The Remains of the Day

Post #1
Hello everyone,
Firstly, I would like to start by clarifying that my apparent delay in posting is in fact not a result of procrastination- I am often unjustly accused of being a 'procrastinator' by many of my fellow students and teachers on a regular basis, not to say that my teachers are unfair in making such accusations for I understand they are merely acting on the intent of helping me- but instead one of respect for my fellow students. I realize that it would be indeed quite selfish of me to be one of the first to post- as has been done by some less experienced bloggers- as this would eliminate the possibility of my answering any possible questions that may arise and inevitably have arisen in this discussion. Of course, it is not for me to suggest that I am worthy of ever being placed alongside the likes of the ‘great’ bloggers of our generation- though it should be said there are those who, perhaps out of misguided generosity, tend to do just this…
Well I hope you enjoyed that attempted Stevens like tone (along with some of my own sarcasm) there, but now I think I have to begin responding and contributing to this discussion. Before really addressing any previous comments, I would like to say that I find it odd how there seems to be an apparent lack of drama as of yet in the novel. Though Stevens Sr.’s illness is to an extent dramatic, it really didn’t feel like it the way Steven’s narration of the events is worded. Even stranger is that somehow the novel is still really interesting even with this lack of drama; I found it hard to stop reading once I got started as I’m sure some of you did too. What I found a bit curious is one of the reviews on the back cover from Salman Rushdie commenting: “Brilliant… a story both beautiful and cruel.” The odd part being, for me at least, that there does not appear to be a “cruel” part yet.
I suppose the narration technique brings me to a point previously made about Stevens’ personality by jlam09 as to whether there are any emotions to Stevens. It seems to me that Stevens was born into a world of buttering and has never taken time to consider any emotions outside of those of his master or his master’s guests. In fact, Stevens even thinks it astonishing and idealistic whenever he recalls of the lack of fear (an emotion) the butler in his father’s story shows in response to finding a tiger under the dining room table.
Maybe I’m getting ahead of myself here but I think that Ishiguro wrote a critique of the lower classes’ lack of belief in individuality and importance of self when writing this novel. Stevens, an example of a “servant” (as kavsgojsw1 put it) is largely inconsiderate of his self. When his new master Mr. Farraday offers Stevens a vacation from buttering (of which he would “foot the gas,” giving Stevens no financial reason to reject the offer) Stevens at first refuses to accept, denying himself freedom. Even later, he only accepts the vacation time for professional motives. This is why I would argue that this book could be a social critique for the loss of individualism as Stevens apparently has lost himself serving others. However, I think it’s way too early to make this assumption and maybe I’ve just read too many works of Transcendentalism.
On a slightly opposite note, I would agree with Mary that Stevens has a very conceited aura about him. This is apparent when he tells Miss Keaton that she has a “lack of experience” and that she gravely misunderstands Stevens Sr.’s ability and professionalism because she does not have as much experience as he. However, I think Stevens is cocky not because he is in tune with or proud of himself but because he has spent his entire life practicing this profession and feels confident with his abilities. Stevens works hard to make sure he is correct and proper and often disregards others because he thinks he is so correct and proper he cannot be wrong. This is, I think, as jlam09 put it a rather “pathetic” quality. Perhaps this is what is “cruel” about this novel or maybe it’s the “[grave] doubts about his own faith in the man he served,” we’ll see… (This back cover was too revealing!!)
Lastly, (yah this was long) to address Kevien’s comment on Stevens being a symbol for something greater, I would personally argue (again with maybe a transcendentalist bias) that Stevens represents perhaps the butler in each of us… God does that sound corny. We all obey, serve and humble ourselves for others (parents, teachers, etc.) and perhaps Stevens is a symbol of us and serves to show us that our submissiveness and trust is at times misguided and not warranted. (And yes, I think this is very much a Quest that Stevens goes on, can’t wait to see what he realizes about himself at the end!) But I say this with a complete lack of confidence as I believe it is WAY too early to make such a hypothesis.
PS: to address courtney can’t…’s question: the way the treaty of Versailles is described is pretty factual and some people were against it, but I think that Lord Darlington is fictional along with the others at the meeting (at the very most they are based on real characters but the names are changed). The conference might have occurred but if it did, it was (according to the history books) unsuccessful as the Treaty was never really repealed and as a result WWII occurred with an angered Germany.

