Read Foster Chapter 15, and then 18-21 and tell me about 2-3 things that really stood out to you from the reading. Maybe they stood out to you because they were interesting, conflicting, good or bad, etc. DON'T SUMMARIZE the reading; instead, discuss those moments in the text that got you thinking...
Due by Sunday at midnight!
While reading the homework assignment from Foster's book, two things stood out to me: the ideas of baptism and archetypes in literature. It is universally known that "baptism" represents a renewal; however, one must be willing to change or go through their "rebirth". If a character had not been emotionally stable enough to bob up from the water, the author would have killed off the character. Also, not all baptisms in literature have to include holy water and a preacher: characters can emerge with a personality/lifestyle change from a struggle with a treacherous storm from a dip in a sludgy marsh. Another recognizable concept in literature is the pattern of archetypes. Archetypes are the noticeably quintessential characters that have appeared in movies, media, and literature. For instance, it’s hard to watch a chick flick without feeling like you’ve already seen it a dozen times before: the protagonist and supporting characters are merely regurgitated onto a change of scenery and a slightly different plot structure. There’s the protagonist, a smart woman who is unsure of both herself and her dating prospects; the protagonist’s love interest, who is a man either out of her league or someone she would have never pictured herself with; the ex or bad date who still remains in the picture; and—we can’t forget—the protagonist’s quirky, clumsy best friend who is always full of advice on men and relationships. Of course, archetypes aren’t only limited to chick flicks. Certain repetition of classic character types—like the shady recluse who is never seen outside of his dank mansion, the coming-of-age quester, the assassin with a conscience—have been portrayed throughout history.
ReplyDelete*OR from a dip in a sludgy marsh
DeleteFirst off, your portrayal of the typical chick flick amused me. I agree that there are often familiar characters in unfamiliar pieces of literature (or movies). That goes along with Foster's idea of memory, symbol, and pattern. Spotting such archetypes can make a story easier to understand and analyze, even if it isn't exactly the same as something before it.
DeleteYour point on baptism is also a very good one. I like the idea that rebirth only occurs when a character is ready. He/she may not realize it, but it can't happen unless that point has been reached. I like to think that a character can be reborn without water (clean or dirty). However, the water is symbolic and does make that change more obvious.
Following Foster’s excessively – yet appropriately – thorough text, that guides a novice reader to intricately dissect works of literature, I was tremendously captivated, and left pondering two of his many brainy philosophies: the significance of season and geography.
ReplyDeleteIn F. Scott Fitzgerald’s classical and brilliant piece, The Great Gatsby, he vividly portrays a particular season. Spring represents rebirth and rejuvenation of nature – in this instance the hopes in renewal of Jay Gatsby’s relationship with Daisy. Fitzgerald didn’t inadvertently “cherry-pick” the spring season due to the regrowth of foliage, rather to depict Gatsby’s passion and desire to evolve his relationship. As the plot transitioned into the midst of summer – lovely weather, blossoming buds – is when the developing relationship with Daisy reached its crowning peak. And as the novel descended into the falling actions, expiration of summer, the once existing bond with shared between Daisy and Jay slowly diminished with the vibrantly-colored gardens on East Egg.
Geography has the ability to determine the entire atmosphere in a piece of literature. A reader must carefully consider an author’s purpose in choosing the sensual-infused city of Italy, or the untouched canvas-like color palette of Greece. Where does the generic vampire and werewolf novel virtually always take place? Romania … or some other European country possessing a doomed essence. The author chooses this location to set a tone. Why does the antagonist – in this instance immoral and savage beast – die at the daunting and forbidden forest in which the entire conflict began? When the demolition and resolution takes place in the same location where it arose, that lifts the curse and essentially saves the innocent family, clique of friends, or perhaps town. Each location signifies a certain meaning. One meaning could include, “[ the sending of a] character south, so they can run amok” (171).
Hi, Ben:
DeleteI liked how you compared what you read in Foster's book to existing literature that Foster has yet to cover. In The Great Gatsby, the season/weather is significant in description of key events; likewise, the season/weather is also foreshadowing. Remember that it is the hottest day of the year Tom finds out about Daisy and Jay's tryst.
