The Hunger Games: To Fight to Forget

The smell of braised rabbit lingered in the air. At first, it made my mouth water as it invaded my nostrils, but now it was an unwanted guest staying well beyond the duration of the meal.

I know the rabbit bones will be ground up by Mom to be used as an extra source of calcium and iron. She had a knack for using every piece; a talent honed by necessity. She'd grown up in a family of nine. With so many kids, it was a miracle they'd managed to survive. Their's had been a coal mining family, and scraping by became their specialty.

She'll be waiting for me, I think. Getting up, I grabbed the rupsack filled with today's strawberry pickings and make my way out of the house and into the street.

James and Klizor, my two younger brothers, run past me laughing, trying to coax me to join in their game of tag.

"You'll never catch us, Gale! We're not little rabbits for you to snare," says Klizor. James only sticks his tongue out, almost tripping in the proccess.

"I'm heading out," I say.

I don't know how to connect with my brothers. That being said, I have a hard time connecting with my little sister or mother too. I am the provider, yet the son; the caretaker, yet the brother; the hunter, yet the helpless. Because what I am is not defineable, I do not know where I stand. These hard times forced me to grow up fast - too fast. I am uncomfortable in how my family depends on me. That pressure keeps me tense at home. Unable to relax, I can't relate or bond with my family. I can only bring food and help them survive. I hope they can understand this gesture as my duty.

Before I know it, I reach the Mayor's house. Instead of going to the backdoor, I make my way around the now-familiar path along the side of the house and into a door that remains mostly unused.

Three raps on the door. It swings open before I can rest my hand at my side.

"Gale! I didn't think you'd come," Madge says.

"And why wouldn't I? It's Tuesday," I say.

"Well, it's just that... Well you know she-" says Madge, but I interrupt her.

"Be quiet. I have to check my traps before dark. That gives us only 20 minutes." Pulling her in abruptly, I silence her mouth with my lips.

I thought I knew Prim's older sister. We'd been friends, if you can call it that. She was different from the other girls. She had dark olive eyes, like mine. When I looked into her eyes, I felt like they were a mirror and I could see myself. She wasn't who I thought she was.

This girl left District 12 to participate in the Hunger Games. Well, I guess "participate" isn't the best of words. Her sister Prim was chosen and she went instead. Unfortunately, that blockhead Peeta was the male champion of District 12 and also competed in the games.

I used to spend a lot of time with this girl. We only really saw each other when it was just the two of us out in the woods. Always so cool and aloof, I thought all along that that was just her personality. All along, I'd been ignoring the signs. She wasn't interested. It wasn't until I saw her react to Peeta's approaches on the screen that I realized what she's really like when she likes someone.

In my anger, I went to the Mayor's house. It was the only localized place I could think of to voice my opinion. They were the representatives of the Capitol. They were the ones that didn't have to hunt for food. They were the ones that don't have to grind up rabbit bones to fight off malnutrition.

It was Madge that opened the door. She knew about me and this girl and I saw pity in her eyes. I had to make that look leave her face. I suppressed the urge to hit her, and before I knew it I had pulled her in and was kissing her.

I go back every Tuesday. If the Capitol can just reap the work of our people, than I'm going to return the favor. The Mayor doesn't know. But that's how the best traps work. The noose is around some pathetic animal's neck and it's dead before it knows it.

I leave Madge with the strawberries. I won't let her pay me. I pay her.

There aren't any traps to check. I walk home to my bed where I won't sleep.

This girl's train will be here tomorrow. She has forgotten me. I have forgotten her. I will forget her.

Spoiler Alert! The Magicians

Quentin's aptitude discipline test is inconclusive. At first I thought that Grossman would later uncover his secret ability but it never happens. We later find out that it's Penny who had the secret genius aptitude who starts his own private research. Even until the end of the book Quentin never "finds" his aptitude. This seems to be commentary on "specialization." Not everyone has extreme talent in one single field. Many people are well-rounded and more or less average in everything. I think this is the case for Quentin; he's good at magic - passable at it - but he doesn't excel into it. To apply this to a real life scenario, I myself perform relatively good in all my classes but there is no one subject that I flourish in. Like Quentin, I think it can be difficult when your skills and abilities aren't the dominate factors influencing your choice in career. Even after he practices in the solitude of fillory and becomes an expert he never discovers any aptitude. Another curious event - he becomes an expert after he experiences the pain of losing his lover, Alice. Is this to go along with the them that becoming an adept stems from how much you suffer? Was Alice really any more talented than him or did she just suffer from the death of her brother sooner allowing her to draw on more pain to fuel her magic?

