1. Can you find a place where the author uses language in a notable way? Explain.
OR
2. The story begins, "This blind man, an old friend of my wife's, he was on the way . . ." Comment on the word "this" and/or the grammatically-not-necessary use of the word "he."
OR
3. Comment on the character of the narrator.
OR
4. Given the information we have at this point, how would you describe the relationship between the narrator's wife (before she married the narrator) and the blind man?
OR
5. Notice something that no one else has noticed yet about the reading.
OR
2. The story begins, "This blind man, an old friend of my wife's, he was on the way . . ." Comment on the word "this" and/or the grammatically-not-necessary use of the word "he."
OR
3. Comment on the character of the narrator.
OR
4. Given the information we have at this point, how would you describe the relationship between the narrator's wife (before she married the narrator) and the blind man?
OR
5. Notice something that no one else has noticed yet about the reading.
19 comments:
Hello guys,
So my answer is pertaining to question 2. I do not think there is a valid reason behind the narrator using the word he. Consisdering the phrase "Blind MAN" was used. Weare not stupid and we know that he is obviously a male figure. Also THIS is a very vauge word. I would much rather of had the narrator say the name of the blind man. I personally am not a fan of how this book has starte this far. I would much rathre have more details and much more imagery and rich wording rather than blatant subtlety. I look forward to reading further, but I hope the story has more twists and turn to keep any member partaking in the story, interested.
I'm answering question three about the character of the narrator. The first thing that came to my mind about him was how judgmental he was. He seems to judge everyone. He judged the blind man, and immediately assumed he wouldn't like him because he was blind, and couldn't see and moved slowly. He then judges the name of the blind man's now deceased wife. He assumes her name means she is black. He then judges her and cannot understand how she could be married to a man who could never see her and compliment her, and know her expressions, or if she had dressed up. I think it would be really hard to live and love someone who never was able to see you. Sight is something I rely on a lot, and I think most humans do. I can understand how the narrator came to this judgment, but he doesn't seem to give any time to think or meet the person before he judges them. Judgments are really hurtful under most circumstances. I think it's really hard for the narrator's wife to deal with some of his judgments, and she says at one point that he will be civil and polite to the blind man if he loves her. I don't really like the narrator and find him to be blunter than necessary and very judgmental.
Hey guys
So, addressing question #3 about the character of the narrator, I have a lot to say. He seems to be very blunt with everything he says. Everything is said in very quick sentences and is very straightforward and telling you exactly how it is with very little description. Also, going along with what Sarah said, he is extremely judgemental. Just because his wife and the blind man know eachother, he seems to think that the blind man is somewhat of a threat. He also does not seem sympathetic at all to the blind man. He did, afterall, just lose his wife and he seems very insensitive to the blind mans feelings. He just seems to care about himself and what he wants and what he does not want. He also appears to not want the blind man to spend time in his house and he called them "weird" because they have dogs and canes. I just don't think he a very nice person and is very self-centered, inconsiderate and insensitive to others, other than himself and his wife.
Hey,
I will be trying to answer question 4. The narrator's wife had a extremely tight relationship with the blind man. They were practically "inseparable" as the wife said, and it holds very true. The two of them were sending videos back and forth between one another and telling each other things that the wife didn't even tell her husband at the time. I would describe their relationship as like they are "two peas in a pod!" I feel that they both really understand one another. They know that whatever they tell each other that the other person on the other side of the tv will respect them and make them feel better. I feel like the two of them were like each others best friends, like when you are in elementary school and all you ever want to talk to is your best friend. I think that a relationship like that is good to hold onto forever. To have someone who always has your back no matter what!
"This blind man, an old friend of my wife's, he was on the way . . ." Whenever a character is not mentioned with his/her full name I tend to not get fully attached to them. There is an obvious element missing with the character especially if all of the other people have classified names. When a specific title/name to a person is not mentioned, there is a lot more mystery that one is able to play with in their mind. Personally, I think that it gets very repetitive in the story when everytime the blind man is being described the word "he" is always involved. I think the narrator has a level of disrespect for this man, which may have something to do with the fact that his name is not mentioned.
If the woman talks about the blind man as much as it seems like, his name had to come up in conversation. I think the personal feelings about the blind man determined whether he would reveal the name of this man.
hey this is Pall, and i'll be answering question number two in response to something someone said earlier.
