Entry #9

I don’t actually remember as much about the book Love Medicine as I probably should. I just didn’t find it interesting. Also, I have absolutely no idea what the question is trying to ask me, so I’m at least going to try and answer with something… relevant? Either way, I’m just putting that out there.

It’s very clear that Love Medicine has a very large theme of family, hence the massive number of characters, a lot of which I don’t even remember how they were relevant! The relevance of family issues becomes apparent very, very early on, considering in the first section of the book, it’s revealed that Albertine has some issues with her mother, Zelda. There also seemed to be a running theme of… betrayal? No… Well… Betrayal is the best way I can find to put it. There’s plenty of Nectar’s affair with Lulu and there’s also plenty of Lulu’s affair with… a lot of people. Lipsha did try and iron that out later on in the book, but that didn’t exactly go well, now did it?

Speaking of that whole love medicine bit, I found that to be the most noteworthy example of indigeneity as a concept in the book. I mean, there’s other ones. It is kind of a huge base for the book. I just find that one to be the most… telling. Nectar refuses to properly swallow the medicine and he dies from choking on it? Even I could catch on to that one, and I normally read things for the intended literal story, not the underlying themes and all that. That’s not to say it’s not a good way to present that kind of thing… Is present the right word? I’m having trouble wording these sentences, if you haven’t noticed. I think you know what I mean anyway. It’s not a bad way to go about that, it’s just much more up-front way.

Anyways, another relatively prominent thing in the novel is substance abuse. I remember that Nectar said that alcohol represented an escape for him, and it seemed like a number of other people had some similar opinions. I feel like the alcohol abuse was kind of used as a way to help the readers better understand just how unhappy some of these people really were. The alcohol abuse seemed to get worse as the characters got more and more unhappy, too. Gordie got so alcoholic that he decided it was a good idea to drink a cleaning liquid. It seemed to be a common way people tried to cope with things in the story… as can be related to real life.

Entry #8

Hey, my slides were actually a big part of the presentation! I was afraid I didn’t actually contribute shit… that’s really not the point of this entry, though. The point of this entry is to reflect on magical realism. To start, magical realism was really the one thing that caught my interest in People of Paper. It has a very unique feel to it and presented me with very easy-to-comprehend metaphors. The book was also very relatable, but that’s more because of the author’s reason for writing the book and the overarching subject and themes. Either way, magical realism was something I found to be interesting.

As it turned out, though, magical realism was (and is) really hard to explain in a short or simple way. It has a lot of specific and unique aspects to it that make it what it is. Probably the most important one is the realistic setting. If the setting isn’t realistic to the audience… then what’s the point of calling it magical realism? There is no point, so the realism is one of the most important aspects of the whole idea. Instead of making up a new world for a story to be in, you use the one that everyone here is already familiar with. Closely alongside that is the fantastical elements of it. If there isn’t any magic… then what’s the point of calling it magical realism? I think you get where I’m going with this. This, coupled with other things such as the acceptance factor, gives magical realism a very distinct feel.

One thing that people tend to mix up with magical realism is surrealism, which is actually very different. Surrealism’s differences with magical realism mostly come from the factor that surrealism doesn’t have any restrictions. It can be anywhere from relatively normal with just a number of things off to bad acid trip levels of confusing (it seems to go for the latter most often, though). Magical realism is made so that it’s easier to understand and comprehend (for most people at least). It seems to try to connect the reader to the universe through the realism, regardless of the unrealistic elements placed within the writing, whereas surrealism does… basically, whatever you want it to. There really isn’t a way to limit the possibilities of surrealism. Either way, I honestly normally find surrealism particularly interesting, so that might help explain some of what drew me to magical realism in the first place.

Entry #7

So, this entry is supposed to be talking about my essay… which is due in three days… I don’t know. I just felt like sharing that bit. Anyways, I chose to do my essay on The People Of Paper, which was the only book I could even remotely retain well because it’s the only one that actually interested me. That’s about half of why I chose it. The other half of the reason is the fact that the concept of magical realism was something I found at least somewhat interesting. I ended up writing the essay based around how effective magical realism is at what it does. By what it does I mean it’s used to create clear and easily recognized metaphors that make sense while presenting them in a fantastical way (while also maintaining a very realistic setting overall). Now, I know that was a really confusing sentence (at least, it was to write), but magical realism is pretty hard to explain in words as it is, and I’m trying to do it in a few sentences… not the easiest thing to try and do.

The one major thing I’m having trouble with in this essay is really just my confidence in it. I’m surprisingly skeptical of my writing abilities for this essay, and I mean more so than usual. I mean, I know for a fact that I ALWAYS feel like I suck at literary analysis. I’m not even sure if I really do suck or not, but now, I’m actually legitimately really nervous about it. Maybe it’s just because of how much it’s worth in terms of the grade. It is worth a surprising amount. Either way, I know I can’t doubt myself too much when I turn it in or else I’ll lose my mind, so the only thing I can do is revise, revise, revise. Maybe another contributing factor to my nervousness is the fact that I wrote the whole essay draft in a single three-plus hour sitting. I remember that by the time I was done, my eyes were really disoriented from looking at the white of the page on Microsoft Word. It was also roughly midnight by the time I finished, so I was tired as hell. I think you get what I’m trying to say. Anyways, I honestly can’t wait to just move onto the second essay because that’ll be something I can actually feel a lot more comfortable doing. It’s gonna involve a lot more room for personal touch, and believe me, that’s gonna help make me feel a lot less nervous about it.

