For anyone still reading this

http://www.papervision3d.org/demos/panorama/

I think we all want this...

Now that it's all over...

THANK YOU, EVERYONE!!

It was fantastic having class with you all. Thanks for your patience with me! I had a great time working with you, and I hope that you all have excellent summers! Be daring! Have adventures!!

And congrats seniors!! Good luck with everything that happens after Saturday!

<3 Abby

Hi everyone!

So I just wanted to wish you all a fantastic summer AND also wanted to let you all know that I really enjoyed learning/discussing with you all! This was one of the more enjoyable classes I've taken at CSC, and I think part of that had to do with the fact that we had such a great group.


To the seniors: you guys are GREAT and I wish you nothing but the best!

-Jessy

Words of encouragement:

YOU CAN DO IT!!


Aaahhh the wisdom of being a senior.

For the final...

I know, you don't want to think about the final. It's okay. I understand.

But I'm still going to give you this "assignment."

For the final, please post your own theory about literature (reading it, writing it, studying it, whatever) that answers the "why," "what," and "how" questions. This doesn't have to be anything immense... just your ideas on it.

To start with: does the author really die with the creation of a text? Does the reader complete the text? Is Shakespeare really all that great? What do you think of the canon? Mini-canons? Alternative canons? And how does any/all of what we've talked about relate to US as individuals who study English and literature? (These are not actually questions you need to answer - just things to ponder to get your thoughts moving if you need a mental push.)

Please bring these posts (or at least the ideas) with you to the final exam on Monday so that you have some ideas to work with for the discussion (which YOU lead!).

P.S. I'm happy to drive some folks to Ann Page's... I can fit four plus me. Just let me know! :)

Shakespeare's Wit in Caliban

The quality of Caliban that I noted throughout the play is the idea that he is perceived as a monster who lacks intelligence and dignity, yet he may be one of the few characters who possesses conscience and fear. During act 4, scene 1 as Caliban, Trinculo, and Stephano are going towards the tent and their judgment is compromised by greed for the clothes, Caliban is the only one who tries to warn them to see beyond that.
He states,

“ Good lord, give me favour still.
Be patient, for the prize I’ll bring thee to
Shall hoodwink this mischance. Therefore speak softly-
All’s hushed as midnight yet” (200-205).

He continues to warn them of their foolishness, and this truly exhibits his intellect and awareness of his surroundings. He is considered the monster, but he is the one who knows how to maneuver in this situation. If we were to look at it from this perspective we could see how Shakespeare’s wit and thought process could be shown through Caliban’s words and actions.

Caliban as Shakespeare

Alright. So.

I had a hard time finding lines said by Caliban that could be interpreted as Shakespeare's own voice, because I don't know much about Shakespeare's opinions or views of the world.

I finally decided upon Caliban's plot to take Prospero's books and kill him. (3.2.87-103)

Although he is completely drunk, Caliban shows that he is a) observant and b) capable of manipulating and leading those who think otherwise (Stephano & Trinculo)

In these lines, Caliban explains that they should sneak up on Prospero during his nap and steal his books (he is useless without them). This demonstrates that Caliban is extremely observant - it reflects Shakespeare's own observation and depiction of the human race through his plays. In addition to this, it seems that Caliban is much more knowledgable about the island and how to go about defeating Prospero. In many, if not all of Shakespeare's plays, one gets a feeling that he knows much more than the audience and the characters do.

To be further discussed!!

Caliban

Act 2, Scene 2, Line 155

CALIBAN: I'll show thee the best springsl I'll pluck thee berries;
I'll fish for thee, and get thee wood enough.
A plague upon the tyrant that I serve!
I'll bear him no more sticks but follow thee,
Thou wondrous man.

TRINCULO: A most ridiculous monster - to make a wonder of a poor drunkard.

CALIBAN: I prithee, let me bring thee where crabs grow,
And I with my long nails will dig thee pignuts,
Show thee a jay's nest, and instruct thee how
To snare the nimble marmoset. I'll bring thee
To clust'ring filberts, and sometimes I'll get thee
Young scamels from the rock. Wilt thou go with me?


I'm not entirely sure I picked a completely legitimate passage...but this definitely shows the importance of nature in the play, especially when it comes to Caliban. He's a product of nature as well as being a living representation of it. I also felt that he spoke particularly beautifully and eloquently in this passage while using words pertaining to nature and its importance. He references Prospero as well in a negative light, calling him "the tyrant that I serve" (that's about Prospero, right?). These lines remind me of the conversation we had in class the other day about the importance of the knowledge Caliban possesses as opposed to the books and words Prospero values but does not necessarily understand. It's also impressive that he speaks so eloquently when drunk!

Talk about taking the good lines...

I can certainly see how Caliban reflects Shakespeare rather than Prospero, however it is very difficult now to find a good example that hasn't been shown already by Abby or Megan. So instead, my post is going to pose a question that can be discussed here or in class. Caliban's last line, in my book is listed as lines 351-354 in Act 5 Scene 1. Prospero's line to Caliban was "Go, sirrah, to my cell./Take with you your companions. As you look/To have my pardon, trim it handsomely." to which Caliban answers:

Ay, that I will, and I'l be wise hereafter
And seek for grace. What a thrice-double ass
Was I to take this drunkard for a god,
And worship this dull fool!

I know we (or at least I remember mentioning) that what seems to be Shakespeare's point is that while some people (i.e. Prospero) get their power and eloquence from books, others (i.e. Caliban) know how to speak naturally and as eloquently too. However this quote makes it sound that Caliban (a.k.a. Shakespeare) DOES have respect for those who speak "by the book" I guess you could say. In this way, Shakespeare/Caliban realizes that not all people who claim to speak well actually can, as we see with the drunkards Stephano and Trinculo. Do other people see this as I do?

Caliban Displaying Shakespeare's Voice...?

I have a feeling that this is going to end up being a long post...I can't really get around it.

This first part is for Abby. Here is another passage that I found, in which Caliban seems to be the hero and Prospero is portrayed as the villain (however, this passage does not necessarily indicate that Caliban voice is actually representative of Shakespeare's voice):

Act 3, Scene 2
Lines 46-62 in my edition of the text
Several of Caliban's lines here certainly incriminate Prospero from seemingly seizing the island from right under his nose. For example:

"As I told thee before, I am subject
to a tyrant, a sorcerer, that by his cunning hath
cheated me of the island." (46-48)

"I say by sorcery he got this isle;
From me he got it. If thy Greatness will,
Revenge it on him, for I know thou dar'st,
But this thing dare not." (59-62).

However, now that I have finished reading the play, I am not entirely convinced that Caliban is speaking for Shakespeare throughout the text. First of all, Caliban's last action in the play is tidying up Prospero's cell before his master's departure. Prospero is the one returning home. Prospero is an old man (similar to Shakespeare at this point) who reflects on his age at several points during the play. Prospero also has a significant name (sounds a lot like "prosperous" to me), and he gives up his magic during Act 5 with an lengthy speech, in which he frees Ariel from his spiritual bondage to Prospero. I connect this scene to Shakespeare giving up his reigns, so to speak. Shakespeare is giving up art/writing, which can easily be related to magic and spirtual experiences.

