"High as Hope": Album or Anthology?

Florence + the Machine's most recent album "High as Hope" is the first album she has created since she took to sobriety. In an interview with The New York Times, she said her new album "created a creative bravery" and in an act of vulnerability, she "made a step away from the metaphoric."

According to Laurence Perrine, author of Sound and Sense: An Introduction to Poetry, a true poet uses language resources and "the materials of life" to create a poem. Throughout Florence Welch's 2018 release, she draws on past experiences to inspire her lyrics. Most notably in her song "The End of Love"

The first experience she reflects on is the telling of a potentially spurious story about her family's history:

We were a family pulled from the flood
You tore the floorboards up
And let the river rush in
Not wash away, wash away

In an interview with Belfast Telegraph, she recalls how her great-great-grandfather, a sailor, saved her family from a flood by pulling up the floorboards in the house so the water would rush through and wouldn't wash the house away. When writing the chorus, she considered the symbolic value of extreme weather and decided the story symbolizes the impact the past has on the future and the weight of cleaning up the past's destruction.

She goes on to write about her grandmother's suicide in the song's second verse:

In a moment of joy and fury I threw myself
From the balcony like my grandmother so many years before me

These lines bank directly on "the materials of life" and employ simile as a language resource. She compares her present condition to that of her grandmother when she fell. Furthermore, Welch illuminates a pattern in the way the women in her family love, each having learned from her mother, a "trickle-down" that is comparable to the succession of the feeling of tragedy following her grandmother's death.

We then see allusion and connotation at play in the song's bridge:

And Joshua came down from the mountain
With a tablet in his hands
Told me that he loved me, yeah
And then ghosted me again

This stanza alludes to a passage in the Old Testament in which Moses receives the Ten Commandments. Then, Welch plays with the 21st-century connotation of the term "ghosted" referring to when a person's love-interest suddenly ceases communication without explanation. With this idea introduced, the tablet she references may have a more modern implication as an electronic device.

Despite making reference to specific events and stories, Florence Welch's song is still accessible to her audience. She creates a foundation that is personally significant but also encourages the listener to contribute their own experiences to the text, thus through the application of their imagination, senses, and emotions the song "enlighten[s] and move[s]" the listener.

Us and Them: The Poetry Within the Music

Pink Floyd is known for their enthralling and poetic lyrics and psychedelic music. As an extremely progressive rock band from London, they topped charts internationally and were inducted into the American Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1996 and the UK Music Hall of Fame in 2005. Their concept album Dark Side of the Moon, conveys the disunity and fragmentation of society and analyzes human nature.

According to Laurence Perrine, poetry should broaden or deepen the reader's experience by allowing one to be present in the poem. Not necessarily moral nor beautiful, it gives us glimpses into realities we can't even dream of.

Pink Floyd's song, "Us and Them" from Dark Side of the Moon does exactly that. On the surface, it seems to simply be about the cruelty and futility of war. If we look closer, we see that war is used as an extended metaphor for society's dictators.

Us and them
And after all we're only ordinary men
Me and you
God only knows it's not what we would choose to do

The first lyrics in the song establish the us vs. them mentality in war. It is simply a matter of the "other" and a way that we justify the murder of other human beings, or "ordinary men". On a deeper level, it reflects the human experience that we are always comparing and pitting ourselves against someone else in our lives. We dissociate ourselves from this "other" when we're really in the same boat trying to live through life. Overall, this extended metaphor illustrates the self-centered mentality that most of us have.

The song later explores the powerlessness people have over their own lives.

And the general sat
And the lines on the map moved from side to side
Black and blue

The imagery of the general sending men to fight while not suffering the consequences himself puts the reader in the shoes of the common man. The reader can feel the anger and frustration with the general, especially when we see him moving miniature figurines on a map in place of human life. On a level deeper than war, one deepens the experience of feeling powerless - whether that be in the battlefield, the workplace, or in any other hierarchical situation. The use of "black and blue" conveys the battering and sickening experience of being at the mercy of a society-deemed important figure. In reality, it's one man determining the fate of thousands. One merely has to glance at our current political saga to see the real life applications.

Finally, Pink Floyd's references to those in poverty and the seemingly indifference of the person in power that follows exemplifies the speaker's disgust of inequality.

