2. Is Connie easily conned by Arnold at the end of Oates' story? Examine the final two pages closely. Using the evidence of the story, and not speculation, assess the reasons Connie leaves the safety of her own home. Provide specific evidence. Is she sacrificing herself for her family like a hero? If so, prove it. Is she a victim of trauma and terror? If so, prove that. Is she seduced by the adventure of the unknown? Has she been brainwashed or hypnotized? What has happened? Why is it significant?
3. Dylan's songs were all very idealistic. How does this story work as a celebration of Dylan? Why is it dedicated to him? How does the spirit of the story celebrate the spirit of Dylan? Explain.
4. Oates is a master at her craft and keeps the reader in great suspense in her story Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been? What do you believe Oates is trying to convey through this story? What is her central insight? Please provide some evidence for your viewpoint.
5. In her essay, On Tim O'Brien's "The Things They Carried," Bobbie Ann Mason writes,
So this effort to detach and control becomes both the drama and the
technique of the story. For it is our impulse to deal with unspeakable
horror and sadness by fashioning some kind of order, a story, to
clarify and contain our emotions. As the writer, Tim O'Brien stands
back far enough to be seen but not so far that he isn't in charge.
(1497)
technique of the story. For it is our impulse to deal with unspeakable
horror and sadness by fashioning some kind of order, a story, to
clarify and contain our emotions. As the writer, Tim O'Brien stands
back far enough to be seen but not so far that he isn't in charge.
(1497)
Apply these words to the characters in Shiloh.
6. Explain the relevance of Mabel's introducing the conversation about "the datsun dog that killed the baby" (832) by chewing its legs off. What similar tidbits does Mable introduce at other times and for what purpose? What is Mabel's role in the story and in the relationship between Leroy and Norma Jean?
7. Discuss the dust ruffle and its importance. It is mentioned in the story and is reiterated in the final line of the story (emphasizing its significance). Explain.
8. Explain Norma Jean's words to Leroy after she tells him she wishes to leave, "In some ways, a woman prefers a man who wanders," says Norma Jean. "That sounds crazy, I know" (835).
8.) So Norma Jean wants to leave Leroy and tells him how "a woman prefers a man who wanders" (835). And in Chopin's story, Louise cannot help but feel overwhelmed by joy and a new-sound sense of freedom within minutes of hearing news of her husband's death.
ReplyDelete"Shiloh" makes an excellent companion to Chopin's "Story of an Hour" because of the parallel between Louise and Norma Jean. Both of them feel TRAPPED in their marriages, even though both of them are apparently trapped with good men.
I struggled with these two stories because of the sense of absolute UNFAIRNESS I got from them. What's wrong with Mr. Mallard or Leroy, anyway? Apart from Leroy's questionable substance (ab)use, there is very little in the text to suggest that Leroy or Brently are anything but excellent husbands, as the world reckons them. There is textual support in both stories that points to Leroy and Brently as dutiful and loving men.
Above all, isn't it irredeemably SELFISH of Louise to assert, "What could love, the unsolved mystery, count for in face of this possession of self-assertion which she suddenly recognized as the strongest impulse of her being!" (251) (Incidentally, how could she have ignored the "strongest impulse of her being" up until that point in life?)
And isn't it selfish of Norma Jean to leave Leroy? When she walks away in the last paragraph in the story, he cannot follow her because of his disability, even though he wants to and struggles nobly. How sad.
I don't like the way the authors, Chopin especially, celebrate this selfishness, this "liberation." And I have no idea why a woman would want a man who wanders. Maybe I don't understand women very well after all, huh? Or maybe it's just plain senseless to talk about "what a woman wants." Different women want different things; this seems obvious enough, so why do we keep slipping back into the rhetoric of the box, grouping people together and generalizing what they want or don't want? Norma Jean should have said, "I prefer a man who wanders." This would have been more truthful and more difficult for her to say, since it would mean taking responsibility for her decision to leave. Instead, she hides behind a (false) generality about what "women want." Blah.
I don't know how you're going to tackle these stories on Monday, Professor Pruss, but you'll have to do some fast talking to buy my sympathies for Louise and/or Norma Jean!
Long live the patriarchy!! (Just kidding...)
test test
ReplyDeleteWith regard to Oates' story, Connie really has no choice with respect to her fate at the end. She is not to blame because she is a normal teenage girl experimenting with her feelings about boys. She is going through hormonal changes and she is seeking independence from her parents -- a normal part of development. Arnold Friend, on the other hand, is expert at his con game -- was she "easily conned"? Probably not, it appears at the end that she had two choices: go with him peacefully, which she does; or be dragged out forcibly. He was going to rape and kill her no matter what. However, she gave him the ultimate control when she went with him because he not only controlled her physically, he controlled her psycicly(?). She gives in to the envitable, and is not to blame because she is a child and she has only exhibited the normal behavior of someone her age. Friend is the culpable one -- evil.
