T or F: The reader forgives Nel and Sula for their handling of the Chicken incident.OR
T or F: Overall, Ajax is presented as a positive character (p. 50)
OR
T or F: the depiction of the whites (63-64) is, overall, positive.
OR
T or F: the part in which Sula and Nel lie down in the shade, but before Chicken arrives, has some symbolic or matephorical possibilities.
28 comments:
T: I do believe the narrator forgives Sula and Nel for the Chicken incident. As with the other death, I feel as though it is too calm to be monstrous. For instance, after Chicken is thrown into the water it says,
"The water was so peaceful now."
Also, I believe the narrator forgives them because they obviously are sorry themselves. "There was a space, a separateness about them."
Another thing, the people at the funeral did not think so much about Chicken but their own emotions, as the narrator says.
T: I think Ajax is presented as a positive character to a certain demographic ("graceful and economical in every movement, he held a place of envy with men of all ages for his significantly foul mouth" 50). I also think that he's represented as positive because that his foulness seems to turn to elegance, a sort of charm about him that otherwise seems offensive.
It also says that Sula and Nel, as they were passing, had to hide their delight after Ajax said "pig meat" aloud, which was everyone was thinking but did not say aloud. I think he is a positive character in the sense that he's amusing to others and has a likeability to him.
Oh, and I just saw this in the front of the book (the book dedication) and I thought it was beautiful: "It is sheer good fortune to miss somebody long before they leave you."
Kay. I'm done now.
i waited for about 15 minutes to see if anyone would write something but no one did. so .. i'm checking in anyways.
checking in.
T I also believe that it is forgiven by the readers. All the deaths and horrible events in this story, particularly Plum being killed by his own mother, seem to be made so much lighter than they should be, and what's strange is, that one was intentional, while Chicken's death certainly was not. I think if such big, intentional deaths are not only forgiven, but justified, then an unintentional death is certainly forgiven.
F: The white people are not displayed as positive.
"He dumped Chicken Little into a burlap sack and tossed him next to some egg crates and boxes of wool cloth...he suddenly became alarmed that the corpse in this heat would have a terrible odor..."
Morrison is depicting the bargeman as someone who although in general they are doing a good deed, it is still a chore that they do not take seriously. He handles a human being by "dumping" and "tossing" him. These words have the connotation of carelessness. Then he goes on to be "alarmed" if heaven forbid his clothes get a little smelly because a little boy's dead body would start to rot. He handles it not out of the caring part of his heart, but almost the feeling of necessary action. Necessary action vs. caring does not bode well for the positive depiction for the whites.
It's difficult to say whether or not the reader forgives Nel and Sula about Chicken Little. I say this because I myself am not quite sure what I think about the incident. It happened so fast- one minute, the girls were playing with him, and the next he was dead. Sula also had been so sweet to him and was showing him ways to play: climbing a tree, swinging in circles. It just went a bit too far.
I guess that the reader does forgive Sula because of these things. Not only has she been presented as a protagonist thus far in the novel, but the fact that she had been so nice to Chicken before he died makes it a bit less tragic that it happened. I also agree with Christine that the death is too calm to be monstrous. Though it is still horribly tragic, it wasn't done intentionally, and it definitely wasn't driven by malice.
It's just very difficult to say what I feel because it is such a terrible event, and it happened so fast I almost felt like I didn't quite understand what happened.
True: Nel and Sula are forgiven by the readers as the readers know that they are merely children and did not know how to appropriately handle the situation.
I agree with Christine's choice of quotes, and the readers could not possibly expect the children to have known exactly what to do.
checking in
i think that it is true that Ajax is presented in a positive light. partially because of the reactions of the Sula and Nel and the other men. He is respected by the men, and Sula and Nel make something of a point of walking to get icecream so that the men and especially men like him will see them. Their newfound interest in the men makes them slightly less crude though if the reader was only reading the actions and thoughts of Ajax and not how he is viewed by others he would most likely be seen in a less positive light.
checking in
checking in
checking innn
It is hard to tell if Ajax is supposed to be positive or not but he is presented as someone who people want to be. the "cool guy". He has an entrancing aspect to his character.
"Graceful and economical in every movement, he held a place of envy with men of all ages for his magnificently foul mouth.... His reputation was derived from the way he handled the words."
He is like able in a way that you just want to know more because you don't really understand him. He seems to be a confident character and is good with words so it makes him like able.
F: I don't eblieve that the reader forgives Sula and Nel for the Chicken incident. I think that the reader instead pities them. The children themselves try to convince themselves that they "have done nothing wrong" , in an attempt to hide their guilt. The reader was saddened and a bit angry, but I don't think that they will forgive Nel or Sula completely by the end of the chapter. Christine made an important observation, that though people were sad at Chicken's funeral, it does not mention people thinking solely about him, even at his own funeral, aside from the uncontrolable grief of his mother.
