The Diary of Anne Frank

In the Diary of Anne Frank, a main idea is how lonely the life is of a teenager.  She does not have a confidant (that’s why here diary becomes one) and she has rather bad relationships with her mother and sister, and weak, shallow relationships with her friends.  She continuously brags about her strings of annoying boys who are "in love with her," and her "large circle of friends," but tyhen says that she does not feel that she can talk to them about anything important. She writes toward the end of the diary, “the young are more lonely than the old.” She also uses mother as an example of how she would not like to be, and her sister as a figure she just isn't so very close to.  Without there people in her life, she was set out on a long track – even before being put in hiding – to loneliness.  

The author, Anne Frank, probably subconsciously wanted us to feel outrage at her treatment and to stand and make a difference (at least back then), while at the same time she just wanted us to sympathize with her – in terms of her situation of being forced to go into jiding because of the  Holocaust, and also just her family/social situation. To make us realize the horror that was going on, she gives vivid details of her “crazy life,” how nice her life was before versus how awful it is now. You get this brief perfect time before everything starts in the beginning of the book, and then iot erupts into chaos. She vividly describes the anti-jew laws, while still maintaining that every thing is alright, that people are good despite it all. Her faith in the human race is admirable.   

I will take away from this book a much better and more comprehensive understanding of the Holocaust and the hardships Jews had to face.  My opinion on the issue obviously has not changed, but fortified and been made stronger. My understanding of World War II was greatly enhanced by this; before I understood what happened, but really not how people, much less a girl my own age, felt. I would like to know more about what happened to Anne, and how she died.

The Great Gatsby

In The Great Gatsby, by F. Scott. Fitzgerald, wealth, and how it corrupts people and destroys lives is a main theme. Nick, the main character and protagonist, goes out from his home of Minnesota to Long Island, seeking money and glamour under the guise of starting up a bond business.

His new neighbor, Jay Gatsby, throws fancy parties every week, and soon strikes up a sort of friendship with Nick. This is mainly because Nick playes a main part in the reintroducing of a girl (Nick's cousin, Daisy) who Gatsby has been in love with for years. In fact, it is revealed that Gatsby, poor when they had met, had lied about his financial status and then taken to cheating and swindeling to eventually create a mass fortune.
The pursuit of wealth is evil in the end, and, even with all his money, he still doesn't get the girl.

Also, knowing that the book takes place in the 1920s, I think about wealth in the time period. The roaring 20s were a period of financial stability, ladies in flapper outfits, and happiness. World War I had been over with, the economy was booming, and the rich were richer. Jay Gatsby's lavish weekly parties might have something to do with the time period-- maybe he wanted to prove that he could fit in the rich who had money to burn. However, he is one of the rich, and he does have money to burn, but he's one of the new, self- made rich who who live on the west egg of Long Island (the old rich live in the east egg.) People like Gatsby are less tasteful than the aristocracy as well, and put up garish displays of money. He feels a need to prove himself and display his riches and to always be looking for more-- which essentially led to his downfall and the fall of the 20s. The economy, after its sudden post- war rise, dropped again after the 20s, more dreadfully and depressively than ever before.

After a series of disasters ultimately leading to the death of Gatsby and moving away of Daisy and her husband, Nick goes back to Minnesota. It's less complicated there, and people have true values-- caring about things other than money and wealth and maintaining the kindnesses that can make a personality, even if you're a beggar on the street.

Emma, by Jane Austen

     In Emma, by Jane Austen, the main character is lovable but not quite likable. In many parts of the story she is her own antagonist and acts accordingly to her friend, Harriet. The book follows Harriet's romance and her own.

     The main plot of the story involves when she tries to set her friend up (after a few successful tries in matchmaking) with a jerk. Then, later on, when Harriet gets a marriage proposal from a really kind man who she really likes, Emma convinces Harriet not to accept because she thinks that he's not good enough for her (by the end of the book, he and Harriet are happily married.)

