"Bastard out of Carolina"

Dorothy Allison’s “Bastard out of Carolina” is one of the best books that I have read in awhile. It is very hard for me to “love” a book, but Allison’s style and realness really grabs my attention. Books that deal with real issues that really delve into the topic really grab my attention, especially sensitive issues such as the abuse that Bone experienced.
Bone was a very intelligent and experienced person for such a young girl. Bone knew a lot of things that most people do not know about until they are much older. Bone’s family and surrounding environment were very honest with whatever was going on in their lives, especially the struggle they went through just to get by. Bone’s family’s financial situation was very bad, and always was her whole life, and she had to experience things that most children do not usually have to go through. I feel that this was the main reason that Bone knew more than most children her age know. Her mother, Anney, was very honest with her, and always let Bone know what was going on whether it was about their financial status or about the health of their family members. They had a big extended family, and all of the members of the family were in the same boat financially.
One main flaw that I have with Anney is her constant need for a man in her life. Anney had Bone at a younger age than most woman plan on having children, and does not even keep in touch with Bone’s father. Anney continues to fill this void of a man in her life, I think, for financial security. However, the men that Anney brings home are never good, and she is much better off without them. More specifically, is Anney’s brother’s friend, Glen. Glen and Anney eventually got married after a little time together, which was one of the biggest mistakes Anney could have made. I am not sure if Anney is aware of the sexual abuse that Glen imposes on Bone, but I feel it is impossible as a mother not to know when something is going on with your child. Anney is a good mother to Bone, and this is why I feel she must not know exactly what is bothering her daughter, because she is always looking out for the best thing for Bone. One main reason besides money that I think Anney stays with Glen is because she knows that he could make Bone’s birth certificate official since he eventually takes over both Bone and Reese’s custody as a father. Dorothy Allison was very descriptive when it came to explaining the abuse that Bone experienced, which added to the realness. So far, Bone has experienced not only too much mentally that most children her age do not have to experience, but also physically. The physical abuse that Glen performs on Bone is absolutely disgusting and disturbing to think that someone who is supposed to be a “father figure” could ever do something like this to anyone, especially a “daughter.” This was a very different perspective of the southern lifestyle, but I do not feel the actions had anything to do with the location of where they live. I feel that an experience such as this could occur anywhere; in the north, south, west or east. I do not think Allison’s intentions were to exactly tear apart the south as a whole with this example of them living in the south, but it was interesting to see Allison’s connections to southern lifestyle. Clearly, Glen is not the ordinary southern gentlemen, nor was he rich, nor did he own slaves, or anything of that matter.
I feel that Dorothy Allison’s “Bastard out of Carolina” is, so far, a great book that tells of the realness of a child’s experience growing up in the south with little money. I feel that due to the amount of negative things that took place in Bone’s young life, there is only hope for goodness in the future. I am hoping that by the duration of this novel, Bone will be happy and successful in her future endeavors.

"The Heaven of Animals"

James Dickey’s “The Heaven of Animals” was a very interesting poem that caught my attention once it was reviewed in class. I did not think this poem was as appealing when I read it on my own, but once we had a class discussion and dissected each stanza of the poem, I have a better respect for Dickey’s writing. Along with the rest of Dickey’s poetry, the title, “The Heaven of Animals” was self explanatory as to what the poem was going to be about. The first line of the poem states “Here they are. The soft eyes open.” This was a very visual poem right from the start, and the first thing I thought of was that this was the start of the after life for the animals. When I envisioned the soft eyes opening I thought of the picture of when a new born baby animal is born and their eyes open, and I feel that birth and “after life” are very similar. Even when it comes to infants and very old people, I think it is the start of a new life for an infant and the restart of life for older people. “The soft eyes opening” was symbolic to this vision, to me, and the way the animals are described is that they are in their natural habitats, comfortable. When animals as well as humans die, it is said that right before they die they are at peace with themselves and are content with everything that they have. Continuing with the theme of visioning the afterlife of these animals, Dickey states in the third stanza “To match them, the landscape flowers...” I felt this part of the poem was a statement in addition to the vision of the afterlife because things “resurrect” such as the blossoming of a new flower, symbolizing new life. This was a reoccurring theme I found throughout the poem, where the afterlife was seen in many different aspects, not just in the animals themselves.
I also liked the way in which Dickey made the afterlife for animals seem the same way it is when they are alive on Earth. These ideas made things seem more realistic and that an afterlife for animals really did exist. Another point that I got out of this sixth stanza was that the weaker animals that are hunted in their lives go to heaven as a reward. When an animal is sacrificed whether it is hunted by humans or physically killed by another animal, its “reward” is to go to heaven and continue their lives in the afterlife and be free of danger from everything and from pain. In the last two stanza, Dickey states the idea that all animals grow into themselves in the afterlife and come full circle and at peace with themselves. If only animals could actually read Dickey’s work, I am sure they would have a positive outlook on death and the afterlife, because Dickey makes everything seem so serene.
The tone throughout this entire poem is peaceful. Dickey makes death seem like an acceptable thing that people, as well as animals, should not be scared of. I feel that Dickey uses animals as an example to show humans that they should not be scared of death. Instead of using people, Dickey makes it seem like the poem is not for people, but I analyzed this poem as a way for people to look at death as a positive thing that things will only get better and you should not fear death.

