He loves me, He loves me not

The term and the novel Double Yoke seem to be about balance, or better yet, how to create a balance between two things such as people ( a relationship), emotion (giving into what you want and what people expect of you), and as the book states "the double yoke of modernity and that of tradition" (87).

What drew me in as a reader was the complex relationship between Ete Kamba and Nko. One minute i would find myself siding with Ete Kamba and the next I'd be on Nko's side, the conflict between this only made me further realize how difficult a relationship can be. When Professor Ikot took Nko to The Falls, i was so enraged and disgusted. At first i couldn't believe Nko could just subject herself to this man, for the simple fact that he was just a man. Later on i realized though that she was really just a victim and i felt compassion for her. It made me think, what would girls be like today if they had to get through college by first getting through the men in college?

This novel made me think about the past novels we read and how sex and relationships and love have all played a role. When Ete Kamba goes to visit Miss Bulewao she tells him "Passing from childhood to adulthood is a long and painful process. And one of the golden rules one has to learn in that process is this-try to put yourself in place of the other person" (160). Life is all about passages that lead us in so many different directions, including college. The thing i find most interesting is that maybe there is such a focus on relationships and love because it helps define us. For example, i felt like Amory's failure and experience with love led him to some success and that it helped to really define him. Also, would Gina Barrecca be the same woman she is today without all of her experience with gender roles and men? In Double Yoke, Ete Kamba had described himself as being half alive the weeks after his relationship ended. Do relationships make us who we are? If i think about it, if we never developed relationships then would anyone really know who we are? And even if we know who we are, would it even matter if we were the only ones to know? I'm not sure if this makes sense, it was just something i wondered about after reading.

This also makes me interested in the idea of suffering. I know that a lot of fiction writers use the idea of suffering to make their writing more interesting or dramatic, but i don't think those are the only reasons. Suffering and pain seem to go hand in hand with beauty and maturing. I know this may seem way off base but let me try to explain. Have you ever heard the expression there is beauty in pain or something similar to that? The world is far from perfect and as someone who has overcome so much, I'm a true believer that the most painful experiences in our life make us better. I'm not saying everyone should go search for something painful to happen to them, i just mean if something ever does, there can be a positive light if you search for it. I'm sure some people could see Nko in a negative light, but i actually see her as extremely brave. She held her head high not only for herself, but mainly for her family.

Double Yoke: Section I Analysis

Double Yoke takes readers on a journey into Nigeria, where gaining a college degree is valued very deeply, much more deeply compared to any other story we have read thus far.

We meet Ete, a college writer who aspires to be something big in his country, and in the world. In the beginning of the novel, he even admires a woman lecturer. However, he questions his admiration. “He was wishing to be as successful as a women: he was wishing to adopt the method used by an ordinary women in the field of Arts! How low would he sink?” (9). This quotes brings into play what Tyler and Nolan have discussed, the role women play in the novel.

Furthermore, through his studies, Ete longs to take a sort of “revenge.” “Get his revenge the civilized and academic way. He would write and tell the outside world that masses in the university campuses are oppressed” (12). Ete wants to tell his story as he knows it. However, he criticizes the government’s oppression while he himself oppresses women (ex. beating girlfriend).

A significant theme that is in the novel is the “coming of age” story. “That night, by the hurricane lamp, with sweet music in his head, and youthful hopefulness pounding in his heart, he penned his first love letter to his first adult love. Ete Kamdba was growing into a man” (36). In, Double Yoke, it seems that love makes a boy into a man.

Continuing on the subject of female oppression, before Ete and Nko get into their quarrel, Ete cries out, “Men are never prostitutes, I have never heard of men being called prostitutes”(59). Here, Ete conveys two themes. First, the ignorance that exists when one does not gain a higher, worldly education and second, the chauvinistic world that is present in Africa. The second theme is exactly what Nolan decscibes from his sister’s experience in Africa.

In addition, the novel touches on the theme of brotherhood. At a college in Nigeria, men discuss females, educational studies, and religion. This theme of the novel bridges the gap between American college students and Nigerian students by making the students in Nigeria not appear as distant from our experience.