I hadn't thought about comparing the supernatural to their geographical locations! What you wrote reminded me of the geographical setting of Twilight, and how Washington is the perfect state for vampires because of its cloudy, rainy climate.
Nice job,
Maeve
Foster makes an interesting argument about flying. Humans have always been “earthbound” (125), so when an author portrays a flying character, there are only a few things that the character can be—fictional, a superhero, symbolic, etc. Authors use flying as a form of freedom. Flying frees us since it’s something that ho human can do. Flying transforms a character into a different person. This got me thinking—if flying represents freedom, what happens when you fall? Foster touched on the subject briefly, just long enough to say that falling changes a person. If the character overcomes the odds and survives the journey back to Earth, it can be just as symbolic as them flying in the first place. While soaring through the air can represent freedom, falling to the ground can represent a traumatic time in someone’s life. They’re falling from the high of freedom.
ReplyDeleteFoster gives a vivid description of a person falling into a pond to elaborate on his point of baptism. The word “baptism” may be misleading, since this chapter isn’t necessarily about a religious practice. Rather, it portrays a person after a near-death experience. Foster uses drowning as the prime example, but his words could describe any near-death experience. After a person experiences such a traumatic event, they are never the same person again. They’re “reborn” (155). This is why Foster compares it to baptism. In the scary circumstance of drowning, the person can change completely. When they hit the surface of the water, they are reborn. Even though it is technically the same person, their old identity died out in the water. If the character isn’t emotionally prepared for rebirth, the author may not have them surface. Some characters just aren’t capable of renewal.
After reading the homework from Foster I thought that everything he mentioned made a great deal of sense. Things that seem so unimportant in literature at the time, now are extremely important. I find myself going through past books I've read and thinking, "Oh! Now I understand why this happened". Foster has definitely helped me become a better reader.
ReplyDeleteTwo things that stood out to me though in the chapters read were: flight and geography. Most every person at some time in their life has wanted to fly. For humans "flight is freedom" (128). Humans want that serenity flight supposedly gives because it doesn't exist here on land due to the restrictions of the "laws of gravity" (126). The interesting thing about flight is it can represent freedom and "counter freedom" (129). For some literary characters, flying is their freedom - an escape from the world they live in - for others flying can be the opposite. If you fly, you can always fall.
Every book has a setting - where the story is taking place, where important things have happened - but it is so easy to not pay any attention because it doesn't seem like a big deal. But geography is vital. Geography helps readers historically, politically, psychologically. In war books, the scenes take place in distracting, vast lands that are eery, dark, and cold. Readers can better understand how brutal war is and how psychologically and physically damaging a place like that can be. Geography sets the tone for literature. While geographically a place is sunny and beautiful and relaxing, a lot of horrible things could take place. Irony can work very well with geography. In the book, Lord of the Flies by William Golding, the young group of boys are stranded on a deserted island. An island is thought of as peaceful, beautiful, pleasant, but it turns the boys into monsters. With so many new things to encounter, the jungle becomes scary and dangerous; the island becomes a battle field between moral and immoral. Pay close attention to geography because it helps tell the story.
Hi, Madi:
DeleteI've had the same "aha" moment while reading Foster's book that you described in your first paragraph! His points really help me fully grasp the author's meaning when she/he slips in allusions, geography, politics, etc.
I liked how you brought up falling while flying. I think Foster briefly mentioned how characters often have fear of falling while they are flying; this fear can symbolize other worries in their lives that they just haven't come to terms with. I also liked how you discussed "counter freedom"; like Foster elaborated on, sometimes having the wings doesn't mean having the freedom.
Your bit on irony and geography was very insightful. I hadn't thought about how islands are usually regarded as peaceful and beautiful while I was reading LOTF; in the book, I could only see it as a desolate, frightening rain forest. Later, the geography added to the boys' problems (ie, the fire, mountains, water).
