As though Sophocles wanted to give us hints about the end of the play, he uses blindness as a constant theme throughout. But blindness and its connotations serve a much greater purpose in the story that just foreshadowing. Blindness, Sophocles shows us, is actually the flaw that brings Oedipus to his end, what we may call his tragic flaw.
One of the largest representations of blindness in the play is Oedipus’s blindness to his actions and true identity. The scene with Teiresias is particularly ironic because even though Teiresias is blind, it is Oedipus that cannot see the truth of his own life. Teiresias insists that Oedipus is better off not knowing the truth about who killed Laius. But Oedipus is “blind” to what the seer is implying and flies into a rage at the man for refusing to disclose what he knows. He even goes so far as to accuse Teiresias himself of plotting the murder. Even when Teiresias flat out tells him the truth, Oedipus still refuses to believe it. He instead turns his anger toward Creon, who initially suggested sending for the seer. He enters into a “blind” rage, throwing accusations and harsh words at everyone to try to deny what he has done. This blindness to his past, his predicament, and his rage eventually manifests itself in his actual blindness. But as is custom in tragedies, Oedipus does morally redeem himself. By blinding himself, he gives himself a symbolic punishment for being ignorant and denying his identity.
Another way that Sophocles hints at Oedipus's fate is through talking about seeing and sight constantly throughout the play. For example, when Teiresias accuses Oedipus of being ignorant of his past, he says that Oedipus "see'st not in what misery" he will fall. While this is extremely slight in meaning, Sophocles could have just as easily written that Oedipus did not understand or know of his past, but he instead uses the imagery of sight to describe it. Even as Teiresias is introduced, the chorus says, “if any man sees eye to eye/With our lord Phoebus, 'tis our prophet.” Oedipus, too, foreshadows his own doom. When he is talking to Jocasta about his fears, he asks the gods to “Forbid, forbid that I should see that day!” Oh the irony. Even looking into Oedipus’s background, we would almost expect his fate. Oedipus is extremely regarded for his clear sight, or insight, but because he is so ignorant to his past, it undermines this reputation. In a way, his physical blindness just symbolizes the full death of his sight in the non-physical sense. For those who are paying special attention to the language of this story, Oedipus’s fate is not entirely surprising; we knew he rambled on about sight and seeing and blindness for some reason.
In a large sense, Oedipus’s fate in the play is fairly predictable. His behavior seems to be strongly associated with the concept of blindness; he is blinded by rage and essentially blind to his true identity. The story also hints at the ending by following the theme of sight and blindness in the language and background of the story. Even if you hadn’t read the mythology that accompanies this play, the characterizations, language, and background of the story all help the reader to predict Oedipus’s tragic fate. (555)
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Now Where'd I Put That Giant Shoe...
It is important to note that the title of this story, "The Metamorphosis", does not only apply to Gregor Samsa. Yes our notice quickly is drawn the transformation of man to giant bug but he is not the only character that undergoes a significant transformation. Other members of his family, namely his father and sister, also undergo profound change because of Gregor's state.
Gregor's sister, Grete, goes through profound change after Gregor's own transformation. Initially, Grete is the most supportive member of the family. She becomes Gregor's caretaker in many ways, even taking special note of his new dietary likes and dislikes. As time goes on, however, Grete begins to lose faith that Gregor's state could improve and even that the giant bug in her house is truly her brother. In the end, she even goes so far as to say that the bug could not possibly be Gregor, because Gregor would have tried to spare them of this misery. We see through this chain that Grete makes more of a negative transformation in the story. She starts out as a loving and sweet sister and even manages to maintain her caring state after Gregor's transformation. But in the end she too transforms, into a selfish person who couldn’t care less about her brother’s unfortunate state. She goes through this extremely negative transformation as a result of Gregor’s state and ends up making his existence even worse.
Gregor’s father also undergoes a profound change after Gregor’s transformation, but his is much more positive than Grete’s. Before, when Gregor was supplying the family’s income, his father was lazy and depressed, sitting at home all day while Gregor works to support the family. When Gregor transforms and obviously stops working, his father is forced to return to work. Rather than making him bitter, however, working returns the father’s vitality and confidence. He transforms back into a full person. For someone, Gregor’s transformation actually has positive impact on life. His positive changes still take tolls on Gregor’s life, but he does manage to become a stronger and better person out of necessity.
