The Intangible Burdens

       In The Things They Carried, Tim O'Brien, describes the things that a group of American soldiers are each carrying in the Vietnam War. He also includes the weights of each of these objects to emphasize the heaviness of these physical burdens. However, throughout the whole story, O'Brien implies the message that the intangible burdens of the soldiers are much heavier than the materials that they carry. For example, Jimmy Cross has a fanatical love for a girl named Martha, and his sexual desires for Martha distract him from the war. Additionally, as the leader of the platoon, Cross carries with him the responsibility of the lives of all the men, along with the sense of guilt he feels after Ted Lavender dies.
     Ted Lavender is also an excellent example that portrays the intensity of the emotional and mental burdens during a war. Lavender carries around tranquilizers and drugs because of his fear of getting killed. Although he carries a relatively light weight, the burden from his guilt is extremely heavy and eventually leads him to his death. On the other hand, Henry Dobbins, a big, masculine soldier, carries the biggest weapons and a lot of ammunition, thus, carrying the heaviest physical weight of all. However, he is free from the emotional and mental burdens that Cross and Lavender possess, which helps him stay focused on the war, and carry the heaviest physical burden of all.
    Lastly, one of the biggest reasons why I thought Tim O'Brien was trying to exemplify the intensity of the   intangible burdens of the war was because of something that almost every soldier possessed: A "unnecessity" or a superstitious object. Dave Jensen carries toiletries, Lavender carries drugs, Scholl carries foot powder, Kiley carries comic books, and Kiowa carries the New Testament, Dobbins carries his girlfriend's underwear, and Sanders carried around a real thumb. The reason why I put quotations around "unnecessity" is because these objects aren't needed for war, but they are things that the men have to carry for their own emotional and mental comfort.

Gryphon: THe Purpose of Intertwining the Conventional and the Unconventional

Gryphon, by Charles Baxter, is a short story about a mysterious substitute teacher, named Miss Ferenczi, written in the perspective of a fourth grader. The reason why I say Miss Ferenczi is mysterious is because of the many unconventional things she says. There are many examples throughout the story where Miss Ferenczi says very fascinating things that make the fourth graders question the accuracy of her statements, but she also intertwines conventional statements, and I think there is a purpose behind this.

During the arithmetic lesson, Miss Ferenczi makes a boy named John Wazny recite the six-times tables. However, even though John makes a mistake by saying six times eleven is sixty-eight, Miss Ferenczi says, “Well now. That was very good.” (Miss Ferenczi 41) and tries to move on with the lesson. The kids stop her and ask her why she didn’t correct John for his mistake, and she tells the children that six times eleven can equal sixty-eight in higher level mathematics, even though six times eleven is obviously sixty six. The kids find this hard to take in and they continue to question Miss Ferenczi, but Miss Ferenczi waves off their questions by telling them to consider it as a “substitute fact” and to think whatever they like.

Another example where Miss Ferenczi mixes conventional and unconventional facts is when she talks about an imaginary animal that she had seen in Cairo called a Gryphon. A Gryphon is a majestic creature that is half-bird, half-lion. Again in this situation Miss Ferenczi intertwines conventional and unconventional facts. A lion and a bird are both creatures that exist in our world, but Miss Ferenczi mixes them together to create something imaginary.

Lastly, another place where conventional and unconventional things are put together are at the end of the short story. At the end Miss Ferenczi tells the kids’ their fortunes with a set of cards that she brings into class. One by one she goes through the kids and tells them their fortunes, but when she gets to Wayne, she tells him that he will die soon. This causes her to get fired and the story draws to a close. However, the very last paragraph of the story is a large section containing factual information about insects, which contrasts heavily from the teaching style that Miss Ferenczi uses.

There were two main purposes of intertwining conventional and unconventional facts. The first was to emphasize that there aren’t that many “right” answers in our world. Everything can be viewed in multiple points of view and by intertwining conventional and unconventional facts; Miss Ferenczi expands the children’s wonder and imagination. The children’s creativity is forced to grow and they use their creativity to come up with their own answers that they believe is right.

