No Victors, All Victims: A Discussion on the Human Costs of War

War is the epitome of hell on earth in every sense of the word. The principle of war is built on the complete disregard of human life and the good within human nature, instead bringing forth and capitalizing on evil, suffering and death. The powers that wage war do so because they deem one human life more valuable than another, taking upon themselves the roles of both judge and executioner. As George S. Patton, a general of the US Army, once put it “the object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his”, highlighting that war is first and foremost about killing the “other”. Although the killing of another human being is always considered morally problematic and prohibited by most legislatures and religious statutes, fighting a war is perceived to give justification to the act of taking a human life. As war seemingly provides justification for killing, the concept of “winning” a war, in turn, seemingly gives justification for fighting a war, as well as the death and destruction that comes with it. As noted by Hitler, “if you win, you need not have to explain” and “the victor will never be asked if he told the truth”. Although widely condemned today, Hitler’s words on the topic echo eerily true today, with many governments and powerful individuals using the concept of winning war to justifying waging war. This mentality can be seen throughout the ages in the rhetoric of world leaders who wage war, from Ho Chi Minh, former Prime Minister of Vietnam, who stated, “you can kill ten of our men for every one we kill of yours. But even at those odds, you will lose and we will win”, to George W. Bush, former US President, who claimed, “confronting the threat posed by Iraq is crucial to winning the war on terror”. Yet such justification begs the question, “how does one determine the winner of a war?” or rather “is there such a thing?”.

Khassan Baiev, a Chechen author and surgeon who went through the two Chechen wars, addresses this question in his autobiographical novel titled The Oath: A Surgeon Under Fire. Baiev, as many before him, and undoubtedly many after him, argues “In war there are no winners” (Baiev xiii). He supports his argument by detailing the horrors of the Chechen wars, focusing on the death and suffering of a multitude of individuals, from Chechen civilians to Russian soldiers. Baiev takes great care to present the reality of war in all its horror, demonstrating how everyone touched by war’s destructive touch is always a victim and, if lucky, a survivor, but never a winner.

From the very beginning of his novel, Baiev showcases the deaths and suffering of Chechen innocent civilians. Although throughout the narrative he focuses on the hardships and pain of individuals, as the war progresses Baiev begins to detail the injustices and horrors of war on a larger scale. In chapter seven, he writes “100,000 civilians remained [in Grozny] dying in the rubble of their apartments” (Baiev 117) and explains how a special weapon was employed by the Russian military and “ended up shredding the bodies of hundreds of civilians (Baiev 117). The use of numerical figures by Baiev illustrates how war takes the lives of individuals, who in the long term become no more than statistics, anonymous and unmourned. Such a shift in descriptions, from names to numbers, demonstrate that war kills and maims indiscriminately. This idea is further reinforced in another instance described by Baiev, as he is trying to treat a young Chechen girl “struck in her back by shrapnel” (Baiev 121). As he is trying to hastily provide her with the necessary medical care and insure her survival, he asks for the mother to remove the girl’s dress, in response to which the girl cried out “No! No!” (Baiev 121). Her objection to have her dress removed in order to maintain her modesty, even though otherwise she might die from her injuries, highlights the innocence of her spirit. Not only is the girl innocent in terms of the war, she is also pure and unadulterated by the corruption of the world. Both of these stories recorded by Baiev in his autobiographical novel, illustrate the victimization of the innocent and general population during wartime, a reality, in my opinion, incompatible with the concept of wartime victory.

Once Baiev establishes the losses and suffering endured by civilians and the innocent, he then proceeds to detail how war and violence also victimizes the troops and soldiers on both sides of the conflict. Although the general perception is that Russia successfully won the Chechen Wars, as it prevented Chechnya from establishing an independent state and instead established a pro-Russian government, Baiev illustrates that the Russian victory is an illusion by telling the story of three Russian soldiers. Baiev met Seriozha, Kostya and Ivan, three young Russian recruits who were stationed in Chechnya during the violent conflict, at a military checkpoint. Upon reading through Baiev’s documents and seeing that he had lived in Krasnoyarsk, they react by recognizing a sort of commonality and from there on they establish a rapport, always greeting him “with a smile” (Baiev 133). Once the three young Russian men cannot take the war and their military duty any more, they desert and come to Baiev for help. Upon seeing them, Baiev reflects, “fear was written all over their faces” (Baiev 135). The young men declare to him that they “have nothing against you Chechens” (Baiev 136) and that they “don’t know why we are here” (Baiev 136). The decision made by Baiev to help three Russian army deserters is made by him because he realizes that even though while in Chechnya they are enemy soldiers, back home they are sons and brothers, civilians thrown into a war that is not their own.