True: Ajax is seen as a positive character through the eyes of Nel and Sula and all other characters. All the men are envious of how Ajax so clearly and powerfully expresses his emotions or puts emphasis on his words and syllables. He is described as having "sinister beauty" and was "graceful and economical in every movement, he held a place of envy with men of all ages for his magnificently foul mouth."
Through the eyes of Nel and Sula Ajax is seen as very attractive and positive because of how they reacted to what Ajax said. They were extremely delighted at Ajax's comment so that means that they must at least like him for his comment to have such a positive affect on them. "So, when he said, "Pig meat" as Nel and Sula passed, they guarded their eyes lest someone see their delight."
True, the part in which Sula and Nel lie down in the shade, but before Chicken arrives, has some symbolic or metaphorical possibilities:
"When the depression was the size of a small dishpan, Nel's twig broke. With a gesture of disgust she threw the pieces into the hole they had made. Sula threw hers in too. Nel saw a bottle cap and tossed it in as well. Each then looked around for more debris to throw into the hole: paper, bits of glass, butts of cigarettes, until all of the small defiling things they could find were collected there. Carefully they replaced the soil and covered the entire grave with uprooted grass. Neither one had spoken a word."
Silently, innocently, and without thinking about it, filling in a grave...yeah.
I agree with todd about the whites not being positive characters. As he said, they treat Chicken with disrespect and even comment on how mules are better than blacks. one line that negatively stuck out to me was when the sheriff himself said (referring to chicken in the river), you "never shoulda taken him out in the first place." the whites in the scene couldn't care less about chicken, his family, or even why he died.
I do not think, however, that morrison is using this example to portray ALL whites in the area, but as for right now, it does not shed a good light on them.
F: The depiction of the whites is, overall, positive.
I agree completely with Todd in the fact that the bargemen treated Chicken's body with as much disrespect as was possible in that situation. He was concerned for his own clothes smelling so he hung the body overboard: "the corpse in this heat would have a terrible odor, which might get into the fabric of his woolen clothing. He dragged the sack away and hooked it over the side, so that Chicken's body was half in and half out of the water." This handling of teh little boy's body was completely unnecessarily (is that a word?) rough and was only out of consideration for the white man's comfort. This did not paint a pretty picture for the white man!
checking in
checking in
checking in
checking in
joining the line of people checking in!
AHH!!! LATE BLOG!!! But what can you do?
For me, I think it is hard to define one way or another that the whites are either depicted positively or negatively. On one hand I especially agree with Todd and Audrey when they said that the bargeman is characterized as yes doing a good deed however, to him, it seems like a chore.
HOWEVER, I think that this passage is full of contradictions. I think that the main reason why the bargeman is disgusted by finding Chicken is (not because he originally mistakes him for a grown up black man but) simply because he cannot stomach the fact that someone would kill their own kin, let alone their own son.
"He shook his head in disgust at the kind of parents who would drown their own children."
The bargeman is so distraught at the idea because he knows that he and his wife and probably all of their white neighbors would never do something like that. He WRONGLY associates that situation/action with a race and not with the actual parents (and the character and moral decency of the parents). He creates a stereotype in his mind that is being "supported" by such evidence as this. So while I don't think that the whites are depicted positively in this passage I don't think they are the most dire pits of negativity either.
One interesting contradiction (I guess you could call it) is in the following quote:
"The Junior Choir, dressed in white, sang "Nearer My God to Thee" and "Precious Memories," their eyes fastened on the songbooks they did not need..."
This quote I feel is the only time when the color white (and possibly the race white) is depicted positively/in a good light. The image and sounds that a junior choir stirs in one's mind is generally very beautiful, naieve, and subtle. The connotation that this quote has is positive while the denotation, however, may be up to interpretation.
- Checking in -
Catherine good point, in some respects the bargeman is only caring about himself, this does imply a negative air.
checking in
checking in
True. The part in which Sula and Nel lie down in the shade together has symbolic connotations.
They absentmindedly strip twigs and dig little holes in the ground. Their holes merge, and they throw trash into the common hole. They do all this without talking. It is as if, subconsciously, they are thinking the same thing and going through the same motions. It is Morrison's way of demonstrating their closeness -- they are the kind of friends who can be around each other in complete silence, without the need to talk.
The childish focus of the stripping of the twigs and the digging of the holes is a stark contrast with Chicken's accidental death. The former embodies innocence and creativity, the latter death and loss of innocence. The two are sharply juxtaposed, which is what gives this moment its significance.
Post a Comment