Quentin never tries to experiment in the creation of new spells - he doesn't even express the desire to do so. I believe this stems from his lack of ability, or his traumatization of the accidental first encounter with the beast. It came to be b/c Foggs mispoke the spell - creating a new spell - which allowed for the beast to come. His not taking part in the creation of spells such as magic missile is even more evidence that he is smart, but not the smartest. However, his self-other-loathing clashes with the more universal traits of being average. If he hadn't been such a wallower, I might have actually identified with him.

The Magicians

At this point in the novel, it's unclear whether Lev Grossman will choose to explore the personal growth of her characters. At page 47, this book just seems like Harry Potter with expletives. It's also interesting how Quentin periodically refers to Fillory. This sets up a timeline in the book where there are already childhood novels about Fillory, and then Q goes to magic school. Similarly, the Narnia books were written first in which a group of young children happen to go to a foreign magical place where they assist the good in claiming control from the White Witch just as the Chatwin kids go to fight the Watcher Woman and claim control of the lands. Harry Potter was written well after C. Lewis' novels... but this novel even references Harry Potter. How curious, why reference Harry Potter but not Narnia when the Fillory novels seem to practically be the Narnia trilogy. Anyone else think of Harry Potter 5th novel when he's all angsty when reading The Magicians? Litterally, these kids are depressed, self-loathing, blaming, competitive dolts. Why does Grossman choose to make Quentin so miserable? The back insinuates this is a "coming-of age" novel so how will Q change? Also, could he have shown a strong character growth with the character being happy? This novel makes me think of the Alchemist in which the character greatly differs from Q, but similarly grows into an adult. The difference is that the other boy is relatively happy his entire life. I found that that book was written to be read by younger as well, but that it wrestled with particularly hard concepts and came to resolutions chapter by chapter. Very useful if you read for introspection and inspiration. The Magicians however, takes the entire novel to really learn anything - but I guess that's how it actually happens. It takes a lot of time, a lot of mistakes and the looking back on everything to come to conclusions to face the future.

Hungry Hungry Games

A very quick, engaging read. Unfortunately, it wasn't a very substantial piece of work. I flew through the novel in one day - a page turner. I'm starting to see what's wrong with page turners - it's not that the author posits interesting ideas and you want to keep hearing more, but that the author won't give you really anything but well placed plot hooks, so you have to keep reading to find that resolution. Once you know the ending, there's no point in reading it again b/c you can never "unsee" it. It's no more satisfying than a mindless soap opera full of "twists" and "turns" to "wow" the audience. My housemate Sarah noticed how in Hunger Games, an entirely new world is created, but each innovation serves a direct purpose making everything. There isn't any exploration of the world for the sake of exploration. Furthermore, there aren't inventions whose purpose is unknown. I'm not sure I entirely agree with this, but I did find it somewhat a contradiction. How can there be tons of cameras in this fighting dome yet there be so many impoverished that support the rich? The one taciturn idea this book touches on is how love is portrayed by the media. The audience is attached to Peeta and Katniss so they want them to be together. No one ever thinks that there might be another guy back home for Katniss. My final thoughts are on what someone said in class: unnatractive girl becomes hot b/c she has some kind of relationship with a dark, emotionally distant man. She becomes even more hot because now she has a big, muscly puppy dog guy after her... Twilight anyone? I read The Alchemist and was very moved by the book. It wrestled with very complex ideas, but expressed them in a simple way much like a fable or parable would. After reading this book, I've come to realize that it doesn't matter what age group the book is intended. Just b/c Hunger Games is for teenagers isn't an excuse for it not to wrestle with difficult deeper ideas.

The City, The City

Exaggerating the real world is a useful way to point out political issues such as immigration. This book is in the "science fiction" section at bookstores yet seems to close to reality to ignore. It reminds me of Kurt Vonnegut short story in which he creates a world of perfect equality. The dancers wear ankle weights and the intelligent are shocked every time a thought is forming. The price of equality is to weigh down any strength until everyone is on the same level. In this novel, so far it seems to be a point on immigration. Furthermore, it seems to be commentary on how Israel and Palestine were divided with undertones of the Great Schism in relation to religion. The derogatory word painted above one murdered man read "ebru" which I believe when spoken resembles "Hebrew". The idea of countries and borders is a construction of government, but more integrally man. It's fascinating how these two, potentially three, countries can all exist within the same geographical location. This story also reminds me of the divided Cypress. The people agree on an imaginary border and its taboo to cross or acknowledge anyone on the other side. It's a shared living rights on the same island divided by, from my understanding, Greeks and Turks. My mom said that there was a restaurant situated right on the border in Cypress and patrons were limited to sit in seats according to where the border fell. She never did go into how the waiting staff got around this obstacle, but it still echoes concepts seen in The City, The City shows.

Looking forward to seeing where this novel goes, but I anticipate its main points will be the role of the government, immigration, but most importantly a complex representation of "the will of the people" - why is it that people go along with "unseeing"? Out of Fear? I think this country will show a society that does not function democratically.