Also, if we take the Epilogue as a verse that was actually written by Shakespeare, Prospero is asking for applause for Shakespeare. He is also asking the audience to forgive Shakespeare for "bewitching" their minds with his art (his plays). He's making a strong statement on art's ability to invade the mind (not always in a positive way).

I'm sure I will be able to discuss this a bit more thoroughly in class tomorrow...

Spirt or Nature or Both?

Interlocking Ripples from the Pebble Throwers

As I wrote in my previous entry, I am a firm believer in the triangle of discourse that is created between the reader, the writer, and the text. My image of the canon is one that includes all three of these subjects. The pebble thrower is the author, launching his texts (the pebbles) into the water (aka out into the public as published works), and the ripples that are created are the responses from readers out in the water (the great wide world). The responses from the readers can interlock like the ripples seen in this photograph because responses to texts can often be similar within a given culture, and sometimes even across cultural lines.

I think it's very interesting that many of us have chosen images that deal with water. Is it because the canon brings about visualizations that deal with fluidity, movement, and transformation?

The Canon as Tide Pools

Or maybe the canon is the ocean, and the books are the tide pools? Let's think of the endless metaphors that can be made for the canon/books with tide pools. Some are shallow, others are deep. They all contain something a little different than the others, and are able to exist independently or be connected by a small channel between rocks. When the tide comes in, however, the life of the individual tide pool coexists with the entire ocean.

I also hinted the other day that, seeing as the moon controls the timing and heights of the tides, it could be symbolic of the readers. During certain times of each lunar cycle, the tide pools might be bigger, smaller, or indistinguishable from the waves crashing into the intertidal zone. I think this could possibly represent the importance, intertextuality, and overall popularity of a book at any given time being at the mercy of the reader.

The Canon...A Jetty

The canon to me I guess is somewhat like a Jetty. It is man made to create some sort of pathway or to keep things on one side or the other. It is a solid structure where the larger rocks are in the center while the smaller ones surround it. To me the larger rocks are the “classics” that are the core of the canon/ Jetty, while the smaller rocks are the newer books, added on more recently. Although a jetty is a solid structure it does still have the ability to be warn away by that thrashing of the waves. I guess in the world of literature the waves could be equated to the critics.
If the person in charge of land preservation chooses they can bring in new rocks to either strengthen the structure or expand. In that, they may need to remove rocks that have been deteriorated. We see in the canon that new literature is brought in and often something else needs to be removed. Much like the Jetty the cycle goes on and on.

The Canon & The Personal Canon...an image

The books on the very top are those belonging in THE CANON...staring down their spines at the easy-to-reach books, which represent one's personal canon - read more often, loved and worn. That's not to say books in the Canon aren't worthy of love...

How Do We Read?

"Mechanically, we read letter by letter. Recognizing the words and giving them meaning is a natural (yet often unappreciated) method to reading. Once each individual definition construes itself into a comprehensible sentence, we ask again what it means. Reading is a process of sorting and understanding, observing and analyzing. Everything we read is a code to be cracked and we are breaking and entering into the treasure locked up behind symbols we call the alphabet."

So I know that most people on the card wrote about "How Do I Read" and not "How Do We Read" but I felt that it was harder to actually generalize for everyone, so I tried it. Personally, I read to be inspired (ah, my favorite word!) because as a writer, I am looking for ideas to write about all the time. Because nothing is really an original thought or idea, I have to read and observe all sources around me for inspiration. I noticed that most of the students in class wrote about reading as a woman, which did interest me. Honestly, I don't know how much my gender plays in my reading, unless it's just my own experiences I can bring to the table when confronted with women or female figures in the texts I read. If I had to say one thing about "How Do I Read" I would probably say that I read with the same passion that both of my parents read with.

A Look at the Canon

I finally chose this particular collage by Valerie Mankoff called "Shane's Reverie." What I was looking for was a good image that showed transparency and texture, which I feel that this particular one does. As we see, there are many layers and different parts to the piece as a whole. There are blends of photographs, paints, texts, and other contributions. Though different from each other, together it creates a larger picture that one can appreciate. One might enjoy the colors more, and someone else might enjoy the use of the pictures more, but all observers are still looking at the same collage. Same with the canon, one can look at it from a distance and find some texts they may prefer more than others, while someone else can get a completely different reaction.

!!!

explanation to follow . . .

Okay, so I felt like I didn't explain my image in class today very well, but here is a pretty good picture that I think illustrates what I was trying to say. There is the canon in the beginning and as time continues and there are more works to choose from, the canon can branch off of itself, constantly weaving in with other texts and branching off of those, etc., etc., etc. I see the canon as fluid and everchanging, always morphing, but keeping the same quality throughout.

canonical ideas

I suppose if I had to explain the way I view the canon as an image or metaphor, I'd describe it as a spider's web. The web in its entirety would be the complete canon with all its different qualifications (different periods to different cultures), and each individual strand or section would make up the various smaller canons, such as the Colby-Sawyer canon or the American canon.

Continuing with the web theme, one may also get "stuck" in it (the idea of the canon), especially if that person is a student of Harold Bloom! (just an example...)

Alan Purves "Telling Our Story about Teaching Literature"

A bit late, but it's the 100th post!

One of the first things that stuck out to me in Alan Purves essay “Telling Our Story about Teaching Literature” was his list of terms with notes as to what he personally believed. He states that “that dubious breed called researchers or experts toss around terms like ‘reader response’ (a good thing), ‘New Criticism’ (a bad thing), ‘multiculturalism’ (good), ‘canon’ (bad), ‘social construction of’ (good), and ‘teacher-centered’ (bad).” (211) I personally agree with the terms that Purves considers “bad” as far as the terms used in relation to literature, but a lot of that is because of what we are expected to go beyond constraints that New Criticism, canons, and teacher-centered styles of teaching provide. I believe that what we need to teach our kids is to go beyond what we hand them as literature.

Purves argues that “all media should be at the heart of our literature classes.” (215) This is important in the classroom because many students learn through different styles and by presenting other forms of literature, there’s a wider net cast to catch students. People forget that films, comics, plays, and other visuals are considered literature because of it’s original form in a script or within panels of illustrations.

The last thought that Purves presents to us is the thought that “if we remain as antagonistic to the media as people like Neil Postman would have us be, we will lose our true end of helping students be disciplined reflective and refractive human beings. That practice will be lost for all but a very small number indeed. I think this would be a great loss, for it seems to me that we would then be giving in to the forces of materialism, instant gratification, and narcissism—surrendering to the culture of the mall and the huckster.” (218) This idea is intriguing as a future educator where my students will reflect me as a teacher. If they cannot interpret texts by texts alone, then my image is impacted. Education is a living being that mutates and shifts over time, and so teachers need to be willing to evolve and adjust their curriculum to the students in ways they can learn.

