You're Ugly, Too

I'm not sure where to really begin with this story. All I know is that not only is the plot humorous, but the main character herself. Something that really caught me was the point of view from which this story is written. I think this is because most of the literature we have read this semester has been first person point of view. This is however third person omniscient. Everything is written in third person, but much of it is from Zoe's point of view, and involves a more in depth description of how characters feel and act. I found that as I was reading this story, I would struggle between the first person conversation and the third person telling of the story, because I would think, wait did the point of view just change on me? In all, I think it is important that the story is taken from Zoe's perspective because she is really the one who seems to impede the gloom for herself through humor. Without taking this story from her point of view, the humor would be irrelevant in trying to describe how she feels about events and certain people.

The Drunkard

I found this whole story ironic and humorous. In general, there are many ironies. First, basically it did not really matter who had died. The father just looked forward to a funeral so he could drink. Second, the father and the son almost trade places in that the son comes home drunk and the father does not. This is also humorous because the son was sent to be the "brake" on the father to keep him from drinking. Third, everyone believes the father gave the son something to drink, when ultimately the son drank himself. Finally, the mother believes the son drank his father's beer to keep his father from getting drunk. So, in reality, the son really was the "brake" for his father, but I am not wholeheartedly sure the son drank the beer to spare his father. Rather, I think it was more of an experience thing for him.

Popular Mechanics

On this week's syllabus I noticed that with this story we were supposed to focus on structure. In the actual way the text is organized, I noticed that each line alternated between the man and woman speaking. In general, I found this to parallel essentially the tug-o-war over the baby. It is as if their words are also playing tug-o-war, going back and forth. Just like the goal is to win the baby, the point of the argument is to have the last word in the conversation.
Also when I read this, I thought of King Solomon, and the two women who both claimed a child, and both refused to admit who the real mother was. In order for the truth to be revealed, Solomon threatened to cut the baby in half, and give each "mom" a piece of the child. In the end, however, both women admitted the truth because they loved the baby. This story is quite the opposite however. In Popular Mechanics, both parents are out for their own selfish wants, instead of showing love towards their child.

The Lottery

2. What is a scapegoat? Who is the scapegoat in the story? What other examples of scapegoating can you recall?

A scapegoat is a person or a group of people that is often persecuted because they are blamed for something they did not do. Often times, they are a cover up for the bad actions of other people. In this story, Tessie, whose name is drawn from the box is ultimately the scapegoat. Throughout history, some examples of scapegoats include Nero blaming the Christians for the fire in Rome in the early 100s, and also the Jewish people which led to the holocaust during World War II. Like the Jews during the holocaust, Tessie is nothing but an innocent bystander who is tortured because she is marked by a slip of paper. One moment, she was a villager like the rest of them, and friends to many of them, but instantly those people turn on her. It truly shows the deadliness of blind traditions in which the villagers participated in.