House Rules Part Deux

I'm going to have to agree with Gahagen on this one. It seems to be a book written for 40 year old mothers who can snag a minute to read in between doing laundry and vaccuuming (I'm not stereotyping anymore than Picoult). Sappy, predictable, "heartfelt", unsatisfying. A quick read, despite it's length, but leaves no lasting impression.

Three Points of Critique:

1) Why did no one ask the simple question: "Did you kill her?"
They talked about how this syndrome leads the a person to be painfully honest. Asking the simple question "did you kill her" would have resolved a lot of problems. Yes, the mom feared what her son might've done, and Theo was afraid of his involvement and ... the lawyer didn't want to put himself into a bind? I suppose the prosecution was afraid he would say no... Litterally, no one asked for his side of the story and I find this unrealistic.

2)The lawyer didn't ask Jacob for his story
Why not? Is this really how the legal system works? I figured lawyers knew the truth about their defendent and just kept a poker face during trial if they should be guilty. I was so confused as to this point. How can one make a sound case without as full a picture as one can get?

3)Ending
If I were sitting in on this case and then, out of the blue, the accused's brother comes forth with his involvement on the case, I would be completely skeptical. Jason is a crime genius - of course he could have planned all of this. What jury would believe this "stroke of luck"? It would seem as if the mother had a hand in all of this too. Picoult should've had Jason go to jail w/out the truth ever being uncovered. The exploration of Theo wrestling with guilt would have been a great read. It would have been a striking tragedy as opposed to a cheap, happy ending.

House Rules

The first time I tried to write on House Rules nothing came to mind. My solution? Put off my homework and take to the kitchen and prepare more food for the week. I already had sweet potatoes boiling in the kitchen and they starting to get too soft. Flipping through some recipes, I decided on "Tropical Sweet Potato Fries" (http://allrecipes.com/Recipe/Tropical-Sweet-Potato-Fries/Detail.aspx). After letting them steam dry, I removed the skins, chopped, and tossed them onto an oiled baking sheet. It was when I was coating them with olive oil that I thought to myself, "Jacob would go ballistic if he were here right now." For those of you who don't know, sweet potatoes are about as orange as you can get, and to top it off, I was using a rubber, orange brush to coat the potatoes with oil. Here I am, preparing food for the week and would never have known that Asperger's syndrome might make sweet potatoes inedible. From this book I am enlightened on the every day challenges of someone on this spectrum of Autism.

I believe this book isn't so much about who killed Olgivery, but instead about the difficulties faced by the "extraordinary". My housemate walked into the living room, and after seeing that House Rules was written by Jessica Picoult said "Oh, she wrote My Sister's Keeper. That author always writes about those challenged with health issues". Granted, that was a generalization, I flipped to the last few pages by accident and saw the last chapter labeled "My Brother's Keeper". With this commonality, I'm guessing there are other reoccurring themes such as sibling relationships in the face of disease, syndromes, etc. Her writing is valuable, I think, because it educates the masses on Asperger's syndrome which would otherwise only be in textbooks.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo: Demonizing S&M

Two oppositions presented in the book are normal vs deviation. Through the character of Lisbeth, we can a clear message of deviation both socially as well as cognitively. However, this opposition is presented not to establish that one is right, or one is wrong but to instead show the spectrum of personalities. Furthermore, this book advocates the breaking of stereotypes. Martin, a seemingly responsible and kind character turns out to be the serial rapist and murderer. Lisbeth, is initially perceived as a social deviant that is daft and contumacious. Although she is by know means a conformist, her appearance repeatedly misleads assumptions made by outsiders. Banal, but, "don't judge a book by it's cover." It acts to strip away the negative connotation of deviant, or different from what is normal.

However, this book solidifies a stereotype. Sexual deviation has often been used to demonize individuals as seen with the Ugandan anti-homosexuality bill. This is in part due to the fact that the most "deviant" behaviors are often shared by the fewest people. The fewer the people, the less likely the majority comes into contact with them. Therefore it can establish an "us" and "them" mentality leading to hostility and lack of empathy. The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo demonizes those who practice S&M. Not does Lisbeth's guardian a practices of S&M who rapes her, but also Martin who is the serial rapist and victim. Through the presentation of S&M, it would seem that Larsson betrays his own true feelings. In the later books, (not that I've read them), Larson couples S&M with satanism completely demonizing the act. As seen in Laura Kipnis' Bound and Gagged, practicers of S&M are demonized. After googling "Stieg Larsson, S&M" I didn't find any group in retaliation of the books. I'm curious as to why this is. No formal S&M group? I'm misinterpreting this book's effects on stereotyping S&M?