Moving on, the idea of a student being the first of his family to attend college is acted out. For example, the town is overjoyed about Ete’s acceptence into the college. Hoever, being a first generation college student has its negatives. While on his way to Calabar, the motor bike driver insults Ete by saying, “I bin tink say you be rich man pikin, rich college boy”(32). The cabdriver wishes to isolate Ete and his success. I can relate to this, coming from a first generation college family. Also, at times I feel I must live up expectations that family and friends set for me.

Finally, religion has a recurring presence in Double Yoke. Towards the end of this section, the entire campus gathers at the Revival and the narrator makes significant commentary. The narrator states, “For many people in Nigeria and many black Americans and West Indians, whose education was very low or non-existent, and who became of life’s demands have really not been able to recapture the art of deep thinking, which was once mastered by their ancestors, - going about the streets shouting ‘Alleluya Jesus is coming now’ was easier to understand. It gave them a sense of purpose as well.” (79). The narrator describes the importance that religion takes on in this region of the world. If one does not have access to education, religion is the next best way to seek fulfillment in life.

Ete Kamba + Nko = <3 ?

Upon opening Double Yoke, I was taken aback by the language Buchi Emecheta uses. It is not standard English that we are accustomed to. Many words are misspelled ("practised," "realised," "puzzzled," etc.), and "one" and "oneself" are used a bit often. After a while, however, I got used to the language, and realized that it adds to the authenticity of the story. Had it been written in perfect English, it would be hard to imagine the Nigerian setting and characters.

She also did a great job of depicting the circumstances in Nigeria at the time (and possibly still today) - the city being controlled by the rich, NEPA taking away water and electricity at random, most people being poor farmers, the center of the city being overly crowded, going to school being an astonishing accomplishment, the patronizing treatment of women, etc.

I am, however, very confused about Ete Kamba's feelings about women and education, but I assume that he himself is unsure. At first he is amazed by the famous female writer, and thinks of her as somewhat of a role model. That is, until he realized that she is a woman, and becomes ashamed of having thought so highly of her. Later, he is happy when he finds out that Nko goes to a good school, because he wants a woman that "must be well educated" (26). Immediately, however, he starts worrying that she might be in a higher grade than him, and that would be unacceptable, because his woman's "education must be a little less than his own, otherwise they would start talking on the same level" (26). Even when he is trying to flirt with Nko, one of his comments "was meant to be both a patronosing and flattering statement" (26), and I do not see how the two could work together.

I am curious to find out how their relationship progresses. Nko is educated, and is obviously offended by his sexist remarks. He, however, wants "a very quiet and submissive woman, a good cook, a good listener, a good worker, a good mother" (26), and I do not believe that Nko matches that description. Yes, she seems to be shy and submissive, but she has very different ideas about the role of women in society than Ete Kamba. She is probably not even a virgin, which really bothers him.

Mistreatment of women in Double Yoke

A popular theme in Double Yoke that jumped out at me was the mistreatment of women in Nigeria. While Nko is obviously the main recipient of this mistreatment, the attitude Ete holds seems widespread. This, more than the physical beatings, is much more harmful.

The book started out with a positive light shone on women, with Ete praising the new female professor who had been so successful in her writing. This did not last long: he soon reprimands himself for holding a woman in such high regard, and his feelings go steadily downhill from there. He holds his mother in high regard, but for all the wrong reasons--because she is obedient, dependent, and holds no secrets. He pictures himself like his father, entirely in control and with a woman to take care of his daily needs.

The pinnacle of abuse comes during the dorm room confrontation. Ete, fueled by his disturbing double standard of expected innocence, simply does what he's observed growing up, and resorts to inflicting physical pain. Nko, in turn, does what she's observed, and goes back to him with little complaint.

I found these instances interesting in light of my sister's experience in Africa. After graduating from college, she joined the Peace Corps and is currently teaching chemistry and biology in Tanzania. The setting is similar: a small village, mostly poor, with limited access to the outside world.

I remember a call from my sister after the first month. Above all the shocking cultural differences, the treatment of females was the hardest for her to adjust to. It was not entirely similar, as she is respected and treated extremely well by everyone in the village, but not entirely different, either. One particular event stayed in her memory. While helping the mother of her host family set the table, the father made a suggestion for my sister to carry something to the dining room. He then set off for the dining room himself, carrying absolutely nothing. She was a bit taken aback by his lack of help, although soon grew accustomed to it. The women of the village are expected to do all the house work, while the men sit, read and drink -- not out of spite, but they simply to not think to help with a chore that is primarily reserved for women.

