully and take mental notes of important parts. I also feel that I get more practice in writing because the blog forces me to take time to analyze my thoughts and structure my ideas. I would feel less incentive to do so if I knew that my writing was for a limited audience, but on a blog, nobody knows who could be reading what. For this reason, I highly appreciate the mandatory blog assignment and believe that it is a very effective requirement for any variety of courses.

Milkman's Hidden Passion

One thing I overlooked throughout my reading of Song of Solomon is Milkman's brief moments when he displays somewhat of a longing for the future. The impression that Milkman gives in the majority of the novel is that he lacks drive for life. In very short instances (I remember only one time before chapter 10), the reader sees Milkman mention the future: Milkman tells Guitar about how he worries about the stories he will tell his children when he is old. This small detail stands far away from Milkman's general image.

In chapter 10, the reader sees a change in Milkman. As Milkman hears more about his father's father from Reverend Cooper, he begins to feel more than nothing for his father, emotionally. He begins to see his heritage from a different life, and even denies that this change of feeling was due to the strong whiskey he ingested. In fact, he begins to feel genuine feelings of "anger" towards the whites that killed his grandfather among other feelings.

Chapter 10 marks the time when Milkman begins his coming of age. He grows up in the fact that he opens his self to his given life. Before he ignored it or took it for granted, but during his 4-day long stay at Reverend Cooper's house, he becomes stronger and braver. Instead of just accepting the events as they come, he begins to feel passion. He feels passion to take the gold from those that killed his grandfather. He feels passion in telling (bragging to) the locals about his father's life. And these are all signs of his development into someone knew. It is hard to say that he strictly becomes a Man, but Milkman definitely becomes something else.

Monsieur Milkman

As I've been reading Songs of Solomon, a huge similarity between the characters Milkman and Monsieur Meursault from The Stranger dawned upon me. They both carry the same mentality which trivializes life. They both act according to physical pleasures and have this idea of the meaninglessness of life nested into their heads. In fact, both portray their disdain for emotional matters: Meursault believes that marriage does not symbolize anything of importance; Milkman similarly believes that his life is just an extension of the present rather than looking to the future.

The two characters' nearly identical ideals help morph my impressions of Songs of Solomon as I continue reading. Meursault is generally admired until the incident at the beach, which brings havoc and shows that society does not accept humans without what is considered normal emotions. At this point, The Stranger ends, and the reader becomes incapable of exploring the circumstances further. On the other hand, Milkman faces "society" with his beliefs (as evident by his situation with Hagar) in the middle of the novel. As we progress further and further into Songs of Solomon, we see Milkman who is forced to face the things which he regarded as unimportant. Perhaps a similar situation would have arose in The Stranger if Albert Camus had not ended his novel at that point.

From my interpretation of The Stranger, I strongly believe that Meursault held on to his belief that emotional matters are of less importance. In Songs of Solomon, I think that Milkman is headed in an opposite direction. As Milkman continues to face more and more consequences of his life, he will change in unforeseen ways (which happens in all coming of age novels). Assuming this is true, I predict that Milkman will learn to settle down and become more aware of those he interacts with (for example, Lena and Corinthians).

Songs of Solomon

First impressions:

Songs of Solomon presents a perspective similar to that of Wide Sargasso Sea. I have noticed many similar parallels between these two novels. Most importantly, the main character Milkman is extremely similar to Antoinette primarily because they both are childish (at least through the eyes of the reader), even as they grow into the early stages of adulthood. One small difference is that the perspective in Wide Sargasso Sea changes throughout the novel to give different views of the characters while so far into the novel, Milkman has not been presented in such a multitude of lights. Another similarity is the importance of names. As I mentioned in a previous post, names played a prominent role in Wide Sargasso Sea, because they define characters. For example, the fact that Mr. Rochester remains unnamed symbolizes his alienation from the culture in Antoinette's world. In Songs of Solomon, the name Macon Dead contains a myriad of interpretations such as how the initials are M.D. which could imply that Milkman was named in hopes that he'd become a doctor, similar to Ruth's father.

The similarities between the two novels is personally encouraging. In Wide Sargasso Sea we were able to see how polar societies intertwine and react which results in peculiar characters such as Antoinette. I feel that in Songs of Solomon we will see a similar development in Milkman, but instead of being an outcast, we will see how this particular type of peculiar character develops in a welcoming environment.

Perspective in Wide Sargasso Sea

In Wide Sargasso Sea, Jean Rhys maintains a static form of narration. In the novel, her tendency is to write from the perspective of the stranger. In part one, she writes in Antoinette’s point of view in which Antoinette seems estranged from everyone, somewhat even from her mother. As one enters part two, one notices that the perspective moves to someone (Mr. Rochester) who is even more of a stranger. In part two, Antoinette is portrayed as in her element while it is Mr. Rochester’s turn to feel distant. In part three, the narrative voice returns to Antoinette who has been moved to England. She feels so out of place that she doesn’t even accept the environment she is in.

