English 103 Blog
Discussion Questions
"Everyday Use" Discussion Question #3
3) “Although many students seem to prefer Maggie to Dee, most would probably rather be Dee than Maggie. Is this true for you? Why/why not?” Provide character analysis in your answer (Making Literature Matter 303)
In the short story, “Everyday Use,” written by Alice Walker, the author writes a wonderfully rich story about a mother and her two very different daughters. The mother in the story talks about Dee, her oldest daughter, and Maggie, her youngest daughter. These two girls are very different from each other; they have different personalities that have shaped their characters. The blog question for this particular story was a relatively easy one for me; it asks, “Although many students seem to prefer Maggie to Dee, most would probably rather be Dee than Maggie. Is this true for you? Why/why not?” For me, my answer is Maggie hands down. This is due to a couple of reasons, and they will be laid out below.
In the story, Maggie is a very down-to-earth, sensitive, gentle, and intelligent individual due to a hardship in her life. The family’s house burned down and this contributed to a limp that she will have for the rest of her life: “Have you ever seen a lame animal, perhaps a dog run over by some careless person rich enough to own a car, sidle up to someone who is ignorant enough to be kind to him? That is the way my Maggie walks. She has been like this, chin on chest, eyes on ground, feet in shuffle, ever since the fire that burned the other house to the ground” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 298). Furthermore, Maggie looks different due to the fire. Her skin is not smooth and pretty like Dee’s and therefore, she has learned to be stronger about this aspect in her life, even though she does get jealous of her sister and does wish she had Dee’s beauty: “Maggie will be nervous until after her sister goes: she will stand hopelessly in corners homely and ashamed of the burn scars down her arms and legs, eyeing her sister with a mixture of envy and awe” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 297). I have to say, in this aspect, I am like Maggie a little bit. I have a disability as well, and sometimes I can feel a little bit out of place. However, I do not feel like that every moment of the day, nor do I feel sorry for myself, as I think is the case with Maggie. Sometimes, however, there is a moment that can creep up that disabled people do wish they had the health of everyone else. This is something that I can relate to easily with Maggie. However, the one thing that I do admire about Maggie is her humble intelligence. She has a sharp, quick memory, and is something even her sister admires about her: “Aunt Dee’s first husband whittled the dash,” said Maggie so low you almost could hear her. “His name was Henry, but they called him Stash.” “Maggie’s brain is like an elephant’s,” Wangero said, laughing. As can be seen from Dee’s statement, Maggie is sharp, but does not quickly display this intelligence. It is as if Maggie thinks intelligence should not go with a disability, and therefore, she is afraid to show it. I do like how she is not a “show-off” with her sharp memory, but I wish that Maggie could have seen the gift that she had with her intelligence, and used it to open up more opportunities in her life (such as school, career, etc). However, being a shy and sensitive soul, Maggie did not even knowledge this gift and kept it to herself. Again, I like how she did not use this to act “better” than other people, but I also wish she could have seen the potential in herself and enjoyed life a little bit more. JJ One last thing that I admire about Maggie is her ability to sacrifice what she wants to make other people happy. When Dee was pouting for the quilts, trying to get Mama to give them to her, Maggie calmly came up to Mama and told her that Dee could have the quilts and that she could remember their “Grandma Dee without the quilts” (303). This piece of evidence from the story shows how self-sacrificing Maggie is – she cares about the needs and wants of others. Even though she really wanted those quilts, she was willing to let them go if she knew that her sister wanted them that badly. This is another great quality that I like about Maggie (everyone should think about what would make other people happy even if it means sacrificing your happiness for a while; I know this is a quality that is important to me and that I like to practice JJ).