Post #2
Hi everyone, I’d like to start off by addressing one of the most interesting points made: the question by Danny as to whether or not Stevens is a reliable narrator. (Great question!)
Certainly, one can argue that Stevens, on the surface, might not resemble a trustworthy narrator. He often squelches his own beliefs and feelings to portray himself in a “dignified” manor (ie. his father’s death, his intensions with Miss Kenton, his attitude toward Lord Darlington’s decision to fire the Jewish maids, etc.) Stevens’s priority after all is his “professional duty” and “not [his] own foibles and sentiments.” (149)
However, Ishiguro shows us Stevens true intensions and feelings on a subject even through Stevens’s telling us otherwise. Stevens tells us on 147 that he had cocoa meetings with Miss Kenton, but then, as soon as he discloses this information, goes into an explanation about them, claiming they were “overwhelmingly professional in tone.” Every time Stevens comes close to discussing his true feelings or intensions, he always goes into lengthy explanations to defend his motives for such actions. This is Ishiguro’s way of letting us infer the truth even through Stevens’s shielding lies. Basically, because Stevens puts so much effort into defending his reasons for doing something (ie. having cocoa with Miss Kenton nightly) in a pathetic way, one can see that that is in actuality not his true intention. His lack of openness is due to his fear of intimacy and inadequacy with his job. Stevens believes he must portray himself as a dignified and professional butler. This of course does not leave any room for indulging in emotions, and when caught with the romantic novel, Stevens puts on a façade. He explains to the audience that his only reason for reading such a book instead of a scholarly article was simply to better his English so he may better his butlering. This, I believe, makes Stevens a credible and trustworthy narrator, for even though his words may tell otherwise, the reader can infer, through pattern and a bit of common sense, Stevens’s real feelings on a matter.
I agree with Thalp that Lord Darlington had very streamline Nazi beliefs on Judaism. On the pages around 146, Stevens keeps trying to convince himself that Lord Darlington wasn’t Anti-Semitic and that he had the best of intensions in doing everything he did. Stevens comments on Lord Darlington’s “…remarking: ‘Oh, you mean that Jewish propaganda sheet.’ And then… instructing me to cease giving donations to a particular local charity which regularly came to the door on the grounds that the management committee was ‘more or less homogeneously Jewish.’” (146) Stevens refers to these occasions as “extremely minor.” (146) However, it becomes increasingly obvious that Stevens knows that these incidents are anything but minor as he spends pages upon pages recollecting about Lord Darlington’s Anti-Semitism in firing the two Jewish maids. Stevens even makes it apparent that he was taken by surprise by his employer’s wishes; responding “I beg your pardon” when told he would have to “let them go.” (147) So, even though through his words he defends his employer’s decisions and morals, one can see that, through Ishiguro’s tone and diction, Stevens in fact questions these qualities.
To respond to Kris10’s and jlam09’s posts, on the reoccurring note of dignity, Stevens’s beliefs are questioned when he meets Harry Smith at the village. Harry Smith believes that “dignity” is attainable by all and that it is about speaking up, having a voice and an opinion on important matters. This is contradictory to Stevens’s general outlook on life… Stevens claims that “There is, after all, a real limit to how much ordinary people can learn and know,” and that it is expected of all those who are not gentlemen to obey mindlessly. (194)
On another note, Stevens’s intentions with his relationship with Miss Kenton and his feelings towards her become ever more apparent in this section. Stevens flirts with Miss Kenton and has cocoa meetings with her. To emphasize that Miss Kenton and Steven’s relationship is a unique one for Stevens, it should be mentioned that Stevens seems to only be able to “banter” with Miss Kenton. Stevens often taunts- in a bantering way, of course –Miss Kenton for her threat to leave Darlington Hall. He comments on 150 as to saying “’Miss Kenton, I’d rather expected you to have handed in your notice by now,’ accompanying this with a light laugh. I did, I suppose, hope that she might finally relent a little and make some conciliatory response or other, allowing us once and for all to put the whole episode behind us.” From that passage, it is clear that Stevens wants to flirt with Miss Kenton (and wants her to flirt back) and wants to patch up the holes in their relationship. Also, Stevens is meticulous with his words when he discusses one of his “errors” and always makes himself appear not at fault. However, when discussing Lisa’s midnight-eloping with the footman. Stevens says, “You did wonders with that girl. What you managed with her proved many times over that it was in fact I who was in error.” (158) Shocker yes, Stevens admits he is not perfect and this time does not blame an error on a “staff shortage.” However, due to his extreme fear of intimacy, Stevens detaches himself from Miss Kenton and calls off the cocoa meetings. Also, when Miss Kenton catches Stevens with a romance novel, Stevens resolves “to set about reestablishing our professional relationship on a more proper basis.” Miss Kenton had gotten too close and Stevens felt the need to push her far enough away. However, he later regrets this decision and later “speculates” on page 177 as to what would have been if he had acted differently in the “turning points” of his life.
All of these aspects- Stevens’s inability to be honest with himself in his journal (which seems to me what “The Remains of the Day” resembles in form); his inability to show weakness; and his fear of intimacy- make Stevens a rather pathetic character… On page 173, Miss Kenton comments to Stevens, “It occurs to me you must be a well-contented man, Mr. Stevens… I really cannot imagine what more you might wish for in life.” So basically, because Stevens is an accomplished butler, he has nothing more to look forward to in life. His only goal and aspiration- in his one-and-only entire life mind you –was to see that his employer was well looked after. Nearing the end of “Day Three - Evening” Stevens epiphany seems to be that Lord Darlington’s life was “at best, a sad waste.” However, Stevens’s rhetoric implies that he tries to desperately convince himself that his own life wasn’t, stating his own work was “first rate.” (201)
And finally on that note, to respond to Mary’s post about Stevens’s being advised to experience life before it is too late, I think it is too late for him to live a fulfilling life and that this book is his portrayal of regret. So, I’d like to leave you all with a rather pathetic and regretful quote from this novel: “There was surely nothing to indicate at the time that such evidently small incidents would render whole dreams forever irredeemable.” (179)