Nesting bubbles? Multi-oversouls?

So, I don't know what to call it... but it's my theory of the canon.

I believe that there are many concurrent canons at any given time, and that these canons shift (by age of reader, by location, by occupation, by region, by language, and so forth) and overlap. I believe that outside of, for instance, the Writing about Literature bubble there is a slightly bigger bubble - the CSC canon bubble. Outside of that, the New London bubble. Then the NH bubble, the NE bubble, the USA bubble, the world bubble, the universe bubble (okay, maybe not the last one...), if you catch my meaning. And every person within any of the smallest bubbles (i.e., the Writing about Lit bubble) is also a part of each bubble that is slightly bigger outside of that, and each person who is in the smallest level of bubble is just as equally in touch with the larger bubbles if they want to be. Some people probably have no desire to leave their tiniest bubbles, while other people may have no desire to be anywhere but the largest bubble... but my point is that they all exist simultaneously.

In addition, when a work stays in one level of bubble for long enough it moves on to the next biggest level of bubble, and may continue to do so until it reaches the biggest bubble, which is the THE canon.

Make any sense? I hope so.

Roving sentient bubbles? Haha.

A Visual Representation of the Canon...Sort of!

All right, so...I'm not sure if this is the best metaphor in the world, but I'm going to share it any way.

Abby's comment about the flying saucer and how canonical literature seems to permeate out from a local area to a wider and wider audience, until it becomes meaningful to an audience that stretches across various races, cultures, countries, both genders, etc. The image that I would like to relate to the canon is that of a hand full of individuals standing on the shore of a huge lake throwing pebbles into the water. The ripples that these pebble-throwers create represent the layers that exist in terms of audiences. However, the ripples created from the pebble-throwers overlap from time to time, effecting the same audiences and groups of individuals. Oh, and these pebble-throwers are eternal beings (well, some are). These pebble-throwers are at work until a piece of literature is removed from the canon. Then, that pebble-thrower begins to evaporate into thin air until he/she is completely gone and the text has been virtually forgotten.

Yup. That is not a very great representation haha. Just goes to show that the canon is an abstract beast that is really difficult to nail down. I'm going to try and explain this better tomorrow in class. :)

-Megan R.

janice radway - introduction to A Feeling For Books

What books have you read, that seriously impacted your perspective of the world, but might be considered as middle or low brow literature?


What is it about these specific works, that maintains your loyalty to them?

Harold Bloom: Elegiac Conclusion

I believe that Harold Bloom is at his obstinately pompous best in this essay, sometimes its difficult to make it through one paragraph just to get to his next. He speaks of literature today vs. the canonical literature of yesterday. He does mention some good points: the fact that literature has too many things to compete against in today's world, his worry about literary studies having a future, and the loss of some worthwhile texts being taught in school because of a lack of audience.

However, it is his obstinacy in maintaining that the only truly great works were written by Milton, Chaucer, Dante and yes, of course, Shakespeare. Ok, got it, they did do some great work but others that came after them have done some remarkable pieces as well. It isn't fair to discount someone's work for the singular reason that their last name isn't Dante. As for the lenses that we spoke of last class, Bloom doesn't even consider the issue worthwhile.

"The idea that you benefit the insulted and injured [race, class, gender, etc.] by reading some of their own origins rather than reading Shakespeare is one of the oddest illusions ever promoted by or in our schools." pg. 229

So, can it be one or the other? Does it have to be? By gaining pieces of modern literature are we forced to give up some of the traditional canonical works? Are we as readers ultimately gaining or losing? I don't believe its really a question in our class any longer but should works by the "insulted and injured" be included? And for what reason? Do they have something to share that the "dead white guys" didn't?

The Politics of Knowledge - Edward W. Said

In Edward W. Said's essay "The Politics of Knowledge," he discusses imperialism and global and modern culture. He references Yeats as a non-Western writer and activist, which I was surprised by because I guess when I think of Western writers I always assumed that meant the US and Western Europe...

Anyway, the essay focuses on the "dead white European males," and is in part a response to another paper Said wrote, which was attacked. The attacker (or critic) was a female African American history professor who called attention to the presence of white Western males and the lack of "African American, Arab, and Indian writers." Said addresses this, saying his paper focuses on European imperialism, but that he did address the response and effect of imperialism all over the globe.

Said also addresses identity and cultural differences, stating that different cultures produce different ways of thinking among people. Said then moves from the theoretical approach and touches briefly on the relationship between the United States and Iraq - his basic argument is that theory and actuality are interconnected, and cultures and thought overlap.

This leads me back to our class discussion last Thursday - do we need African Lit, Women in Lit, Native American Lit? Or do we then need to have Men in Lit, Urban Lit, Rural Lit? How many subcategories can we break down, or should we just have general Literature classes where the professors choose what they wish to teach? Does that extinguish the need for a canon, or even just the existence of one? Does every culture that produces literature deserve to have a special class, genre, or study dedicated specifically and solitarily on JUST literature from within that group or race? ...Or is that going too far? I haven't completely made up my mind on the issue...thoughts?

Edward W. Said - "The Politics of Knowledge"

Said on effectively bringing attention to works by living, non-white/male authors:

"What I am talking about therefore is the opposite of separatism, and aslo the reverse of exclusicism. It is only through the scrutiny of these works as literature, as style, as pleasure and illumination, that they can be brought in, so to speak, and kept in. Other wise they will be regarded only as informative ethnographic specimens, suitable for the limited attention of experts and area specialists," (196).

Throughout his essay, Said addresses the issue of fairly acknowledging nationalism and the literature that results from it while still maintaining a "worldy" stance.

Based on the quote above, my question to the class is:
Do you think it's possible for us to evaluate non-western/dead male literature from a neutral standpoint?

(What I mean is, have we made such a huge deal out of including and acknowledging other nation's literature that we have labeled it as african, chinese, portugese, (etc) literature? Why not take off the prefixes and labels and just call it LITERATURE?)


I can clarify my question in class tomorrow, because I think it is a really important idea to consider -but right now my brain is currently mush due to Tylenol Cold medicine.

Alan Purves " Telling Our Story About Teaching Literature"

In reading Alan Purves essay, Telling Our Story about Teaching Literature, I could not help finding myself agreeing greatly with his views. In his essay he discusses his theory on teaching literature to students and the proper way to go about it. He begins by asserting that many educators find themselves assigning reading with the intent that students will truly love the text and find they are completely engrossed in it. He states that becoming absorbed in a text is not something that can be taught, but rather a miracle that happens by chance. We need to educate in a way that looks at all aspects of literature and only then we can only hope that students take in the text.

He explains “ The kind of readers and viewers we hope to create are those who will work at the text or film and take pleasure in the intellectual play of working with it, and then will take this experience with them and play with other texts or images, getting pleasure not simply from the experiences of reading and viewing but from the thinking and talking that go with school” (212).