Red Ryder Nails the Hammond Kid

Point of View
"Red Ryder Nails the Hammond Kid" is written in first person point of view. The main character Ralph, or "Ralphie" as mentioned in his kid form of the story takes a look back at a significant Christmas as a child. Ralph tells the main plot of the story as a flashback. This structure is rather interesting however because in describing his previous memories his narrating is not at all childish. For example he says, "It was not an easy choice. It was the age-old conflict between the Classic and the Sybaritic, and that is never easily resolved". No child of elementary school age would speak this way of choosing a Christmas gift for their mother. This overall technique over emphasis how he truly felt about certain issues in his childhood. If the narrator would have used childish words, he would have not gotten his true passion for this certain Christmas across to the reader. (And as a side note, I do not even know what the word Sybaritic means, let alone a grade school child, or maybe this is just a passing of the times.)
Plot
The plot of "Red Ryder Nails the Hammond Kid" centers around a sign the main character notices in the opening scene of the story stating to "Disarm the Toy Industry". This ultimately leads him to flashback to a childhood Christmas where he hopes to receive a Red Ryder BB gun. Much of the plot is written in a quick pace. Although the diction is of adult language, it still reflects the mind of a child through sections of short, simple sentences. For example, Ralphie says he wants '"a Red Ryder BB gun!"' Yet, he quickly retracts by saying "'I was just kidding. Even though Flick is getting one.'" In contrast, there are many parts of the plot that are told with a tone of wisdom and age. For example, we "kids plodded to school through forty-five-mile-an-hour gales, tilting forward like tine furred radiation ornaments, moving stiffly over the barren, clattering ground". This reflects those stories often told by grandparents, like the old 'ten miles to school, uphill both ways in rain, sleet or snow'. Overall, the plot incorporates several types of diction and structural aspects that add to the story as a whole.
Setting
There are two setting to "Red Ryder Nails the Hammond Kid". Before the flashback, the narrator is sitting in an H&H during Christmas time in Manhattan. However, he soon turns his story to atleast twenty years before, in the small town of Hammond, Indiana. In the flashback, it is also Christmas time, except during the Great Depression. It seems as if one thing reflected in the setting is that Christmas spirit never dies. Although many people were struggling at this time, people still journeyed to the shops so their children could visit Santa, and Ralphie and his family still had a Christmas tree, and exchanged gifts. Overall, the setting plays an important role because without it being Christmas in both settings, the story would be somewhat irrelevant, and the flashback would have never occurred.
Characterization
The narrator uses indirect characterization to describe the character's personality and actions. This allows for the flashback to be effective. Because the point of view of the story is first person, it is logical that the narrator is essentially telling his own story using indirect characterization. The story mainly focuses on Ralphie, but there are a few minor, unimportant characters such as his Mom, Dad, Teacher, and Santa, The only role these people have in the story is to help move the plot along buy consistently telling Ralphie that he will shoot his eye out with a BB gun. Besides the narrator, the only other important character is the old lady sitting next to him at H&H. it is because of his questioning about "disarming the toy industry" that sends her into an outrage. The overall effect of this outrage sends the narrator into his flashback which is ultimately where the core of the plot is located.
Theme
The theme of "Red Ryder Nails the Hammond Kid" focuses on the idea that some things never change, especially for children. The narrator opens up the plot by reading the sign "Disarm the Toy Industry". This is ironic to him because he was accustomed to the dangers of BB guns as toys when he was a child. It is also ironic that he is not against disarming the toy industry because he was a victim to the dangers of giving kids these toys. However, the ending to the story presents the idea that Red Ryder BB guns still exist, through the "number of kids [he] see[s] with broken glasses". The way he touches on this subject suggests that he is still a 'friend' or Red Ryder, and still accepts the forms of childhood toys. This ultimately reflects that some things will never change.

A Worn Path

6. In answer to a student who wrote to ask her "Is the grandson really dead?" Welty responded, "My best answer would be: Phoenix is alive." What might have led the student to ask that question? How can the author's remark be seen as an answer?

The student might have believed the grandson was dead from the conversation that occurred between Phoenix and the nurse. The nurse asks the grandmother how the boy is? Phoenix continues to be occupied with other things and hesitates to answer. The nurse then replies "He isn't dead is he?" Something flickers across Phoenix face but she sort of changes the topic to how she had forgotten why she had made the long trip. This short conversation could lead the reader to believe that the grandson is dead.
The author's answer, on the other hand, I think suggests that the boy is still alive. I think it is because the grandson is still living that the grandmother herself is still alive. He gives her a reason for her life, and for her journey into the town. It is as if the journey into town is symbolic to her life as a whole.

Once Upon a Time

I have a few thoughts on this story.
Did she mean this to be a child's story? Atleast the third part of the whole script where the author breaks into the story about the burglaries etc. I mean it does not have the magical effect of a fairy tale. It is definitely not a "and then they lived happily ever after..." If anything it is like a warning to children. Maybe against ignorance? I do find it humorous/ironic that the little boy read a fairy tale and "he pretended to be the Prince who braves the terrible thicker of thorns to enter the palace and kiss the Sleeping Beauty...". The action of the child actually doing this in real life, and then the result create the message that the real world is not a fairy tale, bad things happen.
My other thought, and I cannot think of the exact wording, but something along the lines of people create their own prison? I think it is actually people create their own happiness. But honestly, nothing had even happen to this family, yet they shut the outside world out, and so did the rest of the neighborhood. And by all these families kicking their workers to the curb, they sort of created their own worries. They also created their own ending for their son.

Eveline

The theme of Eveline focuses on escaping. Everything about Eveline's life makes her want to escape. She works as a sales clerk in "the stores" for the equivalent of less than ten dollars a week, her father makes her work and then keeps these wages, and she is trying to keep her deceased mother's promise to keep the family together. I think the sentence "Everything changes" really sums up the theme of the story. Some of my other thoughts, I do not believe she truly loves Frank, I think she uses him as her own personal escape, and the escape to her new life. Which explains the final lines of the story..."Her eyes gave him no sign of love or farewell or recognition". Which I took to understand that she did not go with him. If she truly did love him she would have went with him. Her eyes would have been quite the opposite, full of love, and if she really were letting him go, she would have said goodbye. Truly this was not Eveline's great escape.