Other examples of inherent sexism exist, too. Girls are immediately kicked out of the local school if they are pregnant. It's amazing to me that things like this happen in the year 2009. I can only hope the attitudes discussed in Double Yoke are in decline.

Babes In Boyland

A bit of an uninspired title for this post, I know, but I'm flabbergasted.

Impressed, actually. Gina Barreca writes phenomenally. That needs to be said first. She handled the dodgy issue of feminism and male perceptions of feminism with extraordinary wit and keenness of observation. I am slightly ashamed to say that before I read this book, I had a quite negative perception of feminists. To me, they were the oversensitive females responsible for removing specificity from the English language by destroying such words as "actress," "empress," and any other word whose root could be turned female by changing the ending to "ess," replacing all the gender-based words with gender-neutral counterparts. Feminists were generalized into the same camp as the stubbornly misguided "political correctness" activists, and therefore seemed unequivocally harmful to the English language, something I never really forgave them for.

Barreca, however, has singlehandedly changed my view on feminism as a movement, if not entirely on feminists themselves. Pages 49 through 52, therefore, affected me especially, although the whole book astounded me with its astuteness and wit. "Women have a particular way of using humor to survive," Barreca says, and I believe her, having read such snappy comments as "Gina figures she has plenty of time to decide whether Dartmouth College is the right place for her. Nobody expects her home for nine months." and Tiger's response to the question, "Anybody ever mistake you for a guy?": "No. How about you?" The women central to this novel, in fact, are all intelligent, lash-tongued humans using humor to cope with surroundings both uninviting and unforgiving (although, as Gina's father said, you can always take the next bus home).

The sentence that really endeared me to Barreca's feminist view, however, which is not a feminist view at all, but rather a human view, was this:

Any time a woman breaks through a barrier set by society, she's making a feminist gesture of a sort. And every time a woman laughs out loud--any time a woman makes a noise that isn't a whimper or a cooing sound--she's breaking down a barrier.

In fact, Barreca uses her "feminist" lens to deal tactfully and warmly with male camaraderie and privilege. The students are shown to be thought "faggots" if they like spending time with women more than watching male friends vomit beer, somewhat ironically. And everyone caves in to social pressure. The professors always ask the girls how they, as representatives of womankind, view issues, and the guys were, well, sheltered, overprivelaged, and understandable, in a strange sort of way. Barreca has an interesting way of writing empathetically without commiserating.

At least at the beginning, Gina Barreca’s account of Dartmouth College was NOT what I was expecting. While privilege was as important to elite colleges then as before in the 20s, I expected some men, but most importantly the women to be exceptional intellectual candidates as they asserted themselves and proved their worth in a system hostile to their ambitions. To me this would create a sense of solidarity and companionship among the women. Instead Barreca is isolated and resentful of almost every other woman on campus.
But is this the real issue? With the words of my Interp professor ringing in my ears as I read…“Then I realized Ursula Le Guin is not a feminist. She is a humanist”…I considered the possibility that while Regina Barreca calls herself a feminist on page two, this quality developed further into her college and adult career. The dominant criticism and attitude at the beginning of the book promotes one female—not any others, and vilifies the rest of the upper-class (wealthy) population. While the narrative focuses on observations such as “Perched on their family money as solidly as hens on eggs” Barreca battles the system of old money and patronage, not of patriarchy.
After a while as she finds a supportive group of friends, her resentment subsides. As she learns not to “hold onto a guy who believes there’s only one way to pronounce a word,” becoming more comfortable with herself, the classist tension in the narrative relaxes and becomes less important. School too becomes superseded by character development, just as in each other novel.

The second thing that struck me (the first being how money and class were still taller barriers than gender) was the focus on sex at the end of the book, particularly those explicit passages defiantly placed whether I think they fit her narrative or not. In a more conventional plot structure the end of the book would be reserved for her triumph over the system and the odds. The longer accounts of dates and conversations could have been set anywhere. They seem unrelated to Dartmouth. But maybe I was wrong in the beginning. Maybe feminism doesn’t require unity and solidarity among all of the Dartmouth women. The confidence and strength expressed--if not always in her actions in the bluntness of each passage—are evidence of her personal growth and indicative of success. Individuality can be a feminist value as well. And while her relationships could have happened anywhere, they fit into a longer progression of self-expression and individuality that spans from pre to post college. Starting with the teenage Gina who “counted how many horns beeped” at her and quickly changed her dress after being confronted by the conservative dignity of the richer girls.
I believe Eumie correctly identifies ‘control’ as a major motive and motif at the end. In a still male-dominated world, Gina arrives at a position to decide whether she wants to sleep with a guy. She no longer associates with the self-absorbed Yales of the world or throws herself unashamedly at her much older professors. But more importantly the feminist character at the end certainly wouldn’t think ending up a housewife, unemployed but without homework and deadlines, is a “lucky” future.