The idea of literature is portrayed in this essay as a game where students are reared to look at it in a specific way. He claims that many educators feel that learning literature should not be fun, but disciplined. He finds this to be the exact opposite. He knows that students all learn differently and need to be exposed to numerous types of literature. Whether it is a film, comic strip, or a book, students need to be taught to look at it from all angles to make it truly worth while.

Purves says, “ We strive to help students toward that larger and older perspective, to come to a particular understanding of themselves and their past, to enter that broader world that is defined as literate” (215).

I know that I want to be an educator and through practice I have found that I want my students to use different lenses to look at the world. Sometimes the most effective ways of teaching are unconventional and you need to teach your students to look past the lines on a page. They need to see what the literature is worth, and what it can do for them.

Hating Harold Bloom? Not as much as usual...

Usually, I cannot stand reading a single word from Bloom because he is such an egotistical, pompous ass, but for some reason (maybe it's the cynical mood that I'm in) the essay entitled, "Elegiac Confusion," had some pretty solid points. Granted, I was still infuriated at him for his disregard of the "hegemonic lenses" that we discussed in class on Thursday. However, I think that his point about the disolution of English as a course of study in higher education is actually sensible and made me agree wit him for perhaps the first time in my life.

"English and related departments have always been unable to define themselves and unwise enough to swallow up everything that seems available for ingestion" (227).

"The morality of scholarship, as currently practiced, is to encourage everyone to replace difficult pleasures by pleasures universally accessible precisely because they are easier (Ex. Creating shields and swords in class, instead of reading Julius Caesar)" (227).

"...Only a few handfuls of students now enter Yale with an authentic passion for reading. You cannot teach someone to love great poetry it they come to you without such love..." (226).

Bloom argues that not enough scholars are entering college with a passion for reading because "cultural studies" is taking over the English classroom (along with cheesy art projects as described above). Students are beginning to study song lyrics, advertisements, and comics, instead of delving into the depths of classical literature. I can see the problem here. The study of literature for aspects such as form, style, and character development are disappearing and disintegrating. By only looking at literature through cultural lenses (race, class, gender, etc.), English courses cannot be self-sustainable. The realm of study moves from the internal to the external. English's transformation into "cultural studies" is actually a transformation from a humanities-based discipline to a social science-based discipline. I can see Bloom's argument here.

Do I think that is the only reason that English is dying? No, of course not. I also feel that it is important to examine literature through various anthropological lenses, BUT...not all the time. Personally, when I read, two of these lenses barely register for me at all (race and class). Gender is sort of there, chilling in the back of my mind, but really, I read for many of Bloom's reasons (ick...I hate to admit it). I often find myself becoming impressed over figurative language, stream of consciousness, and well-constructed images of abstract ideas. These are texts that I consider canonical. However, texts that can be read through hegemonic lenses can also have these qualities that compel me as well. Their Eyes Were Watching God, by Zora Neale Hurston, is a prime example. Clearly, some lenses apply here, but she's utilized beautiful and unique language in her text novel as well. What would Bloom have to say about her? God only knows. I'm willing to bet Hurston is not a part of his canon.

So...my question...finally:

Do you think that English will ultimately meet its demise and turn into a discipline labeled "Cultural Studies?" Do you think English is dying because our culture has taught us to examine texts through the various lenses we would use to analyze a comic strip, song lyrics, a film, or an advertisement? Is there a happy medium between anthropological lenses and analysis of texts based on form and style, and how can it be established?

Feminist Challenges to the Literary Canon

Lilian S. Robinson's argument in, "Treason Our Text," was particularly striking to me because the thoughts she has attached to her argument are actually thoughts that I have had about feminist criticism of the canon for a very long time. Robinson argues that feminist criticism serves two very different purposes in terms of canonical analysis. "It can emphasize alternative readings of the tradition, readings that reinterpret women's character, motivations, and actions and that identify and challenge sexist ideology. Or it can concentrate on gaining admission to the canon for literature by women writers" (155). I have heard both types of criticism over the years that I have spent chatting with my high school teachers and some college professors. In terms of my own personal beliefs, I don't think the former stance really helps anything. I am for the latter. What's the point of arguing alternative readings of canonical texts in order to point out the injustices and inequalities that exist? That seems like a passive argument to me. This method of approaching canonical reconstruction is not really allowing the woman's voice to speak.

However, us women who hope to see the canon become more female-friendly need to start considering the works of all females. Instead of constantly fighting for the inherent worth in Kate Chopin and Virginia Woolf's work, I think it is also important for us to stand true behind the works of Zora Neale Hurston and Amy Tan. Looking back at my time spent in high school, I feel as if these women were certainly ignored, and I never once heard of an English teacher bringing these great writers before the eyes and ears of curriculum committees.

Basically, Robinson argues that us women need to decide what we want in terms of redeveloping the canon. Feminist critics are fulfilling the female stereotype of indecision at this point in our history of canonical studies. We need to decide what the "female tradition" means to us. We need to decide which female writers are worth fighting for (including those who may be from different ethnic backgrounds, or those with a different sexual orientation than our own). We also need to decide if we're fighting to have the female voice heard, or just to criticize the worlds that surrounded the formation of canonical texts. "In one sense, the more coherent our sense of the female tradition is, the stronger will be our eventual case. Yet the longer we wait, the more comfortable the women's literature ghetto--separate, apparently autonomous, and far from equal--may begin to feel" (164). So let's decide exactly what it is we're arguing for, ladies!

-Meg R.

in no specific order:

Kin of Ata Are Waiting for You by Dorothy Bryant
The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brien
Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu
Jelly Beans For Breakfast by Miriam Young
The Ear, the Eye, and the Arm by Nancy Farmer
It's Here Now (Are You?) by Bhagavan Das
Orlando: A Biography by Virginia Woolf
The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho and Alan R. Clarke
Ishmael: An Adventure of the Mind and Spirit by Daniel Quinn
The Secret Life of Plants by Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird

A Change...

Howdy!

So, I decided to remove The Hours from my canon (well, at least the top ten) because the appreciation for the text is lost a bit if someone has not read Mrs. Dalloway and does not know too much about Virginia Woolf's life. I don't want to be a hypocrite, seeing as I told Jessy that Harry Potter cannot stand alone. I don't necessarily think that The Hours can't, but its meaning is heavily reliant on other texts, at least in my eyes. I am debating what should be placed on my canon in its place. Here are the three texts that I'm considering:

The Divine Comedy by Dante Alighieri
The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brian
Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger

Anyone have any input on the most deserving text of these three? Any other suggestions?

Thanks,
-Meg R.

a change.

I subbed Dubliners by James Joyce for 'Tis by Frank McCourt.

For now....

My Personal Canon - Ten Works

Okay... so, I can't really put these in any sort of order...