As the First Chechen War concludes and a shaky peace is established between the Russian and Chechens, Baiev shifts his focus from describing the horror of war time and instead highlights the devastating long-term consequences of war. Although some would argue that Chechnya won the military conflict by preventing the Russian troops from occupying the area, Baiev instead illustrates how much Chechnya lost during the war. He does so by detailing an interaction he had with an elderly patient who confessed that “he had killed his own son” (Baiev 236). The patient tells the story of how his son, a young man plagued by the horrors he witnessed during the war, became a heroin addict and wreaked havoc on his neighbors and village. As a result, the elders call on the young man’s father to “control him” (Baiev 236). Although the father tried everything from locking the young man in his room to tying him to the bed, he was unable to restrain the young man. The father explains to Baiev, “I had no way out. I shot him. It was the most difficult thing I have ever done” (Baiev 236). As Baiev reflects on the story, he accentuates the deadly echoes of war even long after combat has ceased, claiming more lives and turning more men into murders. Contemplating the post-war state of Chechnya, Baiev states “if prisons, psychiatric hospitals or treatment centers had existed, maybe the son could have been saved. But everything had been destroyed” (Baiev 236). This single story illustrates that the destruction of a region’s infrastructure is an immense loss to the population it is supposed to serve. Although the Chechens in the region had survived and maintained a degree of independence, one would be a fool to argue that the Chechen people had won anything.

The long lasting consequences of war and military ideology still echo through Russia as well. According to a report done by the World Health Organization, Russia ranks first worldwide in number of suicides committed by its male citizens (Serebryany, Russian Men are at the Top Place for Committed Suicides). One of the contributing reason that the number is so high, according to experts, is the widely accepted Russian mentality that “a man is born to sacrifice himself – to the Motherland … and to military duty” (Serebryany, Russian Men are at the Top Place for Committed Suicides). Thus there is a direct connection between the war-centric Russian mentality, as well as perhaps the fact that military service is mandatory for males, and the rate at which the Russian men commit suicide. Moreover, a study published in the Lancet medical journal, estimated that a quarter of Russian men will not make it to the age of 55 due to an excessive consumption of alcohol (Abad-Santos, One in Four Russian Men Won't Make It to 55). When combined with another study, which found that military “service members consume alcohol on more days of the year than any other profession” (Simkins, The Military Leads All Other Professions in the Number of Days Spent Drinking per Year), the connection between Russian men literally drinking themselves to death and the consequences of both the Russian military mentality and history become quite clear. The consequences for the Russian population do not stop there, as such high death rates amongst Russian males result in a third of Russian families being supported by single mothers (Bennetts, Single Mothers Left in Charge of 1 in 3 Russian Households). Overall, I believe that the cited studies clearly demonstrate that while some may argue that Russia won the Chechen Wars, just like decades before it won the Second World War, the country’s population is severely suffering as a result of both the country’s military history and the preserving military mentality. I believe that the figures provided prove that the Russian population is still paying a high price for the military conflicts of the past, resulting in a tragic loss of sobriety, human lives and valuable father-figures for the growing generation.

Although the above cited information pertains directly to the negative consequences of war on the Russian population and Baiev details the costs of war suffered by the Chechens, the principles discussed both in his novel and in this paper are applicable to any violent conflict. The reality that in war there are no winners is just as evident when looking at America’s War on Terror waged in the Middle East. In the last couple decades, multiple US Presidents have insisted on the prospect of victory, from George W. Bush to Donald Trump who stated “we will push onward to victory with power in our hearts” while referring to American troops in Afghanistan. However, a study done by Brown University estimates that the War on Terror has cost the United States $6 trillion and a death toll of almost 400,000 lives of American military and both Afgan and Iraqi civilians. It is estimated that 100,000 opposition fighters have lost their lives in the conflict (Grisales, The Cost of Post 9/11 Wars). These estimates make it impossible to detect a single victory on either side of the conflict, while the losses suffered by both the American people and the people of the Middle East are abounding.

In conclusion I must confess, although I am able to research and summarize the statistics presented above, I am no expert on war. I have never been on the front lines. I do not know what it is like to live without, as a result of military conflict. I have not lost my father or my brother to the violence of war. All that I know of war comes from the news, the stories of people like Baiev and my neighbor who grew up in Chechnya and the statistics available online. Although not an expert with any firsthand experience, I am confident that war is evil. I believe that war kills both body and spirit. I believe that war scars people for generations to come, leaving children without fathers exposed to the worst of what human nature has to offer. Although not an expert with any firsthand experience, I am confident that in war there are no winners. 