Down and out
It can't be helped but there's a lot of it about

"Down and out" refer to those in society who are destitute. The nonchalant tone in the following line that basically says, "Well, whatever!" to society's neglect of its citizens, its human beings, is angering and disgusting. Just these two lines convey the experience of neglect, desolation, and indifference.

We can either look to ourselves to change our faults or we can choose to ignore them and blame them on human nature.
 

Spacecraft Blocking the Sky

Radiohead's A Moon Shaped Pool dives deep into the realm of the human condition and the bounds of earth and space. One of my favorite songs on the album, and it really is a FULL album, is called "Decks Dark." In "Decks Dark," Thom Yorke, one of the masterminds behind Radiohead's brilliant pieces, speaks about the human perception of our darkest moments. In a way, his point of view is existentialist; he argues that even the darkest moments of human life are a construction of what society deems dark. Being trapped underneath a societally forced perception is crippling and constricts humanity to view the moment as even darker. He sets the scene with powerful space diction.

And in your life, there comes the darkness
This spacecraft blocking out the sky
And there's nowhere to hide

Radiohead first sets the tone by creating literal and figurative meaning attached to darkness. In one sense, darkness is a time in life when nothing goes in a desirable way. On a separate level, Radiohead establishes a very literal sense of darkness, where a spacecraft of some kind (maybe you can imagine it as an F-15 if you're as nerdy as me) has blocked over the sun, making the surroundings dark. However, unlike a gorgeous, sleek F-15 crossing over the path of the sun at three times the speed of sound, Yorke describes a process of gradual darkness, where it creeps in without being noticed until it is all consuming. The most interesting part of this stanza, however, is the part at the end that states that the darkness cannot be hid from. In a literal sense, darkness would be the easiest to hide in because it conceals the possibility of being found. The way Radiohead uses darkness is fully captured here because the reader is made to feel the consuming nature of the darkness, mercilessly taking down everything in its path. Later in the verse, Radiohead elaborates on the all encompassing nature of darkness:

You run to the back and you cover your ears
But it's the loudest sound you've ever heard
Now we're trapped, we're dark cloud's people
We are helpless to resist
In you darkest hour

In this part of the song, Radiohead transitions to an extended metaphor of darkness in life as "the loudest sound you've ever heard," which also works along the same lines as comparing it to a majestic spacecraft because both are overwhelming and large in size. After the comparison is made, Yorke uses constricting diction to emphasize the overpowering nature of darkness. In the use of the words "trapped," 'helpless," and "resist," Radiohead establishes that darkness cannot be escaped. In the following verse, Yorke takes this relatively simple message and puts it behind an existentialist lense. Right after repeating "it was just a lie" four times, the song dives into this deeper lens:

Even at this angle
And so we crumble
Still turning heads, you know where it's at
The dread still covers us
You gotta be kidding me
The grass grows over me 

I interpreted this part of the second verse to mean that darkness is a perception, and no matter how hard people try to look at their bad moments in a different light, they still succumb to its power because it is human nature. Specifically, the use of "You gotta be kidding me" shows a human element to the struggle because I can picture myself saying those very lines in the face of disappointment. Yorke describes the moment after he realizes his darkness is constructed. The following emotion is even more constricting than the previous verse; Yorke is beyond just trapped, he is beneath the dirt with thick rooted grass. "The grass grows over me" is my favorite line of the entire song because it a strange image to think of; each individual grain of grass is rooted in the dirt, securing a strong hold in the Earth. Imagine being underneath a field of deeply rooted and growing grass over you. This image is a level of trapped that only this metaphor describes. Hence, Radiohead establishes that when you realize your darkness are miniscule in the grande inner workings of life, you become intensely restricted by the possibility of not living a meaningful life.

You should really listen to Radiohead more often. 

                              

Death With Dignity - Sufjan Stevens

The song Death With Dignity by Sufjan Stevens included in the album Carrie and Lowell, was written in memory of his mother. The album cover and name can be assumed to be about his mom and dad. Looking further into the meaning of Death With Dignity, I found that the song title shared the name with the Death With Dignity Act of 1994. The act legally allowed terminally ill patients to receive physician aided death.

Knowing that his album was dedicated to his mother and that Death With Dignity was the first track on his album, it can be assumed that his mother died of a terminal illness ultimately leading to her death with the help of a physician.