King Lear - William Shakespeare
Thanatopsis - William Cullen Bryant
The Age of Innocence - Edith Wharton
Mrs. Dalloway - Virginia Woolf
East of Eden - John Steinbeck
Lamb: the Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal - Christopher Moore
In Our Time - Ernest Hemingway
The God of Small Things - Arundhati Roy
Memnoch the Devil or Tale of the Body Theif - Anne Rice
Alanna - Tamora Pierce (or any other book by her...)

I'm really glad the my own personal canon can be as big as I want it to be in real life, because I could never live with just these ten works.

Taylor Mali - some videos for your enjoyment

Totally like whatever, you know?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKyIw9fs8T4

What teachers make
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxsOVK4syxU

I could be a poet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnOrrknTxbI

The the impotence of proofreading
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OonDPGwAyfQ

On girls lending pens
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44sXwJgqUyc

Like Lilly Like Wilson
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tshNfYWPlDg

The apologia of Hephaestus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JZW9HEer3o

Voice of America voiceover
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9T9bCsP7_Y4

Labeling keys
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbnQfFaxkno

These are some of the better one's out there. I'm also a big fan of "Falling In Love is Like Walking a Dog" and "Playing Scrabble with Eddie." I used to have What Learning Leaves, one of his books (first? only? not sure), signed and everything. I think it may be gone, but I'm going to try to find it, and if I do any of you are welcome to borrow it. I also had a signed copy of one of his CDs "Like Free Zone," but that too may have disappeared into the land of things that are no more. Cross your fingers.

But seriously, read "Falling In Love is Like Walking a Dog." It's wonderful. Probably one of my all time favorite works by anyone.

My Ten?

In no particular order... this was so hard to do!

The Spoon River Anthology by Edgar Lee Masters
Not Quite What I was Planning: A Collection of Six-Word Memoirs edited by Smith Magazine
A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius by Dave Eggers (Thanks Ann Page!)
1984 by George Orwell
The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini
s√he by Saul Williams
Norton Anthology of Modern and Contemporary Poetry
The Complete Book of Fairy Tales by the Brothers Grimm
Feed by M. T. Anderson
The Hours by Michael Cunningham (again, thank you Ann Page!)

Personal Canon

This was difficult.

In no particular order...

1. The Philosophy of Andy Warhol by Andy Warhol
2. Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer
3. The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Saligner
4. To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
5. Holidays on Ice by David Sedaris
6. Romeo & Juliet by William Shakespeare
7. The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald
8. Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling
9. Everything is Illuminated by Jonathan Safran Foer
10. The Secret Garden by Frances Hodgson Burnett

Personal Canon

(in no particular order)

-Angela's Ashes by Frank McCourt
-Amongst Women by John McGahern
-'Tis by Frank McCourt
-A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius by Dave Eggers
-To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee
-The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger
-Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling
-Me Talk Pretty One Day by David Sedaris
-The Bell Jar by Sylvia Plath
-Romeo & Juliet by William Shakespeare

That was hard!

My Personal Canon

My Personal Canon


1.) The Hours - Michael Cunningham
2.) To Kill A Mockingbird - Harper Lee
3.) My Sisters Keeper - Jodi Picoult
4.) The Pact- Jodi Picoult
5.) The Great Gatsby- F. Scott Fitzgerald
6.) The Color Purple- Alice Walker
7.) Yellow Raft In Blue Water - Michael Dorris
8.) Fences - August Wilson
9.) Romeo & Juliet- Shakespeare
10.) Dear John- Nicholas Sparks

The Thirteenth Tale by Diane Setterfield
Of Water and the Spirit by Malidoma Patrice Some
Angela's Ashes by Frank McCourt
Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling
The Lady by Anne McCaffrey
Leaves of Grass by Walt Whitman
Twelfth Night by William Shakespeare
Well Groomed by Fiona Walker
Nerve by Dick Francis
Song Out of Darkness:Selected Poems by Taras Shevchenko

My Own Personal Canon

Here are 10 literary works that I consider to be invaluable (please note that they are in no particular order):

-East of Eden by John Steinbeck
-Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by Jonathan Safran Foer
-Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte
-The Golden Compass by Phillip Pullman
-Portrait of an Artist as a Young Man by James Joyce
-Where the Red Fern Grows by Wilson Rawls
-A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius by Dave Eggers
-The Hours by Michael Cunningham (not to downplay the genius that is Virginia Woolf)
-A Midsummer Night's Dream by William Shakespeare
-Spoon River Anthology by Edgar Lee Masters

(And upon Noah's request, I have to write this: Green Squadron and the Relics of Power is my 11th choice!)

My justification for my own personal canon is this: a fabulous combination of contemporary works, classic works, poetry, drama, and some adolescent literature as well. I think that "canonical" works should apply to all age ranges. We should not just base our canons off of works we have studied in high school and college. There's much more out there that has brought us to where we are today (English majors!).

-Megan R.

Three Reasons and More...

I've enjoyed your Three Reasons immensely. They are to a person discerning, imaginatiave, and clearly reflective of close and thoughtful reading. We don't have to love Woolf, just take her seriously and grapple with all the ways she changed the face and shape of the novel. You have been both stout of heart and intelligent. And then add persistent. Here's what Woolf's newest biographer, Julia Brigg's writes: THE HOURS and makes a fascinating film; yet to turn back from to MRS DALLOWAY is to recognize how easy and uncontrived, but at the same time how inward, experimental and still startingly modern is this novel, written more than three quarters of a century ago.." (Virginia Woolf: An Inner Life. Julia Briggs, 2005, 158)

3 Reasons to read Virginia Woolf

1. A complex woman whose complexity shows in her writing. 

2. There is a reason Ann Page has so many books on her, it means she has written something meaningful and powerful. (Not always the case with writers with so many books on their life)

3. Choosing a path many women were not expected or viewed to follow at her time, she produced an Emily Dickinson like piece of work. Complicated to read at times and hard to understand, but upon true understanding opens the door to celebration upon understanding and gives you the feeling of invincibility as a reader. 

3 reasons to read The Hours

1. A "How to read Mrs. Dalloway for Dummies," a softer user-friendly book that helps allow a reader understand Woolf more. 

2. It is based on and has the same characters of Mrs. Dalloway, but does not seem like a series or a cheap knock-off.

3. A woman wrote this? Cunningham captures the female view brilliantly. His name on the book is the only giveaway that it was written by a male. 

Decisions, decisions, which to read first

I agree with Meghan that when reading this two novels on should take the read, read, re-read approach. Reading Virginia Woolf first is frustrating, it is one of the hardest books I have read writing and content wise. Though it's not a series reading Cunningham first is like drinking water before eating something spicy, it defeats the purpose. Yah Woolf is spicy makes your tongue and mouth burn, but Cunningham is the cool relief after the burn. Re-reading Woolf after reading Cunningham, allows the reader to walk away with a better understanding of Mrs. Dalloway. 

