True Grit is a rather powerful piece of American mythology, however it feels strange to call the experience mythical. After all, the story is for the most part grounded in reality; referencing real world events and places as well as respecting the barriers of our physical reality.
So what makes this story mythical if there are no fire-breathing dragons? I would say the myth is in the characters. Rooster, LaBoeuf, and our narrator Mattie, are characterized by their uncommonly headstrong disposition of recklessness and courage. I think the strongest part of the myth, one that is now all too common throughout every medium of storytelling, is the myth of the underdog.
Whether it is pursued for heroism, vengeance, or personal gain our characters motivations drive them to a position where the odds are stacked against them. One horseman in the middle of four bandits, one youth girl beside a strong grown man, three wounded versus a pit of venomous snakes.
I think this book touches on a very traditional american ideal of self-reliance and self-mastery. That a person is defined more by their actions than by who they were born as. That regardless that Mattie is a young girl, she is shown to have true grit through her determination to see her father's murderer brought to justice, even though it would be easy to leave it to the marshal alone. I think also attached with this idealistic value is also one of independence, independence which leads to extremities.
Sunday, January 29, 2017
Monday, January 23, 2017
About Jane Austin's Pride and Prejudice
In the past two weeks our class was tasked with reading Pride and Prejudice or any likewise novel scripted by Jane Austin. As I was completely unfamiliar with any of this author's writings, I settled with Jane's most well-known work, as you can surmise from the title of this post.
First I'll express my thoughts on the language of the Pride and Prejudice. Going into the piece, I had anticipated that I would struggle with the interpretation - that I would become lost as I read along as I have experienced before when reading Great Expectations by Charles Dickens. Thankfully I found Jane Austin's words easy to follow. Her language is not entirely relatable to how most people speak today, but the organization is simple and her choice of words heavily appropriate to describing the fictional scenes and events.
One thing I also admired is her use of summarization. The brief setting descriptions and the oft times implied character action that goes on in the background of scene changes helps to keep the story from getting stale for me. Sometimes however I do feel like the author summarizes interactions between characters that I would have been interested in having more detail.
The narrative itself is rather strangely paced. We are quick to understand that courtship and marriage is the direction and general goal for the Bennet sisters, but the process of which the relationships transpire is different from many other romance/relationship stories that I have experienced. Letters in writing are used very prominently in Pride and Prejudice, and they contain some of the most pivotal and interesting information for the overall narrative. The delayed form of correspondence, and the fact that letters are more monologue than dialogue, seemed to throw off what I normally expect in the pacing of a story, but in an interesting manner.
All-in-all my experience was enjoyable. While Pride and Prejudice did not incorporate any intense form of buildup and payoff, Jane Austin was able to hold my attention for the duration of the story with an array of playful characters. I actually quite like how the drama was not exaggerated - it gave a grounding sense of reality to the story which helped me empathize with Elizabeth Bennet more than I think I would have otherwise.
First I'll express my thoughts on the language of the Pride and Prejudice. Going into the piece, I had anticipated that I would struggle with the interpretation - that I would become lost as I read along as I have experienced before when reading Great Expectations by Charles Dickens. Thankfully I found Jane Austin's words easy to follow. Her language is not entirely relatable to how most people speak today, but the organization is simple and her choice of words heavily appropriate to describing the fictional scenes and events.
One thing I also admired is her use of summarization. The brief setting descriptions and the oft times implied character action that goes on in the background of scene changes helps to keep the story from getting stale for me. Sometimes however I do feel like the author summarizes interactions between characters that I would have been interested in having more detail.
The narrative itself is rather strangely paced. We are quick to understand that courtship and marriage is the direction and general goal for the Bennet sisters, but the process of which the relationships transpire is different from many other romance/relationship stories that I have experienced. Letters in writing are used very prominently in Pride and Prejudice, and they contain some of the most pivotal and interesting information for the overall narrative. The delayed form of correspondence, and the fact that letters are more monologue than dialogue, seemed to throw off what I normally expect in the pacing of a story, but in an interesting manner.
All-in-all my experience was enjoyable. While Pride and Prejudice did not incorporate any intense form of buildup and payoff, Jane Austin was able to hold my attention for the duration of the story with an array of playful characters. I actually quite like how the drama was not exaggerated - it gave a grounding sense of reality to the story which helped me empathize with Elizabeth Bennet more than I think I would have otherwise.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)