First, the word 'this' is actually a very CLEAR word. It describes one particular object. Second, i think that there is a reason for the author to have the narrator say 'this blind man, an old friend of my wife's, he was...'. Often times, when real people are actually talking, they will use words that aren't gramatically necessary. Hopefully we all know this to be true. I think that when the narrator says the word 'he', the author brings out a certain element of spoken word in the narrator, as if he is talking without direction. And third, i think that the lack of 'imagery and rich wording' will end up being a key element of this story, and that we should learn to enjoy all forms of literature, not only that which is numbingly easy to read.
Adressing to question number 3, while reading the story "Cathedral" I find the character of the narrator to be jealous at first because his wife is spending more time with the blind man. There was no evidence that the narrator will be jealous of the blind man. So the secound thing that came into my mind about the narrator in the story is that he's the type of person that don't care. I say this because he don't really care about the blind man, also he don't know him very well. "But she and the blind man had kept in touch. They made tapes and mailed them back and forth. I wasn't enthusiastic about his visit. He was no one I knew." (Pg. 21)
I could say that the narrator is caring too, because as soon as his wife told him about the incident of the blind man's wife, he began to feel sorry for her. "Hearing this, I felt sorry for the blind man for a little bit." (Pg.23)
I noticed that the narrator uses the first person point of view and switches into the third person view. He often uses "my" in some parts but he also uses "he" or "his" to address himself to the story. In the second paragraph, he informs the story of how the two, his wife and the blind man, met and he addressed himself in third person. "The man she was going to marry at the end of the summer was in officers' training school. HE didn't have any money." Later, in the story, he uses first person to address himself, "They'd become good friends, my wife and the blind man. How do I know these things? She told me." I find the narrator to be interesting when he refers himself "I" and "Him."
Hello! So I thought I'd try to address a few of the things other people have discussed and hopefully add my own spin to them.
Firstly, I have to say I agree with Quinn when he says that the importance of "he" and "this" in the first sentence are to give it a more spoken feel. I felt as if the narrator was talking to me when I read it and it was very different from most other literature. So I agree with Quinn in that sense. I also feel that it was a nice way to ease into the story. I discussed the bluntness of the opening line of "A Good Man is Hard to Find," and I find this introduction to be exactly the opposite. I don't quite know how to describe the feeling I get from that first sentence, but I guess the best thing I can say is that the narrator almost seems a bit exasperated or as if he is about to tell some long saga that doesn't have a happy ending. He is generally chronological and I'm sure this story, that even he doesn't seem particularly enthusiastic about telling, will serve a purpose later.
Secondly, in response to Megumi, I don't think he was ever referring to himself in third person. His wife actually had a first husband, and the "officer" is not actually the narrator, but rather a man who had been a part of her life prior to when he met her. So I think he is actually consistent in staying in the first person. Maybe I am mistaken, but I feel like that makes a bit more sense than having him sporadically switch points of view.
As for my own opinion, I have found it to be an interestingly written story so far-- very unique. Like I said, I don't get a feeling that it will end happily...
"She told me he touched his fingers to every part of her face, her nose--even her neck!
It's funny how the narrator makes the remark about the blind man touching his wife's face, but is even more weirded out when he touches her neck. The neck is a sensative, sometimes "sensual" place.
Hello,
Addressing question one, "On her last day in the office, the blind man asked if he could touch her face. She agreed to this. She told me he touched his fingers to every part of her face, her nose- even her neck! She never forgot it. She even tried to write a poem about it. She was always trying to write a poem. She wrote a poem or two every year,usually after something really important had happened to her" (22). It can be said of the narrator, that he is very pessimistic toward the blind man and his wife's feelings for him. This quote presents a tenderness and intimacy the wife experienced with the blind man. O'Connor's language is effective and notable because she is able to get across this tenderness through the perspective of her husband, a very negative man. This particular quote shows the narrator expressing emotion and passionate toward the relationship of the blind a and his wife, as we can see through his use of exclamation and detail. He claims, "she always writes after something important has happened to her" and personally, this gives me the idea that the narrator is jealous of the blind man and his relationship with his wife, although the narrator may not admit this to himself. I believe this shows off O'Connor's ability to write well because she is able to express a sort of hidden emotion through a completely different character and as a reader, I still felt this emotion.
