Thursday, January 20, 2011

Toni Morrison and Huckleberry Finn.

Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination was a complicated read for me; however, after a bit of thinking and some class discussion, I found that Toni Morrison made some very meaningful points.

Morrison main focus in her book is race and its role literature. After I read Huck Finn and Playing in the Dark, ( a novel that Morrison mentions in her book) I looked at Twain's classic in a different way. Morrison stated in her book that "Race, in fact, now functions as a metaphor so necessary to the construction of Americanness that it rivals the old psuedo-scientific and class-informed racisms whose dynamics we are more used to deciphering." She also states that " America means white, and Africanist people struggle to make the term applicable to themselves with ethnicity and hyphen after hyphen after hyphen."

The African-American, who is one of the major characters, in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is named Jim. Morrison stated that race is used as a metaphor today; however, I think that Twain used Jim as a metaphor too. I think that Jim is the American dream in a way. I think Twain used a African-American as the metaphor because he wanted to declare something. I believe that Twain was aware of how "America means white" in most peoples' minds. Twain made a powerful stand by making the "white" dream in a non-white race. Jim is constantly trying to overcome his struggles: to find his place of freedom. Twain has been criticized for using Jim as a stereotype, but I think those critics are missing the big picture. Twain really used race in a powerful meaningful way in his novel. A very clever way as well. I believe that Twain used Jim as a metaphor: Jim is the American dream.

Thursday, January 6, 2011

Leif's Overdue Blog Assignment

After looking at many lists that all share a similar title like "All-time Best Classic Novels" and "Top 10 Classic Novels," I've realized that almost all of the novels mentioned are from the first half of the 20th century. Tons of classic novels were written in the 1800s as well. I love reading, and I have to admit, most of the books I read are considered to be class novels. I think it's so weird though that the latest classic novel on the "All-Time Best Classic Novels" to be published was in 1987: Toni Morrison's Beloved. The past two decades lack classic novels according to most of the websites I've seen.

There are so many authors today that have written great novels. Some of these new novels, in my opinion, should be considered to be classics. Cormac Macarthy has written some great novels over the years. The new graphic novels are becoming hits. The Harry Potter series defines a generation. Why are books like these being neglected?

Is it too soon to consider these books as classics? I think the authors of these great books deserve to be respected with the influencial authors of the past. What do you think?

Wednesday, January 5, 2011

My Thoughts on Criticism

After reading Adam Kirch's essay, " The Will Not to Power, but to Self-Understanding," I've noticed some solid points about criticism. Kirch doesn't believe that a critic writes "to convince, to argue, or to establish his argument" which Alfred Kazin once wrote. Criticism isn't about power in Kirch's mind, but he doesn't deny that there are critics writing out there today. He knows that, but he doesn't consider them to be serious writers. Kirch has a clear definition of what serious criticism is: " A serious critic is one who says something true about life and the world. The critic's will is not to power, but to self-understanding, self-expression, truth." He knows that critics have the power to drive down or up a book's sale, but that's not the reason why we, as readers, continue to read. Kirch belives that we read because of the pyschology, society, morals, and politics in the book. I can agree with this.

Adam Kirch makes a great point in his essay. His point is true for all types of texts. Music and movies can be viewed in the same way. I don't usually read a lot of critics' writings; I don't really trust them. I think a lot of critics today are just writing for power. It's a bummer. I guess the world needs more people like Adam Kirch who want to write for the sake of literary beauty.

Monday, January 3, 2011

The Great Gatsby is Pretty Cool.

The character development in The Great Gatsby keeps me reading. Lately, Tom has been the most entertaining character to follow. He's such a mixed up guy. He caused a bunch of hurt within his marriage, and in chapter 7 he tried to fix everything with Daisy by saying that he still loves her. The book is just full of all of this mixed up confusion between the characters. Gatsby is interesting to follow as well. His love for Daisy is odd; there is so much confusion within the love triangle. I'm not even sure if I want Gatsby and Daisy to hook up.
I've noticed throughout this whole book that Nick is just stuck in the middle of all of this conflict. I think that's really interesting. Why does Fitzgerald have Nick, the guy who is stuck in the middle of all of this drama, as the narrator? Having Nick as the narrator allows the reader to see both sides of the love conflict though. Maybe that's why Fitzgerald wrote in Nick's perspective.