Week of 11/1 - LAST BLOG!! :-)

English 103

The LAST BLOG!

Hello Everyone,

I am sorry I am posting this so late. I got a little bit extra time due to my skin breakout, and with my illness going on. I finally got it done! (Sorry it took so long, Professor Bolaski, and thanks again for the extra time. :-) ). Enjoy everyone, and have a blessed week!

Sincerely,

Jillian

1) The poem seems to merely narrate a sequence of events, but is there an implicit argument here? Should the writer have been more explicit?
In the poem, “First They Came for the Jews,” written by Martin Niemoller, the poem seems to merely narrate a sequence of events, but there is an implicit argument embedded in the poem. The implicit argument that Niemoller sends to his readers is that in wartime, all people are subject to death and destruction and people should do something – anything – to stop it. If they do not, they are helping to kill the millions of innocent people just like the enemy is. Niemoller makes this evident throughout the poem when he discusses who the Nazis came for: “First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 1012). As the author demonstrates through these few, simple, but very powerful lines, he could have been the person that spoke out to help save some of these people. But, since he was not included in their particular “group” he did nothing to help. He was not interested – he may have felt a little bit of sympathy for the persecuted group, but not enough to actually help out. However, when he was the persecuted “group” he wanted someone to care and speak up for him, and help him out, but no one did: “Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 1012). This poem may have been short, but it was very powerful due to the implicit argument that was contained within it. Niemoller wants his readers to know that it is wrong to be silent when mass murdering of millions of innocent people is going on, and that if there is anything that can be done on your end to help out – no matter how small – then you should attempt to do it. If the flood is not tamed and a dam is created to stop the destructive waters, then the waters will kill. Niemoller points out that the same thing goes for people – people can be highly destructive to each other, especially if hatred is involved. If other people do nothing to stop this utter destruction, then it can result in the death of millions of people. Niemoller points out that it is important for people to speak up for others, especially if they cannot speak up for themselves. Not only will this action save other peoples’ lives, but it could potentially save the speaker’s life as well.
No, Niemoller did not have to explicitly state his message in his poem. Almost all writers never “explicitly” state their central message or theme in their poems, novels, or short stories. Rather, they “implicitly” state their central message or theme to their readers – that is, it is a message that is evident by the reading and it not just outright stated at the end of the given selection. I would have to say, that would be a little be strange to read something, and then at the end of the reading, the author comes clean in a few paragraphs and states exactly what they wanted the readers to know about the central message or theme of the given selection. I have not come across anything like that as of yet. Therefore, I am glad that Niemoller kept the literary “tradition” going and did not just come out and state the given central message of his poem. I think that it is important to make the readers ponder a little bit about the selection they just read. It is not only good for a reader’s analytical and comprehension skills, but also to help them see that life does not just “explicitly” give out its answers to people’s questions; rather, life works more implicitly, like authors do. 
In the poem, “First They Came for the Jews,” written by Martin Niemoller, the author of the poem seems to narrate a sequence of events in poem; however, there is an important explicit argument embedded into it. Furthermore, Niemoller did not have to be more implicit in his argument as writers usually are not, and they like to leave readers pondering the important message of their pieces.

