Prufrock and Winesburg

T.S. Eliot’s “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” has many connections to Sherwood Anderson’s WInesburg, Ohio, particularly in theme and organization that contribute to the common idea of an internal brokenness and struggle, or as termed by Anderson a “grotesqueness”.

                T.S. Eliot first makes this connection through the organization of the poem. A long poem, written as a variation of a dramatic monologue, the poem divides up very easily, reading as both a part and as a whole. LikeWinesburg, Ohio, which can be considered both a novel and a collection of short stories, the poem can be read as a whole or in segments, each segment being a story within a story. This broken structure connects with the idea of fragmentation, or brokenness, seen in both WInesburg, Ohio and the poem. The poem also displays this fragmentation through the intertwining of formal and informal structure. Like the grotesques, Prufrock struggles internally and this brokenness and disconnect seen in both works is echoed in the divided structure of the poem. The destructive power of this internal battle is particularly seen in the poem with the ending phrase of “we drown”. Drowning indicates a struggle, a challenge between getting air and succumbing to the water, just as characters in both instances face.

                Additionally, the poem echoes WInesburg, Ohio in thematic content. This idea of brokenness seen in both works, connects to the idea of the grotesque in Winesburg, Ohio. A grotesque is described as someone who takes a truth and embraces it, living their life by it; however, this contrasts with the idea that the truths are beautiful. This creates  an interesting juxtaposition in both works. Just as many of the “grotesque” characters in WInesburg face, Prufrock also faces isolation. This separation, as also indicated by the structure’s fragmented feel, also combines with the need for understanding seen in WInesburg. Prufrock’s  communicate what he needs to say, as he mentions “It is impossible to say just what I mean!"—displaying this difficulty with connecting to others . Many characters in Winesburg also have this problem with connecting, and as a result never are truly understood. Enoch, for example does not communicate the true meaning of his art, so he is never really understood.

                The idea of the subconscious and dreams is also prominent in both stories. Prufrock says, “the frame, once chosen, within which the author has elected to work, may itself evoke other psychic material; and then, lines of poetry may come into being, not from the original impulse, but from a secondary stimulation of the unconscious mind." Like many of the Winesburg Characters he also struggles with the difference between his dreams and reality, or the subconscious and conscious. This also draws back to the isolation and inability to communicate as things are said and appear one way, but in the subconscious a whole different world is created and the true inner thoughts of someone are released. This forms the fragmentation and separation not only between the character and others, but within the self.

The Strength of God

Sherwood Anderson’s Winesburg Ohio is full of imagery and allusions, particularly allusions to the bible. There is a strong religious thread running throughout the book, and this is begun from the opening chapter in which the “Book of the Grotesque” describes the nature of truth. One particularly strong example of this connection is seen in “The Strength of God”, which tells the story of Reverend Curtis Hartman. Struggling to preach passionate sermons and at odds with his faith, Reverend Hartman experiences a revelation as he watches Kate Swift from a cracked church window. While the religious references fill this chapter, one particular part of the chapter raise an interesting question of interpretation. In the conclusion of the chapter, Reverend Hartman says, holding up a bleeding fist to George Willard,  "I am delivered. Have no fear… I smashed the glass of the window…Now it will have to be wholly replaced. The strength of God was in me and I broke it with my fist." While the quote can be interpreted a number of ways depending on who is reading it, there are two significant and contrasting interpretations that stood out to me.           

Struggling to find a renewed faith and religious fervor throughout the chapter, the first interpretation of this quote suggests that Reverend Hartman has achieved this feat. The character of Reverend Hartman we see throughout the chapter is inherently weak, although he keeps pushing and fighting to be an impressive speaker and seen as an authority when it comes to God and the Christian faith—or in other words to be powerful. He keeps fighting this weakness and pushing to be powerful, until he comes to a revelation of faith after seeing Kate Swift in the window who bore “the message of truth”, in this case that truth representing God. The chapter concludes with his statement that, “ the strength of God” was in him and that he “broke it” with his fist.  While breaking the window that had  a stained glass image of a boy in the presence of Christ, could easily be interpreted as breaking one’s faith and denouncing this “truth”, the interpretation that after exploration seemed most fitting to me was quite different. After looking deeper into the idea of God’s strength and the possible connections that Reverend Hartman’s journey might hold, the verse of 2 Corinthians 12:8-10 was one that seemed to connect the puzzle.