Walking on Water

James Dickey wrote many poems that all dealt with people, nature, and animals in some way. Dickey labeled his poetry with very significant titles that told the reader exactly what the poem was about. Sometimes poetry can be very confusing to me, and I have to read things over and over to understand visually what is being told, but with the help of significant titles I can make better connections. Sometimes in poems the title has nothing to do with the poem, and it makes it harder to comprehend. In this case, this was not a problem.
"Walking on Water" was the most interesting poem to me out of all of Dickey’s poetry, and I thought it had a religious significance built into it. Once I read the title of the poem, I automatically thought of Jesus. When I continued to read, I got to the second paragraph and read the following lines:

Later, it came to be said
That I was seen walking on water,
Not moving my legs
Except for the wrong step of sliding:
A child who leaned on a staff,
A curious pilgrim hiking
Between two open blue worlds,

My motion a miracle,
Leaving behind me no footprint,
But only the shimmering place
Of an infinite step upon water

The first thing that came to mind was the vision of Jesus walking on water and the significance of this event. When Jesus walked on water he was walking on it to save people. In Dickey’s poem, the person walking on water, I think, was trying to help the animals. The tone throughout this poem was definitely intense. The tone was intense due to the build up of wanting to see if there was going to be the same connection of walking on water with Jesus. The message that I got from this poem was that Dickey was taking the place of Jesus when he walked on the water, and he wanted to leave a mark on nature by leaving steps in the sand. Dickey made the connection of people, nature and animals and how they all are linked to one another.
For the most part, I can never interpret what a poet is trying to say in their poetry. I do not like to read poetry, and I do not like when I have to write it for an assignment. I think it is too personal to the writer to have other people interpret a writer’s work, and that it should not have to be examined, but rather only read. However, I feel that Dickey’s “Walking on Water” was the most comprehensible, to me, and that is why I chose to write about it, especially because I was able to make a religious connection.

"A Streetcar Named Desire" play vs. movie

The play “A Streetcar Named Desire” was very similar to the movie version when it came to plot. I felt that the lines recited in the movie were exactly the same in the play. However, a main problem I had with the movie was the actors. The actors were not exactly how I had pictured them while reading the play, and I prefer the characters I imagined in my mind. I am aware that the movie was not made recently, but I felt the acting was terrible, except for Stanley’s character. The acting was very poor on many levels. I felt there was no emotion coming from Stella and Blanche when they recited their lines, and the producer could have found much better actresses to take their places. The emotion that I felt from the characters while reading the play was much more powerful than in the movie. For instance, when Blanche was about to be raped by Stanley in the play, there was a lot more of a build up and nervousness felt while reading. When I watched this scene in class, I didn’t think Blanche showed any emotions nor was scared whatsoever right before she was raped in the movie. This made the movie very boring and dry since I didn’t feel like the actors were good enough for the parts they played, minus Stanley. I feel that if there was a modern day movie made of “A Streetcar Named Desire” there would be a lot of more emotions put into the parts. Also, in our present society, the rape scene would definitely be shown. Our society has changed drastically since this movie was made, and in today’s media a scene such as this would be expected to be shown in full detail. I found this humorous in a strange way that things like this are expected to be shown in movies because that is what the media wants to see. Times have changed a lot and I am not sure if it is for better or for worse. People want realness in film now and want everything to be revealed and shown, no matter how extreme it may be.
Blanche was portrayed as very sexual in the movie, and I didn’t think she was as sexual in the play. In the play, I felt that Blanche was more of a snooty person and thought she was better than everyone else. In the film she didn’t give this feeling to me as the viewer, but I felt that she was more into her sexual encounters with men. Stella was older looking than I had imagined while reading the play. I felt that Stella was older looking than Stanley and she was very high strung when it came to her relationship with Stanley. From watching their relationship despite the bad acting, the viewer could tell that Stanley had Stella wrapped around his finger. One similarity about Stella in the movie and the play was her weakness. It was upsetting to see someone drop everything for a person that doesn’t appreciate you half as much as you appreciate them and this was the way that Stella and Stanley’s relationship worked. I was very surprising to see how good of an actor Stanley’s character was, especially for his time. Stanley was better than I imagined in the movie than in the play and was very good at showing his true colors that were described in the play. Stanley did a good job of making Blanche feel smaller than a bug and stepping on her whenever he wished, and was abusive to Stella and embarrassed her whenever he wanted to.
Overall I think the movie was dull, boring, and dry and could have been a lot better. It was sad to see such a good play shown in such a bad lighting on film. I think that this should be publicized and fixed, and remade into a modern version of the play with better actors and better music.