“Mystory” Project Proposal

1. Particular Identity 

2. I will be exploring the identity of someone involved directly with the economy (stock broker, economist, as broad as a business man), specifically during the time of the 1982 stock market crash. This identity hits close to home for me, as I am a economics major. I will be speaking for someone who experienced the birth of Reaganomics (neologism), and the “me culture.”

3. Many regard Reaganomics as something that helped the US surpass the Russians in many aspects (made our nation stronger) and therefore ended the cold war peacefully. Created a culture in which it was “easy” to gain huge amounts of money in a very short amount of time (the “american dream” as discussed in class). 

4. Although a time when many people got rich, this era was one in which minorities (common man) is forgotten and left to deal on his own. There is also a transition from the “love” culture of 60’s and 70’s to the “me” culture that dominated the 80’s and has ever since. Something good for very few, but detrimental to many. 

5. Because of the huge influx of wealth to the powerful during this time, people seem to forget the very selfish attitude that dominated these times; selling out your neighbor for a buck. People also seem to be blind to the connection of that mentality to the 1982 stock market crash (perhaps because it was only for a couple days), and the dire economic situation we are in.

6. I will be using poetics to point out the general shift in attitude of the country from the 1970’s into the 80’s and present day. Images of people deserting one another. The notion of moving towards a greater good but sacrificing anyone and everything to get there. The shift in architecture (birth of prefab buildings, and housing). 

7. Possible historical figures, or better yet an interaction of historical figures, would be one between Reagan and McCarthy. One changed us financially, the other socially, but both instilled a “fear” and the belief of one’s self over there neighbor, yet both considered patriotic.

8. The one thing I’m struggling with is whether I should explore the identity of a banker/economist/stock broker (someone blind to the change in attitude) or a “common person” who experiences the brunt of said shift. However in both I feel like I might struggle with reiterating ideas/notions that we have already exhausted in class.

Roth’s “Formula”

As we have been discussing all term, authors are able to have the strongest affect when they meet the reader in an opaque, disembodied space in which only the concept/notion/expression exists. Although Roth manipulates/fabricates the “historical” events in the novel, his ability to reach that “space” is grounded in his allusions to actual concrete  historical events. The similarities and connections between made up and real events make for the most powerful statements. For example, when the Roth family is being relocated, it is a very basic and obvious allusion the relocation of Jews in Nazi Germany. However, once the main character begins a tangent on the image of New Jersey looking like an Indian headdress, the notion/concept that Roth is expressing becomes even stronger. The relocation of Native Americans is maybe the single most influential event in defining the the identity of this country. The combination of the two real historical events, with the “made up” relocation of the Roth’s transports the reader and the author to an oblique space where a very abstract concept is expressed.

Roth Response Parts I and II

Part I

In Philip Roth’s, The Plot Against America, the combination of the historicity and manipulation of historical events within the text cause the novel to function as an antidote to myths that are at the very core of American ideals. Often Roth’s abstract/paradoxical sentiments are grounded in unedited, concrete historical events. One myth that many Americans buy into during times of war is a “holier than thou” sentiment. There is no ignoring/denying the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany, however many of us do not realize that we are condemning a nation for carrying out very similar actions that have already happened on American soil. The reader receives this notion when the narrator goes to his Aunt Evelyn’s office and he sees a map of the US. He is going into the office to argue that his family should not be sent to Kentucky, when he is struck by the uncanny resemblance of New Jersey’s borders to an, “Indian’s feathered headdress.” The disruption of the text, and the captivating affect the map has on the narrator, makes it very hard to ignore Roth’s intentions to draw similarities between the family’s relocation and to the relocation of the Native Americans that happened 200 years prior. The sentiment created through this scene is paradoxical to myth of American innocence and righteousness that so many of us buy into. Roth’s ability to reach the reader through an oblique space with the use of concrete historical events grounded in America’s identity drive home its function as an antidote the myths that we justify many of our actions and beliefs with. Interconnectivity is a concept that we have explored many times in our class, and it is a notion that is explored by Roth. This concept is expired when Roth imagines Highway 22 extending out beyond his neighborhood, beyond New Jersey state lines, and as we saw in class all the way out to Kentucky. Roth imagines all of the violence in the east, spreading all across the country. Once again Roth’s use of (this time literally) concrete images, to reach an idea that is very abstract makes the notion expressed that much more relevant. Roth analyzes the myth that we are all separate, and in this case, the US is separate from the rest of the world. The fact that Roth uses a road, the very thing that connects us all, speaks to the notion that such atrocities as those in Nazi Germany could really happen anywhere.