The song starts with a happy strumming, maybe indicating new beginnings. Initially, I wasn't pulled to the song because of the lyrics, I liked it for its mellow, calming tone. It made me think that Sufjan was writing about himself or someone lifting a weight off their shoulders. But then listening closely, I realized that this song was about Safjun trying to figure out how he felt about his mothers passing, unsure of where to turn to next. The song through imagery, repetition, and diction emphasizes the process of losing someone you love and the grief one might experience. Right at the start, the first stanza illustrates this overwhelming process.

     Spirit of my silence I can hear you

     But I'm afraid to be near you

     And I don't know where to begin

     And I don't know where to begin

He uses diction when saying "Spirit of my silence" which refers to his conscious. "I can hear you but I'm afraid to be near you," calls him out for not listening to his conscious in fear of overwhelming guilt and sadness. "And I don't know where to begin," reveals his jumbled mind. The repetition of "I don't know where to begin," is seen again in the second stanza of the song. In those lines he's revealing his true vulnerability and honestly. The song being so personal to him made me believe he's lost, confused, and unsure how he feels about death like many others who experience grief. 

The use of repetition is seen again throughout the song. The next repeated verses show this same emphasis of confusion.

The next repeated verses:

     What is that song you sing for the dead?

     What is that song you sing for the dead?

     Well I got nothing to prove
     Well I got nothing to prove

     But every road leads to an end
     Yes every road leads to an end

     You'll never see us again
     You'll never see us again

The literary device is used as a way to development growth and eventual acceptance. He displays the stages of grief through his lyrics. Anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance are seen in the song. First, he questions why his mother decided to do what she did, then moves to knowing he can't do anything about it, finally accepting that he'll never see her again. 

Continually, Safjan's use of imagery in the song demonstrates his attempt for emotional renewal and gives cues of what he desires. 

      Somewhere in the desert there's a forest 

      And acre before us

      But I don't know where to begin

      But I don't know where to begin
      Again I've lost my strength completely, oh be near me

      Tired old mare with the wind in your hair

Here he is referring to himself. He is trying to find the sacred forest in the middle of a dessert where he currently is. He wants his mom, the tired old mare, to help guide him, but he knows she's gone. Safjan is stranded in his own mental desert with no clue where to begin and through the song we see his journey to self peace, to his own oasis. 

Safjun's song represents him trudging through his own desert in hope to finally come to the acred forest of peace and renewal. Through the lyrics it seems he ultimately found it at the end.  

Frankenstein

This performance that we saw today was not what I was expecting.  Walking in I didn't realize that it was going to be with puppetry, I was taken aback for a moment.  However, I continued into it with an open mind, and boy am I glad I did.  I have never seen anything like this before. The music along with the images presented were mesmerizing and I couldn't have enjoyed it more.  It was so cool that every single person in the show was on stage all at the same time, and throughout the whole show. 
In addition to that I wasn't very familiar with the story of Frankenstein so I was interested to see how it would play out.  The beautiful artistry they exemplified in this performance made Frankenstein a very enjoyable story to watch, if it wasn't already.  I think that now I should probably go and read the actual book by Mary Shelley.  I also am so happy to have been opened up to this world of performance and theater.  I can see myself continuing to seek out other performances in a similar style as it was so fun to be apart of.  Overall this field trip was a great day out with classmates and seeing and experiencing new things.

A Narrow Reality

In the book Exit West, Mohsin Hamid writes about the refugee crisis. Having never been to the Middle East, or even out of the country for that matter, I was instantly curious about the environment depicted in the book. When Mr. Heidkamp told the class we would be using virtual reality machines, I was immediately intrigued. VR seemed like a perfect opportunity to try out a new piece of technology and get a better picture of the setting of Exit West. However, when it came time to actually watch the videos in the Makerspace, there was a lens that could not be ignored. 

Primarily, something felt inherently wrong about sitting in that space, surrounded by copious amounts of expensive technology, watching videos about refugees. As I heard students in the background giggling and playing with the chairs, I struggled to focus on what I was really watching. I felt guilty watching videos on a topic of such intensity without giving it my full attention. As much as I was supposed to be suspended in VR, I spent most of the time trying to figure out how to close out the noise around me. 