Maggie’s sister, on the other hand, is the complete opposite from Maggie. She is flashy, physically beautiful, has to have the best in life, and will not take “no” for an answer. Dee speaks her mind, and it is obvious when she does not like something. In fact, as her mother points out, Dee was happy when their first house burned down because she “hated” the house: “And Dee. I see her standing off under the sweet gum tree she used to dig gum out of; a look of concentration on her face as she watched the last dingy gray board of the house fall in toward the red-hot brick chimney. Why don’t you do a dance around the ashes? I’d wanted to ask her. She had hated the house that much” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 298-299). Furthermore, Dee was what I like to call a “material girl.” She loved to have nice things and wanted them all of the time. Now, I do not have any problem with anyone wanting nice things once in a while – it is in our nature. However, I do have a problem with people who have to have nice things all of the time, and then they show absolutely no gratitude for them, especially when they know that it caused the family a huge sacrifice. I think Dee was this type of “material girl” as the following piece of evidence suggests: “Dee wanted nice things. A yellow organdy dress to wear to her graduation from high school; black pumps to match a green suit she’d made from an old suit somebody gave me. She was determined to stare down any disaster in her efforts. Her eyelids would not flicker for minutes at a time. Often I fought off the temptation to shake her. At sixteen she had a style of her own: and knew what style was” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 299). One last thing that I really do not admire about Dee is her “I will not take NO for an answer” attitude. When she was trying to persuade Mama to give her the quilts, she already acted like Mama told her she could have them: “Some of those pieces, like those lavender ones, come from old clothes her mother handed down to her,” I said, moving up to touch the quilts. Dee (Wangero) moved back just enough so that I couldn’t reach the quilts. They already belonged to her” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 302). However, when Mama told her that she promised those quilts to Maggie, Dee became furious: “She gasped like a bee had stung her. “Maggie can’t appreciate these quilts!” she said. “She probably be backward enough to put them to everyday use.” When Mama stated that she hoped that Maggie would put them to good, everyday use, Dee became even more furious: “But they’re priceless!” she was saying now, furiously; for she has a temper. “Maggie would put them on the bed and in five years they’d be in rags. Less than that!” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 303). Dee had a horrible attitude about these quilts. She wanted her mother to give in to her, and did not even consider Maggie’s feelings for one second. That is a shame, and it is also a shame that Dee thinks that the entire world will revolve around her. I do not like these “diva” attitudes that people acquire, nor do I admire them. It is pathetic, especially when it comes to not considering the feelings of others.
After analyzing these two characters, the answer to this particular question comes very easily to me. Not only do I prefer Maggie to Dee, but I would rather be Maggie than Dee. I would not want to be Dee! I would want to be Maggie any day of the week, with disability and all. Dee’s personality shaped her character into a person that does not care about other people at all; rather, she cares only about herself. Dee wants nice things, Dee wants people to give her things, Dee will not take no for an answer. The world revolves around Dee. Dee’s attitude and personality makes it really difficult for me to imagine anyone really wanting to be like her. Maggie, on the other hand, I could imagine being like. She may have a physical disability (with her limp) and scars from the fire, but she has a sensitive, gentle personality. Maggie thinks about the feelings of other people. When Dee was pouting like a spoiled child for those quilts, Maggie told Mama that Dee could have those quilts if she wanted them. Maggie was willing to give those quilts up to make Dee happy. Maggie cares about other people. In addition to being a gentle, sensitive, caring soul, Maggie is intelligent as well. But, Maggie does not use that intelligence in a boastful manner to gain attention to herself. That is a quality that I admire, but I wish that she would use her intelligence to open up different opportunities in her life, such as school, career, etc. Maggie could, but chose not to. This is the only thing that I would change if I were to be Maggie. I would be a little bit more out-going, and would not be extremely ashamed of my disability as Maggie is. However, in compassion to Dee, I would be Maggie no questions asked. I just do not like Dee’s personality or character, and therefore, prefer Maggie and would be Maggie if I had to choose between the two characters. In the short story, “Everyday Use,” written by Alice Walker, the author presents two very female characters that showcase how personality differences can shape a person.
In the short story, “Everyday Use,” written by Alice Walker, the author writes a wonderfully rich story about a mother and her two very different daughters. The mother in the story talks about Dee, her oldest daughter, and Maggie, her youngest daughter. These two girls are very different from each other; they have different personalities that have shaped their characters. The blog question for this particular story was a relatively easy one for me; it asks, “Although many students seem to prefer Maggie to Dee, most would probably rather be Dee than Maggie. Is this true for you? Why/why not?” For me, my answer is Maggie hands down. This is due to a couple of reasons, and they will be laid out below.