Babes in Boyland End

Hello! I just wanted to post about this novel...that's how much I like it.

I really wanted to address the first question on how Barreca deals with being in a predominantly male setting. It's as though Barreca is actually fighting against two social norms. I find that Barreca is trying to break away from the idea of being that perfect "Barbie" girl, and that she is fighting against the prejudice she faces for being a woman. I find that way Barreca addresses the prejudice in her school to be witty. She would always have some creative way to answer a very ignorant boy. I especially liked how she quickly remarked to "guys in [her] my classes, about why a woman wanted to attend a 'man's college'" (81). She simply replies, "If I'm here, then it's not a man's college anymore" (82). I feel as though Barreca always feels as though she has something to prove, because she is a woman in a "man's college." However, she doesn't let that idea eat her alive. Instead, she almost embraces the challenge. She even breaks away from the traditional look of a woman by "wearing thrift - shop clothes, cowboy boots, tight pants" (12). It's truly as though Barreca refuses to let any stereotype to consume her. She says, "I was simply never going to be a 'co' anything" (12). When she says this, it really sets the tone for the rest of the novel. She is stating that she never wants to be subservient to anyone or anything. She doesn't allow the typical 'idea' of a woman consume her identity. She also doesn't allow the fact that males ruled her school degrade her worth. She states later in the novel, "I dont want to be treated differently because I'm a girl. I just want to be a Dartmouth student" (43). When she says this, I could just imagine the frustration she must feel. She isn't even considered an equal to a her colleagues because of her gender.

Going along this gender theme, I feel as though sex was a major part of this novel because of just that: gender. I don't think Barreca had sex just because she felt the need to. I really believe sex was a huge part of this novel because she is a woman and she is in a predominantly male place. She gets away by talking about her sex life because it almost shows how she had control over the males. It's as though she no longer was beneath them, but rather above them. She could choose who to become sexual with, and ultimately she had control over the male's hormones. (in a sense). I also think that sexuality was a huge part of this novel because it shows how comfortable she is with being a woman, and how she is finally an equal. Because of sex, there's this commonality. The male and female want the same thing, they are pursuing the same thing - thus making them equals. I don't think I am writing in a comprehensive manner, but that's about as much I could think of for this topic.

-Eumie Kim

Some questions about Babes in Boyland

1) How did Barreca, the author, deal with the issue of Dartmouth as a place of male camaraderie and privilege?

2) How did Barreca address the question of her other “differences” from the “typical” Dartmouth student? What about her class background? What about her ethnic Italian background?

3) In what way is Barreca’s account like other “student perspective” accounts that we’ve read? How does she also bring in her perspective as a professor?

4) Why is sex such a large part of her story? What is the point of including so much information about her affairs?

Faithful are the wounds pp. 211-281

Although he is a relatively young character in the novel, George seems to very well understand why Edward decides to run into the subway track. Therefore, I believe that George is the only character who is able to achieve higher learning in the novel. However, other characters, such as Damon, are not able to understand why Edward decides to die. For instance, Damon's reaction to Julia's sorrow after the funeral represents how shallow and immature he is. In page 225, Damon scolds Julia by saying "Oh for Christ's sake, Julia. He's dead now. That's what funerals are for, to make it final-didn't you feel at all relieved?" His reaction shows that Damon is not able to learn what Edward wanted the people to know, beyond political conflicts and arguments. In contrast, George seems to be able to understand what Edward wanted to mean by his death. In page, 253, he says "I mean my generation didn't have that kind of faith... I have a feeling now that Cavan must have felt that nobody really cared, you know.. The things he believed in aren't working out, you see." In other words, George believes that Edward wanted to deliever some other message rather than simply saying the people should stop political conflicts and become more flexible. Edward also wanted to urge the young generation to actively think and take actions to create differences in their enviornments (possibly political environments). After reading the part where George understands the meaning of Edward's death, I was able to appreciate why May Sarton has dragged so long about Edward's death. Certainly, Edward was not an angry suicidal who jumped for the death because other people didn't simply understand his idea. He wanted to echo for the next generation how important it is to not possessed by old theories and ideas of elder generation but to actively ponder and take actions to make differences in the world they live in.