Entry #6… I guess?

Just as a bit of clarification: Yes, I missed an entry. Yes, I’m late on this. Moving on to the actual entry. According to my prompt, I need to briefly explain the genres that Octavia Butler’s “Kindred” has been identified as and give an argument as to why it might fit into which one. Well, Science Fiction, for all none of you that don’t know, is fiction that involves speculation based on science that is either current or futuristic in nature. This kind of goes with speculative fiction which is relatively self explanatory, but not entirely. It’s often used to categorize works of fantasy, science fiction or horror. Afro-futurism is something that seems to be something along the lines of science fiction and other forms of speculative fiction that critiques present day issues regarding racism, as well as examining the history and historical events regarding race. The last one is exactly what it sounds like. Neo-Slave narrative is apparently a kind of slave narrative that depicts slavery in a “new world” setting.

As for which of these fit Kindred… they could all work. Two of them have a very wide range of what could be classified under them. Science fiction is one of the most utilized genres I’ve ever seen, and speculative fiction includes science fiction. I honestly, don’t see the science part in Kindred, as the time travel aspect of the novel is very sporadic and unintentional (and rather stupidly utilized as well, but that one’s just my opinion), but the fiction part… yeah, I think that ones a bit obvious. Also, the entire idea of how a person from a modern world would react if they were sent back in time a hundred and fifty years would be entirely based on speculation, considering nobody’s ever actually had that experience, so I can see where the speculative part comes from. Afro-futurism is a pretty easy one to figure out how it fits in. And Neo-slave narrative? Well, considering Kindred is one of the go-to examples of it, I think that would give you enough of an idea of how well Kindred fits into that sub-genre. So yes, all of them could work. I believe that the Science Fiction aspect can be argued considering how out-of-nowhere and unexplained the teleportation and time travel is, but other than that, I can understand the other genres and sub-genres it has been placed in.

Entry #4

Okay, all of this talk about what is or is not a man/woman or however you want to say it… I just don’t like to be a part of this kind of discussion. Masculinity and Femininity are not definite in their definitions. Their meanings can differ from person to person, as can the opinion of how important they are. It seemed to me like a lot of people think that masculinity and femininity are completely black and white, that there is NO in-between, that you’re either one or the other. Maybe that’s not what they thought at all. I don’t really know, honestly, but from my point of view, you can have both masculine and feminine traits to you. I’m an emotional person. I’m also very fond of stuffed animals and plush toys even to this day. I have a massive (and I mean a massive) soft spot for cute things. Along side all of those things, which many people would see as not masculine, I’m also very cynical, sarcastic, brutal with my honesty and sometimes borderline violently angry. I play plenty of video games and listen to a lot of rock and metal music. I don’t see me fitting into either stereotypical definition of masculine of feminine… I’m just… me. I really don’t feel like I can be put anywhere else.

That brings me to the idea of gender roles and gender role restrictions… I don’t use them. I mean, I don’t let them be a thing for me. I hardly ever do anything specifically because I’m a guy unless it’s something specifically related to my biological differences from females. Other people may feel like they have to act a certain way because they’re a boy or a girl, but I don’t feel like that. I just feel like if people don’t like the way I act simply because of my race, sexuality, weight, height, class, etc…. that’s not really my problem. Nor would I want that to be my problem. I’ll act however I damn well want to, thank you very much. Now, if they don’t like the way I act because I’m actually being a jerk or something along those lines, that’d be a legitimate reason to disapprove of my actions. My point is, I don’t act for other people’s approval. I act for my own approval. I don’t mean that I act selfishly, because I know that would actually make me feel worse in the long run. Instead, I act in a way that I feel will give me the greatest feelings of accomplishment and positive pride. If someone else’s approval would make me happy, then I’d work towards it. If not, I wouldn’t bother. I really just do what I feel, not unlike what you are supposed to do if her daddy is poor… that feels like the wrong place to put that reference, huh?

Entry #3

So, after very closely analyzing (and brief use of a large dictionary), I think I might have a bit of a better idea of what the prompt for entry 3 is saying. The argument seems to be trying to say that the book can’t be considered raceless because it directly identifies ‘whitenesss’ as a specific ethnic construct. It also says that ‘whiteness’ is somehow dependent on homosexuality and masculinity and other socially prominent topics, but I honestly can’t understand how that works. The only thing I thought of is that he could be saying that the white race is dependent on these topics implying that you can’t have one without the other present, which is such a stupid idea that I have to assume that’s not what he meant.