Miss Brill

What is the purpose of the fur piece? What is the source of the crying in the final sentence of the story?

To Miss Brill, I believe the fur piece to be her companion. I picture her as an older, frail woman. She might possibly have medical problems..."she felt a tingling in her hands and arms..." By the title, and her name, Miss Brill it is obvious that she was never married, or is now widowed. For she is a miss; although miss, to me usually specifies a younger woman. To her, the fur piece is real, to the reader, Miss Brill applies personification to the piece. We know that this item cannot really talk or interact with Miss Brill. I think her identifying with the animal is a sign of her loneliness, possibly disillusionment. Especially, her whole idea that her trip to the park is a play and she is the star. However, the last line of the story talks about crying from the fur she has placed in the box, but really it is Miss Brill. Maybe, she has finally come to accept her loneliness, as she places the fur away.

Bartleby...

There are five characters to this story, the narrator-the lawyer, Turkey, Nippers, Ginger Nut, and Bartleby. From the beginning, the narrator goes into description of the workers in his office Turkey, Nippers, and Ginger Nut. Turkey and Nippers are displayed as foil characters. Turkey is nearly the narrator's age, about sixty, and is a good worker in the morning, but tends not concentrate so much in the afternoon. On the other hand, Nippers is young and ambitious, but hates to work in the morning. He often slumps behind his desk until the afternoon. Although the story eventually transitions to Bartleby, it is important to notice that the narrator's initial intentions are not to go straight into Bartleby's story. He takes time to describe each of his subordinates with much detail. This is a cue for the reader that although the story is titled "Bartleby the Scrivener" it is not ultimately about the events of Bartleby. Rather, it tells the story of how the narrator deals with this character and how he affects the lawyer.

Humor

"Hunters in the Snow" is very amusing, to say the least. The story begins with verbal irony, the portly character is actually named Tub. Then, the situational irony only adds to the humor when Kenny, with permission, shoots the dog. The permission Kenny received is not realized by Tub and Frank until later in the story. I also find it odd that Tub thought, that in shooting the dog, that Kenny was aiming for him. Also, it is quite funny that no one seems to really react to Kenny being shot. All they really say is well it's your left side, so it didn't hit your appendix. Hello? The guy just got shot. Were they using BB guns? Then, the people living in the house basically say no we don't have anything, do you want to use the phone? There is no typical reaction of a character being shot. The ride to the hospital only gets better. Frank and Tub stop twice to warm up, while their friend is sitting in the back of the truck freezing, and with a wound in his stomach! Then we find out that Frank likes a fifteen year old and Tub really does not have gland issues. And then in the reunification of friendship Frank buys Tub pancakes, and then watches him veg out. Then, ultimately, they were not even heading in the right direction to the hospital! Throughout the storyline, it is more important to focus on Tub and Frank, and their metamorphosis. The author took Kenny out of the picture physically so that the change between these two characters would be the vantage point of the reader.

Dynamic Characters

All of the characters in Hunters in the Snow take on a dynamic change. First, Kenny the more assertive, abusive one, who kills the dog is the one who ends up helpless in the back of the truck. Second, Frank the one constantly poking fun at Tub becomes sensitive by the end of the story when the two are able to share their "secrets". Tub, also in this point in the story becomes more accepting of himself, because Frank is able to actually treat him as a human. He also reveals how his diet and health issue is fake. I'm not really sure I would consider these changes permanent. For one, Kenny was only physically changed throughout the story and had no choice. I also believe that Frank's reaction to Tub was just because Tub actually got mad at him, and it might have frightened Frank. Overall, these sort of dynamic changes prove that sometimes the worse situations bring out the best in people, even if the effects do not linger.

Everyday Use

4. Does the mother's refusal to let Dee have the quilts indicate a permanent or temporary change of character?

The mother's refusal to let Dee have the quilts does indeed indicate a permanent change of character. Before, I feel as if the mother was willing to let Dee have or do anything because she was the one that had broken away from the society. Which in the beginning, I believe the mother sees as a good thing. However, Dee seems to put herself on a different level then her mother, and sister Maggie. Dee takes the way she acts as portraying her heritage, when really she has denied everything about her heritage. In the note on the bottom of page 173 we learn that some members of the black community reject names they inherited from a period of slavery and selecting others that keep with their African heritage. To the mother, I do not believe it is her African heritage she finds important, but rather her ancestors that do relate back to the civil war. She mentions her Great Grandpa Ezra's civil war uniform. Clearly, Dee has a conflicting few of heritage than her mother. She merely wants the pieces from the house and quilts for show, not for their real use, not for how they connect to the past. Ultimately, the mother is able to make a connection with Maggie who still lives with her and understands the true meaning of heritage.