Works Cited

Abad-Santos, Alexander. “One in Four Russian Men Won't Make It to 55, and Vodka Is to Blame”. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2014/01/one-four-russian-men-wont-make-it-55-and-vodka-blame/357592/ 

Baiev, Khassan. The Oath: A Surgeon Under Fire. New York, Walker Publishing Company, 2003.

Bennetts, Marc. “Single Mothers Left in Charge of 1 in 3 Russian Households”. The Times. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/single-mothers-left-in-charge-of-1-in-3-russian-households-dkmqbctdz 

Grisales, Claudia. “The Cost of Post 9/11 Wars.” Stars and Stripes. https://www.stripes.com/news/us/the-cost-of-post-9-11-wars-hit-5-9-trillion-480-000-lives-lost-study-says-1.556646

Serebryany, Igor. “Russian Men are at the Top Place for Committed Suicides”. Fair Planet. https://www.fairplanet.org/editors-pick/russian-men-on-the-top-place-of-committed-suicides/ 

Simkins, J. “The Military Leads All Other Professions in the Number of Days Spent Drinking Per Year, Study Claims”. Military Times. https://www.militarytimes.com/off-duty/military-culture/2019/04/05/the-military-leads-all-other-professions-in-the-number-of-days-spent-drinking-per-year/ 

This I Believe About Literature

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxZwMptvtN5IbnZyR2FrMG5NekE/view?usp=sharing

The Four Words You Missed

Inside our authorized text of The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald the dedication read, “Once again to Zelda”. The narrative begins here. Forget the first chapter or first sentence of the first chapter, the takeoff has already happened. By the time you get to the first word of The Great Gatsby the story is already in full swing, the only question is, “Did you miss it?” According to the Cultural Poetics lens, this part of writing, before the fiction begins, is where the true soul and meaning of the work can be found. From this perspective, Fitzgerald’s dedication is the doorway to discovering the meaning of his work as we analyze The Great Gatsby and try to understand Fitzgerald’s societal concerns.

Remembering that any text is a social document that responds and reflects a social and historical situation I took it a step further and assumed that the author through his writing both consciously and subconsciously reflects not only the big picture of society before him, but also the diminutive details of his personal life story. The dedication obviously suggests that Zelda, whoever she may be is an important part of Fitzgerald’s personal story and thus he couldn’t help but write her into the novel. This led me to study Fitzgerald’s personal life and specifically his love story with Zelda, in the effort to answer the question of what type of behavior and lifestyle is being promoted and supported in the pages of The Great Gatsby, as well as who is being blamed or praised as the story of the roaring twenties unfolds. Understanding the biographical facts that are relevant to the text is my in to correctly interpreting The Great Gatsby’s message.  

After a lot of research I realized that the relationship and then the marriage of Fitzgerald and Zelda was very complicated, much more complex than I expected it to be. Be that as it may, I also came to realize that all I was looking for where the overlying themes pronounced in their relationship and major events that I could find projections of in The Great Gatsby, for seeing Fitzgerald’s attitude to those themes and incidents in his life would clue me in on the things he was promoting or condemning in his writing.

Using the broadest of strokes, Zelda was the wife and muse of F. Scott Fitzgerald. He first met her in 1918, and was so enamored by her that he redrafted one of his female characters after her in This Side of Paradise. Furthermore, it is said that their first encounter was recorded by Fitzgerald in his description of when Jay Gatsby first met Daisy Buchanan. However, this proves to be just one of many instances in The Great Gatsby when Fitzgerald used semi-autobiographical content in constructing the tragic love story.

In 1920, by sending his mother’s ring to Zelda in the mail, the couple got engaged. Nevertheless in the time following that, Fitzgerald failed at convincing Zelda that he would be able to support her and their lifestyle, leading in turn to her breaking off the engagement. After months of work and struggling to keep himself afloat, which even including repairing car roofs, Fitzgerald published This Side of Paradise, which became an immediate financial success and led to the reengagement of the couple, as Zelda took this for proof of a financial stable future in marriage.