Post #3
Hi everyone,
Let me be the first 16th person to say this: this book was amazing. One of my favorites.
Ishiguro is a masterful writer and develops Stevens’ character so well that the reader truly wishes that Stevens has a miraculous turn-around in his life and that he can go back in time and fix all of the “turning points” in his life. I, personally, felt a strong connection with Stevens as a character and it saddened me to read about all the missed opportunities in his life.
For example, when Stevens ignores Miss Kenton’s rather unobvious appeals to him to say or do something to make her refuse the marriage proposal, Stevens simply wishes her the best of luck on her marriage and attends to “the most powerful gentlemen of Europe…” (227) It is just so pathetic how clueless Stevens presents himself. However, I believe that Stevens realized at the time Miss Kenton’s true intention, but was simply too stubborn and afraid to recognize it (or as Thalp put it: naïve). Stevens even has “an ever-growing conviction mounting within [him] that just a few yards away, on the other side of that door, Miss Kenton was at that moment crying.” (226) He then however “[hurries] upstairs to serve some of the most distinguished gentlemen of the land…” (227) He later even feels “triumph” over this missed opportunity with Miss Kenton.
It feels to me that Stevens has wasted his life. Being a butler could have been something Stevens could have chosen to do for a couple of years of his life, but to dedicate one’s entire- and one and only –life to another, and to completely disregard one’s own natural human desires and emotions seems to me to be, simply, a waste of a life. When the town’s people mistake Stevens for a gentleman, Stevens appears to rather enjoy the process and does not deny it. Though he later tells The Doctor that he only continued to let the village people to believe incorrectly that he was a gentleman, I believe that Stevens did not reveal his true position because he liked being a Lord Darlington figure rather than a butler. It hurts me to know that Stevens could really never have broken out of his position, and I find a grain of truth in his belief that at least he made an impact in the world by aiding an influential person like Lord Darlington. Though he never fully experienced love- or many other human emotions for that matter – at least he made a global impact, something he could have never done if he were, say, a farmer.
I would also like to point out three distinct philosophies that present themselves throughout Stevens’ experiences. First, Lord Darlington tells Stevens after a meeting that he believes the world of politics and economics is “now a days” too complicated for most people to understand, and that accordingly, the vote should not be given to all. Compare that philosophy to the villagers’, Harry Smith’s in particular, about giving a voice to all, no matter what position. The third belief is presented by Mr. Cardinal, who argues that the world is too “foul” of a place for “fine and noble instincts” like those of Lord Darlington. He believes that people like Lord Darlington are too easily influenced and naïve to be given power. Mr. Cardinal seems to realize the danger in giving power to the select few.
On a different and more meaningful note, I would love to discuss Stevens’ rendezvous with Miss Kenton. When he first sees her, Stevens comments that Miss Kenton “had, naturally, aged somewhat, but to my eyes at least, she seemed to have done so very gracefully.” (232) He then goes into discussing her appearance and how he finds her attractive. However, what I found peculiar- and as jlam09 already discussed a bit -about Stevens’ encounter is that in the narrative Stevens refers to his old acquaintance as “Miss Kenton,” but in speaking to her he does not hesitate to call her “Mrs Benn.” I believe that this is one of the more apparent times where Stevens’ internal and external self conflict. Though he knows her as Miss Kenton and will forever remember her that way, he refers to her as “Mrs Benn” to conform to the “pleasantries” as Stevens often refers to them.
Also, when Miss Kenton finally confesses (implicitly at least) that she has loved and possibly still loves Stevens by saying: “And you get to thinking about a different life, a better life you might have had. For instance, I get to thinking about a life I may have had with you, Mr Stevens. “ (239) I think Stevens response to this is for me one of the saddest parts of this book. Stevens admits to his “sorrow” and “heart… breaking.”
The saddest part of Stevens’ life, I believe, is his own revelation that he has not lived a life of his own. During his chat with the stranger at the pier Stevens confesses, “I’ve given what I had to give. I gave it all to Lord Darlington.” (243) (PS: This might be the first time Stevens has ever made a “simple subject/verb sentence”) I think at this point he realizes that he has not lived his own life, has not yet made his own mistakes and misjudgments. Instead he has vicariously made them through his prior employer, which is no life at all.
Finally, I would like to discuss the title. All that remains of Stevens life is the late evening as Stevens is getting old. He has yet to experience much of what life has to offer and has lost a lot of the “Day.” However, as Stevens is told and comes to believe, “the evening is the best part of the day.” This is apparent throughout the book since it is in the (literal) evenings that Stevens seems to recollect and reminisce on the good times in his life (his cocoa meetings with Miss Kenton, etc.). In the mornings and during the day, it is time for work unpleasantries (firing of the Jewish maids, etc.).
However, unlike most of the people that posted before me, I find myself a bit cynical and see the ending of The Remains of the Day less optimistically. Kris10, Bond_Smoka and Gypsyloo commented that they saw the ending as Stevens’ “rebirth”. However, I see it as a continuation of his old life, just in a different method. Stevens promises to “enthusiastically” peruse bantering. I’m split on this... Stevens proclaims earlier that “in bantering lies the key to human warmth” so this can be seen as Stevens promising to be more warm and more human. On the other hand, he also states that he is doing it for his new employer, Mr Farraday, and is going to return to Darlington Hall. So my question is: does Stevens truly promise to turn his life around or will he continue to waste his possibilities in life?