In the story, Maggie is a very down-to-earth, sensitive, gentle, and intelligent individual due to a hardship in her life. The family’s house burned down and this contributed to a limp that she will have for the rest of her life: “Have you ever seen a lame animal, perhaps a dog run over by some careless person rich enough to own a car, sidle up to someone who is ignorant enough to be kind to him? That is the way my Maggie walks. She has been like this, chin on chest, eyes on ground, feet in shuffle, ever since the fire that burned the other house to the ground” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 298). Furthermore, Maggie looks different due to the fire. Her skin is not smooth and pretty like Dee’s and therefore, she has learned to be stronger about this aspect in her life, even though she does get jealous of her sister and does wish she had Dee’s beauty: “Maggie will be nervous until after her sister goes: she will stand hopelessly in corners homely and ashamed of the burn scars down her arms and legs, eyeing her sister with a mixture of envy and awe” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 297). I have to say, in this aspect, I am like Maggie a little bit. I have a disability as well, and sometimes I can feel a little bit out of place. However, I do not feel like that every moment of the day, nor do I feel sorry for myself, as I think is the case with Maggie. Sometimes, however, there is a moment that can creep up that disabled people do wish they had the health of everyone else. This is something that I can relate to easily with Maggie. However, the one thing that I do admire about Maggie is her humble intelligence. She has a sharp, quick memory, and is something even her sister admires about her: “Aunt Dee’s first husband whittled the dash,” said Maggie so low you almost could hear her. “His name was Henry, but they called him Stash.” “Maggie’s brain is like an elephant’s,” Wangero said, laughing. As can be seen from Dee’s statement, Maggie is sharp, but does not quickly display this intelligence. It is as if Maggie thinks intelligence should not go with a disability, and therefore, she is afraid to show it. I do like how she is not a “show-off” with her sharp memory, but I wish that Maggie could have seen the gift that she had with her intelligence, and used it to open up more opportunities in her life (such as school, career, etc). However, being a shy and sensitive soul, Maggie did not even knowledge this gift and kept it to herself. Again, I like how she did not use this to act “better” than other people, but I also wish she could have seen the potential in herself and enjoyed life a little bit more. JJ One last thing that I admire about Maggie is her ability to sacrifice what she wants to make other people happy. When Dee was pouting for the quilts, trying to get Mama to give them to her, Maggie calmly came up to Mama and told her that Dee could have the quilts and that she could remember their “Grandma Dee without the quilts” (303). This piece of evidence from the story shows how self-sacrificing Maggie is – she cares about the needs and wants of others. Even though she really wanted those quilts, she was willing to let them go if she knew that her sister wanted them that badly. This is another great quality that I like about Maggie (everyone should think about what would make other people happy even if it means sacrificing your happiness for a while; I know this is a quality that is important to me and that I like to practice JJ).
Maggie’s sister, on the other hand, is the complete opposite from Maggie. She is flashy, physically beautiful, has to have the best in life, and will not take “no” for an answer. Dee speaks her mind, and it is obvious when she does not like something. In fact, as her mother points out, Dee was happy when their first house burned down because she “hated” the house: “And Dee. I see her standing off under the sweet gum tree she used to dig gum out of; a look of concentration on her face as she watched the last dingy gray board of the house fall in toward the red-hot brick chimney. Why don’t you do a dance around the ashes? I’d wanted to ask her. She had hated the house that much” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 298-299). Furthermore, Dee was what I like to call a “material girl.” She loved to have nice things and wanted them all of the time. Now, I do not have any problem with anyone wanting nice things once in a while – it is in our nature. However, I do have a problem with people who have to have nice things all of the time, and then they show absolutely no gratitude for them, especially when they know that it caused the family a huge sacrifice. I think Dee was this type of “material girl” as the following piece of evidence suggests: “Dee wanted nice things. A yellow organdy dress to wear to her graduation from high school; black pumps to match a green suit she’d made from an old suit somebody gave me. She was determined to stare down any disaster in her efforts. Her eyelids would not flicker for minutes at a time. Often I fought off the temptation to shake her. At sixteen she had a style of her own: and knew what style was” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 299). One last thing that I really do not admire about Dee is her “I will not take NO for an answer” attitude. When she was trying to persuade Mama to give her the quilts, she already acted like Mama told her she could have them: “Some of those pieces, like those lavender ones, come from old clothes her mother handed down to her,” I said, moving up to touch the quilts. Dee (Wangero) moved back just enough so that I couldn’t reach the quilts. They already belonged to her” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 302). However, when Mama told her that she promised those quilts to Maggie, Dee became furious: “She gasped like a bee had stung her. “Maggie can’t appreciate these quilts!” she said. “She probably be backward enough to put them to everyday use.” When Mama stated that she hoped that Maggie would put them to good, everyday use, Dee became even more furious: “But they’re priceless!” she was saying now, furiously; for she has a temper. “Maggie would put them on the bed and in five years they’d be in rags. Less than that!” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 303). Dee had a horrible attitude about these quilts. She wanted her mother to give in to her, and did not even consider Maggie’s feelings for one second. That is a shame, and it is also a shame that Dee thinks that the entire world will revolve around her. I do not like these “diva” attitudes that people acquire, nor do I admire them. It is pathetic, especially when it comes to not considering the feelings of others.