Gregor is by no means the only member of the family that goes through a profound transformation in this story. Grete, his sister, changes for the worse, beginning as a caring maternal figure and evolving into a selfish jerk like the rest of her family. His father changes for the better, becoming a more confident and stronger person than he was when Gregor was working. Positive or negative, the family’s changes only mean bad things for Gregor, who suffers from his father’s aggression and his sister’s lack of faith. In many ways, we have to consider that the title “the Metamorphosis” encompasses much more than one man’s transformation into a bug. (460)
Gregor's sister, Grete, goes through profound change after Gregor's own transformation. Initially, Grete is the most supportive member of the family. She becomes Gregor's caretaker in many ways, even taking special note of his new dietary likes and dislikes. As time goes on, however, Grete begins to lose faith that Gregor's state could improve and even that the giant bug in her house is truly her brother. In the end, she even goes so far as to say that the bug could not possibly be Gregor, because Gregor would have tried to spare them of this misery. We see through this chain that Grete makes more of a negative transformation in the story. She starts out as a loving and sweet sister and even manages to maintain her caring state after Gregor's transformation. But in the end she too transforms, into a selfish person who couldn’t care less about her brother’s unfortunate state. She goes through this extremely negative transformation as a result of Gregor’s state and ends up making his existence even worse.
Gregor’s father also undergoes a profound change after Gregor’s transformation, but his is much more positive than Grete’s. Before, when Gregor was supplying the family’s income, his father was lazy and depressed, sitting at home all day while Gregor works to support the family. When Gregor transforms and obviously stops working, his father is forced to return to work. Rather than making him bitter, however, working returns the father’s vitality and confidence. He transforms back into a full person. For someone, Gregor’s transformation actually has positive impact on life. His positive changes still take tolls on Gregor’s life, but he does manage to become a stronger and better person out of necessity.
Gregor is by no means the only member of the family that goes through a profound transformation in this story. Grete, his sister, changes for the worse, beginning as a caring maternal figure and evolving into a selfish jerk like the rest of her family. His father changes for the better, becoming a more confident and stronger person than he was when Gregor was working. Positive or negative, the family’s changes only mean bad things for Gregor, who suffers from his father’s aggression and his sister’s lack of faith. In many ways, we have to consider that the title “the Metamorphosis” encompasses much more than one man’s transformation into a bug. (460)
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Well...You Could Have at Least Cried at the Funeral!
Selfishness is a constant theme in “The Death of Ivan Ilyich”. Throughout the story, characters continually prove that more often than not, people are more likely to worry more about themselves and their own problems. Ilyich too is selfish throughout his entire life. Unlike the others, however, Ilyich suffers because of his selfishness. Tolstoy uses Ilyich and the characters around him to illustrate the damaging effects of selfishness.
From the very first chapter, we see that the people all around Illyich care more about themselves than the dying Ivan. One example of this is Peter Ivanovich and Ilyich’s other “friends”. You would expect a dead man’s closest friends to be grieving and inconsolable after their friend’s death. But alas, no. There are much more important things, like bridge, for them to worry about. Peter and the others care much more about how his death affects their own lives. After all, their positions in society will change and they will have to go through the grueling agony of consoling the widow.
Ah yes…the widow. Of all people in the entire world, we would most expect her to be crushed by her husband’s death. However, she too is more worried about how his death affects her own life. She asks Peter if she can find a way to get more widow’s compensation and laments over how hard the last three weeks of his life were for her. In the later chapters that take place before his actual death, she again isn’t sympathetic or concerned for him. During much of that time, in fact, she is impatient for his death and only feigns worry for him. Again the people closest to Ilyich fail to care about him even in his dying days.
Ilyich, too, is a selfish, uncaring character but unlike the other characters, he is hurt by his selfish behaviors. In the descriptions of his life, Tolstoy shows that Ilyich also doesn’t put in the effort to worry about other people. He never truly seems to care about anyone else. He doesn’t marry his wife for love and later doesn’t put in the effort to fix problems in their relationship. Like his friends, Ivan won’t do anything uncomfortable or unpleasant even if it is to help someone he supposedly cares about. By the time Ilyich figures out his mistakes, he is too isolated and sick to repair the damage. When he dies, he is lonely and full of regret. He only wishes for someone to care about him and pity him, but with all that he has done, nobody does. Not only does this show the consequences of his own selfishness but also the selfishness of the people around him. Ilyich, however, is the only one we see suffer for his selfishness. Tolstoy uses him as an example of how selfishness creates loneliness in the end. Even though he uses many characters to show the ugliness of human selfishness, Tolstoy uses Ilyich as the specific example of its consequences.