One Hundred Years of Solitude

Post #1
Hi everyone,
First off, I must say that what I was told about this book- from my brother, last year’s class and current AP Lits –is true: it is confusing yet intriguing. I have to agree with most of you in saying that the names do get confusing and that after a while you forget who is who…
Coming from Ms. Pettit’s Lang. and Comp. class last year, it just dumbfounded me to read about all the “inventions” the gypsies brought to Macondo, including flying carpets, ice and of all things false teeth. (Just kidding about the ice.) I was so used to non-fiction that reading about people coming back from the dead and talking to the living simply because they were “lonely in death” did not make sense to me at first. I asked myself whether the author meant this in a metaphorical way but came to the conclusion that no, this is in fact fiction.
Once I got over that hurdle, things became a lot clearer. Personally, I agree with paul_in_a_nutshell that Macondo is a Utopian society in a sense but do not think that it symbolizes conformity as he and other suggested. I would argue that if anything, Macondo symbolizes the opposite as the founders left government and tradition behind them to start a new life.
On a similar note, I would also disagree with valleygirl09 when she commented that Jose Arcardio Buendia was on a sort-of power trip and a hypocrite. Though he was recognized as the overall leader of the community- a position I believe he earned –I do not believe he went on a power trip as he merely gave a suggestion that the houses should be painted white and did not, as others did, mandate the color.
Also, to comment on bond_smoka’s comment that Jose Arcadio Buendia neglects his family by spending money on the inventions the gypsies brought (even his wife’s ancient coins), I would argue that his ambition is a bit more noble than being called neglect. I suppose I just see this book as more positive than others have. I believe his goal in trying to profit from the gypsies’ inventions was to benefit his family and his country… not to say that he wasn’t also doing it to satisfy his own curiosities.
Finaly, I would like to end on the topic most of us have commented on, Paul’s quote. “A person does not belong to a place until there is someone dead under the ground"(13). I also saw this in a more positive way than others (call me an optimist I suppose). I believe that a family sticks together in situations and that the logic behind Ursula’s saying this is explained by the saying: “never leave a man behind.” Once a family member is buried in a place, he or she cannot move with the rest of the family and family harmony comes from the family living in that area, close to its departed love one. I believe this is why Rebecca came to the Buendia house carrying the bones of her family, for if they were buried, she would not have been able to move.
Those are my thoughts… what are yours?