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo:

Solving a Mystery:

1) Never accept "assumptions". Almost always, a mystery novel rests on this particular point. If the author can lead a reader into assuming something false from the beginning, the further they can lead them from the truth which attributes to all the more surprise when the truth is finally revealed. In fact, if a book is obviously taking one path, keep the alternative at the forefront of your mind. In mystery novels, a character presented through the view point of another must never be accepted at face value. Never assume innocence of a character from the hunch of another character or the protagonist himself. An individual can never be pegged unless we are presented with a candid presentation of inner thoughts through a shift in narration. And even then, there have been cases of MPD in which a character may believe they are innocent when, in fact, there is more at play. So at this point, you might be thinking "Useful advice, Evan. Eliminate no one. I'm so much closer solving the mystery." Ah, but that's the key. Too often will an author construct a misleading path in which a reader will assume the innocence of the true culprit.

2) Who should be at the bottom of your list in terms of culpability? The most obvious characters as presented by the book. Mystery novels are chock full of false trails that both the protagonist and the reader go down. For example, let's take Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone. The whole of the book is designed to suggest that Snape is trying to steal the stone. Yes, facts seem to bolster this theory, yet only in the end does Harry discover Professor Quirrel as Voldemort's accomplice. Mystery novels are built for the unexpected twists and "aha!" moments. You can bank on the end being "surprising".

3) Never rely on just the protagonist to solve the mystery. There are many hidden clues that foreshadow events to come. Unfortunately, tv and movies are shorter and the clues made more apparent. I found Larson's book surprisingly lacking in telling clues. I think a reread of the novel would turn up a pattern, but I won't make that call until I do.

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo: Predictions for after Chptr 11

At this point in the novel, I have a few predictions - so read at your discretion

Predictions:

1)Vanger setup Blomkvist.
~As seen on tv series Damages, starring Glenn Close, it wouldn't be the first time that a boss has gone to extreme measures to manipulate someone into taking a job. Isn't it all too convenient that Vanger just so happens to have the dirt needed to bring down Wennerstrom? Vanger made Blomkvist need what he had, before he could get him to take the job which explains his timing. Furthermore, familiar with his career and aware of his political stance, if not lackthereof, Vanger seems to have already chosen Blomkvist long before the trial. In the business of mystery and suspense, the world is much smaller than one would hope.

2) Lisbeth is the daughter of Harriet
~At this point in the novel, I highly suspect that Lisbeth's difficult past is somehow part of the Vanger turmoil. Furthermore, her mother seems to be suffering dementia or possibly some other brain damage. How did this illness come about, but more importantly, when did this illness come about. If Harriet suffered a case of amnesia after the incident, than its possible she's lived her life without knowing where she's missing from. I'm curious to see if "Camilla" pops up at all in the plot - a name said by Lisbeth's mother, who's thought to be her sister. The connection at this point can be made because there is an end to Harriet's future, yet no past to Lisbeth. The book is bringing attention to both these incomplete stories. Its possible that the two will link up to form one complete story.

3) Lisbeth helps Blomkvist solve the case
Of course, somewhat of a contradiction with 2, but its possible - most unsupported, as of yet, by textual clues.

Questions:

1) Why would Larsson write such a detailed description of where Blomkvist is staying while in Hedestad. Will this play some important, if not tip-giving role to some pivotal point in plot?

2) Who is sending the flowers? Harriet? I'm tempted to rule out Lisbeth. Albeit she has legendary sleuth skills, I think she'd need a guardian's approval to fly to Florida to send a flower. Furthermore, in her office was a shrivelled plant that she does not acknowledge by name. She simply throws it in the trash. Flower pressing requires detailed precision that presses a flower at its peak. Obviously, from her action in her office, Lisbeth seems not the type to cosset plants.

The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo: Hook, Line, and Sinker

Stieg Larsson is non unlike Vanger in how he presents the story. Vanger gives a lot of seeminly unimportant information at the beginning of his story, but soon, you're caught off guard by his objective - solve the mystery of his grand daughter's murder. Larsson's story is running in congruency with Vanger's and the two stories actually touch each other at this point. The beginning of the novel is filled with information concerning a legal case, politics, and a anticlimactic story of a spiraling career. It seems to be going nowhere, but suddeny, it becomes a murder mystery.

Blomkvist is our window to this world. He provides a framework to the story. If a reader can see eye-to-eye with Michael's reluctance to continue hearing a seemingly boring story, than Blomkvist becomes a vehicle in which emmersion into the text is all the more possible. The more a reader can relate to Blomkvist, the more a reader can temporarily stand by Michael within the story . Just as Michael wants to make the evening train back to home, the reader would just like to get back their own life.

In the moment that the Vanger reveals the object of the job, Llarsson is revealing the objective of the novel. Solve the case of the grand daughter's murder. It is the same bait and catches both Blomkvist and reader in a double hooked reel.