I have to say that reading The Great Gatsby for the first time, I didn’t care or wasn’t interested enough to google who Zelda was or why the book was dedicated to her. Yet when I discovered who Zelda was and learned these details of Fitzgerald’s and Zelda’s lives, my interpretation changed completely. The message I began receiving at second glance warped into something opposite. After my first time through the story, I believed that Fitzgerald was condemning the sort of lifestyle he portrayed in Jay Gatsby, Daisy and Tom Buchanan’s lives. How could he possibly stand behind Gatsby who spent all of his life trying to earn a fortune to be with the woman he loves, and behind Gatsby’s attitude towards Daisy, if in the end Gatsby loses everything? How could Fitzgerald possibly justify or sympathize or even understand a woman like Daisy, who welcomes her daughter into the world with, “I hope she'll be a fool—that's the best thing a girl can be in this world, a beautiful little fool” and who is tossed from one man to another by the winds of financial gain?

He couldn’t. Thus The Great Gatsby couldn’t be reinforcing or even condoning this sort of stance on life. It must be meant to break the illusions the readers would have had of the roaring twenties, to show the lives of the wealthy when they are stripped of the glitz and the bling, to present a descriptive lesson to its audience about the value of life. The tragic undertones are ever present in Gatsby and how anyone could ever make different conclusions, astounded me.

In this analysis of The Great Gatsby, guided by some of the assumptions and methodologies of Cultural Poetics, informed of the complex story of Scott and Zelda, I have come to believe something entirely different about this novel. Learning that Fitzgerald, like Gatsby, had to slave away and wait for the love of his life gave me a perspective on what the author was communicating through his fictional character. Realizing that Fitzgerald, like a combination of Gatsby and Buchanan, was in love and married to a “Daisy” (for the infamous words about the baby girl were a direct quote from Zelda upon the birth of her daughter) affected how harshly I judged Daisy, her relationships and her choices. Understanding that Fitzgerald, like Nick Caraway, was documenting in his writing not only the society around him, but also his own partaking in it, added meaning and made me question my concluding thoughts of what the work was trying to convey, what it was supporting and who it was blaming.

I have come to believe that Fitzgerald is condemning neither Gatsby nor Daisy, not even Tom Buchanan really, but is rather putting to paper the odds he and Zelda had beat by ending up together. It does not reinforce or endorse the models practiced by Gatsby or the Buchanans, because their consequences often follow the tragic pattern described, yet they are not clearly condemned either because they are projections of Fitzgerald’s own life and sort of worked out for him. Although no character is constantly praised throughout the pages of The Great Gatsby, not a single one is condemned either. This is obvious in the amount of passivity and aloofness in the author’s treatment of both Myrtle’s and Gatsby’s death, as well as the Buchanans’ move to Europe and Daisy’s estrangement to Gatsby even in his death.

These are of course are only the shallows of the interpretations of The Great Gatsby. There are many more layers to the story of Zelda and Fitzgerald. There are innumerable nuances and controversies that could add to the analysis of this great literary work. However those described in the pages above are those that have helped me take a fresh view at what I was reading and these are the historical details that morphed my understanding of what and how F. Scott Fitzgerald was communicating in the pages of The Great Gatsby. For this reason, I did not and will not go more in depth into Scott’s and Zelda’s relationship. Thus I believe this conclusion and my current understanding of the literary work is appropriate when taking into account the tools and materials I have been working with. 

"People Never Notice Anything"

People Never Notice Anything, the essay on the psychological state of Holden Caulfield (the protagonist of J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye), challenges the fear that many people have towards the great novel and its unsettling character. It highlights the hope in Holden Caulfield’s seemingly lost behavior. Readers of this essay who have had previous experience with The Catcher in the Rye will come away, recognizing their wrongful judgement of Caulfield’s character, and those who have not yet had the pleasure of reading it will have the great opportunity to meet the boy with fresh and unassuming eyes. The essay connects with Caulfield and seeks to understand him in an unconventional way, bringing readers to relate more closely to the troubled boy than they may care to admit. It explores Holden’s inner workings while imploring everyone to always give others the benefit of the doubt. - Micah Wallingford

“People Never Notice Anything” 

