Topic Proposal

http://themargaretatwoodsociety.wordpress.com/links/

A question I’ve thought worth pursuing the role of the Aunts, in A Handmaid’s Tale.  It is interesting to me that I can find sympathy for every character, even a tad for the Commander, but none for the Aunts.  I think Atwood kept them incomprehensibly hateful on purpose.  My guess is that she would view them a “people who betray their own,” which in this case is other women.  If the same concept were applied to Nazi Germany, the “Jew catchers,” or Jewish people that found out and turned in other Jewish people in hiding would be the equivalent.  The comparison has its weaknesses, one being people will do much to stay alive in a totalitarian regime, “Jew catchers,” were other people trying to survive also.  The Aunts seemed to enjoy their role, even had more authority than the men in some areas. 

I hope as I explore the topic farther to have insight into Margaret Atwood herself.  She seems very angry to me and it would be interesting to know why.  It would also be interesting to mark the differences in women of her generation and women of this generation.  If she viewed the Aunts as betrayers, who or what group of people would be view as such now?

Atwood Society

Thesis Statements

1.    “A” This is a weak thesis statement because it makes no claim about The Origin of the Species, or how the writer is going to respond to it. It is also too broad a claim; “Darwin’s concerns” need to be defined.

2.     “A” This statement is too narrow, there is little room for argument.

3.    “B” This statement is obvious or common knowledge.  Makes me think “Well duh.”

4.    “A” makes a broad claim,  it leaves out any argument.

5.    “A” is a personal bias, conviction.  It is not arguable.

Statement for essay #3:

“Further, it, (“faction”) is a tool apropos to the America of O’Brien’s youth, out of the chaos, came clarity.” 

Comment: This will work for a thesis statement, because it can be argued, though I’m hoping to pull something better out of the hat for the final draft.  I support the idea in O’Brien’s text viewed through history. 

Other Thesis for exploration: 

I have questioned why O’Brien uses the two less prominent females mentioned in his book.

One is Kathleen, a daughter character. The other is Linda, his childhood sweetheart. It would be interesting to know who the characters are based on, or if like Norman Bowker, they are real people and that is their actual names.   

Why, as the writer, not the narrator, did O’Brien use each of them? What might their characters represent?

They are minor characters that fill in much of the story. In "Ambush" Kathleen is a starry eyed little girl that, like any kid, can get away with saying things no adult could-nor should they.  In essence she asks her “dad” if he killed anyone in Viet Nam.  It’s a question that goes through the mind of many when they meet a combat veteran.  Kathleen is naive, but without guile.  I think she represent many of the “folks back home” in a war-even one as controversial as Viet Nam.  Not everyone was spitting on soldiers when they returned home.  The narrator wanted to “tell her exactly what happened.”  I think most soldiers want people to understand “exactly what happened.”  Throughout O’Brien’s book are examples of combatants wanting to be understood, the most obvious is Bowker.  

A thesis statement would run something like: “Kathleen represents the home folks, not family, but a population, that were not hostile towards Viet Nam veterans.”

Linda's character in "The Lives of the Dead" could be a explored from the childhood/adult aspect, “survival guilt”, curiosity about the afterlife and probably a lot more. What comes to mind most immediately is she is another innocent little girl, but not naive as Kathleen is, because she has cancer.  She carries much too. 

A thesis might be: “Neither Linda nor O’Brien chose their burdens, but the manner of how they were carried is telling a great character.”  (I know that’s hackneyed, but I’m tired and want to get my homework done. M;)

Sources for Reserch Essay

Wesley, Marilyn. "Truth and fiction in Hit >> Tim O'Brien's If I Die in a Combat Zone and The Things They Carried." College Literature. 29.2 (Spring 2002): 1-18. Print.

http://lion.chadwyck.com.proxy.yc.edu/searchFulltext.do?id=R01615238&divLevel=0&queryId=../session/1287808478_25168&trailId=12B3CDF2422&area=abell&forward=critref_ft

Marilyn Wesley discusses war in general and Vietnam in particular in relation to a true factual account verses “a true story.”  She has excerpts from Tim O’Brien carrying out the  themes of truth versus fiction versus accuracy, concepts throughout “The Things They Carried.”  I am hoping to incorporate some of the thoughts she puts forth about O’Brien’s work compared to Hemmingway’s or works of other time periods concerning war.