It would also seem that Lisbeth is somewhat of a personification of the book itsellf. The binding of the book is covered in a dragon tattoo like she. At first, the book starts slow just as Lisbeth's first impressions are lacking in good impression. However, abruptly, the expectation and evaluation of both the book and Lisbeth are changed; Lisbeth with the case and the book when the objective is revealed.

This Used to Be a Fun Home. But now it's full of Sunbeam Bread.

Bechdel introduces her family character by character. At first I though she was an only child and lived with her father. Because, her family dynamics change dramatically with the addition of another character - brother, brothers, and eventually mother, I was able to reassess my initial assumptions. This is indicative of her overall style in the telling of a story. She gives you one part of a story, and then later goes back to fill in more, and then more until eventually you know the whole story. This approach is effective because she makes sure to give you the prior knowledge needed to appreciate her presentation of her life.

On another note, I find the genre of this novel to be somewhat unclear. I see that this book presents the reality of Bechdel's past constructed through memory. This novel offers a perspective on reality, but specifically Bechedel's point of view. Because she is telling the story of what happened, I'm sure that at least parts of the story are unbiased and that some ground can be safely regarded as neutral. For example, her mother was an actress. I don't feel pressured to analyze why the author decided on the career actress because I know this detail was not up to her discrepancy. Nevertheless, because she is not omnipotent, omnipresent, or omniscient her story cannot be regarded as a completely accurate portrayal of past reality. Memory can play tricks and so she may have remembered somethings differently. Therefore, I think this is well placed in realistic fiction.

Most interesting were the differences in some of her panels. I think she does this to demonstrate, what drawings are derived from memory, and which are from actual past photographs. For example, Roy on page 100 is very different from the majority of her work. From what I've heard, she took many, many Polaroids of actual people in the positions she desired, and then with the picture next to her paper, she drew out her comics.

Rough Draft 1

Sunset Park: A Modern Epic

The classic epic(work on synonyms) Gilgamesh is a tale of glory, sorrow, divine intervention and secular immortality. However, Paul Auster has taken this tale and adapted it to a modern epic. Chronological distortions, character splicing, and fusions reflect Auster’s unique take on the Mesopotamian epic(change from epic to another word). It is told in this manner to be accessible and relatable(combine with another sentence - short(Ayesha likes it thoug). Secondary characters are explored and the designated roles of protagonist are blurred with the shift in narration. Sunset Park beautifully captures the gem cut faces of the same story. The book does not directly come out as an adaptation, but the similarities are endless and uncanny. Characters, events, and relationships reflect the recycling of an old story that captures the essence of Gilgamesh.

Auster anthropomorphizes Gilgamesh. He strips away the 2/3(look into propotion of Willa, Mary, Morris) divinity, kingship, and physical strength to leave a flawed character with a violent, irrational temper: Miles Heller. This humanification(go with humanization) illustrates the internal struggles and personal shortcomings that even the high and mighty must suffer. Miles flees from Providence to wrestle with his internal demons just as Gilgamesh leaves his kingdom to kill the ogre Humbaba. Neither is able to accomplish what they truly desire. Although, Gilgamesh obtains secular immortality but remains mortal and must eventually face death(flesh out to make a better comparison). Similarly, Miles runs from guilt, and for a while succeeds in losing himself, yet eventually is forced to realize that denial is no means to cope or understand his brother’s death. Although Miles is only a diaphanous specter of Gilgamesh, his essence of true humanity embodies a more complete, strong, and alive representation of the same being.

The role of the family in Gilgamesh is one of mutual protection, love, and sacrifice. The Mesopotamian hero’s mother is the minor goddess Ninsun. Adapted to a modern story, Miles mother is a relatively famous celebrity idolize(look for potentially a better word) and worshipped in American culture. Ninsun adopts Enkidu as her own son just as Morris and Mary-Lee Swann adopt Bing into their family after witnessing his displays of unending kindness and loyalty. Ninsun does this to bestow protection on Enkidu along with Gilgamesh. Not surprisingly, “Willa”, the name of Miles' stepmother, from Germanic roots translates to “protection” (Work on it). As secondary characters in the ancient story, Auster does not strip the parents of any qualities, instead promoting their own perspective to the forefront of the story. In Gilgamesh’s quest to attain immortality, his family is greatly affected yet his mother’s viewpoint is not thoroughly addressed. By switching perspectives to Morris, Sunset Park expands on the full effects of the protagonist’s actions and the repercussions in full to secondary characters.