The second purpose of intertwining conventional and unconventional facts was to make us wonder which facts were conventional and which facts are unconventional. By mixing the two types of facts together throughout the whole story, we as readers begin to wonder if even the conventional facts are true and this process of questioning was another purpose of intertwining the two types of facts. 

Interpreter of Maladies: The Negative Ending

Interpreter of Maladies, by Jhumpa Lihiri, is about a tour guide named Mr. Kapasi, taking a dysfunctional family on a tour around some parts of India. However, during this trip, the mother of this dysfunctional family, Mrs. Das, begins to show an interest in Mr. Kapasi when she hears that he also works as an interpreter at a hospital. At first, Mr. Kapasi doesn’t understand why Mrs. Das has such a big interest in his work, but he is lured into her beauty and begins to have dreams of expanding his relationship with Mrs. Das. However, later in the story, Mrs. Das confesses to Mr. Kapasi that one of her kids, Bobby, has a different father and she asks Mr. Kapasi for an interpretation of her problems. Mr. Kapasi quickly realizes that Mrs. Das’ problem is the source of the dysfunctional relationships within the family and he tells her that her problem is “guilt” rather than pain. Although Mrs. Das is very angry with Mr. Kapasi for saying that she is guilty, she quickly accepts Mr. Kapasi’s interpretation of her pain and she begins to change. Evidence of this change can be seen in the ending scenes of the story where Bobby is getting harassed by a large group of monkeys. Before, Mrs. Das seemed indifferent towards her whole family, and everything the children did seemed annoying to Mrs. Das, however, at the sight of her son’s danger, Mrs. Das screams for help and as soon as Mr. Kapasi saves Bobby from the monkeys, she makes sure that Bobby is okay. Although this may seem like a hopeful ending to the story because the mother finally makes an effort to show some compassion to her child, I think very differently.

At close inspection to the ending of Interpreter of Maladies there is a lot of evidence that can support a negative or sad ending to the story. First of all, none of the family was really interested in saving Bobby from the monkeys, except Mrs. Das. In fact, nobody even noticed that Bobby was missing until Mrs. Das and Mr. Kapasi joined them after their private conversation. Secondly, Mr. Das’ lack of love towards his children is perfectly exemplified when Bobby is put into danger. During this scene, Mr. Das becomes very nervous, but we as readers, can tell that Mr. Das is nervous, not because Bobby is in danger, but because he was put in the uncomfortable situation where he would be expected to act. If a child was put in this kind of a situation, it is quite reasonable to assume that the strong male in the family, who cares for the child’s wellbeing, would help the child. In this case, it should’ve been Mr. Das, but because of his lack of compassion towards his own son, Mr. Das was reluctant to save Bobby. Similarly, his lack of love can also be seen after Mr. Kapasi saves Bobby from the monkeys. Unlike most parents who would say something like, “are you ok?” or “are you hurt?” Mr. Das just assumes Bobby is ok by saying, “He’s fine. Just a little scared, right, Bobby?” (Mr. Das 80) This quote exemplifies Mr. Das’ lack of love and the fact that Bobby’s voice is never heard, shows how little he matters to the rest of the family.

As stated before, readers may consider the ending to be a hopeful ending because of the positive efforts that Mrs. Das makes to get closer to her family, however, even in the ending scene Mrs. Das doesn’t change that much. During the middle of the trip, Mrs. Das had asked for Mr. Kapasi’s phone number and address. However, as Mrs. Das whips out a hairbrush to fix Bobby’s hair in the ending scene, the note that Mr. Kapasi wrote his phone number and address on fluttered away. Although some may argue that this event was coincidental, I think it portrays Mrs. Das’ true personality. The only reason why Mrs. Das asked for Mr. Kapasi’s phone number was to show a fake interest in him, and the only reason why she showed a fake interest in him, was because she thought he could interpret her family problems. Therefore, because Mr. Kapasi had already helped Mrs. Das with her family problems by the time of the ending scene, Mr. Kapasi was about as good as nothing to her, which is why she was so negligent about keeping Mr. Kapasi’s phone number and address well-contained.