In the entire story of Ivan Ilyich, Tolstory creates a pattern of people who are extremely selfish to warn readers away from being selfish. He starts by creating a dislikeable cast of secondary characters who only care about themselves even in light of their friend’s death. Next he presents Ilyich’s life story and shows how his selfish behavior eventually lead to his suffering at the end of his life. By presenting Ilyich as the selfish characters who suffers and falls into a lonely death, Tolstory warns readers that selfishness is one of the most damaging flaws for anyone to have.
From the very first chapter, we see that the people all around Illyich care more about themselves than the dying Ivan. One example of this is Peter Ivanovich and Ilyich’s other “friends”. You would expect a dead man’s closest friends to be grieving and inconsolable after their friend’s death. But alas, no. There are much more important things, like bridge, for them to worry about. Peter and the others care much more about how his death affects their own lives. After all, their positions in society will change and they will have to go through the grueling agony of consoling the widow.
Ah yes…the widow. Of all people in the entire world, we would most expect her to be crushed by her husband’s death. However, she too is more worried about how his death affects her own life. She asks Peter if she can find a way to get more widow’s compensation and laments over how hard the last three weeks of his life were for her. In the later chapters that take place before his actual death, she again isn’t sympathetic or concerned for him. During much of that time, in fact, she is impatient for his death and only feigns worry for him. Again the people closest to Ilyich fail to care about him even in his dying days.
Ilyich, too, is a selfish, uncaring character but unlike the other characters, he is hurt by his selfish behaviors. In the descriptions of his life, Tolstoy shows that Ilyich also doesn’t put in the effort to worry about other people. He never truly seems to care about anyone else. He doesn’t marry his wife for love and later doesn’t put in the effort to fix problems in their relationship. Like his friends, Ivan won’t do anything uncomfortable or unpleasant even if it is to help someone he supposedly cares about. By the time Ilyich figures out his mistakes, he is too isolated and sick to repair the damage. When he dies, he is lonely and full of regret. He only wishes for someone to care about him and pity him, but with all that he has done, nobody does. Not only does this show the consequences of his own selfishness but also the selfishness of the people around him. Ilyich, however, is the only one we see suffer for his selfishness. Tolstoy uses him as an example of how selfishness creates loneliness in the end. Even though he uses many characters to show the ugliness of human selfishness, Tolstoy uses Ilyich as the specific example of its consequences.
In the entire story of Ivan Ilyich, Tolstory creates a pattern of people who are extremely selfish to warn readers away from being selfish. He starts by creating a dislikeable cast of secondary characters who only care about themselves even in light of their friend’s death. Next he presents Ilyich’s life story and shows how his selfish behavior eventually lead to his suffering at the end of his life. By presenting Ilyich as the selfish characters who suffers and falls into a lonely death, Tolstory warns readers that selfishness is one of the most damaging flaws for anyone to have.
Saturday, December 8, 2007
Some Poems!
THE MASTER SPEED
Robert Frost
No speed of wind or water rushing by
But you have speed far greater. You can climb
Back up a stream of radiance to the sky,
And back through history up the steam of time.
And you were given this swiftness, not for haste,
Nor chiefly that you may go where you will,
But in the rush of everything to waste,
That you may have the power of standing still-
Off any still or moving thing you say.
Two such as you with such a master speed
Cannot be parted nor be swept away
From one another once you are agreed
That life is only life forevermore
Together wing to wing and oar to oar.
^Favorite poem EVER
Devotion by Robert Frost
The heart can think of no devotion
Greater than being shore to ocean -
Holding the curve of one position,
Counting an endless repetition.
Acquainted with the Night by Robert Frost
I have been one acquainted with the night.
I have walked out in rain -- and back in rain.
I have outwalked the furthest city light.
I have looked down the saddest city lane.
I have passed by the watchman on his beat
And dropped my eyes, unwilling to explain.
I have stood still and stopped the sound of feet
When far away an interrupted cry
Came over houses from another street,
But not to call me back or say good-bye;
And further still at an unearthly height,
A luminary clock against the sky
Proclaimed the time was neither wrong nor right.
I have been one acquainted with the night.
Robert Frost
No speed of wind or water rushing by
But you have speed far greater. You can climb
Back up a stream of radiance to the sky,
And back through history up the steam of time.