 

Part II

The success of this novel’s ability to function as a “para – doxa” work is grounded in the power of the images created by Roth, and the manner in which they are presented. As I wrote in Part I, the power of the images in this novel come from Roth’s ability to use very concrete/historical events to make a point that is very abstract. When we examine the scene with the map of New Jersey that looks like an Indian headdress we see Roth employ two major techniques: 1. The disruption of text (main character going very in depth about image of NJ) 2. Reaching the reader in an oblique space through the use of concrete events. In addition to this Roth, also picks an event (relocation of Native Americans) that played one of the biggest roles in shaping this country’s identity. All of these elements work toward Roth’s work to function as a “para doxa” text.

Homogenization

One of our tasks starting from the first day of class was to not generalize concepts, but rather to look at the world very objectively with a critical eye. Although this is a productive, active way of look at the world, after reading “The Plot Against America” the idea of homogeneity does not seem so negative. This notion comes from the fact that most of the conflict seems to come from labeling/categorizing/separating people. In the most recent reading the idea of the fiancee being simply a label, and the woman never being able to live up to said label. Additionally we see a fight between Alvin and the father simply because of the idea of judaism and separation that it causes. Perhaps the key is to combine the two ideas: to notice the small differences between us, but to also recognize that perhaps we all just really aren’t that different.

response 4 part II

Throughout George’s response we see many images/instances in which the main character is not in control or is being dragged along against his will. When the main character is driving to work, he is not looking forward, or even paying attention, its as though he’s being carried by the current of cars, similar to a passenger down the river that is next to him. From these images we get the feeling or sentiment of life surrounding us, instead of us controlling it. At the end of the story, the main character sees a fire off in the distance that is being kept at bay by a river, similar the flame that seems to be burning inside of him. 

my attempt at prose…ehhhh

When he woke up that morning, or whenever it was, something was different. He could not put his finger on it though. Finally, he opened his eyes and began to understand why he felt so different. He could not remember his name, but it did not matter, he was on his own, but connected to everything at the same time. In reality, there is no way to describe the way he felt, because he was in a different place, a different state of mind that none of us could understand. There is no correct state of being that truly explains his state, for he began to see the world with no time; he was no longer a slave to time. He did not know how to react at first. Was he alone? Was he stuck like this forever? Did forever even matter anymore? As he began to get his wits about him, he realized that maybe this was not so bad. Time and life no longer surrounded him; he was outside of it, looking in. He surrounded time and life; they were at his mercy now. Although he had never actually had an image in his head of what something like this would be like, it was still somehow “different.” For one, time was not in a straight never ending line, nor was a blind Goddess weaving time and life in an endless quilt like the Greeks had imagined it.  Instead, what he was seeing, was not a line or shape at all. Instead, the “object” he saw in front of him twisted and turned, and overlapped itself. In fact, some places were “thicker” than others, as though one “time” had in fact occurred in greater frequency than others. The “object” had segments that were constantly moving, morphing, and connecting themselves to different parts of the “object.” It made it so this shape, object (or whatever it was) was indescribable and inexplicable. There would be no way that he could tell his friends about what he saw in an accurate, explicit way. As this notion crept inside his head, it occurred to him that maybe he should try to visit his “time” and experience it in a way that he never had before. As he walked in/around/through time, he began to understand that this was going to be a lot harder than he first imagined. However, he began to noises and sounds coming from the object. He searched until he heard familiar sounds. He heard the president talking about imminent attacks and national security. He recognized the fear. It had to be from the Cold War time, where he was from. However the “spot” on the object that he had reached, was in fact one of the “thickest” parts of the object, as though his life/his world had happened hundreds of time, and would continue to exist in the future. Somehow he entered the object at this point. It took him a second to get his surroundings, but once he did he realized that he was in central park. However, the style had changed while he was “away.” Men’s clothes were much baggier, and women’s clothing had moved in the other direction. It was much tighter and revealing. He looked for something that was familiar to him. Off in the distance he saw a tower emitting smoke signals for others to see. All of the sudden the second tower began smoking two. He decided that he had in fact gone back in time or was in a parallel universe, for no one had used smoke signals for centuries. With this he miraculously disconnected himself again, and went in search of his own time again.