Faithful Are The Wounds

The conclusion of this novel ultimately embodies the lasting influence Edward had on all those close to him. The whole novel was not primarily focused on Edward himself – instead, it illustrated the significance of the passion one man had, and how it impacted his peers, colleagues, students.

Another thing I found interesting was how his death played a role in defining the relationships of those living – Damon and Julia, for example, and George and Pen. When Edward died, Julia seemed to be more aware of how superficial and fickle her relationship is with Damon, but as time goes on, she seems to sweep those troubles beyond her conscious mind. I don’t think I will ever understand Pen’s feelings for George, but they do get married at the end, which demonstrates, I think, George’s character development.

The death is also daunting for Isabel, because it caused her to look deep within herself; she found troubles which have been hiding in her for a long time. This is exemplified when she went to Edward’s house: “She had not come here so fearfully then to be confronted by Edward, or Edward’s life but her own” (244).

Cavan had an invaluable, awe-inspiring passion, which ultimately lead him to insanity. That passion, however, seems to be something so pure and invaluable, and it is what left a lasting impression on all those he left behind. In the end, for example, even Damon, who had disagreed with Edward, stood up, in front of thousands, for what he believed in – channeling Edward’s passion.
Grace was probably the funniest character. I find her strength and pride inspiring (when she had to be taken out of court, for example), but I pity the fact that she’s always so bitter. Anger is the only emotion she channels; I think she hates feeling vulnerable, so she just hides it under endless resentment, towards everything. This, however, makes her seem like nothing more than a bitter, lonely old lady.

In the end, though, I think everyone was inspired by Edward’s passion, but frightened and confused by his actions. It caused everyone close to him to become stronger, to realize their own faults and weaknesses. And, maybe that’s all Cavan wanted – to make an impact.

death of a martyr?

After finishing the book, i'm not sure how i feel about Edward Cavan. At the beginning of the book i had expected to learn a lot about this eclectic professor's life but the novel worked to illustrate all that he had left behind instead. None of the characters appealed to me much and they kept mentioning how Harvard would never be the same again but it seems that it took 5 years after he dies for any tangible change to manifest. If anything, i learned that professors and professional academics have things that they find worth living, or dying for, besides just their areas of study. Most enter the teaching profession so that they can find stability and further their studies of their specialties. As students, i think it is difficult to see our professors as people that can be passionate about other things as well.
Cavan was a literature (?) professor while his friend Damon Phillips was a physics professor. Yet they both felt so strongly about politics that they lost their cordiality to each other based off a small discrepancy. For someone like Cavan, who was portrayed as quite a solitary and lonely figure, this would definitely be a hefty price to pay for the sake of his politcal beliefs.
The character i disliked the most was Grace Kimlock. She seemed full of passion but all of her feelings would just erupt all over the place. Also, despite having been a steady character throughout the novel, by its end, i still had no idea who she really was. What was her place in the Harvard community? Was it common for outsiders such as herself to really be so immersed in academia society among professors like she was?
May Sarton paints Cambridge as a foundation for all the characters, even Edward's sister who is just visiting for the funeral. However, none of the characters or the town seemed alive to me. The setting seemed completely dreary and bleak, unlike the Princeton of This Side of Paradise. Maybe Sarton was trying to extend the lonliness of Edward onto everyone else...?

A Living Wound

From the start in Faithful Are the Wounds, there is this "two faced" idea represented through all of the characters. In one instance the professors are compared to Greek gods and yet in another scene Grace appeared to me as a child while she was doodling at a meeting. In fact, Grace is described in a way that it was hard to picture her as an old woman. Julia seems trapped in her marriage, stuck between her inner thoughts of resenting her husband and then being the "perfect" wife. Damon was more secretive, instantly changing his thoughts so that it was hard to tell what he was really feeling. Julia stated that she "almost resented this man's ability to rise like a phoenix from his own ashes over and over (146)". Isabelle struggled with her safety world with her husband who was Julia Ferrier and the little girl still trapped inside of her who she referred to as Julia Cavan. Fosca is a wise character whose experiences have made him the man he truly is. Dr. Willoughby said to Julia that he had respect for Fosca "because he lives what he believes (185)". Maybe that's why Edward and even Grace would come to Fosca for guidance, because he was one of the few characters that had no other face to hide behind. Even looking at the many faces of politics, this theme could relate to the political aspect of the book as well.