Post #2
Hello fellow AP-Lits,+
I just found Kris10’s last comment a bit funny… It is ironic that this book is, as you say “repetitive” but that it is, at the same time, completely different each time. However, I did not really pick up on the repetitive nature of the novel because of the fact that, though Jose Arcadio Buendia and Aureliano seem to encounter similar fates in their old age, the circumstances of their lives are eerily dissimilar at the same time. For that reason, I would like to purpose that instead of “repetitive,” a better word to describe this narrative would be “reoccurring,” simply because it has a less boring connotative meaning.+
What I found intersrting about the Buendia family is how diverse it is even amongst itself. Jose Arcadio Buendia is inventive but eventually becomes delirious and alone in his mind. His son, Jose Arcadio has a child at the age of around 15, joins a group of gypsies, travels the world, comes back to Macondo, becomes a sex legend there, maries his sister (though not related by blood), and later dies from a mysterious gunshot to the head. Jose Arcadio Buendia’s other son, Aureliano Buendia, marries a very young girl who is poisoned by his sister and later dies while pregnant with twins, has a child by Pilar Ternera, joins the Liberals, goes to war, becomes a general, starts and loses 32 civil wars, has 17 children all by different women, returns home a war hero, settles with the government he greatly opposes, has his 17 children killed by the same government he spent his life fighting, secludes himself in his workshop manufacturing little gold fish until the day of his death. I do not think I have to continue to writing run on sentences for the other family members to convince everyone that the family itself is very diverse. It just feels really unlikely to me that people from such a small village could go on to live such extravagant lives (Colonel Aureliano Buendia especially). +
Moving on, let me just comment on bond_smoka’s observation- one that I also made several times, often to my annoyance –Garcia Marquez will say “he would never see her again” and either begin a new chapter or a new topic. Though it is a very creative, and I am sure difficult style to incorporate into one’s writing, often I found it annoying for two reasons: it did not fully develop the topic to a degree where the reader’s curiosity is satisfied and it did not leave any room for hope (for example, it is a bit depressing to know that Aureliano’s sons all die before that part in the story actually occurs). Though I understand that this is done to build suspense and enrich the reading- very effectively I might add –it still eats at me a little bit.+
On the topic of the corruption of Macondo by the outside world, I have one word: government. I believe that that is what brought down the “utopian” society. Government in Macondo started at mandating all houses be painted blue and evolved into one whose officials butchered little children because of childish behavior and, at one point under the rule of Arcadio, fired on innocent people all the meanwhile instilling fear in a once peaceful society. Before government was introduced to Macondo, it was a land that had no cemeteries and no need for cemeteries.+
Finally, to answer c-rod’s question regarding the title, I think I agree mostly with Taylor in saying that the entire Buendia family is essentially a very lonely one. All of the characters born into the Buendia family (excluding the ones that married a Buendia) become very solitary at a certain age, some even from birth. The “100 Years” part could indicate or foreshadow an end to the Buendia line… along with the family tree at the beginning of the book.+
Sorry to make everyone read that long post. :)

Post #3
Once more: hello,+
I think I might have to steal Babaloo’s first sentence and say: “the ending is tragic” but not at all unforeseen. This novel has been filled with so much foreshadowing that the bit of dramatic irony at the end where Aureliano and Amaranta Ursula have no idea what their child will be like while the reader does comes as no surprise. The number of illegitimate births in this novel is astounding. What I noticed thinking back about the entire novel is that Pilar Ternera is such an intricate part of the family tree. Looking at the first page, one can see that 10 out of the 14 Buendias in Macondo (that is excluding Colonel Aureliano Buendia’s 17 illegitimate children) are decendants from Pilar Ternera and when she reappears at the end of the novel and embraces Aureliano and his heart-ache, I feel that she is finally aiding the Buendia family that she had been such a large part of the entire time. +
I found it interesting that paul_in_a_nutshell commented on the irony that exists between Ursula and her fear of incest. Ursula kept the family away from incest during her long lifetime but was unable to beyond her death. As has been mentioned several times before in this blog, the pig tail represents the punishment for giving into one’s temptations. +
However, what I did not pick up on in this novel are the parallels between it and Genesis, an observation that Steph113 pointed out. I completely agree with Steph113’s claim that a similarity exists and would like to develop it further. Sin in Macondo I believe, as I stated in my last blog, originated with the government beginning to impose their ways which led to the first verbal disagreement in the society. Later, governments brought the first physical disagreements in Macondo as well, to the point where over 3000 men, women and children were massacred and their bodies carried to the ocean in 200 railway carts to be dumped in the ocean. However, in Genesis, it is the Snake that tempts Eve to disobey God. As a result she and Adam are imposed the cruelty of mortality. This I where I fail to connect my previous claim that government brought on the downfall of Macondo and the Biblical reference. If anyone could help make that connection- if there is any connection at all to be made that is –I would greatly appreciate it.+
To respond to Mary’s initial question, no, I did not make a photocopy as advised but I suppose overtime I just got familiar with the names… though at times with great difficulty since new Arcadios and Aurelianos were being added left and right. I liked how you brought up Melquiades' parchment. I found it so strange that Melquiades was able to predict and write down the family’s history as if he were the author (connection?) of the novel itself that wrote it. Fine, maybe not as strange as him coming back from the dead… Anyway, to talk a little bit more about that, I would like to point out that Aureliano “skips” parts of the writing to see his own future and does not read a substantial amount of the text. Does this mean that this part of the Buendia’s lives did not happen since they were not read by Aureliano? Also, I found it quite interesting and a bit pathetic that Auerliano skips ahead to see his future and reads his own death… not to mention that this is after his lover bled to death and he had neglected his son and killed him. Not a good day in the life of a Buendia. +
One final analysis I will leave everyone with: the entire downfall of the Buendia line is due to Fernanda (wife of Aureliano Segundo). I know this is a bold claim, but imagine if Fernanda had told Auerlian (Meme’s son) that he had Buendia blood in him. Towards the very end of the novel, Auerliano worries during Amaranta Ursula’s pregnancy that the two are related and goes to great lengths to find out whether they are or not but finds no records of himself. He worries himself sick thinking that Amaranta Ursula is his wife. The question I purpose is would Auerliano and Amaranta Ursula have become lovers had they known they were related (a secret Fernanda kept due to the shame she felt over Auerliano)?+
417 pages and later and I must say, what a ride… I will not lie, I enjoyed it as much as my brother and friends told me I would. +
Thank you all, +see you soon :)+