After analyzing these two characters, the answer to this particular question comes very easily to me. Not only do I prefer Maggie to Dee, but I would rather be Maggie than Dee. I would not want to be Dee! I would want to be Maggie any day of the week, with disability and all. Dee’s personality shaped her character into a person that does not care about other people at all; rather, she cares only about herself. Dee wants nice things, Dee wants people to give her things, Dee will not take no for an answer. The world revolves around Dee. Dee’s attitude and personality makes it really difficult for me to imagine anyone really wanting to be like her. Maggie, on the other hand, I could imagine being like. She may have a physical disability (with her limp) and scars from the fire, but she has a sensitive, gentle personality. Maggie thinks about the feelings of other people. When Dee was pouting like a spoiled child for those quilts, Maggie told Mama that Dee could have those quilts if she wanted them. Maggie was willing to give those quilts up to make Dee happy. Maggie cares about other people. In addition to being a gentle, sensitive, caring soul, Maggie is intelligent as well. But, Maggie does not use that intelligence in a boastful manner to gain attention to herself. That is a quality that I admire, but I wish that she would use her intelligence to open up different opportunities in her life, such as school, career, etc. Maggie could, but chose not to. This is the only thing that I would change if I were to be Maggie. I would be a little bit more out-going, and would not be extremely ashamed of my disability as Maggie is. However, in compassion to Dee, I would be Maggie no questions asked. I just do not like Dee’s personality or character, and therefore, prefer Maggie and would be Maggie if I had to choose between the two characters. In the short story, “Everyday Use,” written by Alice Walker, the author presents two very female characters that showcase how personality differences can shape a person.
"Kaspar Hauser Speaks" Discussion Question #2
2) Are you intrigued by Kaspar Hauser’s story? Do you find that you want to keep reading, or are you turned off by the narrative? In your explanation, consider structure: the author uses a “frame narrative” to concretize the story (here, within the confines of a speech to a group of people). How do you think you would have responded differently were the context NOT a speech but, say, a story told from an objective, third-person narrator?
In the short story, “Kaspar Hauser Speaks,” written by Steven Millhauser, the author presents the speech of a person who has recently become “civilized” after living in a dark tower all of his life. After reading Kaspar’s story all of the way through, I have to say, yes, I was intrigued by it. It was really interesting, sad, and inspiring at the same time. It was all of these things mixed into one due to the fact that Kaspar lived in complete isolation all of his life, and then made a remarkable recovery after he placed into Professor Daumer’s care. Yes, I found that I wanted to keep reading Kaspar’s speech; I really enjoyed reading it solely from his point of view, and not anyone else’s. I wanted to keep on reading because it was interesting hearing his story about how he viewed his life in confinement compared to his new life living among people. It helped me imagine what people, like Kaspar, feel like after such a life-changing ordeal. It was quite an interesting experience reading this story. In no way was I turned off by the narrative. It was the Kaspar’s narrative that “turned me on” so of speak. I really enjoyed it.
The author of the story, “Kaspar Hauser Speaks,” uses a frame narrative to concretize the story (in this story, within the confines of a speech to a group of people). If the narrative were not a speech, but told from an objective, third-person narrator, I would have to say that I do not think I would have responded as well to this particular story. This story really lends itself to the first-person point of view speech that Kaspar gives himself, and if it were told from a different point of view instead of Kaspar’s, then I do not think it would have the same effect. Kaspar is telling the audience, in his speech, about his experiences during his time of confinement, and his experiences after he was released. This makes it not only more believable, but also more personable. One experience that Kaspar tells the audience about during his speech that I found sad and interesting at the same time was when he was describing his frightening experience with the black hen: “One day I was taken for a walk in the streets, in the company of two policemen. Suddenly a black thing came toward me, a shaking black thing. Terror seized me, I tried to run away. Only later, much later, could I be made to understand that I had seen a black hen” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 1087). This particular experience with the hen could only be recounted in Kaspar’s words. Only he could recount to the audience what terror he felt at that particular moment when the hen ran towards him – this could not be told from a third person point of view. Another experience that could only be recounted to the audience in Kaspar’s own words was his progress after he left the confinement of the dark tower: “Within three months I had learned to speak, to write, to understand the difference between things that are alive, like cats, and things that only appear to be alive, like paper blown by the wind. The ball didn’t roll along by itself whenever it wanted to: this too I learned, with difficulty. Who had cut the leaves into their shapes? Why did the horse on the wall not run away? Professor Daumer was very patient. I felt bursts of power and curiosity, followed always by a fall into melancholy, as I became more deeply aware of the big hole in my life” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 1088). I realize that Professor Daumer or even Professor Daumer’s family could have recounted these experiences in different ways as well, but it would not be the same because it is important to note how Kaspar felt during this amazing time of development for him. Only Kaspar, and Kaspar alone, could recount how he felt during this particular time in his life. Therefore, considering these things, the story would not have been the same for me if it were not in the speech form, and written in an objective, third-person narrative. This particular story, in my opinion, has to be written from the perspective of the person who went through the actual experiences – in this case, Kaspar Hauser himself.