Bing is perhaps the most unchanged character in this modern epic. He epitomizes the primitive Enkidu; Gilgamesh’s bosom friend that was born of the earth and raised by animals. Physically, Bing and Enkidu are large and have “hirsute [chests]” (pg 222) and are large bulking bears. Enkidu is a literal creature of the earth, an animal from the point in which humanity existed before the rise of Mesopotamia. Because Sunset Park occurs in 2007, Bing is instead a creature of the primitive modern: the point proceeding the era of software. The arguably homoerotic relationship between Gilgamesh and Enkidu is seen in Bing’s attraction to Miles. Further strengthening the analogy, Bing gives advice and helps Miles throughout the novel just as Enkidu interprets Gilgamesh’s dreams. Both characters serve to foil their protagonists and demonstrate that despite fundamental differences, friendship can endure hardships. Auster switches narration which shows that the foil to the protagonist can be complex and suffer personal problems. "It also suggests that a true protagonist in the story of a person’s life is on whom the story gravitates (unclear - simplify). The story surrounds Miles; his story establishes him as the protagonist. If during the moments of Mile’s life Auster had instead focused on Bing, than the roles would reverse and Miles would instead be the foil to the protagonist, Bing. Literary roles are in relation to the centralized character and there is a constant fluidity since in a moment, every character’s story is in motion." - potentially new paragraph, but it would be a compare and contrast ( so you'd have to watch out)... Ayesha likes it, though. make sure it fits in with your overarching theme... make a whole new paragraph.

Originally, Enkidu exists outside civilization. It is not until he sleeps with the temple prostitute Shamhat for seven days and seven nights that he understands the language and customs of man(show Bing's specific social changes from living in the house). Bing lives alone due to his social ineptitude but through Ellen, who is of questionable sexual integrity and with whom he later has sexual relations, he is capable of entering society. Interestingly, she works on 7th Ave. and it is only after looking at seven houses do the two find the house in Sunset Park. The house is formed and Bing becomes a member of the tightknit community of Sunset Park. The message is universal and clear in both stories. Human civilization is a creation of people and so it is only through people that a person can enter society. In fact, it is the bond between more than two people that establishes a society.

Sunset Park is the neighborhood in which the four housemates choose to squat within. The house protects them from the cost of living and shields them from the elements. In Gilgamesh, Shamash is the sun god that protects Enkidu and Gilgamesh throughout the epic. The sun god sends wind to bind Humbaba to enable the victory, but more importantly to ensure the survival of Gilgamesh and Enkidu. Eventually, higher powers decide to assail the heroes of Uruk and not even Shamash can grant protection. The house enables Alice to finish her dissertation, Ellen to develop true expression, Bing to exist as a part of society, and Miles to live in New York and confront his past. The house provides an environment in which the characters are able to live together, affect one another, and within this environment(new word) save one another. Both Gilgamesh and Enkidu have prophetic dreams throughout the tale indicating impending, unavoidable disaster. At the house in Sunset Park, the tenants receive many eviction notifications and their refusal to leave ends in violence. The transformation of the sun god into Sunset Park suggests that there is the existence of tangible, positive circumstances and that “all luck isn’t bad” (pg ?). ---(pinto says put nourish)

Ishtar is the antagonist of Gilgamesh and her actions cause the complications and sufferings. Gilgamesh denies this authoritative goddess sex and in retaliation she sends a deadly bull from heaven to destroy him and Enkidu. The two of them are capable to defeat the beast without divine intervention. Pilar’s older sister approaches Miles and demands she provides her with the spoils of gutted houses. At his refusal she angrily sends two thugs to beat him up. They succeed. This dissimilarity might have to do with the absence of Bing. Had his two hundred and twenty pound friend been at his side, the confrontation might have ended differently. Ishtar eventually instigates divine retribution and the gods choose to kill Enkidu seemingly without reason. Miles’ brother is suddenly killed in a small skirmish that should not have resulted in his death. It is a catholic notion that is no different over space or time. Unexpected tragedy does occur without reason.

Gilgamesh travels to the end of the world to the oceans in an effort to learn the secret of immortality. Since he cannot master sleep(explain that), he is convinced to return home but to take a flower from the bottom of the ocean that will restore youth. Miles travels south to the end of the United States yet since he cannot comply with the legalities between him and Pilar he must return north. She is Cuban, which like the boxflower, is from the ocean beyond the end of the earth. Gilgamesh is bathing on his way home and a serpent clandestinely steals off with the flower. It is an abrupt end that seems rushed. Sunset Park ends with Miles’ hopes of the future stolen by the fight with the eviction police. His life with Pilar slips from his grasp and he falls into the despair. Just like Gilgamesh the novel ends abruptly at a point of panic and melancholy.

Human Tessela

Both Sarah and Little Bee lost flesh and blood on the beach; Sarah - her finger - and Little Bee - her sister. Although the blows occur in very different places with equally varying emotional damage, they are derived from the same blade. Symbolically, the characters posses an identical scar from which the flesh was sliced, their wounds mirror images of each other. Chris Cleaver writes a beautiful and poignant scene in which the two characters join together at the wound to form a whole.