In response to number three. The Character of the narrator seems to be a character that is close minded and uncomfortable with people who are different. The idea of a blind man really affects him. He seems to have trouble seeing the blind man as a person with feelings, but someone who is different because he is blind. Yes, people who are blind are different, but they still feel emotions and they still have capabilities of having relationships with others. The narrator seems unable to fathom the idea of a good relationship with a blind person. This shows his close mindedness, and also shallow personality. He spends a great deal of time pondering how any pathetic woman could marry a blind man. I can actually relate with him because I think it would be very hard to be in a relationship with someone without them knowing what I look like. The narrator makes me think about how important looks really are in relationships. The narrator doesn't tell us the blind man's name or the previous husband's name. This shows that he can't get past the fact that the man is blind, or that the officer is his wife's previous husband. That is all he sees them as, blind, and an ex. This shows that the narrator doesn't take a lot of time to get to know a person but relates to them based on preconceived notions. He seems insecure and uncomfortable with the fact that his wife can relate to this blind man and keep a relationship with him. Like others have commented, I too sense some jealousy coming from the narrator in reference to the blind man touching her neck. I get the idea that he his self centered. He doesn't care about his wife's poems. Most loving husband's would care about things like this but he says that he didn't think much of the poem. He doesn't care about her effort and the fact that poetry is important to her and maybe he should make more of an effort to appreciate it.
Adressing question number two the author says, "This blind man............" By using the word "This" it makes the blind man detached from the narrator. Notice the narrator does not say, "The blind man......." The narrator seems to speak down towards the blind man and not give him any respect.
"This blind man, an old friend of my wife's, he was was on his way to spend the night" is a sentence that grammatically speaking seems to be incorrect. The use of the words "this" and "he" are both pertaining to the blind man but only one of them is necessary. To make a more perfectly correct sentence something of this nature might instead occur "This blind man, an old friend of my wife's, was on his way to spend the night." By having the inclusion of "he" the author is able to subtly startle us. Because this is the opening sentence of the story we immediately feel that perhaps this will continue throughout.
Hakuna Matata!
Hi
I feel that the author uses notable language throughout the story several times. It seems he repeats phrases and begins most sentences about the wife with "she". The repetition creates a pattern that makes the writing flow smoothly and simplifies the thoughts of the narrator. The husband constantly refers to the blind man, as if saying it over and over will enforce the fact that his blindness changes the way he tells the story. It was also interesting to me that the wife said "If you love me you can do this for me" and then, "If you don't love me, okay. But if you had a friend, any friend, and the friend came to visit, I'd make him feel comfortable" (23). This quote stood out to me for some reason. We haven't heard much from the wife, even though she is talked about a lot. This seems to describe her personality. She questions his love for her, but not directly, and doesn't emphasize it. She seems as if she is trying to be completely fair in everything she states about what she would do for him that she feels he should do for her. She may be questioning if she loves him as well. If she is thinking about being in his shoes, she is telling herself she would do that favor for him if she loved him or not. Whether or not they love each other doesn't seem to be important since she clearly excepts this as being "okay" , but the fact that it is so nonchalant seems strange. The author makes it seem like the equality in their marriage is more important than having passion.
When the narrator refers to the blind man as this blind man it implies disrespect towards the blind man. The narrator specificly uses the word this because it is more impersonable. If he had referred to the man as the blind man or the friend of my wife it would be much more personal.
"This blind man, an old friend of my wife's, he was on the way . . ."
I was most intrigued with this statement from the get-go. I found it to be so capturing of a point of view, just be manipulating the grammar. The starting word- "This" makes the sentence sound like the "set up" to a punch line joke. Then the use of a comma, to show that the blind man was not a friend of his. It gave me the sense that the narrator was saying this in a derogatory way, like the blind man is something to be ashamed of; and with the use of the comma my gut feeling was that the possession of shame was shifted from him to his wife. I also find it off that the narrator does not give the blind man a name, as if he did not deserve one; that the main description of him was the fact that his is "blind." to me it sounds like the narrator is the blind one. He is blind to the fact that he is treating him as less than human. If the man is really a true old friend of his wife's and he does not know the guys name, that shows he is blind to his wife. I found this to be one of the most informative openings of my reading thus far in life!
I also forgot to mention, the set up of the sentence. While it did seem to be "incorrect" or "rough" I am taking the stand that this was an intentional, and deliberate comment on life. That people who think the way I have interpreted the narrator to be feeling, are a bit rough and incorrect. If this is intentionally cohesive i think that is a stellar way to portray point of view. I also admire the daring way the writer just 'starts'- no set up and loss of point of view, just begins the way it should be.
"This blind man, an old friend of my wife's, he was on his way to spend the night.
Gramatically this sentence may seem wrong. However in a different view, it may seem right or awkwardly make sense because of the style of author. Honestly, the way this sentence is structured can not be judged or gramatically argued only because it is author's choice to make an aura out of the beginning of the sentence.
Post a Comment