Three Reasons to Read Mrs. Dalloway:
1. To challenge yourself to read in a new way. There is a lot to unpack in this book, and one learns to read slowly and refer back to previous sections in the novel. Mrs. Dalloway forces you to take your time.
2. To gain a different perspective on everyday occurrences. While basing an entire novel on the actions of an ordinary woman on a single day in her life seems dull, it is this basic concept that makes Mrs. Dalloway is so brilliantly thought-provoking. Not only is the reader able to get a firsthand look at the thoughts of the characters in a way most other books don’t allow, but they are also likely to take a closer look at their own “ordinary” thoughts and actions. How much do we miss in the 365 days we experience every year?
3. To encourage discussion as a part of the reading process. I think that a large part of reading is discussing works with other readers, gaining new insight, and perhaps even revising your own thoughts as a result. There is a lot to be picked up on in this book, and I think it is unlikely that one will easily pick up on all of Woolf’s details without a second set of eyes and opinions.

Three Reasons to Read The Hours:
1. Like Margaret, I feel that Michael Cunningham, as a male author, has done a phenomenal job portraying three woman’s lives. Even if the book doesn’t become a favorite, I think it is worth the few hours that it would take a woman to read this book.
2. To help you better understand Mrs. Dalloway. The Hours made Mrs. Dalloway much more approachable for me; I was better able to appreciate Virginia Woolf’s intentions with Mrs. Dalloway after I had a more modern text to consult.
3. To be surprised by how closely someone can draw from an already unique text, but create something entirely new. Although some may call The Hours direct imitation, but I think it is a reinvention; taking something old and making it entirely new. The Hours as modern day modernism? Perhaps.
Why One Should Read Mrs. Dalloway First:
While the books complement each other nicely, I think it is important to read Mrs. Dalloway first. Without having read Mrs. Dalloway first, a reader will not be able to appreciate the countless details and allusions Michael Cunningham specifically includes in The Hours. Also, by reading The Hours after Mrs. Dalloway, it is easier to appreciate and understand Woolf’s text; people are more likely to return to Dalloway to match up characters, symbolism, and other hidden messages they may have missed.

My 3 Reasons

Three reasons to read Mrs. Dalloway
1. There are so many examples of symbolism throughout that there's always a new way to read closely.
2. Following the inner-thoughts of many characters is an interesting literary style to read along with.
3. The dynamic creation of characters that Woolf creates is one that can be admired.

Three reasons to read The Hours
1. The intertwining of the three stories of each woman is beautifully done.
2. Despite being a male author, Michael Cunningham captured the femininity of the stories almost perfectly.
3. Laura Brown. She is one of my biggest reasons as to why one should read The Hours.

Three reasons to read The Hours first
1. I believe that by reading The Hours first, it is easier to follow Mrs. Dalloway.
2. It is always an option to reread The Hours after Mrs. Dalloway to rediscover the similarities and symbolism.
3. The Hours as a general rule is usually liked on the first read, and the style is not as complex right away so it's an easy gateway to tackle Mrs. Dalloway

3 Reasons ( Virginia Woolf, The Hours, Both)

3 Reasons Why We Read Virginia Woolf

1.) Paints a picture of a world less colorful than ours, but somehow shows it in a light more bright.
2.) I feel she does find a way to create the new sentence.
3.) Creates foundations for brilliance.

3 Reasons Why We Read The Hours

1.) Because Michael Cunningham has the ability to speak with the voice and conviction of a woman.
2.) It allows us to appreciate and better understand the complexity of Virginia Woolf.
3.) Finds a way to tie the ends in the lives left dangling in Mrs. Dalloway.


Which should we read first and why?

It is my honest belief that there should be three steps when it comes to reading Mrs. Dalloway and The Hours. I feel that it would be best to read Mrs. Dalloway to get some sort of foundation for the stories of the lives of Clarissa, Virginia, and Mrs. Brown. Then I feel that we should read The Hours to get a greater appreciation for Mrs. Dalloway, and get a more solid grasp on the characters. Finally I feel that we should then read Mrs. Dalloway again to not only understand it more fully, but to pick up on all of the pieces we missed. I feel that somewhere down the road I will want to return to The Hours again to complete the never ending circle of these two novels.

3 reasons, times 3

Three reasons to read Virginia Woolf:

1. Just as the The Baseball Hall of Fame requires eligible players to have played ten years in the majors and be retired for five before being considered as an inductee, Virginia Woolf has passed the test of time. More than fifty years has slipped away since her death, so there can be no claim that the hype and prestige that surrounds her is simply the heat of the moment or temporary popularity. To put it simply and bluntly: she's legitimate.

2. She is one of the strongest writers of the twentieth century, and this transcends gender boundaries. She encompasses relevant questions and social analyses in her stories, as well as having mastered the art of writing. Despite personal preference, can that be denied?

3. Woolf provides a strong female voice, especially in a crucial time period where women were not always thought to be equal to men. She opened the door for others, such as Anne Sexton, Sylvia Plath, and many more to be able to share their stories.

Three reasons to read The Hours:

1. Having a basic knowledge of Virginia Woolf and/or Mrs. Dalloway, reading Cunningham's work will help shed light and understanding on Woolf; it's a much more "reader-friendly" book than Mrs. Dalloway, and can assist with the understanding of Woolf's major points.

2. The book serves as a great example of intertextuality and the brilliance of creating new characters and plot lines based off another's ideas. As Thoreau believed, read, then make it your own.

3. Since "like" is not a category of analysis, how about the ability of The Hours to help one enjoy Mrs. Dalloway more, upon reflection?

...which brings me to three reasons to read Mrs. Dalloway before The Hours:

1. You will gain a better appreciation for Mrs. Dalloway after finishing The Hours. Cunningham's many references to Woolf's threads (especially flowers, but time, birds, etc.) help to literally and figuratively tie the story in with Woolf's. The parallels between characters is shifted in The Hours, leaving the reader to figure out whuch of Cunningham's characters represents those of Virginia Woolf.

2. The Hours is the "easier" text to read, whereas if you read The Hours first, Mrs. Dalloway would surely seem quite difficult and confusing in comparison.

3. The idea of explaining the character of Mrs. Dalloway, Virginia Woolf herself, during the time she was writing Mrs. Dalloway, and her idea of a Mrs. Brown tie together the many ideas and sides to the one author. Essentially, we understand Virginia Woolf better by reading The Hours.

3 Reasons...

3 Reasons to Read Mrs. Dalloway:

-The thoughts of Woolf's characters are marvelously complex and fascinating and simply for the way that she enters ever characters head, at least for a second, is a reason this novel should not be missed.

-The way that Woolf explores the relationships and parallels between her characters is very interesting. Even though some of them seem to have nothing in common on the outside, the way that Woolf can take us inside their thoughts proves that they aren't so different after all.

-Every emotion that the character of Mrs. Dalloway feel, self-doubt, insanity, simple joys and wondering the "what if", is something that every person does and can relate to. It is a human novel.