Nice job,
Maeve
Although Foster's chapters each have a specific title and topic, many of them contain ideas that transcend those bounds. In chapter 18, he says, "I've been insisting that in novels things are rarely as simple as they seem on the surface." (156). At the time, he was discussing drowning and baptism, but the statement really covers it all. Whether it is a name or the setting (weather, season, or geography), Foster believes that it all has meaning. The idea of rebirth/baptism was an interesting one. At the beginning of the book, Foster proposed that there is often a quest. The character that goes on the quest usually comes out a changed person, not necessarily having been submerged. He provided several examples of baptisms from novels, including Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon, but I don't think that such change requires water. It can simply be the completion of a quest that bring about a "new" character.
ReplyDeleteAnother interesting idea came from the chapter on geography. On page 171, Foster says, "...when writers send characters south, it's so they can run amok." That made me think of when people say that something went south to indicate some sort of deviation. For some reason, 'south' has a bit of a negative connotation. It's similar to things 'going downhill.' Geography seems to play a role even in our everyday expressions. Its use in novels adds to the idea that nothing is as shallow as it seems. Hills are more than hills, and directions take characters to places that have specific meanings.
Foster’s argument about physical deformities is definitely one that made me think. Like Foster says, “in real life, when people have any physical mark or imperfection, it means nothing thematically, metaphorically, or spiritually” (Foster, 193) However, in literature, when author includes descriptions like these, they do so for a reason. It can reveal details about their personalities, history and hold deeper meanings. Foster gives the example of Oedipus and his wounded foot. From his birth, Oedipus was ‘marked’, set apart from everyone else because of his scars.
ReplyDeleteI was also interested by Foster’s interlude, where he described his theory that there is “only one story” (Foster, 184) While reading this chapter, I had to disagree with Foster. Yes, there are patterns in literature and it’s difficult not to be influenced by other works when writing. However, Foster’s explanation that this one story isn’t “about anything. It’s about everything” (Foster, 186) seemed incredibly vague. The whole chapter seemed unnecessary and repetitive of everything else in the book. Foster questions if we can ever “put together a combination of words that is absolutely unique?”(Foster, 187) This was a sentence that definitely made me wonder—is there a limit to the amount of unique sentences that can be created?
These chapters from Foster were highly insightful and it discusses many types of symbolism. He once again talks about how something that is in a book has a deeper meaning than what is on the surface and throughout these chapters I agreed with him. After peddling my way through the chapters, I was left thinking about a few of his topics of analysis.
ReplyDeleteThe first thing that jumped out to me were the similarities between the geography and the season. Both of which clearly mean more than just the plain old setting, and this is what is intriguing. The reader never notices the creativity and the art of the author's writing when they choose the season or the location. It almost always represents a portion of the "Theme? Sure. Symbol? No problem. Plot? Without a doubt"(166) The location of a story can a great deal of the background information. For instance, in To Kill a Mockingbird the setting is Maycomb, Alabama in the 1930's. Now any person of average intelligence knows that this is prime territory for racial discrimination and segregation. So it is almost fitting that in the book a black man is put on trial and convicted for a crime he commit. Now while reading the this portion of the story, one hopes that they will find him not guilty and the clearly shows that he isn't but the reader also knows that the odds of him being found not guilty are slim to none. The geography examples that Foster presents are both thoughtful and in depth and they get had me pondering the examples I know of geography playing a part. He also states that the seasons play a big role and it is true. Just judging by the time of year the book is placed in can tell the reader some hints as to how the story will flow. "Writers can work magic with seasons" (184) since they portray a certain feeling that the author is trying to stretch across to the observer. I agree with this completely. There are countless examples of the seasons living up to what they are supposed to mean.
The next thing that stood out was how drowning can cleanse someone. Foster discussed this topic earlier in the book when he was on the importance of weather but he says that the author can create a rebirth in a character when he arises from the water, much like a baptism. Being "reborn"(155) through the water is a very interesting idea. This concept has obviously gone back all the way to Biblical times but how does it apply to literature today was my question? Since i know many stories where the submersion of water does not end in a rebirth, more so a death. But when thinking it through, its clear the rebirth does not have to happen to the person drowning. It can be his family or friends or even the entire community that has a rebirth. The importance of death or survival by water is an extremely crucial point in a literary pieces plot because it can cause a turn around and set things on a right course. It is truly jaw dropping how powerful this one tool is in literature.