If the problems of noise and technological struggles are eliminated, I am still not sure if virtual reality would successfully fill in the holes of an education in global setting. Because the virtual reality videos are constructed by a creator, whether that be a doctor, from Doctors Without Borders, or a journalist from The New York Times, the videos contain a specific bias. The individuals behind the videos make a conscious choice of what to include and not include, and while that is true in all forms of media, it is important to recognize this is also true in something trademarked by the word "reality". 

Therefore, I think that VR can be useful to get a general look at what is going on in different places, but should not be depended on as the name "virtual reality" seems to suggest.

Animalism in Exit West

"...in these trees now were dark bodies too, children who climbed and played among the boughs, like little monkeys, not because to be dark is to be monkey-like, though that has been and was being and will long be slurred, but because people are monkeys who have forgotten that they are monkeys, and so have lost respect for what they are born of, for the natural world around them..."

Throughout Exit West animal analogies are prevalent. From comparing Saeed and Nadia's love to a fox or migrants to hunted animals, Mohsin Hamid relies on a comparison between humans and animals. On the one hand, comparisons to animals dehumanize characters perhaps reflecting the way in which they are received by natives after arriving through the doors. However, often Hamid uses animals in order to demonstrate a greater depth of the human experience.

This seemingly contradictory function of animal analogies in fact provides the key to a theme of the story. Rather than dehumanizing people like the traditional usage, it instead provides readers a greater understanding of the characters as human beings. In the response of the natives to the migrants is the lack of recognition of them as human beings in need of help but rather an unwelcome threat. This fundamental lack of compassion in the response of natives to migrants must be solved through a recognition of humanity. For example, as Saeed and the preacher's daughter grow closer, or Nadia and the cook, we can see the power of developing relationships and recognition. In the same way by turning the purpose of animal analogies on its head, Hamid supplies readers with an element of human connection otherwise missing from the story.

Life Without Social Constructs

Camus’ argument in his essay The Myth of Sisyphus on the quality of Sisyphus’ life seems very inaccurate. He argues Sisyphus is living a happy life while pushing a rock up a mountain just to see it roll to the bottom when he reaches the top. Camus' existentialist beliefs bash social constructs, which is why Sisyphus is able to live a "happy" life. Although social constructs often get the worse of people, they also are necessary for having a structured and meaningful life. If everyone was an existentialist, life would be extremely boring and not worth living.

Imagine a world full of Meursaults. It would be terrible. Or imagine being Sisyphus, and claiming to be happy. There would be very little pleasure or fun in life, and Camus would be lying to say he would be fine living Sisyphus’ life. Just living to live isn’t happy by any means, and Camus doesn’t seem to understand that. It could be argued that feelings are a social construct, but they are also very natural, and life without emotion or feelings is unhealthy. People need motives in their life to be productive, and existentialists lack this, which makes the quality of the world go down, consequently making the quality of life decrease. Based off of Camus’ The Stranger, existentialists seem to be self-centered and mean, which is something this world definitely doesn’t need more of.

What do White People ACTUALLY Know About Black People?

The thing about a book like Citizen is that in theory is a nice book. But in actuality it isn’t. The book give a light glimpse of black life. It it only feeds into the one negative the black women live this side life filled with filled with racial adversity. And as a black women, I believe I can say we are more than this. What about your first love? Your first heartbreak? First swim of the summer? Failing a test? All of this thing make up a person and I do not believe this book helps capture this much need picture. Growing up I never saw this images of black women.

This thought bring up one question for me, What do non-black people actually know about black people? The answer to that is very little if anything. The one lens they are shown in classrooms and in the media is a stereotypical. Black people are never aloud to be well rounded characters. Instead they are the butt of jokes about how "ghetto", that character is. Where are the black girl next door characters? Where are the dark skin black characters? Where are the 'strong black leades' (as Netflix calls them)? What lacks is lacking in Citizen is the ability for black people to be who they are, people.

What Does Meursault feel...Anything?