2) Are we made to feel sympathetic toward Mirabella? But not toward Jeanette? If so, what does that suggest about the author’s point of view regarding the education of the “girls raised by wolves?”
In the short story, “St. Lucy’s Home for Girls Raised by Wolves,” written by Karen Russell, the author writes an interesting piece about girls that are brought in to a Catholic school in order to be “reformed” from their wild ways. These girls were not orphans or outcasts in human society – they lived out in the wild, and lived liked wild animals. They acted like wild wolves, and did not know how to act like humans. Therefore, they were brought into this school to be taught how to act like their own species. All of the girls that were brought in adapted at different speeds, but they all eventually learned how to speak, eat, and dress properly like normal civilized girls –all except Mirabella. She did not want to adapt to the new ways of her new home – she fought against the system and wanted to just be herself. This happens quite a few times throughout the story, and the other girls start to treat her like an outsider. Because Russell creates these characters to act this way towards Mirabella, the readers cannot help but to feel sympathetic toward her because she is struggling, and because of her childlike innocence. The narrator of the story, Claudette, talks about when Sister Josephine paired her up with Mirabella to feed the ducks, and the disgust she felt at that moment when this happened to her: “It wasn’t fair. They knew Mirabella couldn’t make bread balls yet. She couldn’t even undo the twist tie of the bag. She was sure to eat the birds: Mirabella didn’t even try to curb her desire to kill things – and then who would get blamed for the dark spots of duck blood on our Peter Pan collars? Who would get penalized with negative Skill Points? Exactly” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 1078). As can be seen from the excerpt from the story, Claudette, the narrator of the story, is thoroughly irritated at Mirabella because the ways she acts affects the entire group of girls. They all get punished for Mirabella’s irresponsible actions, and because of this, her own “family” has even thrown her out of the pack. Claudette further explains Mirabella’s refusal to become a “human” in this new environment, and how Mirabella continues to act like an animal: “She’d go bounding around, gleefully spraying on their gilded statue of St. Lucy, mad-scratching at the virulent fleas that survived all of their powders and baths. At Sister Maria’s tearful insistence, she’d stand upright for roll call, her knobby, oddly muscled legs quivering from the effort. Then she’d collapse right back to the ground with an ecstatic oomph! She was still loping around on all fours (which the nuns had taught us to see looked unnatural and ridiculous – we could barely believe it now, the shame of it, that we used to locomote like that!), her fists blue-white from the strain” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 1077). Mirabella is the only one of the girls that refused to act like a civilized human girl – she did not seem to understand why she had to change her ways. The reader can see how the other girls could become irritated with Mirabella because her actions affected the entire group; however, it is very easy to feel sympathetic toward Mirabella as well. She became an outcast in this strange place – not because the Nuns made her one, but because her own “family,” the group of girls that she lived with all her life, made her one. They became disgusted with her, and did not want anything to do with her because she would act like a regular human. The reader cannot help but to be sympathetic towards Mirabella – she has become alone in a strange world and her only “relatives” have deserted her. It is quite sad, indeed, but I do believe that this was Russell’s intention when she was writing this short story. And, it was interesting to see how an author’s way of writing can affect their readers to this extent.
The readers of this particular short story were made to feel sympathetic towards Mirabella, but not towards Jeanette. Jeanette was the “alpha” male of the group, and she was also the smartest one. She was the first one to learn everything – from reading, dancing, and speaking – and impressed the Nuns at her rate of progress. The group of girls did hate Jeanette because of her progress, but they hated Mirabella more because she made them look bad and would get them in trouble if she was around them. As stated before, Jeanette was very intelligent and learned everything quickly: “Jeanette was the first among us to apologize; to drink apple juice out of a sippy cup; to quit eyeballing the cleric’s jugular in a disconcerting fashion. She curled her lips back into a cousin of a smile as the traveling barber cut her pelt into bangs” (qtd. in Schilb and Clifford 1077). The entire pack of girls knew that Jeanette was the most successful of the bunch – as Claudette stated in the story, they hated her for her high intelligence, but they did not hate her so much that they made her an outcast of the group. Even though the group of girls hated that Jeanette was intelligent, they all knew that her intelligence made them look good. It was for this reason that they still included her in everything they did, and why the reader does not feel as sympathetic towards Jeanette as we do for Mirabella. Again, it is interesting to analyze the effect that Russell’s particular way of writing has on her readers.
Because readers are made to feel sympathetic towards Mirabella and not Jeanette, this suggests that the author’s point of view regarding the education of the “girls raised by wolves,” is one of split opinion. Russell is showing how the education of these girls is tough, and what it can do to them. If they do not learn to become “civilized,” and if they get punished for not acting like humans, then these girls will start to turn on each other. They want to please their elders, but they know they cannot do this if there are members of their pack that are hindering their progress. However, on the other hand, Russell shows how educating these girls who have lived all of their lives in the wild are a good thing as well. If they learn to act like their own species, then they can live in a human society and have a chance at a better future than what they had before, living like a wild animal – naked and trying to find food. After reading this story, it was easy to decipher that the author had this split point of view about educating girls raised by wolves. It is not a subject that has the perfect answer to, and it could cause a lot of controversy as people could have a variety of opinions on the matter. As can be seen from the story, author had two different points of views, as shown through Mirabella and Jeanette.
In the short story, “St. Lucy’s Home for Girls Raised by Wolves,” the readers of Karen Russell’s story are made to feel sympathetic towards Mirabella, but not Jeanette, and because of this, it clearly shows that the author had two different opinions regarding the education of the “girls raised by wolves.”