Side Note:
("+" signs indicate start of a new line.)

Things Fall Apart

Post # 1
I am afraid that, since the title is “things fall apart” Okonkwo will be taken as a slave.

Wow… reading the blogs before me was a workout, but I recognize that it’s my fault procrastinating yet again.
Moving on, let me start by commenting on the two topics that everyone else has: animal imagery and gender roles. (Hmm… what’s the opposite of personification, animalification? For our purposes let’s call it animal imagery.)
Anyway, the animal imagery is certainly very prominent in the text but I had never seen it the way most others here have. I assumed as Marrisa did that all of the animal imagery was used simply for the reason of developing the setting and the characters. I strongly disagree (sorry) with Angel, Malsa and others in saying that Achebe uses animal imagery to instill in the reader the sense that the people of Umuofia are uncivilized in anyway. One need only turn to the “about the author” section of the book (located towards the back) to see that a man educated in African cultures and studies would seldom be heard classifying any world-culture as uncivilized.
Personally, I believe Achebe’s purpose in using the animal imagery is two-fold: to symbolize manliness (a quality that is very clearly stressed in this novel) and to stress the richness of the Umuofian and other tribal cultures. Firstly, Okonkwo, the epitome of the stereotypical manly-man, is often described using animal like qualities. He is described as “pouncing” and “roaring” much like a cheetah (as Ashley8 observed) or as a lion (as Taylor did).
Secondly, I believe that the tone and mood created by the animal-ification is used to stress the richness of the tribal culture. A passage that Paul beat me to that struck me as literary genius was when Achebe wrote “Among the Igbo the art of conversation is regarded very highly, and proverbs are the palm-oil with which words are eaten” (7) describing the richness of the Umuofian language (and I believe, civilization). Though not directly animal imagery in itself, this passage is enhanced, as are many others, by the animalistic tone.
To move on to gender roles in the novel, I was initially struck by the immense inequalities between men and women in this book. However, I disagree with Marrisa, Matt, Cynthia, Alinne and many others in saying that Okonkwo is a distinctly evil person for his beliefs that women are in some way inferior to men. Though I disagree with Okonkwo’s belief on this topic, I do not hold him at any fault for his belief as it is so prominent in their culture and in many if not most African and other foreign cultures (sadly even today).
Responding to Mario’s question: yes there is a universal appeal to this novel. We are all conflicted by certain things portrayed so far, whether that be issues with a parent or an issue conforming to what society expects of us. I personally do not believe Okonkwo is a bad person but is made to act the way he does (killing what became a son to him just to please a clan) by one of the most ancient and universal of all evils: peer pressure.
To end on a bit of a depressing note, I am afraid that since the novel is titled “Things Fall Apart” it foreshadows a terrible event in the village or a terrible event happening to Okonkwo’s family. What I think this is, for some reason, is Okonkwo’s entire village or just him being taken from their tribe and brought to work as slaves across the Atlantic. I am not sure why I think this, just a feeling I am getting… it feels that things are going a bit too smoothly for the village as a whole.
Thanks Everyone, I loved reading the blogs!-Dario