And you were given this swiftness, not for haste,
Nor chiefly that you may go where you will,
But in the rush of everything to waste,
That you may have the power of standing still-
Off any still or moving thing you say.
Two such as you with such a master speed
Cannot be parted nor be swept away
From one another once you are agreed
That life is only life forevermore
Together wing to wing and oar to oar.
^Favorite poem EVER
Devotion by Robert Frost
The heart can think of no devotion
Greater than being shore to ocean -
Holding the curve of one position,
Counting an endless repetition.
Acquainted with the Night by Robert Frost
I have been one acquainted with the night.
I have walked out in rain -- and back in rain.
I have outwalked the furthest city light.
I have looked down the saddest city lane.
I have passed by the watchman on his beat
And dropped my eyes, unwilling to explain.
I have stood still and stopped the sound of feet
When far away an interrupted cry
Came over houses from another street,
But not to call me back or say good-bye;
And further still at an unearthly height,
A luminary clock against the sky
Proclaimed the time was neither wrong nor right.
I have been one acquainted with the night.
Sunday, December 2, 2007
One of the biggest mysteries in Love in the Time of Cholera is how two acutely different characters can become dedicated to the same woman. Though they are very different people, they do have one thing beyond Fermina in common: they follow a strict set of principles that eventually breaks down because of passion.
Dr. Urbino lives by, or tries to live by, the set of principles that govern his profession and social class but allows himself to disregard this standards because of love. We first see this when he courts Fermina Daza. He befriends Fermina’s father and gains his favor in order to get closer to the family and Fermina. He also hires a famous pianist to serenade her at night. As would be typical for a member of his social class, he courts Fermina by trying to impress her with everything he can offer as her husband. When Lorenzo Daza’s conflicted past arises, Urbino, in a less romantic but still commanding Darcy fashion, covers up the story to protect the honor of his wife and the whole family. However, this set of class and professional standards break down when he meets Barbara Lynch. Ironically he directly breaks his professional standards first by initiating a relationship with a patient. He also breaks his class and moral standards by having an ongoing affair with Barbara Lynch even though he is married to Fermina. Before his affair, Urbino obsessively followed a strict set of principles but he disregards it almost carelessly when he falls in love with Barbara.
Florentino Ariza also lives by a strict set of moral principles until he loses Fermina’s love and must find a replacement for his passion. When he meets Fermina Daza, Florentino falls instantly in love with her and, subconsciously, creates a set of principles that he believes he must live by in order to stay faithful to Fermina. The biggest part of this commitment is eternal fidelity and the promise to save himself for Fermina. He also believes that he should shower Fermina with letters and attention as a sign of his love for her. He also serenades Fermina and tries to make money so that he can impress and support her. He lives by a set of guidelines because he wants to be fully dedicated and faithful to Fermina. When Fermina breaks off their engagement, however, circumstances change drastically. After he is “robbed of” his virginity, Florentino begins to realize that he doesn’t have to keep to his guidelines because he can replace his passion for Fermina with a passion for women in general. He sleeps with tons of women and lies to most of them about his past and hides his history with Fermina. Arguably, he doesn’t see these things as a betrayal to Fermina but they are a betrayal of his moral code that he followed when he was courting her. When he and Fermina were involved, Florentino followed a standard of behavior to honor her, but after their engagement ends and he finds passion elsewhere, he abandons his guidelines altogether.
Both Florentino and Urbino initially dedicate themselves to a set of standards but abandon them after their loves and passions change. These standards directly tie in with the effects that Fermina has on men since they are set and eliminated as her relationship with each man changes. In a way, the way that both men change their standards shows how Fermina, Florentino, and Urbino are all impacted by love and passion.
Dr. Urbino lives by, or tries to live by, the set of principles that govern his profession and social class but allows himself to disregard this standards because of love. We first see this when he courts Fermina Daza. He befriends Fermina’s father and gains his favor in order to get closer to the family and Fermina. He also hires a famous pianist to serenade her at night. As would be typical for a member of his social class, he courts Fermina by trying to impress her with everything he can offer as her husband. When Lorenzo Daza’s conflicted past arises, Urbino, in a less romantic but still commanding Darcy fashion, covers up the story to protect the honor of his wife and the whole family. However, this set of class and professional standards break down when he meets Barbara Lynch. Ironically he directly breaks his professional standards first by initiating a relationship with a patient. He also breaks his class and moral standards by having an ongoing affair with Barbara Lynch even though he is married to Fermina. Before his affair, Urbino obsessively followed a strict set of principles but he disregards it almost carelessly when he falls in love with Barbara.