     This book makes me wonder if justice was served or not. In my opinion, justice is served when the victim of something emerges content, and the bad guy is punished. For instance, if someone murders someone, they are thrown in jail (assuming they're caught). In this story, Emma is both the bad guy and the victim, but she comes out of her situation pretty happily (if not with a little angst) with no punishment that I can see. So, going by my typical ruling, there would not be justice in this story.

     However, I might say that Emma does get served justice, as Harriet is happy at the end, and Emma gets berrated once (which really affects her, as she grew up with only one lenient parent) and even learns a lesson by the end. You good also argue that Emma meant well, and had good intentions all along, and had nothing to justfy. It goes both ways.

     If justice is not served by the end of the story, it certainly seems like there is; the "jerk ex- boyfriend" character is made to marry an awful lady, and Emma, our heroine, and Harriet, the cheerful henchperson, live happily ever after.

Rice Concedes Error on Libya; G.O.P. Digs In

In the article "Rice Concedes Error on Libya; G.O.P. Digs In," Republicans criticise her for stating that the attack in Benghazi was a  "spontaneous protest gone awry," and not a terrorist attack.  They also say that when the post of Secretary of State becomes available, they would rather vote for John Kerry than her. The author wants us to know that she was not aware that the attack was terrorism, but even so, she tried to imply it. However, the F.B.I. made her change her speech. Therefore, the public statements may not have been her fault.

The author wants us to think that she is innocent, and that the Republicans criticising her (mostly Senators McCain and Graham) are incorrect and just looking for ways to insult the Obama administration.  He does this in numerous ways. He constantly quotes the Republicans, but in ways that make them seem unreasonable and a tad ridiculous. He subtly mentions ties that the Republicans have to our ever- so popular ex- President Bush. He also states things in a very "attack and defend" kind of way. First he writes what they think she did wrong, then he writes what they think, and then he writes what her defenders think. In this way, the Republicans are made into soounding awfully wrong.

I, though knowing that the piece is subtly manipulative, agree with the author. I think that any information that they should have had, but didn't, is the fault of the intelligence agencies, and that anything she wanted to say, but didn't is the fault of the F.B.I.  However, I think that these agencies were working on the behalf of their country and did what they could, considering what they had at the time.  And the Republicans' arguments about her were biased and unreasonable. They were so desperate to insult the White House, that they scrutinized her every move and said that, in an interview, she acted badly because she left a word out. I think that so far, she's been doing a fine job in a difficult job, and that the recent actions weren't her fault. If I were a senator, I'm not sure who I would vote for-- I'm right now very satisfied with Hilary Clinton.

The Catcher in the Rye

     The Catcher in the Rye, by J.D. Salinger, has an odd yet symbolic title. It relates to how Holden, the main character, is scared of growing up.
    
     However, the title doesn't even come clearly into play until the sixteenth chapter, where a boy is singing the song "Comin' Thro' the Rye." This song is by Robert Burns, and is about, bluntly enough, two stangers having a one night stand in a rye field. Holden doesn't really know this, and it becomes a central theme.This song appears later in the book as well, when Phoebe asks him what he wants to do with his life. He sees an image of a "Catcher in the Rye," where there's a field of rye full of childrenwith a nearby cliff.
   
     He would pull falling children back into the rye, and off the scary cliff. This signifies growing up and how Holden, the main character in the book, does not want kids to grow up. He has a bad and weary adulthood, though he is not a full-fledged grown up, and is scared of the world and things he doesn't understand.
 
     He's scared for the kids, too. Maybe he shpuldn't be. I think he's using his own life to model the lives of kids around him. Though he has their best interests at heart, perhaps kids do not need to be "catched." But then what is the point of Holden's life anyway?

     Phoebe, Holden's little sister later points out that he has misheard the song anyway. He thought a line was "if a body catch a body comin' thro' the rye," when it wasn't. It was "when a body meet a body comin' thro' the rye." 

Everything is Illuminated, By Jonathan Safran Foer

     In Everything is Illuminated, by Jonathan Safran Foer, a young Jew named Jonathan Safran Foer heads to Ukraine to figure out his grandfather's past and hopefully, find traces of a woman named Augustine who reportedly saved his grandfather's life from the Nazis. I am not finished with the book, but from what I've read I have come to understand that one of the main themes in the book is the past, and remembering it.  