For what purpose does Jean Rhys write in the voice of a stranger as opposed to staying consistent? I believe Rhys is attempting to portray the transformation of each character through multiple perspectives in order to set-up the final connection to Jane Eyre. There is no way for me to verify this until I read the other book, but I can reasonably guess that Rhys wants to provide a new perspective to Jane Eyre readers by taking minor characters from the other book and giving them a greater role in both novels.

By speaking from an isolated perspective in each part, Rhys gains the ability to heighten the reader’s understanding of both the narrating character and the characters to which the speaker relates. For example, in part two, by narrating through Mr. Rochester, the reader learns a lot about the way Mr. Rochester thinks and feels, and what Antoinette looks like from the outside rather than from what she says she is.

On the other hand, the reader is also able to experience Antoinette’s transformation on a greater level. One can see the way she changes from a child to an adult from the perspective of both herself, and from others. As a child, she says she is an adult, but I feel she retains many childlike tendencies. In part two, one can see how she changes and becomes more adult-like in her manner. In part three, she seems to grow even older, losing faith amongst other things.

I feel that Rhys’ writing style helps the reader see aspects of characters that would have otherwise been invisible. For me, this is both enlightening and saddening. I appreciate having novels hide small things for me to openly interpret and imagine, but it is also very interesting to be able to fully understand a character’s perspective and image without being unsure.

Who is Sympathetic?

Is Antoinette or Mr. Rochester a sympathetic character? I believe Antoinette is the sympathetic character. In part two of the novel, Antoinette is stuck in a situation with Mr. Rochester. They seem to settle down kindly, but then Mr. Rochester begins to become very skeptical. In Granbois, Mr. Rochester feels out of place, and the treatment of the locals towards him cause him to wonder what is wrong. When Daniel Cosway tells him of Antoinette’s situation, he tips and becomes almost completely estranged from Antoinette. Even though they share an intimate moment later on, he lacks the true trust of someone who believes in another. More importantly, the following morning when he wakes up sick, he immediately suspects that he has been poisoned (which he has been), but it is such a sudden realization that one has to wonder how he really views Antoinette. Very few people would immediately think that they have been poisoned when sick, and especially suspecting that the person who you are with was the one who did it. His obvious suspicion and the fact that he sleeps with another person right afterward makes him an unsympathetic character. Instead of doing what a normal person would do, which is finding out why someone would poison them (or whether or not they were poisoned), he gets his revenge by sleeping with someone as soon as possible. Antoinette, on the other hand, we know had good intentions by poisoning him. She was convinced that the “tonic” which she was giving him would make him love her. Even though one can say that her intent is somewhat malicious because she intends to change Mr. Rochester, one must consider the situation which she is in. She grew up without happiness and Mr. Rochester gave her some but then took it away.  Antoinette is sympathetic because of her innocence in this situation. On the other hand, Mr. Rochester is not sympathetic because of his rash and harsh response to Antoinette’s good intentions.

Wide Sargasso Sea: Mystery Man

The voice of the narration of the second part of Wide Sargasso Sea is mysteriously unnamed. Many critics interpret him as Mr. Rochester of Charlotte Brontë's Jane Eyre. I believe that he remains unnamed as a symbol of distance. Throughout part two, Mr. Rochester is depicted as a stranger who knows nothing of the culture/social circumstances in which he lives with his new wife, Antoinette. In many instances, people are described as glancing askance at Mr. Rochester and other at times the people who serve him are described as suppressing a mocking laugh. In addition, there are many people trying to sway his perspective. Daniel Cosway (Boyd) attempts to skew Mr. Rochester's impression of Antoinette by telling him that she will become crazy as did her mother.

It is obvious that names play an important rule in character depiction. The fact that Daniel Boyd refers to himself as a Cosway may be his way of increasing his appearance of disdain towards white people (because it greatly discredits the Cosways if he is seen as both a relative and a slave to them). Even the name Antoinette plays an important role in associating Antoinette to her mother, Annete (causing people to predict that Antoinette will end up just like her mother, that is, insane). Mr. Rochester, who lacks a name in this novel, is thus seen as a stranger. He has no place in a land such as Granois and is seen as a complete alien.

If he were to be adressed as "Mr. Rochester" in the novel, it would seem as if he were accepted which is not true. The people in Granois are hiding things from him. Even the land "kept its secrets." (52. This version of Wide Sargasso Sea was edited by Judith L. Raiskin) and Mr. Rochester has no way of discovering them because he is a true stranger: someone who does not understand the culture.