However, besides the politic aspect of the book the themes of communication, love, and self awareness were constant. Julia had asked herself the question, "Can people who really love each other be divided (125)?" This seemed not only a question related to her marriage, but to the relationship Edward had with almost everyone. In another passage Julia states that Edward "can't give love or take it, but he knows what it means. He knows all about it, that's what's so terrible (134)." So Edward understood the concept of love, we see that from his love for his mother, but he wasn't willing to except love which created his walls of division. In a scene with Goldberg and his wife, they are described as "people who communicated (not by words), but by the invisible waves of feeling and breathing and touch and silence (153)." Communication seems to be a huge issue throughout the novel. Julia can't confess her true feelings to Damon, neither can Isabelle to her husband, Edward is trapped in his own mind, George could never tell Edward how greatly he admired him, etc. This reminds me again of the idea of Grace being childish and where Julia had stated to herself "that they seemed to her childishly passionate (207)." She was referring to Edward's group of friends and it seemed like the perfect way to describe them. Despite being professors of Harvard or just having brilliant minds in general, they still had childish elements and still seemed to be searching for themselves. Maybe the reoccurring theme in the novels we have read is that even from a professors point of view, college life and its surroundings is still a self journey. Edward was a passionate professor who had many accomplishments, yet he was often compared to a trapped animal. Did his passion make him seem "naked" to the world and more animal like, creating a separation between himself and people? Julia had declared that "suicide is not a simple death, bringing peace with it. It haunts; it asks a question (144)." It was harder to fight with a dead man than a living one she went on to say, but Edward was so trapped inside himself that he really left the characters no choice.

103-211

Throughout this section of the story ,Edward seems to lose himself both mentally and emotionally. People around him can't understand why he seems to be so down and depressed in that everytime they see him it appears that he's completely rapped up within himself. The author delibrately describes Edward's appearance as constantly being down on himself, "hands folded in pockets", "head down", always gloomy. I expected that something big was going to happen since the author hadn't expressed any change in Edward's demeanor for a hundred pages.
Edward's discussion with Ivan gives the reader incentive on what he's been struggling over. Edward feels that he's too much of a scholar and needs to be more active. He's fighting over himself because he notices that everyone is just sitting around talking about there needs to be change and that no one is stepping up and actually doing anything. Ivan states, "This morbid sense of responsibility. You're killing yourself, you're using up your marrow, wasting very great powers. It's tragic"(109).
Grace Kimlock also notices that Edward is detaching himself from the world when they take a usual walk through a cemetary. The usual places that pass Grace has to remind Edward of noticing. Obviously Grace notices that Edward is extremely sad and the author once again describes Edward's body language as "head down", and "hands in pocket". After this incident she tells others such as Damon to try and help him and bring him back.
Damon invites Edward to dinner it's safe to say that it was a failed attempt to try and bring Edward back to normal. His wife Julia begged him to not argue with Damon about politics but Edward could not resist. Edward states to Damon that know one is standing up for anything during the most important time. "The great American pastime- laugh it off. Pretend it's not real. But it is real."(130). Edward continues to fight within himself and become more active. He then leaves Damon's residence and commits suicide.
Throughout the rest of the section people begin to relate to Edward saying that he was "necessary" in that he was cold but at the same time a courageous person that wanted to stand up for what he believed in.

Faithful Are Our Wounds: Part One (Pgs 1-102) and Comparison of Amory's Princeton

In pages 1 to 102 of Faithful Are The Wounds by May Sarton, readers are introduced to the Harvard University of the 1940s. The novel begins with the prologue where we meet Isabel, a middle ages women who is devastated by the death of her bother, a reputable Harvard professor. Isabel’s husband, not ever being fond of his brother-in-law, takes on a blasé attitude with dealing with the tragedy. Edward Cavan, the Harvard professor commits suicide by throwing himself under an elevated train. Isabel says, “He wanted to be more than anything but he wasn’t” (pg. 22).