It then, however, mentions that the person believes that homosexuality is an analogy for black people and heterosexuality is an analogy for white people. This kind of cleared up my confusion on the second part, allowing me to get a better idea as to what the overall point of the given quote actually was. From what I could tell, the point is that this person is trying their hardest to make this book more racial than it really seems like it is.

I can understand how they may think of heterosexuality and homosexuality as analog to white and black, but I feel that’s reading a bit too deep to find things that aren’t necessarily there. Besides, it seems like that analogy wouldn’t really work with how the story was presented. How many black people only figure out they’re black when they’re a young adult? How many white people figure out their race like that? A rather small number, I’d assume. Both takes on the story make some amount of sense as to why they would be relevant to the author, but honestly, the one on the surface just seems to make more logical sense. Something that I have to acknowledge in relation to this is that works of literature like this don’t have to have a deeper meaning in literally every place. Every single part of the story doesn’t have to have some metaphor or analogy behind it. Sometimes the text just is what it is. The same goes for music, artwork and everything in between. Some works of art may not be nearly as mind-blowingly deep as you may think. Instead, it might be more along the lines of “what you see is what you get.”

Entry #2

Reading James Baldwin’s ‘Giovanni’s Room’ has been a… thing. I don’t really know what I should say about it. It honestly hasn’t caught my interest all that much, and considering how short the book is, I’m not sure it will at all. The story’s structure is alright, but the way the sentences are put together are kind of… irritating. I don’t know how to explain it that well, but I’m just not all that fond of the way the sentences have been put together. I’m also rather confused as to why it took so long to figure out the main character’s first name. I think that’d be something rather important to tell the audience rather quickly. It’s not THAT big of a deal, because what really matters is the character himself, as this seems to be a book that focuses more on being artistic and meaningful.

I have found very few themes that have caught my interest. The only one I can even remotely relate to is the concept of belonging. I can relate to that because I’ve never really had the best social skills due to… well… I don’t really know why, honestly. But, I’ve worked through a lot of issues like that and now have… acceptable social skills. But, the concept of belonging fits in because in grade school as well as middle school, I didn’t really fit in. I was constantly alone and that has led to me being quite introverted. Am I bothered by my introversion? Nope! Not at all! It’s who I am, and, dammit, I’m fine with it, but it’s not always THAT easy to accept yourself, which seems to be David’s constant problem. He tends to constantly self-loathe from what I’ve read, and that’s relatively annoying to me, but that’s not the point. The point is that it seems to stem from him having issues accepting himself.

I have a very close friend who recently came out as transsexual and they were terrified that I was going to reject them for it. The one thing that I figured out not too much after they told me was that they had been thinking about their… situation for quite a long time, and they had only accepted it so long ago. They also have a constant tendency to self-loathe as well, but not in the same unique way that David does it. David self-loathes because he seems to be ashamed of who he really is and how he has developed as a person, whereas my friend… just doesn’t really like themselves in general.

As for a link to something about Baldwin, I found a video of him on an old talk-show reacting to the host asking about how he felt starting out as a poor, black and homosexual writer. Baldwin’s response is genius.

Entry #1

Alright, it’s time to do this ‘blog’ thing I gotta do. This whole thing is for an introduction to fiction class and to start off, I’ve been given a prompt that involves basic explanations and introductions. Allow me to start off by saying I will not be using my real name. So, for the sake of this blog, I’ll go by my Pseudonym, Nero.

For those of you that don’t know me… which is pretty much all of you (if not all of you), I am a huge lover of narrative writing. Games were the first thing that really got me into the concept of narrative, books being a secondary contributor and movies being a third. Since I’ve grown up, I’ve noticed that I’ve become a lot more… perceptive with narrative… in an overall sense. I’ve just gotten better at analyzing text for what it is. That doesn’t stop me from sucking at writing analytical essays, though. Something about school essays just messes with my analytical ability.

Anywhoozle, that’s how I was first introduced to fiction. I’ve also, since then, become a fairly frequent reader of fanfiction… bad fanfiction, most of the time. Doing so has actually helped me become better at writing. Looking at how not to write is a good way to learn how to write. Along with that, it’s just really, really funny sometimes.

As for the outcomes of the class, it seems like most of them won’t be a huge issue for me, particularly defining and identifying literary terminology like plot, characterization, setting, point of view, irony and symbolism. However, the close reading and analysis parts will be a little more difficult. Not because I struggle significantly with the concepts of close reading and analysis, more of because I struggle with the work that accompany those concepts.

For the question on Raymond Carver and what his view on love is… that’s not exactly an easy thing to identify. From what I could gather while reading, he seems to be on the side that love is in the eye of the beholder which seems to be portrayed by the various characters having totally different views on the concept of love. As a matter of fact, a decent portion of the story is the characters arguing about whether or not Ed’s actions could be considered love. I feel like this expresses the whole “to each their own” concept. It could also be that his view is just that nobody really knows enough about love to be able to say for sure what it is. Either one fits the situation to some degree.