Florentino Ariza also lives by a strict set of moral principles until he loses Fermina’s love and must find a replacement for his passion. When he meets Fermina Daza, Florentino falls instantly in love with her and, subconsciously, creates a set of principles that he believes he must live by in order to stay faithful to Fermina. The biggest part of this commitment is eternal fidelity and the promise to save himself for Fermina. He also believes that he should shower Fermina with letters and attention as a sign of his love for her. He also serenades Fermina and tries to make money so that he can impress and support her. He lives by a set of guidelines because he wants to be fully dedicated and faithful to Fermina. When Fermina breaks off their engagement, however, circumstances change drastically. After he is “robbed of” his virginity, Florentino begins to realize that he doesn’t have to keep to his guidelines because he can replace his passion for Fermina with a passion for women in general. He sleeps with tons of women and lies to most of them about his past and hides his history with Fermina. Arguably, he doesn’t see these things as a betrayal to Fermina but they are a betrayal of his moral code that he followed when he was courting her. When he and Fermina were involved, Florentino followed a standard of behavior to honor her, but after their engagement ends and he finds passion elsewhere, he abandons his guidelines altogether.
Both Florentino and Urbino initially dedicate themselves to a set of standards but abandon them after their loves and passions change. These standards directly tie in with the effects that Fermina has on men since they are set and eliminated as her relationship with each man changes. In a way, the way that both men change their standards shows how Fermina, Florentino, and Urbino are all impacted by love and passion.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Already in the first two sections of the novel, we encounter many different types of love from the three main characters. In the relationship between the elderly Dr. Urbino and Fermina, we see love that is merely convenient and passionless even at the very end. In the affair between Fermina and Florentino, however, we see love that is based on passion and fascination, as well as a touch of unrequited love. Even early on in the novel, Marquez shows us the many different shades of love and how they can entrance and control the people who fall into them.
The love between Fermina and Urbino in the first section shows the less romantic side of love. On the surface, the couple may appear to be still in love. As Marquez describes, they are dependent on one another and cannot be apart without thinking of the other. However, it quickly becomes clear that her love is not so pure, as Fermina is often annoyed by Urbino’s habits and inability to care for himself. Because they are both growing old and he is several years older, she has to care for him now that he is weakening. Fermina is contemptuous of her aging husband’s frailty and often will pretend to be asleep so she will not have to help him in the morning. There is also hidden resentment between them that comes pouring out in their only argument over soap. This argument, while over something trivial, becomes an outlet for any tensions or repressed anger. The tension skyrockets into a multi-month argument until Urbino finally lies and says that there was actually soap in the bathroom. She also becomes annoyed by how he urinates and finally pressures him into using the toilet like a woman. If there was any doubt before, we know that Fermina does not truly love Urbino because she thinks more about Florentino than about her deceased husband after the funeral. After all that time, loving her husband was more convenient and easy rather than passionate and deep. Even though she stays married to him for fifty years, Fermina does not love Urbino in the passionate, romantic way that we see Florentino loving her in the second section.
The love between Florentino and Fermina is vastly different and more romantic than her marriage to Urbino, except that, once again, he seems more in love than she does. Florentino’s love is passionate and instantaneous. After meeting her, he thinks of her constantly and writes a note that turns into a seventy-or-so page letter. Fermina notices him in the park every day and starts to pine for him as well. They both are in love but the intensity of his love is extreme and begins to frighten her after she reads the letter and their love becomes unequal. Even so, their love seems much more passionate and true than what we see of Fermina’s marriage to Urbino. For Fermina, this “relationship” is more passionate and deep. Through her eyes, we get to see the other, exciting side of love that we do not see in the first section of the novel.