“Three times I pleaded with the Lord to take it away from me. ⁹ But he said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me. ¹⁰ That is why, for Christ’s sake, I delight in weaknesses, in insults, in hardships, in persecutions, in difficulties. For when I am weak, then I am strong,” the verse reads and boasts a strong connection to the Reverend’s final statements in the chapter.  The premise of the scripture is that humans do not need to be powerful like God, but in their weaknesses they are supported by the power of a loving God. The entire chapter, reverend Hartman struggles with his weaknesses, trying desperately to be powerful like God; however his realization that the window must be wholly replaced and that he had broken the strength of God within him marks an acceptance of the religious truth told in this verse. He had before relied on himself, but breaking the window was breaking free. The window would have to be replaced, just as God’s power would replace his fear and weakness, as in weakness his power is made perfect.

"On the Subway"-- a poetry analysis

On the Subway

The young man and I face each other.
His feet are huge, in black sneakers
laced with white in a complex pattern like a
set of intentional scars. We are stuck on
opposite sides of the car, a couple of
molecules stuck in a rod of energy
rapidly moving through darkness. He has
or my white eye imagines he has
the casual cold look of a mugger,
alert under lowered eyelids. He is wearing
red, like the inside of the body
exposed. I am wearing old fur, the
whole skin of an animal taken
and used. I look at his unknown face,
he looks at my grandmother’s coat, and I don’t
know if I am in his power —
he could take my coat so easily, my
briefcase, my life —
or if he is in my power, the way I am
living off his life, eating the steak
he may not be eating, as if I am taking
the food from his mouth. And he is black
and I am white, and without meaning or
trying to I must profit from our history,
the way he absorbs the murderous beams of the
nation’s heart, as black cotton
absorbs the heat of the sun and holds it. There is
no way to know how easy this
white skin makes my life, this
he could break so easily, the way I
think his own back is being broken, the
rod of his soul that at birth was dark and
fluid, rich as the heart of a seedling
ready to thrust up into any available light

"On the Subway" by Sharon Olds expresses a complex relationship between Whites and African-Americans. Using a juxtaposed description of two different worlds that is aided by shifts in tone, Olds comments on the nature of segregation and racial separation in society and the tension it creates, only to realize that the people of the segregated society are inherently the same.

The imagery Olds places in the beginning of the poem emphasizes the difference between narrator who is a white woman and the black boy looking on, and whose actions are being observed as they ride the subway. His shoes are described as black "laced with white" (line 3),in a zigzag pattern that the speaker describes as "intentional scars" (line 4). The scars serve as a symbol of pain and suffering, alluding to the discrimination against blacks by white society. Furthermore, the use of "intentional" denotes that this suffering inflicted by whites on blacks was done with a purpose of harm. This image of the shoes contrasts whites with blacks, painting a picture of whites as powerful, while blacks are forced to be subservient and intentionally harmed as if they are worth nothing. Similarly, the two characters are mentioned to be "stuck on opposite sides" of the subway car, being permanently separated by a divide (lines 4–5). Here the physical separation is used to reference the racial separation seen in society. The clothing description included continues the contrast. While the black man is said to be "exposed," the speaker is lavishly covered in fur (line 11), reinforcing a societal separation of race and associated class that places whites in a superior position.