Getlin, Josh. "Vietnam and WWII: Myths and Memories." Los Angeles Times (Los Angeles, CA). 09 Apr 1995: A1+. SIRS Researcher. Web. 23 Oct 2010.

http://sks.sirs.com.proxy.yc.edu/cgi-bin/hst-article-display?id=SAZ0642-0-7815&artno=0000012698&type=ART&shfilter=U&key=War%2C%20vietnam%20stories&title=Vietnam%20and%20WWII%3A%20Myths%20and%20Memories&res=Y&ren=N&gov=N&lnk=N&ic=N#citation

An article that caught my attention in a SIRS search was “Vietnam and WWII: Myths and Memories.”  It touches on the how war stories are told and how they affect the nation.  Published in 1995, in the Los Angeles Times, it has credibility with interviews from participants of both wars.  I’m most confident because the search was through the library SIRS database, rather than a general web search.

Portfolio Letter

October 12, 2010

Laura Cline

Yavapai College

1800 Sheldon

Prescott, AZ 86301

Dear Mrs. Cline;

I’ve enjoyed English 102 at Yavapai College this semester.  I have found the use of electronic mediums one of the bigger challenges of class.  In part that comes from lack of familiarity with things like creating a blog or using a web cam.  By the same token, learning to participate as required using the web more efficiently has been a great reward. 

Though I had seen Tin O'Brien work “The Things They Carried” and perused the book once, I was unfamiliar with the other reading required in class.  That is, The Sand Storm by Sean Huze and “A Handmaidens Tail.” by Margaret Atwood.  Each book has had food for thought, and caused me to define or sort out issues they have brought up, that I had not considered before.  I have felt that I’ve been saturated in foul language after finishing the first two works.  While the argument can be made it is the vernacular of the settings, it is still "saturating."   By far I have been most affected by the poetry unit, in particular “Photograph on September 11. “   Not only did it strike a personal note with me, I enjoyed Szymborska simple style of writing.

I have had some formal writing experience, and limited literary analysis.   I hope to be quite comfortable with analysis by the end of the semester.  No doubt, because of the requirements of the class, helpful resources, and input, I will be.

Sincerely;

Mary Dennis

Summary v. Analysis-O'Brien

In Ghost Soldiers, Tim O’Brien kept with his “flashback” style of writing to tell about getting wounded twice in Vietnam.  The first time was when Rat Kiley was medic and he took care of O’Brien with speedy competence and courage.  The second wound occurred when Kiley’s replacement, Bobby Jorgenson, had joined the unit.  By contrast, Jorgenson, as a new medic, “bungled the patch job” (O’Brien 190), which nearly cost O’Brien his life and certainly caused a lot more pain.  O’Brien was eventually transferred to a supply station, away from front line fighting.  He spent a lot of energy hating Jorgenson for his incompetence.  He also was taken aback to realized he “missed the real war out in the boonies” (O’Brien 192).  Eventually his former Alpha Company unit arrived for a couple weeks of rest.  O’Brien, while enjoying the reunion also realized he was “out of touch” with the unit and Jorgenson “was one of us now” (O’Brien, 197), as told to him by Sanders.  O’Brien, though receiving an apology from Jorgenson, had his mind set on revenge, Sanders was letting him know Jorgenson had proven himself and was a part of the unit, to leave him alone.  O’Brien enlisted Azar’s help to frighten Jorgenson, maybe hoping he would over react or disgrace himself somehow.  In the end, it was O’Brien who was shamed, and Azar, in total disgust, kicked him in the head.  Jorgenson, skillfully treated O’Brien and the hard feelings were set aside.

Vietnam War Memorial by William Yager

O’Brien portrayed another intriguing theme as this story unfolded; the communication between the soldiers was always “bottom line.”  All the conversations were at the least direct and in more extreme circumstance brutally raw.  There are examples throughout, like when Sander told O’Brien: “Negative” and “Man, you’re sick” (O’Brien 201), rather than trying to talk him out of action against Jorgenson.  Or again, when Azar was revolted by O’Brien and, though his cohort, told him “You’re a sorry, sorry case” (O’Brien 216), and much worse before kicking him in the head.  It was as if conversations were a reflection of their environment.  There was no compromise when there was a conflict.  One did not need to guess the politics of a situation; it was made clear and acted on.  It was as if the conversations were everything the politics of the day was not, relevant, clear and with a concise plan of action.  Maybe, conversation in any war or in any closed environment, are brutally direct.  Maybe, it was a relief to be able to “declare whose side you’re on” and act on it without doubt when the opportunity arose.