In the first two sections of the novel, Marquez contrasts two types of love using the contrasting relationships in Fermina’s life. On the one hand, we see how love can be passionless and empty. In the other section, we see how love can be exciting and caring. Using Fermina’s life to contrast these two sides, Marquez builds anticipation in the book in a unique way. We as readers want to know which love affair was really the better one and what happened that Fermina ended up with “the wrong guy”. It is an effective tool that not only builds suspense but also shows readers the dual side of love and its power. (632)
The love between Fermina and Urbino in the first section shows the less romantic side of love. On the surface, the couple may appear to be still in love. As Marquez describes, they are dependent on one another and cannot be apart without thinking of the other. However, it quickly becomes clear that her love is not so pure, as Fermina is often annoyed by Urbino’s habits and inability to care for himself. Because they are both growing old and he is several years older, she has to care for him now that he is weakening. Fermina is contemptuous of her aging husband’s frailty and often will pretend to be asleep so she will not have to help him in the morning. There is also hidden resentment between them that comes pouring out in their only argument over soap. This argument, while over something trivial, becomes an outlet for any tensions or repressed anger. The tension skyrockets into a multi-month argument until Urbino finally lies and says that there was actually soap in the bathroom. She also becomes annoyed by how he urinates and finally pressures him into using the toilet like a woman. If there was any doubt before, we know that Fermina does not truly love Urbino because she thinks more about Florentino than about her deceased husband after the funeral. After all that time, loving her husband was more convenient and easy rather than passionate and deep. Even though she stays married to him for fifty years, Fermina does not love Urbino in the passionate, romantic way that we see Florentino loving her in the second section.
The love between Florentino and Fermina is vastly different and more romantic than her marriage to Urbino, except that, once again, he seems more in love than she does. Florentino’s love is passionate and instantaneous. After meeting her, he thinks of her constantly and writes a note that turns into a seventy-or-so page letter. Fermina notices him in the park every day and starts to pine for him as well. They both are in love but the intensity of his love is extreme and begins to frighten her after she reads the letter and their love becomes unequal. Even so, their love seems much more passionate and true than what we see of Fermina’s marriage to Urbino. For Fermina, this “relationship” is more passionate and deep. Through her eyes, we get to see the other, exciting side of love that we do not see in the first section of the novel.
In the first two sections of the novel, Marquez contrasts two types of love using the contrasting relationships in Fermina’s life. On the one hand, we see how love can be passionless and empty. In the other section, we see how love can be exciting and caring. Using Fermina’s life to contrast these two sides, Marquez builds anticipation in the book in a unique way. We as readers want to know which love affair was really the better one and what happened that Fermina ended up with “the wrong guy”. It is an effective tool that not only builds suspense but also shows readers the dual side of love and its power. (632)
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Jason Compson Needs to Be Kicked in the Shins, Just Hold Back a Little Bit
Jason Compson is a jerk. It’s indisputable. You can probably justify his actions by pointing out that his mother is psychotic and his family is torn apart but you can’t deny it altogether. It is so easy to hate Jason, but there is a catch to every jerk on the planet, and Jason’s is one that makes him a philosophical problem in his own right. It doesn't quite change the fact that he's a jerk, but you might hesitate as your foot goes to kick him.
Jason is an outright jerk. He is cruel, racist, controlling, manipulative, and disrespectful. From the start we get the sense that Jason is the nicest person: “Once a bitch always a bitch” (180). Good first impression! His attitude toward other people is probably his worst quality. We see this attitude best in his interaction with Quentin and Luster. He is always cold and degrading to Quentin, even stealing the money her mother sends and calling her a slut. He taunts Luster with the show tickets and refuses to give him the tickets even though he has no reason not to let Luster use them. His behavior toward Caddy, though perhaps more understandable, is also openly hostile and cruel. He refuses to let Caddy see Quentin even when she offers him money and continuously sends money to support her daughter. He even implies that her money comes from prostitution. And while a small part of us cheers every time Jason tells off his mother, he is still being disrespectful to the one person that gives him credit. He is obviously a bluntly distasteful person.
We do have to give Jason a little credit for being smart. He has devised a scheme where he embezzles Caddy’s money gifts to Quentin without his mother or niece having the slightest idea of how much money he is acquiring. Now we can’t hate him for being stupid, but hating him for scheming his family is even better. As we learn more about him, we discern that Jason’s problems go far beyond irritability and bitterness. He also has a control complex that has become intertwined with his obsession with money and the stock market. He is acutely aware and quick to remind the family that he is the man and sole provider of the family, in a sense also reminding them that he is in charge. He plays mind games with his mother and Quentin, further bursting his ego. There is Jason in a nutshell. But with every bitter, emotionally disturbed sociopath there is a catch that redeems him ever so slightly.