The middle of the poem continues to support this racial commentary, beginning with a shift in tone. Whereas the beginning focuses on a more physical description, this part of the work delves into the thoughts of those previously mentioned. The speaker says, "I don't / know if I am in his power … or if he is in my power" (lines 14–15, 18), illustrating a tension and confusion for power created by the racial divide. The statement is important as it illustrates that the separation between whites and blacks is not quite as clearcut as it is made out to be. This can arguably be seen as a realization on behalf of the speaker that the idea of the subservient black and the powerful white seen in the beginning of the poem may not be what is correct or intended. The  repetitive use of the word "Life" develops the idea of an interconnectedness between the two characters in spite of the racial separation that society has created.  The speaker is unable to distinguish whether her wealth trumps the power of the black man or whether his potential aggressive behavior trumps her power, again adding to the confusing separation of whites and blacks based on race. (lines 17, 19).

Towards the end of the poem, the tone again shifts, making it clear that the speaker is trying to understand the relationship between the white world and blacks, in this case represented by the black boy. While she realizes they are different because "he is black and I am white" (lines 21–22), which is emphasized by the image of the "black cotton" that references slavery, and again referring to the scars, or separations, imposed by white society, by the end of the poem, the differences between the two people become seemingly minute. This is achieved by repetition of an image—the image of being broken. Lines 29–31 discuss how the black man could hurt the white woman, as he could "break [her] across his knee the way his own back is being broken." The quote emphasizes the idea that both whites and blacks can hurt, as both races can be injured by the others action. Here despite the racial divide, a connection is drawn through the pain and unrealized dreams they all share.

 

 

What it Means to be Grotesque

  Originally planned to be titled “The Book of the Grotesque”, Winesburg Ohio  is based upon the ideal of “grotesqueness”. In Winesburg, Ohio, Sherwood Anderson defines a "grotesque" as who struggles with one of life's many truths, pursuing it relentlessly . As mentioned in the book of the grotesque, these truths range from sex, innocence, age, and homosexuality to  passion, virginity, profligacy, and abandon. Their fixation on these truths results in a life of falsehood and isolation from society as they face this inward struggle. The grotesques, are lonely, unhappy, and unfulfilled, and the majority of the characters in the book take on these characteristics, giving each a unique tale of their “grotesqueness”.
 
The concept of the "grotesque" is first introduced in “The Book of the Grotesque” at the beginning of the novel, providing insight into the characters mentioned later on in the work. In this opening story, an old writer witnesses a procession of distorted figures in his dream, each of which snatch a truth by which to live their life by, a truth that makes them grotesque. The chapter almost provides a summary of the characters to come, as it is centered on the idea of the "grotesqueness" which is central to the identity of characters seen later on. The old writer, is haunted by these "grotesques", but at the same time understands the condition that makes them grotesque-- the embracing of life's truths ("the moment one of the people took one of the truths to himself, called it his truth, and tried to live his life by it, he became a grotesque and the truth he embraced became a falsehood.” ). It is this grotesqueness that leads to their isolation. 
 

            This idea of grotesqueness caused by the truths is the common thread throughout the book. While it does lack a true plot in the traditional sense, it instead is unified through the idea of the grotesque and the exposure of George Willard, who functions as the main character, to these grotesques throughout the story. With all the characters mentioned in the story, each grotesque has a moment in which they come to a realization of their self and condition, usually through conversation, action, or emotions of others. George Willard, whom these characters relay their stories to, also sparks  this realization for many characters in the book.  While they lead boring lives in the small town of Winesburg on the outside, on the inside there is a spark and longing within them caused by their truth. Every character encountered in the novel has some struggle, some truth that is affecting their life, whether it be a need for knowledge, connection, understanding, or anything else. George carries on throughout the novel taking in the truths of various characters, from Wing Biddlebaum, to Kate Swift, to Elizabeth Willard, and Dr. Reefy, and using him to learn about the human condition. While their grotesque condition causes them pain and suffering, it also holds a unique truth that makes them beautiful beings. The truths they possess ignite a spark inside that has a need to be fulfilled and understood. This spark on the inside is what makes them grotesque, and their grotesqueness makes them human.