As the book begins, we meet a series of odd characters. The novel focuses on the life of graduate students and professors. Following along with all college novels, all the characters seem to be misplaced in the world. I found this surprising because I thought that at the graduate level students and professors would have a better understanding of their environment and of who they are.

The backdrop of the novel is the skepticism of Communism and Socialism in the post-World War II era. Since the novel begins with one of the main characters killing himself (Edward Cavan), the story is boiling with an ominous stench that the reader cannot disregard.

Edward Cavan, after storming out of a Civil Liberties meeting, takes on the a mysterious role. Everyone is interested in his life and the cause of his odd behavior.

Overall, Harvard is depicted as a place where intellectual debate and inquiry is valued. Having moved past the undergrad years of “living out a wild youth,” the novel appears to be more academically focused. The professors play a more active role in the students’ experience.

Amory’s Princeton is defined by youthful angst and the search for self in an environment where social hierarchy, women, and friends dominate college life.

Harvard, as described in Faithful Are The Wounds, takes on the themes of self-discovery and confusion as This Side of Paradise. In addition, similarly, the theme of young romance is present. However, academics seem to be at the center of the college life. The attitude is much more scholarly. Many scenes take place in the classroom setting, or even outside including themes subjects such as American Literature (ex. Willa Cather) and socialism. This is something clearly missing in Amory’s Princeton.

From reading this novel, you learn that no matter what stage a person is at in their life, whether that be a undergrad, a graduate student, or even a professor, he is constantly on a struggle for self-discovery.

-Christian Aponte

Some additional quesitons for the "official" topic

Dear Class: Nolan C. and others have helped me to see an internal flaw in the original "prompt" for this paper. Below I've included some questions that might help you pump up your thesis if you are having trouble with it:

Here's one of the original questions: "Is This Side of Paradise an adequate study of young manhood, or an exposé of the "country club" nature of college life?"

Here's my response to Nolan's questions about this quote:

If you were to take the first part of the sentence as your argument you would violate my "don't
write a boring descriptive thesis" dicta.

Determining whether or not it is an "adequate" study of young manhood, either in terms of the present or the past, would require a lot of sociological knowledge of youn manhood, and is probably be beyond the scope of what you can do in the next few days.

So, maybe another way to think about the prompt, is, is this novel really about college life? Does it present an elitist version of college life? If yes, how? If not, how would you build that argument? Or, is TSOP really about an individual (Amory Blaine) and not about college at all? Or, alternatively, does it portray college in a positive light? (there's a lot of evidence on both sides here). If it is more of a study of "young manhood," then is this an admirable young man? A model? A hero? Or would this novel scare away any mother from sending her child off to college?

I hope these questions add to your argumentative arsenal if you are struggling!

To read, or not to read?

With the reading of The Plastic Age by Percy Marks being optional, I was faced with a dilemma - to read, or not to read? Deciding that my decision will depend on whether or not the book seems interesting, I turned to the back in order to read the blurb, only to find out that there is none. So I turned to other sources as well as skimming, and here is what I found:

-It tells the story of co-eds at a fictional college called Sanford.
-It is a fictional representation of current cultural trends.
-Includes content about hazing, partying, "petting" [flirting, foreplay], pranks, fraternities, and football games.
-It discusses the value of college and moral decency.
-The 1920's (when the book was written), were obsessed with youth on all levels.
-Marks was an instructor at Brown, and got fired after the book was published.

While skimming, the following excerpts caught my eye:

"Life was suddenly becoming very complicated, more complicated, it seemed, every day. With other undergraduates he discussed women and religion endlessly, but never reached any satisfactory conclusions" (Marks, 111).

"For once, he did not want to return to college ... The initiation of the freshmen amused him only slightly, and the football games did not seem so important as they had the two previous years" (Marks, 147).

"Hour after hour - on and on. Flushed faces, breaths hot with passion and whisky... Pretty girls, cool and sober, dancing with men who held them with drunken lasciviousness; sober men hating the whisky breaths of the girls... On and on, the drunken carnival to maddening music - the passion, the lust" (Marks, 165).

The Plastic Age sounds more interesting to me than This Side of Paradise, so I think I will read it after all.