i'm lovin' it.

Maus... an un-heroic survival.

In looking for analysis on Maus, I came across an article by Stacy Affleck titled, “Art Spiegelman's Maus: An Analysis of Honesty and Imperfection.” In this article she touches on many issues portrayed in Maus, but for the most part she puts an emphasis on how Spiegeleman highlghts the overall imperfection of the Holocaust.

First off, Affleck points out that within Maus the Holocaust survivors aren’t being idolized; instead, they are conveyed in a more honest light—as selfish. Affleck states, “The honesty in this novel shows that people are not perfect and they cannot be placed on a pedestal for any reason.” The survivors look out for themselves and have little concern for others’ suffering. Vladek’s survival is only found through a series of tricks that misleadingly pushes him in a better position than others—whether taking jobs that he doesn’t deserve, bribing those around him, or sharing less than he can truly offer. Affleck argues Spiegleman’s intention in making survivors seem more human through imperfection, “By doing this it is possible that Art and other second generation survivors like him will no longer feel like they are living in the shadows of people they have no way of competing with.”

Affleck also shares that the imperfection of the Holocaust can be seen in the un-heroic rescue that supposedly “ends the prisoners’ misery.” She explains, “Survivors were not rescued in a neat and tidy manner and things did not go back to normal for them. Everything they lost in the war, valuables and businesses, were not returned and survivors were still being killed.” The absence of a typical rescue that makes everything better helps convey the entirety of the victims’ suffering. It was much more life impacting than just a few brutal months in a miserable camp.

           Affleck conveys that throughout the novel Spiegelman hints that Holocaust victims are not heroes, but just regular people like anyone else. She states, “Maus suggests that people like Vladek are not perfect, they are not idols and it is not a matter of living up to their level of greatness.” She argues that we shouldn’t compare our misery with theirs, but rather try to relate to it. And by making the Holocaust appear more imperfect than what we our use to imagining, Spiegelman allows us to more easily relate with the victims’ circumstances. 

I'll Post your Cat to a Modernist Cradle!

Postmodernism is a term that refers to the search for truth and reason in life.  Postmodernism began after the failed attempts of making order based on truth. In Postmodernism for Beginners, author Jim Powel explains how “Modern artists began to look for some internal value that was beyond all the chaos.”  In a postmodern era thinkers and society as a whole want to see life at its entirety and then explain what it means and how it exist.  This postmodernist idea appears throughout Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut.  At the beginning of the novel Vonnegut explains the religion of Bokonnism, stating “All of the true things I am about to tell you are harmless lies.” This religion gives the people something to believe and follow, but at the same time they don’t have to search for the deeper mean and find truth or reason. Vonnegut is able to emphasize the idea that there is no absolute truth. Writings from the modernist period focused on creating the perfect society by revealing the truth of science. However, Vonnegut points out the flaws of such a philosophy by criticizing the idea of absolute truth. In the novel, John goes to a laboratory for one of his articles, and talks to one of the directors and finds that the main purpose of the place was to find clarity in life.  He explains how, “Nothing generous about it. New knowledge is the most valuable commodity on earth.  The more truth we have to work with, the richer we become.” They thrive to find the deeper meaning in all the chaos of the world.  This clearly parallels with Postmodernism and the search for truth and reason.  In their eyes, it makes society as a whole closer to perfection by knowing the truth, similar to what Postmodernist believe. 

O' Brave New Essay!

In our essay for Brave New World I think it would be interesting to connect the novel to modern society and form parallels between the two. In addition I think it would be appropriate to even connect history with the development of the novel; such as the creation of the assembly line to “Fordism,” and so on.

Coming at this essay in this manner would benefit the most from the Sir Ken Robinson video we watched on the blog. It did a great job addressing some of the prominent issues in Brave New World. The video expanded on such topics like the “manufacturing” of students through the school system and “standardizing” them. This hits the hammer on the nail, so to speak, in making a parallel between reality and the novels focus on productivity and manufacturing. Also Robinson shares an interesting perspective on ADHD “anesthetics”  and how they are utilized in the classroom, a lot like soma is used by the government in the novel.

As for another source to include in my essay, I honestly don’t have much to choose from. I have hardly read books, up until this class really, which makes it hard to draw connections from Brave New World to outside texts. However I think I can manage using The Tempest in my essay. They are very similar in addressing the issue of civilization vs savagery.  Perhaps I can expand on it somehow…

As for the articles and texts supplied on the forum, I have yet to read them. Hopefully I come across some that further connect human development from the real world to Brave New World. I know that there was the one we went over in class, that I for the life of me cant remember and am too tired to look up real quick. It had a lot of good stuff in it I remember thinking in class… I think. Ugh, I have some reading to do…. 

People start losing interest in Oklahoma...