3 Reasons to Read The Hours:

-It gives a deeper understanding of some of the characters or their parallels from Mrs. Dalloway and enriches the first text.

-The Hours also seems to be an easier read and is enjoyable simply for itself but almost seems to bring Mrs. Dalloway forward to address issues that are more of the current time.

-The novel can stand on its own without the background of Mrs. Dalloway if it so chooses. Cunningham wove the threads of his own novel marvelously with Woolf's, and even though his complements Mrs. Dalloway, it can function as its own text entirely.

3 Reasons for Reading The Hours after Mrs. Dalloway:

-Without reading Mrs. Dalloway first, you'd lose all the allusions that Michael Cunningham makes to the symbols that run through Mrs. Dalloway (ex. clocks, water, birds of paradise) and it would somehow be a lesser read because of that.

-Reading The Hours after Mrs. Dalloway helped me at least, to understand the characters better, even though they are two different texts. I believe Cunningham captured the essence of Clarissa and the other parallel characters.

-It makes it easier to go back and re-read Mrs. Dalloway because it makes no matter that the two are set in different times, the issues of the characters remain the same but the melding of both texts makes a much richer read.

The 3 Reasons to...

The 3 reasons to read Virginia Woolf's Mrs. Dalloway:

1) Woolf allows her readers into the heads of multiple characters in the novel at the same time, and this is something that novels can lack at times. I don't just want to know what's going on in the head of the protagonist. What about her best friend? Her lover? Her enemy? Her mother? This term that I have deemed "multiple consciousnesses" is definitely one reason why I think it's important to read Mrs. Dalloway.

2) I am stealing this one from Ann Page's list...Ecstasy of the moment. I have never seen a writer pay tribute to acts that seem so trivial in life. For Woolf, every action is a work of art, and that is the same attitude that Clarissa has in the novel. Making a moment seem so spectacular can often be difficult to sum up in words. Woolf has no problem with this task.

3) Woolf teaches her readers to read carefully, not just carefully, but with extreme precision. Every word seems to be chosen for a specific reason, and as an English major, I respect her ability to create such a dense piece of literature.

The 3 Reasons to Read Michael Cunningham's The Hours:

1) To me, Cunningham's novel is the epitome of intertexuality. In order to create a definition of the term "intertexuality," I think it's important to use The Hours as an example. I have never really understood the term until now.

2) The message. Again, I couldn't help but feel elated when I read the final pages of the novel. This is how life is. It's made up of struggles, torment, and hardship, but we live for those few hours that make us feel like we are bursting with energy and happiness. I can relate to the message, especially right now, in my college years.

3) Dedication to characters. The progressions of the three women's attitudes are believable. I was shocked that he was able to cram in so much character development into 226 pages. My creative works are extremely character-driven, so I can look to Cunningham's novel as a source of believable development.

The 3 Reasons to Read Mrs. Dalloway before The Hours:

1) All three of the women (especially Clarissa's character) would not seem as deep and complex if an individual read The Hours without having any knowledge of Mrs. Dalloway. Mrs. Dalloway, the character came first. Clarissa Vaughan came next. It seems like a logical way of being introduced to the two literary characters.

2) Due to the difficulties that arise over reading Mrs. Dalloway, I think it is important to read that text first, so that The Hours can supplement the former of the texts. I don't think Mrs. Dalloway could serve as a supplement for The Hours. The Hours can be used as a plot tool to supplement what is occuring in Mrs. Dalloway.

3) Virginia Woolf's motifs can be appreciated further in The Hours (flowers, birds, clocks/time, etc.) if an individual reads Mrs. Dalloway first. If a person were to read Woolf after Cunningham, he or she might not remember and appreciate the subtle references to these motifs in The Hours.

-Megan R.

I Guess I'll Go First (?)

Reasons to read Virginia Woolf:

1. I would like to simply say "she is brilliant," but I think that's not quite enough. I believe we should read Virginia Woolf because she has an uncanny ability to very precisely understand human beings. Shakespeare may have invented the human, but Virginia Woolf brought it to life.

2. We should read Virginia Woolf because she forces us to think. She insists that we recognize issues in our world and in our lives, and she insists that we consider these issues and deal with them. She refuses to let us remain comfortable in our world without justifying parts of it... which can be hugely intimidating and disruptive and difficult, but it is also frequently extraordinarily rewarding.

3. We should read Virginia Woolf because reading her works completes the woman's sentence. I believe that she wrote it (particularly in Mrs. Dalloway... although that might be also the human sentence... and maybe they'll always be one and the same), but I also believe that nothing written has real cultural value until it is read... so we should read her to complete her work, to make it a part of the world, to make it matter.

Reasons to read Michael Cunningham's The Hours:

1. The Hours is nearly as insightful into "the human condition" (gee, how about I use the most over-used phrase ever?!) as Virginia Woolf's writing tends to be, and it is more easily accessible than Woolf. Maybe what I'm trying to say is that Cunningham is more readable, particularly by people who may not study literature all the time, but it is just as meaningful and important... which may mean that this has even more value than Mrs. Dalloway because it can reach a wider audience... (I'm not sure I really believe that last bit... but I do think that we need to give Michael Cunningham credit for making these women's lives accessible).

2. I think one source of value in the text is Cunningham's acknowledgement of homosexuality that is incredibly unimposing or intimidating. What I'm trying to say is that, until Ann Page pointed out that it was clearly written about the gay community and (some people claim) for the gay community, I hadn't even realized that almost every lead in the book is gay or experiments with their sexuality. Maybe that's just evidence of my obliviousness... but I'd prefer to call it a facet of Cunningham's genius; he addresses a very important and controversial issue without making us uncomfortable.

3. We should read The Hours because it finishes (or extends?) what Virginia Woolf started. He pushes the limits of her work (not that I would call her work limited), and he has managed to (quite successfully) modernize the issues of her work to fit the present day. I wonder who will be the next in line to extend this story on to future generations...?

Three reasons to read Mrs. Dalloway first:

1. Half of Cunningham's very clever allusions are lost without knowledge of Mrs. Dalloway.

2. More importantly, half of the impressiveness of Cunningham's innovations and creations is lost without having first read the work that inspired him.

3. Reading The Hours inspires many to want to reread Mrs. Dalloway. If we hadn't read Mrs. Dalloway previously, I doubt that The Hours would inspire us to read Mrs. Dalloway a first time. I think that reading Mrs. Dalloway makes The Hours richer, and I think that then going back to Mrs. Dalloway a second time makes them both even more complex and complete. (And one might argue that The Hours would inspire us to read Mrs. Dalloway... but I still think Mrs. Dalloway benefits from multiple readings... so I still vote MD --> Hours --> MD.)

Assignment:

1. three reasons to read Virginia Woolf OR three reasons to read Mrs. Dalloway

2. three reasons to read The Hours

3. three reasons to read Mrs. Dalloway first OR three reasons to read The Hours first

4. comment on the posts of two other people


THANKS!!