During Chapter 18 of Foster’s book, he discusses the significance of water in a story. Before reading this chapter, I had never thought about the importance of water. If someone drowned or survived a drowning, it wasn’t something I thought to dwell on or analyze; it was just a death or a lucky avoidance of death. However, Foster’s explanation of water and what its true meaning is in a story makes a lot of sense. The first thing that came to mind was the book The Secret Life of Bees. A key character in this book ultimately drowned herself and it got me thinking – why did she choose to commit suicide by drowning? What was the significance in making it water that kills her? Foster claims that sometimes a character doesn’t want to be reborn or make it out of the water alive. Foster uses a lot of examples to back up his point that when someone comes out of the water after a near death experience, it is most likely symbolizing baptism. After being on the brink of death and making it out unscathed, a character will often be “clearly changed” (157) and have a new outlook on life. Sounds a lot like rebirth; coming out of the water is what symbolizes a baptism.
ReplyDeleteI especially like Chapter 21, ‘Marked for Greatness’. In literature, a physical mark means something; in real life it doesn’t necessarily. A scar isn’t symbolic in real life, but it very well could be (and probably is) in a piece of literature. Foster points out that “sameness doesn’t present us with metaphorical possibilities” (194) and it is very true. After reading this chapter, I will definitely pay closer attention to character descriptions while reading and see if I can spot any physical marks that could represent something in the character’s personality. Literature is all about that deeper meaning, and like Foster said earlier on “things are rarely as simple as they seem on the surface” (156).
While reading chapters 18-21 a couple of things really stood out above the rest one of them being chapter 15, Flights of Fancy. While reading Foster points out two main things (he actually bolds them too): that flight is freedom and that irony trumps everything. Of course the main topic of flying immediately reminded me of Up, probably because we compare it often in third block. In Up, neither of the characters really fly... But the house does. I personally think this symbolizes Carl's freedom from his grief he still carries from his wife dying.
ReplyDeleteAs I continued reading, I loved the chapter, Marked for Greatness. In this chapter it explains that, "shape tells us something ... about them or other people in the story," (Foster, 193).. After that it talks about how scars being symbolic for being different and this made me think about our book club book, The Storyteller. In this book, a girl named Sage who had a, " scar that ripples from her left eyebrow down her cheek," (Picoult, 185). As Foster says, this symbolizes her uniqueness in literature and helps develop her as a character because of how shy and in confident she is because of that scar.
Foster makes many valid points like how the geography and season also play a role and can be symbolic.
OMG I ACTUALLY FIGURED OUT HOW TO DO THIS AND IT ONLY TOOK 3 WEEKS INTO SCHOOL!!!
DeleteWhoo!
DeleteWhile reading through some of the chapters of Foster's "How to Read Literature Like a Professor" two things really shined through to me. One being in chapter 15, Flights of Fancy, and in the Interlude, One Story.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 15, Flights of Fancy, Foster discusses flying, be it superheroes, circus acts, angels, crazy people, etc. it's all about the meaning behind, as the entirety of the book generally is doing. But what really grabbed my attention is the aftermath, the fall. Obviously this is something majorly symbolic, how could it not be? I just didn't realize I suppose. This point was just really interesting to me, because whenever someone falls you know it isn't a good thing; it's symbolizing a piece of them/something falling apart, or GOING to fall apart. Foster's statement of, "the opposite of flying" (131), really got me thinking about how obvious writers can be.
In the Interlude, One Story, there was one line that really stood out to me, "On one level, everyone who writes anything knows that pure originality is impossible" (187). This piece really stood out to me because it is 100% true not only in writing and reading and stories, but in real life things also. This is a perfect point to point out because it is so true, although I'm sure Foster has already said it, and probably somebody else too. Nothing anyone can ever do will be original, even if you don't realize it, or the writer or whomever, someone else will be able to make a reference to something. Foster really got me thinking--he's right, "originality is impossible" (187).