Poetry and Such Response

In this past week of class, the style of “literature” we are reading changed significantly, in concurrence with this change we, the readers, have had to change our mode of reading (critical eye).  While our readings in Cold War contained much more straightforward, concrete information, the poetry we have read in class relies much more on images/vehicles/figures through which a certain sentiment or feeling is expressed. As we learned, the latter mode of writing is known as figurative expression. Although such a style of writing would seem hard to find in a biographical writing style such as Lowell’s, he implements images/vehicles gracefully and subtly into some of his poems to express a sentiment that may be very close to his heart. An example of Lowell’s use of this style comes in his poem, “The Quaker Graveyard in Nantucket.” Although the poem is biographical (about a cousin that died at sea), Lowell is still able to produce a sentiment/notion/tenor that is universal, through the used of such images/vehicles as captain Ahab and the Pequod.  Both of these images come from Moby Dick, a novel that explores the struggles between man and the sea. Lowell uses theses images not to call attention to the plot or story of Moby Dick, but rather to create a mood/tenor similar to his own regarding the death of the main character of the poem. Through the use of this indirect mode of writing, Lowell never implies a myth regarding the death of the sailor (death of man at sea), rather he simply leads the reader to explore or look at certain idea that exists in his head. This idea/sentiment is the gap between man’s belief in the myth of its dominion over the see and the reality of man’s actual interaction with sea/mother nature. This sentiment is hinted at before the poem even starts: “Let man have dominion over the fishes of the sea and fowls of the air and the beasts of the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon this earth“ (Genesis 1.26). Through the use of vehicles/figures, Lowell creates a tenor that allows the reader to explore feelings, rather than cornering the reader into the belief of a certain myth or consensus.

 

An example of a “consensus at work” that came from this week’s reading in Cold War is the polarizing affects nuclear technology (or lack of the US’s compared to Russia) had on the 1960 presidential election. As the reading discussed, there was a consensus/myth in America that the communist movement (specifically Russia) could take over the world at any point. Through this irrational fear of the far reaches of communism, a myth/consensus was created that Russia was winning the arms race dramatically. As we discussed school/family/pop culture help create these myths that we buy into. As we have discussed a consensus entails, and “fenced-in” style of thinking in which a certain opinion bought into. In contrast we see that figurative expression leads us into more productive thinking in which there are no opinions, or fences. Often figurative expression is used simply express a notion/or sentiment, one that often explores the gap between consensus/doxa/an ideal and reality. 

New Fear in a New World Order

One theme that we have discussed in depth as a class recently was the shift from the old world order to the new world order.  One thing that changed during this time in concurrence with the shift towards a new world order was a shift in warfare and “intelligence” for the US army.  As discussed in chapters 3 and 4 in Cold War the CIA became very prevalent during the Cold War, as we were always trying to catch a slip up by the communist forces in the world. As a result of a new style of warfare, Americans experienced a new type of fear. Although we have always been concerned for our well being, the Cold War brought on a new type of hysteria and internal paranoia that the US had not seen. The sentiment was that Communism could snatch your kids up, or secretly attack at any second. It is also no coincidence  how terms like “national security” that seemed to pop up during the Cold War are still being used today in a society in which we believe that communists  terrorists could strike at any time.

Response 2

In Flannery O’ Connor’s, “The Life You Save May Be Your Own,” we meet the character Tom T. Shiftlet, a brimming example of someone who was raised in the “old order” and has to make the transition/change into the “new order.” In particular, we see a man who is really struggling with the culture of the “new order.” There are multiple incidences in the story in which Shiftlet reminisces about the days of old, and their superiority over the “new order.” Shiftlet’s resentment of the present, and change in culture is revealed when O’Connor tells us, “…he had fought and bled in the Arm Service of his country and visited every foreign land and that everywhere he had seen people that didn’t care if they did a thing one way or another. He said he hadn’t been raised thataway.” The condition of living in this particular post WWII short story is really more concurrent with how those would have lived in the “old order” (a rural shack/farm). This shows not just Shiftlet’s inability to change with the times, but really all of the characters’ unwillingness. This living condition makes it seem like the new culture in the U.S. has really forgotten about these particular character, and the old order altogether. Shiftlet’s role as a wanderer/(hitchhiker?)/(con man?) shows the despair/loneliness of someone who is struggling with the change form the old order to the new. Shiftlet actually reminds of the main character from Jack Kerouac’s On the Road. Both characters are WWII vets and wanderers that move from place to place in a “new order” that has no place for them.

 

One concept that we have been discussing this semester is not looking for the black and white “answer” in every reading, and extending that concept from class room, every day life situations. This concept is concurrent with the idea of looking at history/life as always in “moments of flux.” However, it is our very nature to look at the world or a piece of literature, and want to categorize it, so we think we have answers about aspects of life that we do not quite understand. This is particularly true in the way we look at our history. Many of us came in to this class with my own preconceived myths regarding the cold war. When it comes to the cold war we want to look at it in a “good vs. evil/black and white” because it is easier for us to understand it that way. As we read in McMahon, the cold war was actually much more of a murky of a situation. Instead of the notion that the US were the good guys leading the world to freedom, and that the Russians wanted to destroy the world through communism, we see that both countries were just trying to lead the world in this “new order.” From situations like this it is easy to see how the gap between the constant flux nature of the world and the innate desire for humans to categorize (black and white/ bad vs. evil), gives way to historical discourse and myth. And in contrast, how pieces of non-bias literature can help us to understand these “moments of flux.”

Hello world!

Welcome to WordPress.com. This is your first post. Edit or delete it and start blogging!