     In Albert Camus's novel The Stranger, he begins to discuss the death of the main character, Meursault's, mother. "Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don't know. I got a telegram from the home: "Mother deceased. Funeral tomorrow. Faithfully yours." "That doesn't mean anything. Maybe it was yesterday.  Immediately, the reader is able to see that Meursault does not show a particular emotion towards the death of his mother. He just thinks about how he has to go to the funeral, but shows no discomfort and doesn't even bother to figure out what day she died. However, in the end of part I, he discusses the weather to a great extent. Meursault states, "The light shot off the steel and it was like a long flashing blade cutting at my forehead. At the same instant the sweat in my eyebrows dripped over my eyelids at once and covered them with a warm, thick film"(59). Meursault spends a few sentences describing the feeling that the intense sun, but only uses about a sentence and a half to talk about his mother's death. The reaction was almost robotic. This shows that he feels very little connection to the people around them and maybe lives in a world that is more focused on himself. When Marie asks him to marry him, he says that he does not love her, but if she wants to get married then they could. He shows very little emotion towards her and is not excited by the idea of human relationships.

WALL-E

What is satire? Well to me, satire is an exaggeration or oversimplification intended to ridicule, highlight or expose the flaws of an idea. The purpose would then be to inform or change the behavior and perceptions of others and our environment.

Wall-e is a movie where it is showing the inhabitants of Earth have fled onto spaceships, leaving robots behind to clean up the garage that has consumed the Earth. Wall-e, the main character, is eventually the last robot remaining to clean up the Earth. After some time, Wall-e arrives at one of the spaceships that the inhabitant are on. While on the spaceships, Wall-e realizes that humans have evolved and become morbidly obese. An example of that is that the humans float around all day on chairs with screens on them watching television all day. 

Humans and their inability to be self-reliant with showing humans laziness. Humans are really reliant on new technologies but when that all disappears what would everyone do? In the movie, the characters are sitting lazily in chairs throughout their life. With the environment where does all this waste end up? Most of over waste and garbage doesn't get reused. After a time, this garage accumulates to an unthinkable quantity. Large companies who sell quantities of packages goods are kind of responsible for the mess? Machines are taking over kind of in a way because if you think about it technology is advancing at such a high rate that human has become unnecessary. 

Some devices that were used throughout the movie to bring a greater idea to it. Exaggeration because it is showing the world would never end up covered in garage. Diminution is another one because it is taking real-life situations and showcasing all the flaws. The last one that I found was a reversal and how the idea of obesity is considered positive with all the humans in the movie.

Needs Vs. Wants

After reading Peter Singer's, Solution to World Poverty, I felt guilty. It was insane to see how ridiculous the scenarios he wrote about and how they apply to everyone in our society. While there are people like us who live in a wonderful town and are somewhat privileged, their are people around the world who do not get to experience the same lifestyle as us. Singer's argument really struck with me because he focused on the fact that the privileged people in our society need to be giving back to the community and helping the less fortunate rather than turning a blind eye to world hunger and poverty. While Singer's argument hit me with guilt, I believe that some of his argument is valid and the other part is incorrect.

In his article, Singer believes that people with excess money that are being spent on items that they do not necessarily need should instead be given to help end poverty and world hunger. I think that Singer is right in everybody should be giving money to various organizations in order to help end these problems in our country. If the privileged people in society continue to not realize the importance of donating to this cause, the world will experience and even greater economic and social gap. People will continue to be hungry, without a place to stay, and without the proper care to survive. If people continue to not donate and help solve these issues then more and more people will die each day because another family wanted to buy a lake house or a new car.

With all this being said, there are some points to Singer's argument that I do not agree with. While I believe that everybody should be giving a portion of their money to help end world hunger, I believe that people also have the right to spend some their money on things that they want because they have earned the right to do that. People have earned the right purchase that new car or buy that bigger TV because they worked hard for it. If people had to give all of their excess money to help these world issues, then people would not work as hard and care less about their job. I also believe that when people are giving their money to these issues, there money should be used in a way that gives them the most "bang for their buck". Their money should be spent in a way that helps the most amount of people possible.

While Singer's argument is convincing and fills you with guilt, you have to look at the whole picture. Yes, everybody should be giving some of their money to help end world hunger and poverty but it should not be all of their money. It is also very hard to make everybody give some of their money. Their will always be people who will not want to give any of their money away and it would be very hard to create some sort of law where you have to give money to these charities.

Slavery in the Mind

Throughout the first couple chapters of beloved, I have noticed the theme of slavery and how it destroys a persons identity. Slavery is no doubt one of the worst things that can happen someone and while slavery has an affect on someone through the endless labor that is required, perhaps its biggest influence is on someone's family, mind, and self esteem. Sethe, Paul D, and Baby Suggs all experience the effects of slavery on their families and in their minds.