In the short story, “Kaspar Hauser Speaks,” written by Steven Millhauser, the author presents the speech of a person who has recently become “civilized” after living in confinement for the majority of his natural life.
In the short story, “Kaspar Hauser Speaks,” written by Steven Millhauser, the author presents the speech of a person who has recently become “civilized” after living in a dark tower all of his life. After reading Kaspar’s story all of the way through, I have to say, yes, I was intrigued by it. It was really interesting, sad, and inspiring at the same time. It was all of these things mixed into one due to the fact that Kaspar lived in complete isolation all of his life, and then made a remarkable recovery after he placed into Professor Daumer’s care. Yes, I found that I wanted to keep reading Kaspar’s speech; I really enjoyed reading it solely from his point of view, and not anyone else’s. I wanted to keep on reading because it was interesting hearing his story about how he viewed his life in confinement compared to his new life living among people. It helped me imagine what people, like Kaspar, feel like after such a life-changing ordeal. It was quite an interesting experience reading this story. In no way was I turned off by the narrative. It was the Kaspar’s narrative that “turned me on” so of speak. I really enjoyed it.
The author of the story, “Kaspar Hauser Speaks,” uses a frame narrative to concretize the story (in this story, within the confines of a speech to a group of people). If the narrative were not a speech, but told from an objective, third-person narrator, I would have to say that I do not think I would have responded as well to this particular story. This story really lends itself to the first-person point of view speech that Kaspar gives himself, and if it were told from a different point of view instead of Kaspar’s, then I do not think it would have the same effect. Kaspar is telling the audience, in his speech, about his experiences during his time of confinement, and his experiences after he was released. This makes it not only more believable, but also more personable. One experience that Kaspar tells the audience about during his speech that I found sad and interesting at the same time was when he was describing his frightening experience with the black hen: “One day I was taken for a walk in the streets, in the company of two policemen. Suddenly a black thing came toward me, a shaking black thing. Terror seized me, I tried to run away. Only later, much later, could I be made to understand that I had seen a black hen” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 1087). This particular experience with the hen could only be recounted in Kaspar’s words. Only he could recount to the audience what terror he felt at that particular moment when the hen ran towards him – this could not be told from a third person point of view. Another experience that could only be recounted to the audience in Kaspar’s own words was his progress after he left the confinement of the dark tower: “Within three months I had learned to speak, to write, to understand the difference between things that are alive, like cats, and things that only appear to be alive, like paper blown by the wind. The ball didn’t roll along by itself whenever it wanted to: this too I learned, with difficulty. Who had cut the leaves into their shapes? Why did the horse on the wall not run away? Professor Daumer was very patient. I felt bursts of power and curiosity, followed always by a fall into melancholy, as I became more deeply aware of the big hole in my life” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 1088). I realize that Professor Daumer or even Professor Daumer’s family could have recounted these experiences in different ways as well, but it would not be the same because it is important to note how Kaspar felt during this amazing time of development for him. Only Kaspar, and Kaspar alone, could recount how he felt during this particular time in his life. Therefore, considering these things, the story would not have been the same for me if it were not in the speech form, and written in an objective, third-person narrative. This particular story, in my opinion, has to be written from the perspective of the person who went through the actual experiences – in this case, Kaspar Hauser himself.
In the short story, “Kaspar Hauser Speaks,” written by Steven Millhauser, the author presents the speech of a person who has recently become “civilized” after living in confinement for the majority of his natural life.
No comments:
Post a Comment