           

How does Jhumpa Lahiri use the minor action and subtle details to express the unmet needs of the characters?

     There are many minor details and subtle things throughout the short story, Interpreter of Maladies, that seem unimportant. However, there is a reason behind all those subtle details and it is to reveal the flaws and  lack of unity among the Das family. In the story, almost every member of the Das family has an object that preoccupies them from spending time with the rest of the family. Mina, the mother of the family, polishes her nails during the car ride and ignores her daughter's pleas. Discouraged by her mother's indifference, Tina (the daughter), just plays with her doll throughout the car ride. Likewise the father, Raj, doesn't make an effort to converse with his family, but keeps his eyes glued to his book about India, or takes pictures with his camera to please his own interests.
     However, there are even more subtle details and minor actions that exemplify the family's lack of unity. During the car ride to the Sun Temple, Tina constantly plays with the lock on the car door. Although it seemed insignificant at first, Mr. Kapasi (tour guide) says, "... but Mrs. Das said nothing to stop her." (Mr. Kapasi 61) If Mina really cared for her daughter and considered her young daughter's safety, she would have stopped her from playing with the door. This situation shows that Mina doesn't really love her family like she should. Similarly, at the very end of the story, the flaws of the Das family are portrayed through a very interesting scene. Bobby is harassed by a large group of monkeys and the quote the narrator says after chasing away the monkeys is, "the slip of paper with Mr. Kapasi's address on it fluttered away in the wind. He watched as it rose, carried higher and higher by the breeze, into the trees where the monkeys now sat, solemnly observing the scene below." This scene was the most memorable for me because I felt as if the monkeys felt sorry for the Das family. Naturally lively and jocular in nature, monkeys rarely remain still, but I guess even the monkeys saw the sad flaws of the family, because they stayed still and solemn.

What's the motivation??

In Introduction, Tobias Wolff talks about the history of the short story, but more importantly, he explains the purpose behind good writing and the objective of reading good writing. According to Tobias Wolff, writing and reading are things that, “require isolation as the price of the best society.” (Wolff 6) Wolff believes that reading or writing literature puts people into a whole new world where ideas can be given or exchanged better than real society, which is why he describes it as “the best society.” Also, a writer’s objective of writing good literature is to move people and to plant their ideas and opinions about current issues in our world into the minds’ of their readers. However, in order to move someone with writing, the writing must have literary depth and the story should, “somehow take on flesh and blood” (Wolff 16) and come to life. This is also another purpose for writers to write good writing. To make their literature come to life in the readers’ minds so that the influence and the impact the writing has on the reader lasts forever. “They live and die, and yet do not die.” (Wolff 16) According to Wolff this eternal impact is something that can only be found in literature, which again, is why he describes the world of literature as the best society.

Now that we know Wolff’s explanation of the purpose of good writing, by reflecting on the information above, it is quite easy to realize what the readers’ motivation to read good writing is. Readers read good writing to be influenced. They want to know the writer’s opinion and they want to feel the text come alive in their minds. Additionally, readers want to relate to the honesty of the writing, so that they know what other people are thinking, and so that they know that they are not the only ones who are afraid to face some of the horrible truths of mankind, that are often the subjects in short stories. “As it happens, many of the stories in this book confront difficult material: violence, sickness, alcoholism, sexual exploitation, marital breakup.” (Wolff 14)

            

The Bass, the River, and Sheila Mant

Recently, a divided interest gave me a very tough time. Tennis and basketball have always been my favorite sports from when I was little, but as I grew up tennis became more and more important to me. Basketball was just a recreational sport and tennis emerged as something I had to be good at no matter what. Unable to resist the fun and team bonding experiences with the other guys on the team, I played for my school’s varsity basketball team last year. Although we had a very bad season, full of losses rather than wins, I have to admit, it was so much fun. Forming close relationships with the other guys on the team was a valuable experience, and getting to know so many new faces enhanced my social life. However this year, after much thought, I decided not to try out for basketball. Although basketball provided me with so many valuable things, I couldn’t stop thinking about how much I worried about tennis throughout the basketball season, and I think that worry distracted me, resulting in a horrible performance from myself. Additionally, recovering from the three months of almost no tennis was extremely hard work and I think that affected my academics negatively as well.