INTERTEXTUALITY

A term created by Julia Kristeva, who said,"Every text builds itself as a mosaic of quotations, every text is absorption and transformation of another text."

I Call This Passage (No stealing!)

As in Mrs. Dalloway, I also find that one of the last passages in The Hours serves as the most poignant in the entire novel. We get to see how Clarissa's take on everything that has occurred throughout the day, including the suicide of her best friend, has evolved over the course of a few hours (which, by the way, there are many references to throughout the novel...hours here, hours there, hours everywhere).

"Yes, Clarissa thinks, it's time for the day to be over. We throw our parties; we abandon our families to live alone in Canada; we struggle to write books that do not change the world...We live our lives, do whatever we do, and then we sleep--it's as simple an ordinary as that. A few jump out of windows or drown themselves or take pills; more die by accident; and most of us, the vast majority, are slowly devoured by some disease, or if we're fortunate, by time itself. There's just this consolation: an hour here or there when our lives seem, against all odds and expectations, to burst open and give us everything we've ever imagined...Still, we cherish the city, the morning; we hope, more than anything, for more" (pg. 225).

It's beautiful. Enough said. I had one of these "hours" this weekend, and I can completely see where Cunningham is coming from about these special instances in our lives.

-Megan R.

Multiple Consciousnesses (I hope that's a word...) In "The Hours"

Something that really stayed with me about Woolf's writing style was the fact that she was able to get into the brains of not just one, but all of her characters. She was definitely an omnipresent narrator with a twist. Sometimes it was difficult to tell who was doing the thinking in Mrs. Dalloway. I respect Michael Cunningham for attributed this stylistic choice to The Hours. I am also pleased that he was able to make the choice in a clearer fashion. I didn't have to pause to think about whose thoughts I was reading about when reading The Hours.

Obviously, there are some pretty apparent examples of this throughout the text. He has broken up the book into Mrs. Dalloway's, Mrs's Woolf's, and Mrs. Brown's separate stories. The book is not a continuous narrative like Mrs. Dalloway. Woolf did not use any chapter segmentation in her novel. Cunningham also uses the idea of mutliple consciousnesses within each piece of narration as well. On page 160, we get to see what is going on in Clarissa's head, as well as Mary Krull's head.

"Briefly, while Julia's back is turned, Clarissa and Mary face each other. Fool, Mary thinks, though she struggles to remain charitable...Fraud, Clarissa thinks. You've fooled my daughter, but you don't fool me..." (160).

This approach is also used in the conversation between Clarissa and Louis about their past relationship and the present. I remember Woolf using this approach in the scene between Peter and Clarissa in Mrs. Dalloway as well. It's definitely a point of view that I would like to work with in the future in my own writing. I think this thought may have to be present in my next paper! :)

-Megan R.

The Hours - Innovations

Some people accuse Michael Cunningham of having merely copied Virginia Woolf. I would argue that Michael Cunningham's work is a work of innovation and newness. Cunningham does not copy, he reinvents. For instance, the relationships between the characters are clearly drawn from Virginia Woolf, but they are new and original. Clarissa and Sally, in Mrs. Dalloway, have a brief attraction as young women which does not turn into much of anything. Cunningham reinvents this relationship, turning it into a lasting relationship which seems to perfectly suit both women. Clarissa and Peter in Mrs. Dalloway, who are sort of Clarissa and Richard in The Hours, have a brief relationship in their youths, as well; again, Cunningham not only reinvents this relationship but he complicates it, turning Clarissa and Richard into best friends and former lovers who, at the present time in the novel, have no attraction to each other. This relationship is also complex because it plays on the idea of Clarissa and Richard as husband and wife in Mrs. Dalloway. In The Hours, Clarissa and Richard are a life-long female/male partnership, but it is non-romantic, platonic. Am I making my point? Cunningham was clearly inspired by Virginia Woolf, and it is obvious that he wanted to pay homage to her with his work, but he has done much more than copy or imitate Mrs. Dalloway. Cunningham has created a complex, intelligent, creative, innovative, and still very readable text.

One other example of Cunningham's brilliance as a writer comes not from comparisons between him and Woolf but from his own writing alone:
She could, she thinks, have entered another world. She could have had a life as potent and dangerous as literature itself. - Pg. 97
and then just a page later:
It had seemed like the beginning of happiness, and Clarissa is still sometimes shocked, more than thirty years later, to realize that it was happiness; that the entire experience lay in a kiss and a walk, the anticipation of dinner and a book. - Pg. 98

These observations are not fluff. They are not the work of an amateur author. Cunningham has skills!!

Ok, one more comparison. Doesn't the first quote remind us of Clarissa Dalloway's (Woolf's) observation that it is dangerous to live for just one day? Cunningham is not saying the same thing, but these ideas are related... Cunningham's statement seems to be pointing directly to Woolf's work, both because it is a similar sentiment, and because he points to the possible power of literature... which he clearly felt Woolf's work possessed. Mrs. Dalloway is dangerous. And so is life.

Why We Read?

I'll admit, I just installed the Stumbleupon toolbar for Firefox which brings me to all of these great sites (like the one with the buildings) and I found another one to share.

http://citypaper.com/special/story.asp?id=16743

It's an article about loving books, and why the books we read when we're younger "May Be The Most Important Reading We Ever Do." Enjoy!

Just for Fun!

http://villageofjoy.com/50-strange-buildings-of-the-world/

Does number 12 look familiar? The other buildings are amazing too!

The Hours! (aka: Michael Cunningham is a genius)

Ok, the first thing I want to point out is on the page with the two quotes (before the prologue). The second quote, by Virginia Woolf, reminds me of her "tunneling" comment. "I dig out beautiful caves behind my characters," she says. The same concept? I believe so.

While reading Michael Cunningham, keep your eye out for subtle references to VW and Mrs. D. They litter every page, for sure. Some are not so subtle... like Clarissa Vaughn's nickname... but check out the names of the other characters. Most main characters have names we encountered in Mrs. D, but many are used for people who play a different role. Also, it's neat to observe how MC has changed the Sally/Clarissa story. And don't forget Mary Krull... you'll meet her later. And what does Wellfleet remind us of? Bourton? NO WAY!

Another thing that impresses me all the time about The Hours is MC's ability to create for us VW's mental state (and Mrs. Brown's, for that matter). His descriptions of diseased mental health are spot-on and very realistic. I am 100% convinced while reading this book that MC actually has lived inside VW's brain... he's that good.

This is one well-crafted novel, I'd say. But who am I to say? What do YOU say?!

Updated Page Numbers for Window References

Here are the page numbers for the window references in Mrs. Dalloway for the version all of you have. See my other blogs for my own two cents for some of the passages. Hope you're enjoying The Hours!

3, 5, 9, 13, 14, 15, 24, 30, 31, 37, 47, 48, 53, 54, 61, 88, 89, 112, 113, 126, 127, 134, 138, 149, 150, 163, 168, 184, 185, 186