ReplyDeleteOates is trying to convey that no matter how grown up a teenager is, teens need compassion and understanding, even when they are difficult. It is a teen's job to be difficult and want independence, but despite their grown-up appearances and mannerisms and determination to be adult, they can have poor judgment and lack the experience to deal with people like Arnold Friend.
That's it from me.
Robin
What bothers me about the three stories in question (Shiloh, Where Are You Going, and Man Almost a Man) is that they make excellent arguments for what Man isn't, but never really make an argument as to what Man actually is. Wright depicts manhood, negatively, as strength/power that instills fear. In "Shiloh," the author depicts Leroy as less of a man than the wife - he sews while she body-builds. He tries to fulfill the occupation of Provider, but can't do that any longer after the accident, which apparently upsets Norma drastically. Also, she claims the real change was when her mother catches her smoking, perhaps because that's more of a manly thing to do.
ReplyDeleteIn "Where Are You Going," the only thing manly about Arnold at all is his appearance. He's the definition of manly, what with the muscles and the pride in his car, but beyond that he's more like Satan, or some such devil-being, in man's flesh. I'm not inclined to call him a "man" at all, the same way I'm not inclined to refer to him as "human."
The biggest issue seems to be that the more manly (if man is equated with power and strength) a character is, the more evil he is. Then, the more manly a woman is, the more Liberated and Self-Sufficient and Independent she is, as though being manly is positive so long as you're not a man. "'Is this one of those women's lib things?' Leroy asks. 'Don't be funny'" (835). ... YES, it IS a "women's lib thing."
I can somewhat see what Chris B is saying in regard to "The Story of an Hour." Louise would appear, on the surface, to be ungrateful to her loving husband, but it is not because of ill-treatment that Louise seeks freedom. Even though her husband does not mistreat her, she is still enslaved by what she has to give up as a wife. The narrator explains the impact that the death of her husband will have on her, saying: "There would be no one to live for her during those coming years: she would live for herself. There would be no powerful will bending hers in that blnid persistence with which men and women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow-creature. A kind intention or a cruel intention made the act seem no less a crime as she looked upon it in that brief moment of illumination" (251). This passage explains the theme of this course better than any of us can. It also goes to show, regardless of intentions, Louise wants to be free from restraints, period.
ReplyDeleteExplain Norma Jean's words to Leroy after she tells him she wishes to leave, "In some ways, a woman prefers a man who wanders," says Norma Jean. "That sounds crazy, I know" (835).
ReplyDeleteI believe Norma's words to Leroy show the reader how she feels trapped in her marriage and the role that society has 'enslaved' her in. Chris and Dusty both mentioned Chopin's story and the feeling of relief that Lousia feels when she learns of the death of her husband. Both women in the stories feel that in order to be themselves, they need to be alone. Norma ends up taking on 'masculine' qualities and Lousia feels that she is "free, free, free" (251). They need to be themselves in order to feel like a person. I personally need space from my husband and if he was constantly 'hovering' or around...i'd go crazy too!
3. Dylan's songs were all very idealistic. How does this story work as a celebration of Dylan? Why is it dedicated to him? How does the spirit of the story celebrate the spirit of Dylan? Explain.
ReplyDeleteNot to fall too deeply into the intentional fallacy, but Oates has since written that she regrets the dedication, because the story was much more clearly inspired by the stories of serial killers in California than the music of Bob Dylan. Oates writes, “…the haunting melody of "Baby Blue" seemed to beautifully approximate the atmosphere of my story, as of that time” (“Dylan at 60”). There’s bleakness and harshness to the world in which Connie’s otherwise innocent and normal development is violently disrupted by a predatory and demonic figure. Likewise, the loss of innocence in the refrain and tone of “It’s All Over Now, Baby Blue” is almost apocalyptic in its finality and abruptness. Arnold Friend’s arrival into Connie’s unprotected adolescence is a complete breakdown of order; the sky might as well be folding. Christopher Ricks has posited that the song may as well be about Dylan's transition to folk-rock from traditional folk music and the idealistic fans that objected to this shift, but in both cases there is a profound transition between periods of innocence and experience.