    The book often indicates that though we search for the past, we may not be pleased with what we find. That that past can be confining, can hold you down. There is a part in the book where the people of Trachimbrod, the Ukrainian town Jonathan's grandfather is from,  get so absorbed in the past that the line between then and now starts to blur and peoples' lives are stirred up.

     Lista, the more-than-slightly senile old woman who is the last survivor of Trachimbrod and unofficial guardian of the town, indicates that she would rather be dead than live with the memories she has when she says that the survivors of the town are not lucky. She dislikes her "job" as guardian instead of being glad to hold such a very signifigant position.
 
     Also, Grandfather has issues with his past as well. He'd been involved in the war (WWII) and has such scarring memories of it that he tries to forget them. He almost ignores these memories.

     Ignoring the past vividly contradicts with the other side of the theme-- learning from your past. The entire reason Jonathan goes on this adventure in the first place is find out about his grandfathers' past, and through it, find out and learn about himself. 

    I think that Jonathan Safran Foer tries to have us know that everything has a good and a bad side, and the past is no exception. He wants to to see the irony-- that Jonathan goes on a quest to discover what everyone else is trying their very best to forget.   

Special Topics in Calamity Physics, by Marisha Pessl

     Special Topics in Calamity Physics, by Marisha Pessl, parental abandonment is a main theme and issue.

     The main character, Blue van Meer, has a scholarly father who has them in a constant state of movement and often meets with colleages during free time. He does spend an abundance of time with Blue, but during this time he'll quiz her on Nobokov, or have her recite Shakespeare. He does not have a typical relationship with his daughter; however, she loves him very much, and towards the beginning of the book, even idolizes him.  Her mother dies before when she is young, and is mentioned surreptitously (and bluntly, too) throughout the book. Though she is dead, Blue is very aware of her mother, and  her haunting memory gives Blue's life lonliness and leaves a space missing.

     The other characters have sketchy parental backrounds as well; many of the kids in the little clique that Blue is kind-of in, the Bluebloods, do not have clear and reliable parents.

     Jade, for one (the snotty ice queen that every story needs) father is a nearly nonexistant figure in her life, and her mother is a slutty has-been who's still stuck in the 70s, and Jade calls her not Mom, but Jefferson. When Blue says Jefferson looks "very nice,"  Jade's reply is "About as nice as Hitler." "Boyfriends" frequent Jade and Jeffersons' mansion, and Jade is spiteful and unhappy as a result of her home life.

     Blue never even meets the parents of the other Bluebloods, and for most of the story is deluded to think that they had all had extravagantly melodramatic pasts. She believes this as an result of a tale that Hannah, their friend and teacher, who dies later on in the book, tells her. In reality, Hannah has had a bad relationship with her parents.

     This story is, essentially, a coming of age piece (as Blue is turning 18) in which you learn about growing up and becoming independent from your parents. Blue has been pretty much independent her whole life, except for her Dad, and during the course of the book, she becomes independent of him, too. But it isn't the struggle it may be for other kids-- normal children depend more when they haven't got failure on their parents' part in their past.

     Reading this book makes me wonder what inspired Marisha Pessl to write it. Does it come from her lifeit more about the mystery or the relationships? Did she have a bad family situation?

Special Topics in Calamity Physics, by Marisha Pessl

     I am currently reading Special Topics in Calamity Physics, by Marisha Pessl. The book is brimming with both external and internal conflict.

     About a teenager named Blue van Meer, the book describes the family (herself and her father) the friends (herself and her father) and the life, of an unusual high school senior, which primarily centers around her father and herself-- until she meets Hannah Schneider.

     In the book, Blue agrees with most everything her father (Gareth) says, and, as he is the only parental influence (or any influence) she has, and is also uncommonly brilliant to boot --an accomplished and well known literature figure/ professor/ lecturer/ writer. But when they meet Hannah Schneider, and he thinks she's "commonplace," while she thinks she's "elegant, with a romantic face."