So what could possibly redeem Jason in anyone’s eyes? Despite his open hostility toward his family, he works every day for money that not only feeds his stock addiction but also supports his family. So why do we care? Because he doesn’t have to do it. He obviously has no strong emotional ties to Quentin or his mother, so we know supporting his family is more for his benefit than theirs. In essence, he supports his family to cater to his own controlling and manipulative nature. But he still supports them. Oddly enough, he reminds me of Mrs. Joe from Great Expectations, who likewise supports a family she treats terribly. Now the debate begins. Is Jason at least sort of a good guy because he supports the family? If you are a member of Kant’s school of thought, Jason is still a jerk. According to Kant, it’s the intentions that matter. Jason’s intentions are obviously not honorable, so to the Kants of the world, Jason is still a jerk. Then there are the more…Machiavellian types. In their eyes, the ends justify the means. Therefore, Jason is a good guy in the sense that the family stays “afloat” because Jason brings home money. Both points of view have decent philosophical arguments going for them.
So it begs the question, who is really right? I agree with Kant personally—it’s about the intentions. Jason uses his family relative well-being to support his addiction to control, which, in my opinion, disqualifies him as a good person. He also counters any economic help with his constant battery of the family’s emotions, defeating the purpose of keeping them economically healthy in the first place. I admit that there is something to be said that he continuously works for and lives with people he doesn’t care about, but it is not enough to redeem him in my eyes. Jason is still a jerk, but maybe I’ll hold back just a bit when I get the chance to kick him in the shins. (747).
Jason is an outright jerk. He is cruel, racist, controlling, manipulative, and disrespectful. From the start we get the sense that Jason is the nicest person: “Once a bitch always a bitch” (180). Good first impression! His attitude toward other people is probably his worst quality. We see this attitude best in his interaction with Quentin and Luster. He is always cold and degrading to Quentin, even stealing the money her mother sends and calling her a slut. He taunts Luster with the show tickets and refuses to give him the tickets even though he has no reason not to let Luster use them. His behavior toward Caddy, though perhaps more understandable, is also openly hostile and cruel. He refuses to let Caddy see Quentin even when she offers him money and continuously sends money to support her daughter. He even implies that her money comes from prostitution. And while a small part of us cheers every time Jason tells off his mother, he is still being disrespectful to the one person that gives him credit. He is obviously a bluntly distasteful person.
We do have to give Jason a little credit for being smart. He has devised a scheme where he embezzles Caddy’s money gifts to Quentin without his mother or niece having the slightest idea of how much money he is acquiring. Now we can’t hate him for being stupid, but hating him for scheming his family is even better. As we learn more about him, we discern that Jason’s problems go far beyond irritability and bitterness. He also has a control complex that has become intertwined with his obsession with money and the stock market. He is acutely aware and quick to remind the family that he is the man and sole provider of the family, in a sense also reminding them that he is in charge. He plays mind games with his mother and Quentin, further bursting his ego. There is Jason in a nutshell. But with every bitter, emotionally disturbed sociopath there is a catch that redeems him ever so slightly.
So what could possibly redeem Jason in anyone’s eyes? Despite his open hostility toward his family, he works every day for money that not only feeds his stock addiction but also supports his family. So why do we care? Because he doesn’t have to do it. He obviously has no strong emotional ties to Quentin or his mother, so we know supporting his family is more for his benefit than theirs. In essence, he supports his family to cater to his own controlling and manipulative nature. But he still supports them. Oddly enough, he reminds me of Mrs. Joe from Great Expectations, who likewise supports a family she treats terribly. Now the debate begins. Is Jason at least sort of a good guy because he supports the family? If you are a member of Kant’s school of thought, Jason is still a jerk. According to Kant, it’s the intentions that matter. Jason’s intentions are obviously not honorable, so to the Kants of the world, Jason is still a jerk. Then there are the more…Machiavellian types. In their eyes, the ends justify the means. Therefore, Jason is a good guy in the sense that the family stays “afloat” because Jason brings home money. Both points of view have decent philosophical arguments going for them.
So it begs the question, who is really right? I agree with Kant personally—it’s about the intentions. Jason uses his family relative well-being to support his addiction to control, which, in my opinion, disqualifies him as a good person. He also counters any economic help with his constant battery of the family’s emotions, defeating the purpose of keeping them economically healthy in the first place. I admit that there is something to be said that he continuously works for and lives with people he doesn’t care about, but it is not enough to redeem him in my eyes. Jason is still a jerk, but maybe I’ll hold back just a bit when I get the chance to kick him in the shins. (747).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