Post # 2
Let me just say that I am taken by surprise by these blogs and am really glad we’re doing them… I did not notice the ironies of this section as apparently everyone else has, but now that they are pointed out, I can clearly see them and I agree.
I liked how ashley8 pointed out the irony by pointing out that Okonkwo was exiled for committing a female crime when he himself sees females lowly and week. However, I think there is a misunderstanding amongst some of us about what Okonkwo actually did (or maybe the misunderstanding is mine alone, which would certainly not be the first time). When it is written that Okonkwo commits a “female” crime, I am pretty sure he did not kill a female (as he killed Ezeudu’s son). I also am pretty sure that the crime is not female because it is commited by females but instead because it is less severe and less malicious. As the clan believed “it was a crime against the earth goddess to kill a clansman,” and that “the crime was of two kidns, male and female. Okonkwo had committeed the female because it had been inadvertent. He could return to the clan after seven years” (124). So basically, this returns to the gender inequalities in the novel. As the clan sees it, a “female” crime is less severe (as it is inadvertent) and in general weaker, whereas a “male” crime would be the intentional murder of a clansman. Does anyone know what the punishment for a male crime would be? I think I have read it before in the novel where it said that it held a life banishment from the clan but I’m not sure.
Anyway, I have to say that the irony I found most noticeable in this section was the fact that Okonkwo, the manly-man, has to return to the land of his mother after committing a female crime. Unlike some of the bloggers (Alinne in particular) I feel bad for Okonkwo, nothing goes his way… hence the title. I still am wondering what the title is referring to in general. Though I think the degration of Okonkwo’s life has certainly begun, I wonder what event will finally do it… Any guesses? I still think it will be the slave-ships to come and take him away just because of the time and place this story is taking place.
I’m also really curious, as most of you are too, as to what happened in the cave with Enzima. It really was a bit of a… dare I say it… random event. I tried to find meaning in it but failed. Now, as I learned last year and I am sure still applies this year: everything a writer does has a purpose, and I am sure Achebe did not waste over 3 pages explaining this event without a purpose. But then, what is that purpose? I would love to hear if anyone thinks they have an idea of what it is! Please share :).
Also, I am very surprised like Kris10 that the new religion (Christianity) gains as much influence in the society as it does, especially when the new religion’s entire premice for joining is that all the native gods are “false idols” and that their God is “the true God” (150). Does this kind of conversion- merely stating “I’m right, you’re wrong, come join me” -actually work?
Also, I wonder if this is where the downfall lies in the society, from these outsiders. This reminds me of 100 Years of Solitude and the corruption that came to the peaceful community of Macondo from the outside world. Same story here?
We’ll find out soon I suppose,Hope everyone enjoys the book :)

Post # 3
As Angel said, things have finally fallen apart. I must admit my original prediction as to what the new religion would bring (see last blog) was off… but not entirely.
I had suspicions about the new religion from the start because, as those of us that have taken any form of history know, imperialism tends not to be the best policy for those being imperialized. Though Mr. Brown was at first very calm about the situation and did not try fanatically to recruit and convert, his successor did. Again, like Angel said, this is fairly similar to 100 Years of Solitude with the outsiders coming into a society to ruin an otherwise stable community. In 100 Years of Solitude I believe it was the government that brought the downfall of the society and led it on its path. In Things Fall Apart, I believe it is going to be Christianity that does that (Kris10 pointed out a good passage in the novel that says this almost explicitly: “[the white man] has put a knife on the things that held us together and we have fallen apart."(176)). As we have seen, the officials of the Christian church are corrupt, and arrest and beat the natives (Okonkwo included). The religion also lead to Okonkwo’s “forced” suicide and I believe would lead to the entire downfall of all the Nigerian tribes if the storyline were continued (as already happened to one village and has begun to happen to Umuofia).
I must say I felt a good deal of remorse and pity for Okonkwo and his family after the unfortunate series of events that took place that led to him falling apart. Clearly Okonkwo is a sexist war hound (“Worth men are no more… Isike will never forget how we slaughtered them in that war... Before the end of the fourth market week they were suing for peace. Those were the days when men were men” (200)) but I still believe that it is due to the circumstances and society he has grown up in, and not his own beliefs.
I liked gypsyloo’s analysis of Okonkwo as a Christ figure. To add to it, Okonkwo died as a martyr for his religion and I would like to prupose this question: does anyone think that (if the story were to be extended) Okonkwo’s death and his reputation as a great man would bring Umuofia to the point of expelling the intruding religion?
It was a nice voyage with you all, and if I were to give advise from all three summer reading books it would be this:Don’t miss opportunities. Dislike the Government and Religion. (Just kidding :P)
Bye!
-Dario