            After reading the memoir, The Bass, the River, and Sheila Mant, by W.D. Wetherell, I realized that my situation with tennis and basketball was a lot like Wetherall’s divided interest with the largemouth bass and Sheila Mant. In the memoir, Wetherall couldn’t let go of the bass that was on his line throughout the whole date out in the river with Sheila Mant. Although he describes Sheila as a goddess in the beginning of the memoir, he couldn’t resist his obsession and love for fishing, even when he had what he had wanted so badly right in front of him: Sheila Mant. So the question, “which one did he really want, the bass or Sheila?” arises and I think the author finds the answer to that question at the end of the story, unfortunately by picking the wrong answer. At the end, Wetherall cuts the line and gives up the bass to devote his mind towards Sheila, but discovers that Sheila has absolutely no interest in him. I hope I have cut the right line for my divided interests.

           

            Throughout the whole date in the memoir, there are hints and clues that help us foreshadow that Wetherall’s relationship with Sheila Mant will be unsuccessful. During the date, Sheila says, “ I think fishing’s dumb. I mean, it’s boring and all. Definitely dumb.” This comment exemplifies how inconsiderate Sheila Mant is and because she says that to someone who is so passionate about fishing, we can foreshadow that Wetherall and Sheila’s relationship will be unsuccessful. Additionally, during Wetherall and Sheila’s conversations, Sheila only talks about another guy named Eric and herself. She never shows any signs of interest in Wetherall, and this also helps us foreshadow the outcome of their relationship. 

THe meaning of the title "No News From Auschwitz"

     No News From Auschwitz was an article written by A. M. Rosenthal, talking about his experiences of visiting Auschwitz, one of, if not, the most famous extermination camp, that was used to kill Jews during the Holocaust. However, I'd like to talk about the purpose and implied meanings of his article's title "No News form Auschwitz." The question, "Why did Rosenthal write an article about something with no news?" is a question that will inevitably run through the readers' minds. However, if you read the text, and fully comprehend Rosenthal's opinions, then it is very clear to see that the title, "No News From Auschwitz" reflects the meaning of his article very well. 

     Throughout the whole article, there is clear evidence that Rosenthal wants the world to remember the Holocaust's horrors and terrors as it actually happened. This stance can be seen in many of the things he says. 

     "For every visitor there is one particular bit of horror that he knows he will never forget. For some it is seeing the rebuilt gas chamber at Oswiecim and being told that this is the “small one.” For others it is the fact that at Brzizinka, in the ruins of the gas chambers and the Crematoria the Germans blew up when they retreated, there were daisies growing." (412 Rosenthal)

     Through this quote we can see that shying away from the horrors of the Holocaust and denying the facts, is what Rosenthal fears the most and thinks is the most terrible thing that could possibly happen. 

     Now that we've understood Rosenthal's opinion, interpreting the meaning of the title is very easy. What Rosenthal means by "No news" means that he has nothing new to report about the horrors of the Holocaust.  Instead, he is reporting his experiences of going to Auschwitz to remind the readers once again of the horrors of the Holocaust and to send the message, that denying the terrors of the Holocaust would be the most terrible thing people could do. One of Rosenthal’s quotes in his article summarizes my interpretations very clearly.

            “There is merely the compulsion to write something about it, a compulsion that grows out of a restless feeling that to have visited Auschwitz and then turned away without having said or written anything would somehow be a most grievous act of discourtesy to those who died here.” (Rosenthal 412)

This article belongs in the Op-ed category of the Opinion Section of the New York Times. Op-Ed stands for “Opposite of the Editorial Page” and it is a newspaper article that openly expresses the writer’s opinions. This writer doesn’t have to be affiliated with the editorial board of the New York Times. Rosenthal had retired from working at the New York Times when he had written this article, and that’s why his article, which contained opinion in it, was included in the Op-ed section of the newspaper.