A Rose for Emily

So I want to share my opinion of this story, just let it go, right now, it was weird, grotesque, I mean I'm not even sure of words that describe it. But anyway, for the basics, A Rose for Emily, like How I met my Husband, is another flashback. Yet, except this time, instead of being told by the main character, it's told in first person plural shortly after her death. Which, I believe the first person plural to represent those of the townspeople.
I feel much of the story builds suspense. I mean she buys arsenic, and then purchases things for the wedding, and then Homer Barron disappears, and she is never seen...and the smell. By the end, it all makes sense, but when reading it through, it just seems like a series of unrelated events. To me, it also seems very choppy--like so many parts of her life are missing, but then again, that is what happens when one disappears into a house for years and years.
My final comments/questions/random thoughts
1. She let people (art students) into her house?!? ew ew
2. The title suggests a rose for Emily. Where does the rose come into play in this story?

Interpreter of Maladies (Foreshadow)

I feel there are certain things that foreshadow the ending of the story. Because of the two things I noticed, I believe that there are more hints within the story that I have yet to pick up on. However, first, on page 151 Mr. Kapasi "noted that the boy was slightly paler than the other children..." This, obviously foreshadows the affair that will eventually be brought to the surface by Mrs. Das. However, there is no suggestions to how or when it will be brought up. As a side note, I find it fitting that Mr. Kapasi notices this flaw in the family since he is an "interpreter". However, I find it weird that Mr. Das never questioned his sons skin coloring, or that Mrs. Das fails to mention if he ever did, and what her reasoning was for it.
Another item I noticed, and maybe it could be more of a symbol than foreshadowing, but the occurrence of the monkeys. It seems appropriate that the ending scene of the story involves a chaotic "rendezvous" with the monkeys. I feel it once again somehow parallels the whole idea of Americans not being in touch with the outside world. I mean Mr. Kapasi did warn that the monkeys were only harmless if fed. Yet, it's Mrs. Das who continues up the trail eating her puffed rice and putting herself and children in danger.
Oh silly Americans.

Interpreter of Maladies

I find this story very interesting in regards to the American culture. I feel that the author really makes a point to show how this family with an Indian ethnicity has been absorbed into not traditional Indian ways. I'd like to go through several of these examples:
First, Mr. Das with his tour book and camera. This sounds like any typical American tourist. Yet, what makes it ironic, is that it is his own country. I feel he is more absorbed in his own tour book rather than just listening to Mr. Kapasi share the history, especially when they visit the sun temple.
Second, Mrs. Das is fascinated with looking her best. She paints her nails, shows her calfs, and wears big sunglasses. This I believe to be typical of most American women, yet most likely not something seen in India.
Next, I find the whole affair Mrs. Das had with her husband very American. This can be directly compared to Mr. Kapasi who is also miserable in his marriage, but stays true to his wife. Although, I think his thoughts toward Mrs. Das may have suggested more "American" actions.
Finally, I take the whole event of Mrs. Das misinterpreting Mr. Kapasi's job and spilling her deepest secret as stereotypical of Americans. It is almost as if the author is saying that Americans do not understand the issues pertaining to anything beyond their own little world.
Overall, I find the story satirizing American culture, and how it has the ability to take over families.

How I met my Husband

8. Discuss the effectiveness of the surprise ending. How does Carmichael differ from Chris Watters? Can it be argued that the surprise ending is also inevitable and appropriate?


In this flashback, in which an older wiser Edie tells her story, it seems only appropriate that another man take the place of Chris Watters. The structure of the flashback does create a story telling type atmosphere in which the story would not be complete without a surprise ending. If Watters would have written her back and the story would have ended it, to the reader, it would have just been pointless to read her story. Almost as if the reader would say, oh typical, another story where the woman gets the man and they run away together etc etc. Yet, in adding the surprise ending with Carmichael, the story becomes more characteristic of real life. It's characteristic of how things do not always work out as planned or even imagined. Plus, Carmichael was the more appropriate man for Edie. He did not take advantage of her, and did not make her wait. Instead, it was as if Carmichael waited on Edie. He waited until she gave up, realized that she could not wait there forever on Watters, and that is what makes him much more suitable for Edie than Watters. He was merely all for her, rather than himself.