"Tintern Abbey" and "Frankenstein"

Mary Shelley’s work features a strong Romantic influence, due to the era in which it was written. In Frankenstein, this influence is seen most notably in the references to romantic poetry, specifically to Wordworth’s “Tinturn Abbey”. Shelley utilizes excerpts from Wordsworth's poems throughout her writings, doing so in order to mirror the journey taken by the speaker of "Tintern Abbey", with Victor’s growth from youth to maturity. Additionally, the use of Clerval throughout the novel is indicative of what Victor’s childhood might have been like had his actions taken a different course, one that did not follow of those seen in “Tinturn Abbey”

Throughout "Tintern Abbey," the speaker of the poem reminisces of his childhood and the enthusiasm he had in exploring the natural world.  In “Tinturn Abbey”, the speaker comments on this exploration stating, "Like a roe I bounded o'er the mountains, by the sides of the deep rivers, and the lonely streams, wherever nature led." Because he was consistently in contact with nature, his growth throughout childhood was allowed to be dictated by his natural surroundings and occurances. While this constant interaction with nature appears to be a positive influence on his youth initially, later the speaker comes to the realization that he was acting "in the hour of thoughtless youth." Ignoring the amazing aspects of nature, he merely focuses on simple and superficial observations of his natural surroundings. These petty activities engaged in through his childhood reveal a carelessness and recklessness that leads to the abandonment of anything but what exists on the surface of the natural world. When compared  to the youth discussed in the poem, Victor’s youthful nativity mirrors the that of the reckless youth displayed in the poem. Victor was blind to the potential effects of his creation in during his wild search for scientific discover, and he devotes all of his time and energy during his maturation to such discovery, ignoring the consequences.  Eager  to pursue the path of science and to achieve glory, Victor never even considers what will happen if he actually succeeds in creating life.

Clerval is also used by Shelley to represent the potential that rested in Victor’s youth. Clerval and Victor were both eager to take in what the world and nature had to offer during their youth. While both  are eager for what each day beholds, they have dramatically different motives and reasoning for their eagerness. Clerval directs his energy towards good by continuing his knowledge and education, while Victor educates himself, but on far more controversial topics, leading him down a dangerous path.  He fervently works on creating life without ceasing and is saddened over all moments lost in working on it.

The latter part of "Tintern Abbey" reveals the maturity that the speaker experiences after the a reckless childhood.).After maturing, the speaker realizes that his actions as a child were incorrect and harmful, leaving him with empty and superficial experiences of the natural world. This connects to Victor's life because he ultimately realizes that his discovery has created disastrous consequences for both others and himself. In  "Tintern Abbey", it is also mentioned that the past, with "all its aching joys, are now no more, and all its dizzy rapture" are lost. Victor realizes that the past is done and he no longer wants to engage in his previous passionate scientific endeavors, and instead  wishes he could take back his youthful mistakes that he has now come to realize as harmful.

The contrast of  reckless youth and the matured adult seenin Wordsworth's "Tintern Abbey" exemplify the changes that occur during Victor Frankenstein's life. Additionally, Mary Shelley usesn the characters of  Clerval and Victor Frankenstein in an attempt to reveal the two contrasting choices present in youth. Clerval chose to use his energy to further his educate himself, while Victor Frankenstein used his energy to partake in disastrous scientific discoveries and ignoring the consequences. Clerval represents Victor Frankenstein could have become had he made different choices.

Is the "Grapes of Wrath" Still Relevant Today?

As my choice novel this summer, I chose to read The Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck. Considered a classic work of American Literature, The Grapes of Wrath shares the story of the Joad family, focusing particularly on the character of Tom Joad.  The work chronicles the experiences of the family as they are evicted from their farm in Oklahoma and make their way to California, all the while battling the poverty of the depression-stricken nation.  Despite the work being focused on the historical event of the Great depression, The Grapes of Wrath, unlike many other great American novels, has succeeded in remaining relevant today.  The story of hardship is something many Americans can relate to, and this common ground shared with the book’s characters has allowed the novel to withstand the changes in pop culture, remaining one of the most popular novels ever written today.

The story’s main staying power rests in the reader connection to the plight of its main characters—the Joad family. The book may have been written about the great depression; however, the socioeconomic plight the characters are faced with is something that Americans in many decades can relate to. In the book the hardships faced, despite this historical connection, are not specifically attributed to the depression, not binding it to a specific historical period, but rather a theme central to America.