     This is the first of many clashes between the two van Meers.

     Blue evolves over the book, and gradually is illuminated to her father's (many) flaws.

     And with realizing his flaws, comes shaping her own life. She goes to a dance with a boy her father doesn't like, makes friends with kids who sneak into adult parties, and becomes part of Hannah Schneider's "group."

     Her issues with him all come to a beaming climax when it is revealed that he's having an affair with one of her teachers, Eva (she finds out when the angry Eva Brewster breaks into their house, suspicious Gareth is cheating.)
   
     In the book, Blue begins to rely on her father less, and put more trust in herself, and her views. She begins to develop her own personality, away from the sphere of influence of her influential dad. She comes into herself, and, in some parts of the book, it is astory of self discovery-- finding the Blue van Meer amongst the sea of Gareth.
    
    


    

One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel García Márquez

     I recently read One Hundred Years of Solitude, by Gabriel García Márquez. It is a novel that describes the foundation and fall of the town Macondo, and with it its founding family, the Buendías.

     The book spans over more than a hundred years, and you get lost in the generations. It covers early technology,  a civil war, factory and civil rights issues, and plagues. There are so many characters named Aureliano, José Arcadio, Arcadio, Amaranta, Remedios and Ursula, that you get confused as to who is the son of who and if Aureliano is Meme's son or great- grandfather (he's neither.)

      However, as you read the book, you begin to understand that the characters all have the same personalities as their namesakes. You don't even need to worry about who's related to who, because as long as you know their name you understand their personality( I stopped rigorously flipping to the family tree about halfway through, when I realized this.) Aurelianos are always thoughtful and vague, José Arcadios rough and rational, Remedioses beautiful and innocent. Throughout the years, the same characters appear over and over again (only with more flaws each time).The overarching mentor character, Melquíades, even comes back from the dead so as to repeat his teachings to the younger generation.

     In the story, the characters have similiar personalities, but their flaws are not fixed.
 The same mistakes are made over and over, cousin marries cousin, and characters have children with the same prostitute their grandfather did (ew.) The town is founded, becomes a bustling city, and then falls, victim to the never ending cycle.

     You can practically feel the history go around and around, which brings us to what I've been talking about this whole time and what I think is one of Márquez's main themes: time. He is trying to point out that everything repeats itself and rarely improves.

     I got the sense from this book that Gabriel García Márquez must've been a pretty cynical guy. The Buendías eventually repeat and deteriorate until there are only two left (who have a child with a pig's tail who, ultimately, dies). The town is doomed from the start, and I think that maybe Márquez is trying to say that everything is doomed, and everything ends.

Am I Blue? Response

In “Am I Blue?” by Bruce Coville, a boy named Vince struggles with his sexuality and is bullied for what he may or may not be. His primary tormentor, Butch Carrigan, is convinced that Vince wants nothing better than to “jump his bones.” One horrid day, Butch pushes him into a particularly nasty puddle, and he picks himself up to see lo! his fairy godfather. His name is Melvin. Throughout the story, Melvin helps to guide Vince through his life being maybe- gay.
 

One of the things Melvin helps him learn is that you should stay true to yourself. When Vince makes a comment on how he walks "swishy," he replies that he gave up his life to walk that way. In this context, walking swishy is clearly a metaphor for being gay.

Melvin also helps him realize that if he realizes that he is gay, he won't be alone. He does this by telling him of Gay Fantasy #3--being blue.
 

         “We used to imagine what it would be like if every gay person in the country turned blue for a day. So all the straights would have to stop imagining that they didn’t know any gay people.”

          When Melvin gives him “gaydar,” the ability to see gays in shades of blue (for the degrees of their gayness), he finds out that the very people who proclaim to hate gays-- a republican homophobe and Butch Carrigan are both gay themselves. So is a married (to a woman) storekeeper with three kids,  while a librarian that “everybody knows is gay,” is not. Even his father is tinted blue.