O'Brien, Tim. 1st. New York, NY: Houghton Miffin Harcourt, 1990. 189-218. Print.

An interesting tribute

Response to O'Brien

Vietnam Review 

There was much food for thought in Tim O’Brien’s  “The Things They Carried With Them.”  What caught my attention in one chapter was his narrative on telling war stories.  He has many definitions of what a “true” war story is, including “A true war story is never moral” and that a true story adheres to “absolute and uncompromising allegiance to obscenity and evil” (O’Brien 68).  He’s playing with the mind of the reader a bit.  Not all aspects of war are ugly, harsh and cruel.  What O’Brien is defining as a War Story, is the aspects non-participants would not understand.  Most people can identify with pain and sacrifice to some degree, O’Brien wants his readers to understand from a soldier’s perspective.  Hence, his somewhat narrow definition of a true war story-it will always involve negative, terrifying, gut wrenching aspects; most blurred because “it’s hard to separate what happened from what seemed to happen” (O’Brien 71).  I’m not minimizing what a combatant faces, rather had to reconcile what I’ve heard from veterans of the Vietnam era and even now as they talk of their experiences.  The horrific is alluded to, but usually it’s the funny or touching stories that are spoken.  In effect, O’Brien molded a key to understanding what was not spoken.

Another interesting point is the aspect of truth verses accuracy, when O’Brien speaks of war stories.   If deceit can be defined as “Taking the truth and telling a lie,” he has worked the antithesis, using a lie, or as he says, “making up a few things to get at the real truth” (O’Brien 85).  It is an incredible irony.   He describes retelling a story until his listener gets it, usually thinking uncomplimentary things as he pictures the war story.  He seems frustrated, almost angry that someone does not get it, “Because she wasn’t listening” (O’Brien 85), as he patronizes her with a different version of the true story.  What is most ironic is the True Story itself.  What he is trying to get his audience to see is not the hardship so much as the outcome from all the privation and pain.  He finally describes courage, disillusion, sorrow, and oblivion.  But what he says is a true war story is about is “love and memory” (O’Brien 85).

O'Brien Tim. 1st Mariner ed. New York, NY: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1990. 67-85. Print.

The Sand Storm

 

Whether it’s been family, close friends or acquaintances, it’s been my privilege to know many members of the armed service.    I think many who have served could identify with The Sand Strom, because it is telling soldiers’ stories, not the news spin or political drivel.   I appreciate being able to “just listen” to each story, though they are ruthlessly honest and hard to hear.  

In the play, MARINE/SGT CASAVECCHI expressed an interesting sentiment concerning war stories: “You’re supposed to go through absolute Hell, become something so base you can’t hardly believe it’s still you, but whatever you do, if you make it home…keep it to yourself” (Huze 1).   There are many things this play has made me think about, the isolation of veterans is one of them.  I have heard comparatively few war stories, even from Viet Nam veterans.  I think there are a couple reasons for that.  Number one is social taboo, folks want to hear about adventures but not about harsh realities. We are comfortable knowing vets. are able to “protect” us, but we really don’t want to know what that involved.  We just want them to be able cope with it, and get on with civilian life.    I also think it takes too much energy on the part of the veteran to tell their stories; so many just don’t try.  They are too tired.  They are tired of war, of travel, of MRE’s,…of everything, to bother trying to make someone understand what they’ve  been through, except perhaps someone who has shared experiences.  I think it is the forgotten part of “Supporting our troops.”  They can be home but need time to “come back”, without feeling isolated.

            The best example I can give of this, is the community response when a friend of ours returned from Iraq.  His Marine Wife, a calling of its own, asked the community welcome him back with poster and ribbons-and give them some space.  It was touching to drive through town and see welcome home signs all over.  When the family was ready, after a short vacation, they hosted a get together.  There was allowance for readjustment without isolation. 

"We still have hearts"   

Works Cited:

The Sand Storm.  BY Sean Huze.  Dir. David Fofi. Perf. The Elephant Asylum Theater, New York, Jan2004.

Photos used with permission, Mrs. Brig Pleitgen, Marie Wife.