The Joad Family’s story is essentially an indictment of the unequal socioeconomic system that is central to a capitalist economy, such as the United States. The individual farmer was a representation of the last obstacle in transferring the labor class from being human to being a commodity and satisfying the capitalist owner’s dreams. In the novel, Steinbeck here saw the future of the American economic system, and the plight of the farmers. Although this has much to do with the Great Depression, it also is largely to do with the capitalist and socialist arguments present in the novel. Steinbeck foresaw that the system would cause workers to become more alienated and subjugated, placing power in the hands of a small and shrinking amount of people. This brings about the major theme of the novel that both reward and responsibility must be shared equally, and presents a strong contrast to the capitalist ideals.

The novel presents a questioning of these ideals with the incorporation of socialist ideals, and the connection of socialism to Christianity is often mentioned. Some, however, argue that Casy's words offer proof that socialism cannot be likened with Christ when he says: "Why do we got to hang it on God or Jesus? Maybe, I figgered, maybe it's all men an' all women we love; maybe that's the Holy Sperit -- the human sperit -- the whole shebang". On the surface it seems the criticism that Steinbeck is challenging belief in God is fitting, but placed in the context of the rest of the book, it becomes evident that Casy isn't unhappy with Jesus or God, but instead in the way religion has used the Bible for its own political agenda. In reality, Casey is proposing something even more essential than socialism: that people would be better if they followed Christ in teaching to love others.

This is relevant today because of the political magnitude in addition to the story of economic hardship. It also comments on the tendency of society to stray from Christs’ wishes and towards societal and economic wishes.

An Analysis of "Fire and Ice"

 

Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I've tasted of desire
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.

This poem titled “Fire and Ice” raises a question about the fate of the world, wondering if it will more likely be destroyed by fire or ice. Both sides of the debate have supporters, and Frost introduces the narrator to display his own take on the question of the world’s end. The narrator first makes the conclusion that the world must end in fire after the consideration of experiences with desire and passion, the emotions fire is associated with. However, after considering his experience with ice, which signifies hatred, the narrator acknowledges that ice could easily be just as destructive.

In the first two lines of the poem, Frost creates a clear contrast between fire and ice and the two types of people connected to each natural element. In using the word “some” instead of “I” or a specific individual, Frost suggests that the separation between the two elements is a universal truth, not just an idea supported by one individual. Besides the obvious contradiction between fire and ice, the first lines also frame Frost’s claim that the world will end as a result of these elements, either fire or ice. It is at this point not made clear which one will destroy the world; however, they are the only options presented—something significant to note. The poem doesn’t present any additional possibilities for the cause of the world’s fate, making it a black and white debate between fire and ice, as well as their associated emotions.

Although at the surface the argument seems scientific, arguing whether the world will end in a frozen state or as a fiery inferno, Frost introduces a more emotional side through the feelings associated with the two elements. While passionate desire is connected to fire (“From what I’ve tasted of desire, I hold on to those that favor fire”) , hatred is generally associated with ice (“I think I know enough of hate, to say that for destruction ice, is also great”). This underlying emotional context creates a whole other level of understanding of the poem’s meaning. This metaphorical view of the two elements allows the world to be recognized as a metaphor for a relationship, also connecting to the relationships of the people who inhabit it. Passion and fire consume a relationship very rapidly, but the hatred of cold can destruct the relationship just as well. Frost’s poem raises the question of “which is worse”?

          While in the first two lines of the poem only allow a single choice between fire and ice, the narrator undercuts this assertion through acknowledgement that both elements could be successful in destroying the world. Also the experience of their associated emotions, which often occur in conjunction, reveals that fire and ice are not exactly mutually exclusive as suggested in the first two lines, but rather that they are equally destructive leading to the conclusion that while world will end in fire, it could just as easily end in ice. Two very different elements in reality are proven to be surprisingly similar, both possessing the power to destroy the world.