In particular, we can see the effects of slavery wearing off on Sethe throughout the beginning of the book. In slavery, Sethe was treated as subhuman and seems to be alienated from herself and filled with seth-loathing. For example, when Paul D is rubbing the back of Sethe she becomes very insecure. All throughout slavery, a tree of whips has been growing on the back of Sethe and she feels relieved when Paul D comes to rub her back. When Paul D was rubbing her, Sethe says, "What she knew was that the responsibility for her breasts, at last, was in somebody else's hands"(21). Sethe was experiencing the aftermath of slavery ever since she escaped and now she was happy that Paul D is there to help take the responsibility. Also, later on in the book, Paul D says, "For a used-to-be-salve woman to love anything that much was dangerous, especially if it was her children she had settled on to love"(54). Because Sethe seems to be full of self-loathing, she sees the best part of herself through her children. Paul D realises this and calls her out on it. Sethe says that she will be able to protect Denver when she is alive and when she is dead. While this is not possible, Sethe believes that Denver is a part of her and she needs to take care of her forever, even when she is not a child.

Slavery has also affected Baby Suggs and destroyed her family. Baby suggs self conception has been shattered through the loss of her family members which permitted her from being a caring mother. Baby suggs says that "men and women were moved around like checkers"(27). Nobody was safe slavery and it can take away anybody at any point in time. Baby Suggs children were all sold away or taken before she had a chance to see them grow up. She says that the longest one of her children stayed with her was for 20 years. Baby Suggs could not do anything about her children leaving and that takes a toll on a mother let alone one whose eight children were all taken. This must be why Sethe takes such good care of Denver as if they are the same person. Sethe does not know when the endless game of checkers is going to end especially when her own child might be a checker one day.

Failure to Conform

Throughout his trial, the judge and opposing council seem more disturbed by Meursault's indifference towards the situation than the fact that he murdered another human being. All parties involved in this case seem to be so desensitized to this blatant felony. On page 100, the prosecution states that Meursault's case is no "ordinary murder", which to me is an oxymoron. The lawyer's reasoning is that Meurault did not feel guilty about his actions, and therefore has an abnormal case. Both the Chaplain and Meursault's lawyer give him multiple opportunities for moral redemption, and they are offended when he does not take the bate.

Meursault does not lie to the jury to protect himself. In fact, he is brutally honest with them. As well as he is able to identify his motivations, he shares them (99). As any good lawyer would, the prosecutor takes this opportunity to paint Meurault as a sociopath guilty of deliberate murder. The prosecutor drives his argument home by reminding the jury that Meursault has not shown any remorse for his crime (100). I think that the jury was more appalled by Meursault's lack of emotional expression and refusal to conform to societal expectations than the crime itself.

To be honest, I am impressed by Meusault's dedication to the truth. He could have almost definitely avoided the death penalty by simply pretending that he regrets his actions. I cannot help but ask the question then, did Meursault have a death wish or did was he just truly indifferent? In the last few pages he tells himself that he would die anyway, so what's the difference between now or 20 years from now? Whether he really believed this initially, he did a good job of convincing himself because once he let himself be truly indifferent, Meursault was overwhelmed by happiness (123).

Meursault in Albert Camus's "The Stranger" Comparison to Junot Diaz's Main Character in "Edison, New Jersey"