           Like Melvin says, we are helpless at distinguishing between gay and straight-- we just assume that everyone they we know is straight because it hasn't been denied.  We are an ignorant, discriminatory bunch of people. In many human societies, the idea of being gay is profound and vague; a rebellious progressive disease that can be squashed as long as you stay away from them.

           In “Am I Blue?” we learn that it’s impossible.

  My Mom’s best friend is gay. His brother knows, and is unsympathetic. He (still) hasn’t told his high-school age children yet. He thinks that, somehow, keeping the fact that their uncle is gay from them will protect them. When the oldest daughter (a couple of weeks ago) was told --- at 19!!!!!--- she was shocked, but supportive. Realizing that her uncle, who she’d loved her whole life, was gay, taught her that we know and love many gay people in our lives.
 

           Bruce Coville really wants us to realize that gay people are as human as straights, and that we probably know and are rather fond of many. He wants to make us wonder if our parents are, if our friends are, if our uncles are, and if we are. He wants us to take it as one of aspects of everyday life, just like being straight is, and accept it with open arms.

"The Drummer Boy of Shiloh"

“The Drummer Boy of Shiloh” is an artfully written short story which takes place right before the battle of (surprise) Shiloh during the Civil War. It’s about a young drummer boy named Joby who feels that he is unable to make a difference in the war or fulfill the high expectations he has set for himself, fueled by his “firm and fiery family devotion.”

 

Hopeful and young, Joby runs away to join the army, and until this time, has never realized how horrible and scarring the war can be. Overwhelmed by his insecurity and fear, Joby begins to cry. I know that if I were asked to fight in a war I’d be terrified, and I’d certainly never be brave enough to run away from home for that purpose; my 5 year old sister can intimidate me with a blink.

 

The general, hearing Joby’s cries, talks to him (or maybe rants) about his place in the war.

            
              “You are the heart of the army. The general of the army when the general’s left behind.” He tells Joby of how awful war is, how none of the soldiers are ready. He teaches Joby that people like him can inspire others, help them gain the confidence to fight, and avoid becoming victims of war’s destruction.

War creates loneliness, death, lack of confidence, and (even worse, what many of the soldiers are ailed with in the story) deluded confidence. People can come out hardened, bitter and shell-shocked. But it also can create a great colonel, a strong fighter, a brave drummer boy. People die in war, and the rest come out changed.

 

If fighting is bad, and war is worse, than those who fight in war have got to be pretty spiffin’strong.

 

In “The Drummer Boy of Shiloh,” Joby learns this—how much of a difference he can make and how strong he has to be( or as the general thinks, will be) to make that difference.  People, in general, become stronger as a result of their experiences, which may not be as destructive as war, but can be just as personally scarring.

The Pearl Reflection/ Review

"The Pearl," by John Steinbeck, is a suspenseful and quick- moving novella. It is a good introduction to his work, being much less tedious than others of his books.

The book is about Kino, his wife Juana, and their baby boy Coyotito. They are a poor family living in a poor village, and to make money, Kino dives for pearls. One day Kino finds an eerily large and perfect pearl,  worth  thousands of pesos. He goes to the local pearl buyers, and  believes they're trying to cheat him. Juana, noticing the obsessive aditude Kino has developed, claims that the pearl is evil and that he should sell it away quickly. But Kino wants to go to the capital and try for a higher price. When on the way, tragedy strikes them, and Coyotito ends up dead. The book ends with Kino throwing the pearl back into the water.

The book was full of symbolism, most of it centering around how riches can corrupt, and how family is more important than it. Before Kino found the pearl, they were a happy, albeit poor family, but by the end of the story, the pearl had destroyed them. When he throws the pearl into the water, he was choosing Juana over the money, and no doubt bitter and angry over what had happened.

The book also demonstrates how shallow and self- absorbed the human race is. In the story, a doctor refuses to treat Coyotito when he is bitten by a snake, but after Kino finds the pearl and becomes temporaily wealthy, he welcomes them in and uses his best treatment.

Overall, the book was both entertaining and insightful, themed, but not droning. It was a lovely read and I may read more of Steinbeck.