 

Allusions to Paradise Lost Seen in Frankenstein

            The novel Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley, is centered on the story of Victor Frankenstein and his creation and subsequent abandonment of a creature he brings to life from various body parts. Following the achievement of creating this life form, thus completing his quest for the glory and knowledge of the secret to life, the hideous creature is no longer acceptable to Frankenstein and is subsequently abandoned. Left to the world to fend for itself and learn how to live in society, the creature goes off on its own and is able to educate itself, but spurned by society comes to resent his creator and turns to a quest for vengeance. Throughout the story line of the novel allusions to Milton’s Paradise Lost are evident, particularly in character traits and roles, and additionally in specific references to the book.  Shelley parallels Paradise Lost through the sharing of characteristics between Victor and his creation and Milton’s characters of God, Adam, Eve, and Satan.

            The story of Paradise Lost is ultimately a twist on the story of Adam and Eve found in the Bible, and concern’s their disobedience and subsequent fall from grace. Satan and Rebel angels decide to Corrupt God’s creations—Adam and Eve, so Satan builds a bridge between Hell and Earth. God then creates a council of angels and his son (Jesus Christ) volunteers himself to make a sacrifice for all of humankind. Disguised as a cherub, Satan proceeds to enter Paradise which in the Bible is called Eden. Satan perches himself atop the tree of life as Adam and Eve tend to the garden, and angels soon realize he may be evil. Eve has a dream of being tempted by an Angel, who is in reality Satan, and God then sends Raphael as a warning, and he cautions Adam against his unquenchable thirst for knowledge. Satan takes the form of a snake, and tempts Eve to eat from the Tree of Knowledge and after Adam finds out and eats the fruit as well, they both turn to a life of lust. Upon news of this sin, God decides to punish them and Adam and Eve both blame each other for the sin that has occurred. Adam wonders while God ever created Eve, and Eve begs him not to abandon her as she believes they can survive by loving each other. After praying and repenting to God, God sends Michael down to earth to tell Adam and Eve they must leave paradise. After putting Eve to sleep, he takes Adam onto the highest hill and shows him the future that God will bring to the earth, including Jesus, and when Eve awakes, both of them walk into the new world of Earth. Paradise Lost is paralleled in Frankenstein through the characteristics shared between Victor and his creation and Milton’s Characters of God, Adam, Eve, and Satan.

            First, Adam can be connected to Victor Frankenstein, while the monster can be connected to Eve. Like Adam, Victor has an intense thirst for knowledge, which ultimately leads to his sin. Like Adam’s thirst for knowledge that leads him to sin and eat the fruit, Victor’s thirst for knowledge leads him to create the monster which is sinful itself due to the placement of himself above God by playing creator, but more importantly leads to his major sin of abandoning the creature he has brought to life—an event that like the first sin of eating the fruit, leads to many other sins. Additionally, like Adam’s anger towards Eve for her sin, Frankenstein also shows anger towards his creation, who parallels Eve, for his sinful way of being a “wretched beast”.  The monster, Like Eve, was created from Adam, or in this case Victor. Additionally Eve turns to sin, like the monster’s turn to evil rage, but still desires love, just as the Monster deep down truly wants. Besides these major connections, Satan can also be connected to the Monster due to his evil and revenge, while Victor can also be connected to God for his role in creation. While these roles parallel, motives do not necessarily match up.

            Perhaps most thought-provoking parallel used by Shelley is the one that is explicitly stated by the monster. While trying to understand language, the monster reads Paradise Lost and arrives a conclusion about his own existence. In Frankenstein, Victor comes across his creation while alone on a hike, and the creature commands Victor to listen to his story. The creature tells the story of what happened after fleeing Frankenstein’s lab, which is essentially a story of how he came to understand his existence and society’s views on him. The monster says to Victor “remember, that I am thy creature: I ought to be thy Adam; but I am rather the fallen angel.” By comparing Victor to God, the monster places responsibility for his evil actions upon Victor, reprimanding him for his negligent failure to offer a nurturing environment.