Quest in ‘The Remains of the Day’ by Kazuo Ishiguro

A journey or trip in a work of literature often holds a meaning deeper than is apparent on the surface. In The Remains of the Day Kazuo Ishiguro uses a trip initiated for practical and modest purposes to reveal to the protagonist of the novel a self truth of which he is originally blind to. Ishiguro’s trip in The Remains of the Day fits the criteria of a “Quest” as laid out by Thomas C. Foster in How to Read Literature Like a Professor. Ishiguro’s quest contains “a quester, a place to go, a stated reason to go there, challenges and trials en route, and a real reason to go there” (Foster 3). Ishiguro chooses to send his protagonist, Stevens, on the quest to have him undergo a great self realization from which the reader also benefits from.
As all quests require, Ishiguro’s quest has a quester that is blind to some part of his life and who “goes on a quest, whether or not he knows it’s a quest” (Foster 3). The quester of The Remains of the Day, the quirky and overly polite Stevens, is a man who has spent his entire life concerning himself with the comfort of others and never with his own needs, mentally or emotionally. Stevens, except for one point, is a clear cut candidate for being this quest’s quester; he is “inexperienced, immature, sheltered… [doesn’t] know enough about the only subject that really matters: [himself]” (Foster 3) and thus in need of a quest to discover self-knowledge. However, Foster writes, “questers are so often young… forty-five-year-old men either have self-knowledge or they’re never going to get it…”(3). It would thus appear that Stevens is missing this quality of a quester, as he is certainly over forty-five years old. Nevertheless, because Stevens has all of the other characteristics Foster attributes to the quester stereotype, he can be considered emotionally young and as the reader finds out, he is not too old to learn a new trick.
Though Ishiguro slightly strays from the traditional form of a quest story by choosing as his quester a middle aged man, he follows the next three requirements of a quest story- a place to go, a stated reason to go there, and challenges en route -rather precisely. Stevens is encouraged by his employer, Mr. Farraday, to “take the car and drive off somewhere for a few days,” (Ishiguro 3) a request which he initially declines. However, he later decides to take his employer up on his offer and decides to visit an old co-worker, Miss Kenton, for the stated reason of offering to her the position she once held as head maid at Darlington Hall. However the importance and chances of Miss Kenton coming back to Darlington Hall diminish as the story progresses and the focus becomes more on Stevens’ reflections on his life and his missed opportunities. This fits the quest story mold because, as Foster writes, “the real reason for a quest never involves the stated reason” (3).
The “challenges en route” that Stevens faces throughout his quest manifest themselves in the form of mechanical troubles and personal dilemmas. Superficially, car troubles hold Stevens back from reaching his stated goal- that of contacting Miss Kenton -and on more than one occasion he finds himself stranded on the side of the road. Moreover, Stevens faces a more powerful force holding him back from his goal: his own doubts and mentality. Stevens’ professionalism- and at times over professionalism –combined with his self doubts lead him to question whether he and Miss Kenton can connect on a personal rather than occupational level. Stevens ends up believing that perhaps Miss Kenton has no intention of coming back to Darlington Hall and considers turning back. However, Stevens overcomes these automotive and personal predicaments and reaches his destination and achieves his stated goal of offering Miss Kenton her old position back, though she does not accept it.
As Foster stresses in his chapter describing quests, Every Trip Is a Quest (Except When It’s Not), it is the real reason for quest that is most important, and that reason “is always self-knowledge” (Foster 3). The same is true for Ishiguro’s quest involving Stevens. After his six day quest, the events and recollections of which comprise the entire novel, Stevens comes to one “hard reality” that he “should cease looking back so much, that [he] should adopt a more positive outlook and try to make the best of what remains of [his] day. After all, what can [one] ever gain in forever looking back…” (Ishiguro 244). Stevens then vows to himself to make the best of his life by lightening up and, more specifically, bantering with his new employer because “in bantering lies the key to human warmth” (Ishiguro 245). Stevens’ self-knowledge comes in the form of his new awareness of the importance of self-gratification and human warmth.
The metamorphosis of character that Stevens undergoes throughout his quest is testament to Ishiguro’s mastery of writing. By choosing to portray his message through the self-realization of Stevens, Ishiguro has the reader realize through very emotional means the consequences of a life unlived. However, Ishiguro also conveys the message that it is never too late to begin enjoying one’s life through the open-ended finish to his quest. By conveying his maxims in the form of a quest, Ishiguro is able to give a believable and emotionally charged narrative of the importance of them. Thus, Ishiguro effectively and in a nonthreatening manner introduces the reader to the lessons from Stevens’ quest.

Birth and Creation

Hi all, I have made my blog! "Let the good times roll!"