"I held tight to her arm and I placed the palm of her left hand on the back of my left hand. I arranged my fingers underneath hers so that the only one of my fingers you could see was the one that was missing from Sarah's hand. I saw how it could be I saw how we could make a life again." (pg 148).

It carries the beauty of sympathy and empathy yet unveils the gravity of their fragility. Sarah is incapable of surviving in a quotidian sense, and Little Bee cannot survive at all. Combined, these characters have the abilities and the means to live full lives unburdened by the past. However, it is through each other that they make this possible because they have a common suffering. I wonder about the characters in Auster's Sunset Park and how they might have coped if they found others who were familiar with the prickly details of their horrors. Although Mile's parents suffered the same loss of Bobby, neither carried the burden witnessing the event. I suppose the wisdom to be distilled from these two novels is that distancing one's self from others, like Miles, does not equate to independence and maturity. It is recognizing when one is stuck and in need of assistance, and then actively seeks guidance that marks adulthood, like Little Bee.

A Dose of Honey

Little Bee. I feel ashamed because little Bug has it right. "Horror in your country is a something you take a dose of to remind yourself that you are not suffering from it" (pg. 45). This novel is just another dose of that sweet medicine to remind me that I live in a life without fear. Blood Diamond, The Invisible Children, Zeitoun have all touched me yet I've done nothing. What can we do? There are so many of these terrible stories. Bee is not special - she is a beautiful, strong, independent girl who is just like countless others. Who do we help. This feeling of helplessness overcomes me.

And here I go again, making this about me. Isn't it exactly like Americans to hear about tragedy and focus so much on how it affects them. Yes, it does affect them, but is that where their core focus should rest? The reminds me in Sunset Park where Alice notices that our generation won't shut up. We have so much to say about ourselves, but most is just prattle.

On an entirely different note, I found my self sighing with relief after the death of the nameless women. I found it right for her. Her family was murdered, and she was broken seemingly beyond repair. I do not doubt that she could have gotten through it and found people to love and help again, but I wonder if it would have been worth it to her. Our society stigmatizes suicide but Bee puts it in a beautiful new perspective. In fact, its practically impossible for the majority of our society to understand this concept since most do not live in a state of fear: that there are hardships worse than death. Death can be a haven.

Sunset Park: A Critical Reflection

The end of the novel poses the question of whether or not Miles has grown from his seven year penitence. His test of character occurs after he assaults an officer in the heat of the eviction. Once again "his angry punching hands, his angry pushing hands" got the best of him and his disappointment in his own actions are clear(pg 307). He displays the same rashness as he did on the road with Bobby all those years ago. On the other hand, he chooses against the fugitive path to instead "face the music" with the help of his father and friends (or so we assume)(pg 306).

So has he matured, or is he the same boy?

Neither. The final passage is meant to explore a concept discussed earlier in the novel presented by Renzo. "To write an essay about the things that don't happen, the lives not lived, the wars not fought, the shadow worlds that run parallel to the world we take to be the real world, the not-said and the not-done, the not-remembered" (pg 153).

Miles' condition is altered drastically due to the circumstantial presence of Ellen. She pressures him into speaking with his father over the phone even when he obdurately resists. You might be thinking The complication with the eviction occurred. Why think of this as in the shadow world? Ah yes, so to bring meaning to this approach, we must look at a third point in the novel: Morris and Willa did not have a child between them. Willa even states in the novel how she wanted a kid which sets up the possibility of "what if". Say their was a third sibling who likely would have been at the scene of Bobby's death. Sed person might have acted like Ellen giving the full story to render Miles incapable to bottle his guilt. An early, complete confession might have enabled him to move forward in life through the support of his family and friends, the very same position he is in at the end of the novel. But of course, this possibility is "chancy at best" (pg 153). Nevertheless, the end of the novel is a strikingly congruent situation that gives light to how things might have happened for Miles had there been another member present at the scene of Bobby's death.

The text seems to suggest that dealing with tragedy is not always a measure of maturity, but rather it is up to circumstance and the presence of others that attribute to how people cope, understand and move forward from tragedy; furthermore, that running may not offer an opportunity to grow, but instead a prison where guilt can fester until the broken individual becomes "addicted to the struggle" (pg 263).

Sunset Park: An Initial Reflection

Everything that exists in a delicate stasis can be torn apart in an instant. Blinded by the new chapters they are on the brink of living, the tenants of Sunset Park are caught unawares of the violent eviction that suddenly materializes. I (your blogger truly) think about Linderman's acidic reaction to the finale of the book, but I find it an accurate telling of the suddenness and magnitude of tragedy from the view point of one experiencing it.