2.) Connie is not easily “conned.” I find it debatable to say she is “conned” at all, as the reader is given no clear indication that Arnold Friend would not actually harm her family. Arnold could have attempted to hurt her family, and if he is a devil then he would have succeeded. If he could have hurt her loved ones, then Connie giving herself to him does become an act of heroism from, as Arnold calls her, “a brave sweet little girl” (989). She is, at the same time, the victim of terror. The reader is told explicitly that Connie was “sick with fear” (988). She is helpless by the story’s end when she feels completely separate from her body and devoid of any sense of self-control. “She felt her pounding heart. She thought for the first time in her life that it was nothing that was hers, that belonged to her, but just a pounding, living thing inside this body that wasn’t really hers either” (989). This quotation reveals the intensity of her dissociation; even her heartbeat is not her own. It isn’t fair to say she has been seduced by adventure. There is little textual evidence (if there is any at all) that Connie takes any pleasure in the experience. She wants to find a way to escape the men, or she would not have run to the phone nor tried to convince herself to think clearly (989). Connie is scared, is convinced of the danger to herself and her family, and is being manipulated (whether through Arnold’s powers or through the clever words of a rapist). Connie doesn’t leave the house of her own free will in either case. She is still too young, and is being controlled by the significantly older Arnold. While her sexuality is good and still innocent, the abuse that Arnold promises her shows the ability of others to exploit the unguided and unprotected adolescents like Connie. He is undeniably evil.
ReplyDeleteThe part of this story I most appreciated when I first read it in high school was the subtle way that Oates builds the possibility of Arnold Friend’s supernatural identity. First, his name, which (with the R’s removed) becomes An old Fiend, a reference to the devil (credit to Dr. Usekes for sharing that analysis). He is described as standing oddly, as though he has to balance himself by leaning backwards (982), and doesn’t fit his shoes. “Evidently his feet did not go all the way down; the boots must have been stuffed with something so that he would seem taller” (987). If Arnold is a man, then he is crazy and is trying to appear more intimidating by seeming taller. If he is truly a “fiend,” then the boots may be stuffed because of his mythical cloven hooves. There are references to his be unable to situate himself in time, and hints that he may be much older than he admits: “. . . as if he were running through all the expressions he’d learned but was no longer sure which one of them was in style, then rushing on to new ones, making them up with his eyes closed” (987). I know many of you may have been exposed to this reading before, as I was in high school, yet this consistent and skillful subtext still impresses me and is relevant to the question of why Connie left her home.
Connie is more seduced than conned: she also decides to be a scapegoat, to sacrifice herself for her family; she was an empty shell that no one tried to fill: “She felt her pounding heart. Her hand seemed to enclose it. She thought for the first time in her life that it was nothing that was hers, that belonged to her, but just a pounding, living thing inside this body that wasn't really hers either.”
ReplyDeleteWith no role models, no hope, no destiny, Connie was a child in an adult situation: “She thought, I have got to think. I have got to know what to do.”; but she didn’t know what to do because she was empty inside: “She was hollow with what had been fear but what was now just an emptiness.”
She is forced to come to terms with her helplessness: “She thought, I'm not going to see my mother again. She thought, I'm not going to sleep in my bed again.” She has nothing to rely on ; not even prayer because “none of them bothered with church”; so she gives in to being a sacrifice, a lamb for the slaugghter:"'You don't want them to get hurt,'" Arnold Friend went on. "Now, get up, honey. Get up all by yourself."
She stood.
I have a hard time with the idea that Connie was conned and/or raped - it seems to simplify Oates' story into just another victim tale, and I don't think Connie is a victim at all.
ReplyDeleteThere are many different ways to explore the character of Arnold Friend, but as I reread this story, I have to wonder if he's a person at all. I don't view him so much as the devil, but more of a personification of Connie's desire. He's dressed just as "she likes boys to dress," and he's only a couple of inches taller than she is. A fifteen year old girl could still be growing, and most likely, wouldn't be that tall at all.
Connie is an incredibly shallow teenager - she can be viewed as a case study of adolescence, consumed with appearance and hormones, snubbing her family at every chance offered. What she wants is to be adored and loved - seen differently from her family. She is humiliated by her twenty-four year old sister, and scuffed at by her mother. Arnold Friend repeatedly tells Connie how different she is, how special she is. She is finally the object of a desire she courted, but being a teenager, she had no idea how to handle it.
The last sentence shows that Connie is not being raped - it's too whimisical in its wonderings. "...so much land Connie had never seen before and did not recognize except to know that she was going to it.(989)" I don't think a rape victim would consider the act an adventure - and it's difficult to look at this last sentence in any other way.