Sir Ken Robinson advocates a revolutionary idea in education. He argues against the old ways of education that focused on two foundational pillars: economic and intellectual. Education took a turn towards focusing learning to these concepts and thus initiated a “standardized” curriculum. Kids are now brought up in an education that pursues complete uniformity in knowledge. Robinson argues that we should be moving in the opposite direction, towards a divergent thinking mentality; in which we begin to focus on creativity and seeing multiple answers to a situation.

 Robinson’s video shows a strong connection to Brave New World. The government in the novel thrives upon productivity, “Ninety-six identical eggs working ninety-six identical machines!” And they achieve this by “standardizing” individuals to their future specific roles in society. In the video, the analogy is made that schools “manufacture” kids in an “assembly line” manner. Public schools are seen to be sharing the same “ford mentality” that exists in Brave New World.

 In the Enlightment and Industrial Revolution the idea of public education was first introduced. According to the video this idea angered many people of the time. They believed that it was pointless and a waste of time to educate lower-end individuals. In Brave New World, the government also sees it as unnecessary—a waste of energy—to educate everyone, and thus they separate the society into different castes and levels of knowledge.

Also the video talks about an ADHD “epidemic,” which is less an epidemic than it is a trend. Children are being numbed to “distractions” in order to achieve focus in class. In Brave New World, the drug soma has a close relationship to the ADHD anesthetic. When the government feels that its people are being unproductive or distracted they have conditioned them to drug themselves.  This worry-free state leaves actions unaccountable, and furthermore, not attemptable. 

Stability? ...or insanity?

Mustapha Mond mentions, "Wheels must turn steadily, but can not turn untended. There must be men to tend them, men as sturdy as the wheels upon their axles, sane men, obedient men, stable in contentment." He alludes to the universal principle of government in overseeing and forming its desired society. In A Brave New World this desired society is one of efficiency and controllability. Mond reveals that the achievement of such a vision is succeeded by distorting perceptions of the past.

Ford, the constructed society’s inspiration, is quoted to have said, “History is bunk. History is bunk” and thus is why “you’re taught no history.” This ignorance to historical record is essential when putting such things as family, monogamy, impulse, feeling, and desire into a favored perspective.

Mond reconstructs, “Home, home—a few small rooms, stiflingly over inhabited by a man, by a periodically teeming woman, by a rabble of boys and girls of all ages. No air, no space; an understarilized prison; darkness, disease, and smells.” Mond establishes an unfavorable and exaggerated connection to family, and with no prior experience or knowledge the listeners unquestionably accept every words stated by the “prestigious” man.

Mond continuous, “No wonder these poor pre-moderns were mad and wicked and miserable. Their world didn’t allow them to take things easily, didn’t allow them to be sane, virtuous, happy. What with mothers and lovers, what with the prohibitions they were not conditioned to obey, what with the temptations and the lonely remorses, what with diseases and the endless isolating pain, what with the uncertainties and the poverty.” These characteristics are “dirtied” in a way by Mond and thus the people remain grateful with their current life.

Mond focuses on stability in a society. He states, “No civilization without social stability. No social stability without individual stability.” And he drives this message in by expressing that the ways of the earlier era caused the people to feel strongly; “And feeling strongly, how could they be stable?”

This I think brings us to the center of the manipulation taking place. The people are deprived of ever feeling strongly and thus are able to be controlled. And Mond influences the perception of feeling strong by saying it leads to a civilization being unstable. 

Critical Critics

In discussions of The Tempest and the boundaries of interpretation by critics, a major controversy has broken out over whether or not Shakespeare intended to connect The Tempest to the political issue of imperialism and colonialism.  On the one hand, critics such as Aime Cesaire argue that the context of the Shakespeare era is at full works in The Tempest.  In her rewriting of The Tempest titled, A Tempest, she highlights what she thinks to be the central theme of the play—imperialism. Advocators of this interpretation include Stephen Greenblatt who states, “It is, I believe, all but possible to understand these plays without grappling with the dark energies upon which Shakespeare’s art so powerfully draws.” He advocates the importance placed on imperialism inferred from the context of The Tempest. Both support that the characters of Caliban and Ariel are enslaved by the foreign figure of Prospero, representing the waft of imperialist on native inhabitants. On the other hand are the critics who believe that such analysis by contextual supporters goes too far. Among these individuals stands George Will. He argues, “By “deconstructing,” or politically decoding, or otherwise attacking the meaning of literary works, critics strip literature of its authority.” Will believes that overzealous critics become in control of a text’s purpose when they analyze it too far. “Critics displace literature and critics displace authors as bestowers of meaning.” Taking these extremely polarized viewpoints into account I lean towards the argument made by Will, and I believe that it is too far a leap to connect The Tempest to imperialism and colonialism. I feel that Shakespeare intended no reference, or at least very little reference, to be made to the imperialism of his time through his writing of the comedic and highly controversial play, The Tempest.