The entire book is teeming with reflection on past tragedy and how people move forward. However, it supplements this illustration with the sobering truth that tragedies will continue to happen even after you come to terms with those of the past. Just as the estranged soldiers are coping with the emotional and physical wounds of war, they must face infidelity, alcoholism, and handicaps in their "new" life.

Sunset Park ends without any resolution to the current dilemma. Personally, I feel that Ellen might find her drawings in a trash, or possibly finds solace in creating new artwork to accompany her new identity. I think Bing will serve a little time and resolve to fight the system in another petty way. Alice must have emailed herself copies of the dissertation at some point - I find it difficult to believe that she literally only has one copy in her computer. Miles might have to serve some time, but he has powerful connections, and as the nation has seen with the Bush twins there are ways to shirk consequence.

There are so many themes and ways to approach this novel, but I'm particularly interested in Auster's style of writing in telling the story. His level of vocabulary and style do not change from character to character indicating that there is a consistent author. However, the narrator speaks as if he is situated within the minds of these characters, relaying their unedited, internal thoughts. However, there is a shift when focus settles on Morris Heller. Suddenly, the reader has been transported to where the narrator exists and experiences the plot within the mind of Morris Heller. For example, "You have met with the boy twice more since your reuninon on January twenty-sixth" (pg. 274). Is this the recording of observations that Heller mentioned he would start writing? If so, why does Auster have him choose to write "you" instead of I? These are all questions requiring further scrutiny of the novel and shifts in narration from chapter to chapter.

From Sunset Park to Stars Hollow

What do the Gilmore Girls and Paul Aster's Sunset Park have in common? According to Juliet Linderman of Jewcy.com, the two are interchangeable. Linderman was sucked into the TV series, but after the switch from Amy Sherman-Paladino to another writer, the hit WB show (later CW) ended in an "undisputed disaster." Much to her dismay, Linderman finds Auster's recent novel just as unsavory as the last 18 episodes of the Gilmore Girls.

Linderman, who usually identifies as an exponent of Auster, believes the book is lacking in exploration of the protagonist, Miles. He is quick to recount the tragedies of past baseball stars, but his own secrets remains untold. She also found the Sunset Park tenants' infatuation with Miles to be unwarranted as he is riddled with flaws and too few redemptive qualities.

Personally, I'm not as familiar as Linderman is with those chatty girls from Stars Hollow, a name more indicative of the show itself. However, I can see Pilar making a guest appearance on the show to give that obnoxious Lory another reason to hysterically babble. My tastes aside, I find Linderman's criticism heated, possibly with the disappointment a fan faces with unmet expectations. I'm only through part I of the novel, but I think Auster does a fair job of showing "what makes Miles tick." Particularly in the memories that Miles is stripped and sized by his mother. Auster doesn't implicitly explain how this affects Miles, but his relationship with Pilar is evidence enough. Miles refuses to show Pilar himself as a result of the relationship with his mother. He has learned to never be "naked" in front of women because it will be met with calculated judgment.

Nevertheless, Linderman's criticism may come as a blow to Auster, but I find its humorous tone enjoyable, not too mention effective in communicating her point.

"Paul Auster Meets Gilmore Girls In This Review Of Sunset Park"
http://www.jewcy.com/arts-and-culture/books/paul-auster-meets-gilmore-girls-in-this-review-of-sunset-park

I criticize because I care

Jackson Pollock comes to mind when critical theory is on the table. Many of his paintings have numbers instead of titles, because he believed that one should “look passively -- and try to receive what the painting has to offer and not bring a subject matter or preconceived idea of what they are to be looking for.” Arguably, this is an aspect of critical theory. Nevertheless, I believe that Pollock recognized how oftentimes people loose themselves in the obsession over the creator's intent. He seems to say that the message does not come from the creator, but the created. Furthermore, that the message may not even come from the painter, but derived solely from the painting. Pollock is stressing importance in the relationship between an individual and artistic.

Pollock’s approach to critical theory demonstrates how the experience is unique to the beholder which also applies to literary theory. Conventional literary criticism wrestles to illuminate the confounded influences that attribute to the creation of literature. For example, an inseparable component to literary criticism is cultural context. Not surprisingly, a literary criticism is also a product of culture as it too is a piece of literature. Even this blog post is an indicator of our own culture. All literature, including literary criticism, acts as a window peering into its point of origin.

I suspect that critical literary theory seeks to address the following:
argument
question
proposed solution
cultural context
historical context
spatial context
hidden references or dialogue between works

Critical theory is the dissection of literature, the tool that is comprised of written thoughts or ideas and can serve almost any purpose in relation to communication, to understand the interworking of verbal organ systems.

http://painting.about.com/od/colourtheory/a/Pollock_paint.htm