Meursault throughout Albert Camus's book The Stranger is portrayed from the beginning to be a selfish and uncaring human being. Meursault seems to lack love for anything or anyone except himself. For instance on page 6 when the caretaker asks if he wants to see his mother's body, Meursault replies, "'No.' He was quiet, and I was embarrassed because I felt I shouldn't have said that." When the character asks why he does not want to see his mother a few sentences later, Meursault simply replies, "I don't know." Undoubtedly, this response to his mother's death gives the reader a sense that Meursault truly is an uncaring human being. Meursault has not seen his mother in what the reader can infer as quite a while and he does not even bother to say goodbye forever. This is an insult to his mother's life because it is as if his mother never meant anything to him. Again, when asked on page 9 if he would like to see his mother one last time, he quite plainly responds no. Evidently, Meursault's life lacks meaning because he does not even care for one's who love him. He has no personal goals to reach for himself and is wandering aimlessly through his life.
Furthermore, Meursault can be more interpreted as a man who has lost his way. In chapter 5, his "girlfriend" asks him to marry him twice, his response is dull. On page 41, the text reads, "I said it didn't make any difference to me and that we could if she wanted to." This is one of the most important decisions of his life and he still has no care for it. He puts the choice on Marie, his girlfriend, and not himself. This further exhibits Meursault's inability to make decisions for himself and his lack of personal goals. He is gliding through life, taking each day as it comes, but is not really living. He avoids most important decisions in his life because they do not matter to him.
A character that relates to Meursault the most is the main narrator from Junot Diaz's short story Edison, New Jersey. The main narrator throughout the story seems lost, with no sense of direction in life. He is going through every day, taking risks in hope for something to come out of the opportunities that arise. For example, at the end of the story when the main narrator comes back from New York to drop of the woman, his coworker asks, "Was it worth it," and "Did you at least get some?". Even though he simply dropped off the woman and came straight back, he replied,"Hell yeah." This exemplifies that the narrator's goals was to get something out of taking the woman to New York, whether a relationship or sex. Just like Meursault, the narrator in Edison, New Jersey has no personal goals and is going through life without really living it.
What is going on with these two characters? Why do they just sit back and observe life, letting it pass right before them?

Meursault's Unique style of Communication

In my opinion, Albert Camus has done an amazing job of communicating the character of Meursault very quickly, and efficiently. Even without looking at his actions, or what he says, we can gain a significant insight to how he thinks, and how he relates to people. The real meat of his character is displayed in how he communicates to others in the story, and with us, the audience. When reading, I noticed that Meursault rarely ever quotes himself, and when he does, his quotations are limited to two words at the most. This starkly contrasts the more normal quotation length seen with all of the other characters. He quotes himself on yes and no, but little else. When he wants to communicate to us that he has something longer to say, he merely summarizes, much as if I were to report this post as "I explained my standpoint to the internet." This style of communication shows that Meursault feels that he can't be bothered to extend himself to try to actually converse with others. His use of short simple sentences to relay the rest of the story also helps to reinforce his tired, aloof personality that his actions have also established. With all that being said, I think it will be interesting to see what caused him to be the way that he is. I feel like his behavior goes beyond that of the standard introvert, and delves closer to the realm of nihilism. He avoids giving his girlfriend a clear answer as to whether or not he loves her. He reports that visiting his mother when alive, or going to her funeral is a pain. He seems to feel nothing for one of his mother's closest friends as he struggles to keep up with the funeral procession, as the heat mercilessly beats upon his old withered frame. The list goes on. Something appears to be off.

But, now I must ask, is this really how he is? He gives us the short summaries of what he says to people, but are those enough to gauge how he says what he says? Going back to my previous example, it's very obvious that the statement in quotes doesn't come close to really explaining what's going on. This story is told in the first person perspective, so Meursault is the one telling us the story. He controls what we see, and he tries to give us the same impression of himself that he has of himself. It could be that he has very low self esteem, and reports himself as being this kind of careless aloof person when in reality he's actually very caring. We see that he has problems with himself early on. He feels guilt over trivial matters, and beats himself up over smaller matters. There are two sides for every story, and in this case, we're getting Meursault's. What are we missing? Does Meursault provide an objective description and portrayal of himself, or does he twist things for reasons unknown to us as of now? Does his style of communication communicate anything else? Am I grasping at straws?

Justice is a Funny Thing

Chapter Four of Part Two ends by saying, "But the presiding judge asked me if I had anything to say. I thought about it. I said 'No.' That's when they took me away" (107).  

After months, the court finally made a decision on Meursault's case and Meursault is found guilty of killing the Arab. The death penalty might seem a big extreme but in that time period it was perfectly normal to sentence someone to death for comitting a murder. It is obvious that Meursault killed the Arab but did he kill him intentionally? Was it really murder? I guess one could argue that Meursault did mean to kill the Arab because Meursault shot him 5 times and I admit that's valid reasoning but I don't think it's enough. 

When examining the way the court declares Meursault guilty, it's obvious that neither side is concerned with the truth. Both sides make up their own interpretation of what happened. The prosecutor argues that Meursault planned to kill the Arab because he has a "criminal soul" while Meursault's defense lawyer uses first person to recreate an event in which he knew nothing about. Meursault himself felt like an object, he states "In a way, they seemed to be arguing the case as if it had nothing to do with me. Everything was happening without my interpretation. My fate was being decided without anyone so much as asking for my opinion" (page 98). 

Meursault himself does not know why he killed the Arab. When asked why he committed the murder, Meursault blurted out "because of the sun" (103). Although the people in the court room could have interpreted that as a lie, Meursault did not have a motive for killing the Arab. He simply pullled the trigger.

So with that, there are new questions that arise: How do you punish a man who doesn't know why he killed someone? And, is it okay to punish someone because they have a cold soul? But the most concerning question would be, was justice served? 

Translating Camus

To be blunt, I am struggling with Camus' writing style. Not because it is too eloquent or uses old English. In fact, it is the lack of ornateness that stumps me. I'm stuck trying to find some meaning in Camus' bluntness. So that's what I'll try to do here: translate one of the most straightforward pieces of literature.

Mersault is obviously not your average character, especially when juxtaposed with exuberant characters like Raymond and Salamano. He bleeds ambivalence. Take, for example, Marie's marriage proposal. Mersault could not care less whether or not he was married or whether he loved her, for that matter. He tends to live in the present, and knows that whichever decision he makes his life will move one way, but does not value one choice over another.

This is definitely a blunt way of living. So Camus must choose to mirror that bluntness in his writing. After all, Mersault is the narrator. So whose words are they: Camus' or Mersault's? It is that blurred line that I get tangled on. Am I analyzing the character or the diction? Could it be both?

Mersault is a character of purity. I imagine him with the brain of his age but the thought process of an infant. He distances himself from those around him, does not care what happens to him, seems to be floating through life with an indifference that I cannot decide if I despise or envy. I wonder if it is truly best to seize the day like he does. Or whether we must weigh our actions deliberately. Does Camus' writing style give humanity something to emulate or something to reject?

"That Person Over There Is a Person" - Jermaine Clement

During the period of European imperialism in Africa. Africa was seen as a continent of savagery. A place that was inherently evil. As the Congo is further explored through the eyes of Marlowe, in Heart of Darkness, we learn that the Europeans themselves are the ones who cannot control themselves, and act irrationally in the face of danger. While the Congolese are perfectly in control of themselves in instances of danger and panic. 

The Europeans refused to accept the idea that the Congolese were just the same as they were, because they did not want to be associated with the "savages." Instead they hid behind the idea that they were more civilized than the Congolese, when in reality they simply just had a different culture. 

In modern day, many Americans think of the middle east as a place of turmoil and evil, and what stems from this idea of the middle east is a torrent of American islamophobia. According to a 2010 ABC poll, only 37 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion about Islam and 22 percent said they wouldn't want to have a Muslim as a neighbor. This wide outbreak of fear of Muslims is much like that of the fear of the Congolese. And just like the Europeans, we are so blinded by this widespread fear that we cannot see past the fact that the bombings and attacks that caused this was just a small group of men, not an entire religion. We can't see that these people are just people and not the monsters that 22 percent of Americans don't want to live next door to.

Meursault's Ignorance to Love and Humanity

Meursault is a blunt character that is honest to the world around him. Through his straightforward reactions to society's order, his position in society, and his emotions, his honesty is seen as ignorance. He is ignorant in a sense that his mindset and his feelings are detached from the norms of society. Furthermore, he is constantly challenging the morals of society and he views life from the outside. His lack of ability to express emotion illustrates not only his ignorance to the meaning of love and human life, but also his unstable person as a whole.

The significant two examples of his emotionless character are when he doesn't express sadness at his mother's funeral and his unawareness of love with Marie. Because of the unorganized structure in society according to Meursault, this causes him to not connect with others and how they feel towards him. For example, in Part One Chapter 4, it states, "A minute later she asked me if I loved her. I told her that it didn't mean anything but that I didn't think so" (35).

Love is felt through emotion. And emotion is part of human life. The fact that Meursault doesn't think love means anything and that he doesn't love someone who is always there for him proves he is stubborn. It also shows that when encountered with someone else and their feelings, his intuition about society and its sentiments is different from the rest of the world. He is a removed individual because he not only has a different opinion on love, but he also doesn't fully understand the degree of importance of Marie's statement. This represents his unfamiliarity with social expectations. Meursault's response to Marie foreshadows his ultimate opinion on society and how he doesn't understand the purpose of human life.