            The Catcher in the Rye became an enormous success and an extreme controversy within two weeks after being published. In the first two weeks J.D. Salinger’s novel made it to No. 1 on the New York Times best-seller list. Yet in the following years this book had been banned time after time from schools, communities and libraries, accused of “violating codes on ‘excess vulgar language, sexual scenes, things concerning moral issues, excessive violence’” and cost many teachers their jobs and reputations (Time, “Top 10 Censored Books”). For example, nine years after the novel’s release, a teacher from a school in the city of Tulsa, Oklahoma, was fired for assigning the book as required reading to his eleventh grade class. In Ohio, a petition was started in the community of Columbus to ban the book from all the schools in the area, because the book was labeled as “antiwhite” (Time, “Top 10 Censored Books”). Several other interesting cases involved a petition to remove The Catcher in the Rye from the required reading list in 1993, in a school district in California, because it is “centered around negative activity”. And another instance in South Carolina, when two school board members banned the book from certain district schools because it “is a filthy, filthy book” (Bookczuk, CSUN, “Banned Books— The Catcher in the Rye”). There have also been individual petitions started by parents against The Catcher in the Rye. In 2004, in Pennsylvania, a mother presented at a school board meeting a signed petition to protest the assigning of Salinger’s novel. The mother, Cydney Schuch, said that she “would prefer that ‘students read about a lifestyle that exemplified better morals and values’” (Lowe, CSUN, “Banned Books— The Catcher in the Rye”).

Having read The Catcher in the Rye, I have inevitably joined the conversation about the novel and chosen a side in this heated debate. As I flipped through the pages and followed Holden through the streets of New York City, I savored the narrative, the simple and honest language and thoughts of a complex and distinctive young man. I enjoyed the novel greatly and found myself relating to Holden Caulfield, which was very surprising to me and perhaps to some of those who know me. Having realized the heated debate over The Catcher in the Rye that has been taking place for years now, I decided to analyze why I liked this novel so immensely. I searched within myself to see where and why I could relate to Holden. Reading Holden say, “People never notice anything” (Salinger, 5) when talking about himself and his age, I felt challenged to take a closer look at the main character himself, trying to peel back the layers and getting beyond his six foot stature and “bad boy” tag.

Holden Caulfield is a peculiar young man, with a very long and grim life story for his age of sixteen. When he was younger, he first handedly experienced loss and death with the passing of his younger brother Allie, he the also witnessed the suicide of a classmate of his and throughout most of the novel his parents seem pretty distant and aloof.

When we meet him he has just flunked out of the fourth boarding school in a row, gets in a fight with his roommate and leaves his school three days early. Then on a train he substantially lies to the mother of one of the boys attending his ex-school, telling her great stories about her rather grey son. When in the hotel he calls a stripper in hopes that she will agree to have sex with him although eventually he gets annoyed with the call and hangs up. However this is not the last of his escapades. He agrees to see a prostitute and promises to pay five bucks if she comes to his room, yet this time too he prefers having a conversation with the girl. Holden drinks a lot of alcohol throughout the time he is alone in the city, getting very drunk at one point.

All in all, these events point to the disturbed state of Holden’s mind. The rage he flies into when beating his roommate is a clear indication that there is something in his subconscious being suppressed and had been for a while and the moment when it broke free was the moment he attacked his roommate. Thinking back to the exposure he has had with violence and death, there are many possible theories as to what has been suppressed over the years; however none of the hypothesis point to anything healthy. His dishonesty with the mother of one the boys he knew from school suggests the fact that he is incapable of being truthful. The false emotion he expresses when telling these fictitious stories, in turn, suggest he lacks the facility for sincerity. The several attempts at having sex with random women, as well as his multiple discussions of sex and intimacy throughout the book, definitely point to the fact that Holden is in some way unfulfilled. It could be that he is just craving a connection with people, which he lost with the death of his brother and never regained as a result of his parent’s aloofness. The alcohol and drunkenness point to deep pain and confusion within Holden, which has obviously not been dealt with, thus his need to numb it with alcohol. His violent outburst, his fixation with the subject of sexuality and sexual intimacy and the excessive consumption of alcohol all add up to a very obvious verdict- Holden is a lost cause, deeply disturbed, perverted, an alcoholic with a moral compass totally off north.

However I believe this verdict would be completely wrong and there are many instances throughout the book that would support this different reading of Holden and whatever is brewing inside him. The fact that he removes himself from the situation in which he lost control and got violent, points to some sort of understanding of the situation and an understanding of himself. The fictitious stories he tells on the train, suggest that he is aware of the social norms that dictate one shouldn’t insult a child to the parent’s face and the social conduct acceptable in such an encounter with an older woman, especially a mother, because “Mothers are all slightly insane.” (Salinger, 30) The fact that he does not go through with his plan in either case with the women, in the end preferring to have a conversation with the prostitute, although still paying her for his time suggests his moral compass is not as far off north as all his other actions would suggest. Even the alcohol would point to the fact that he is hurting and that is a result of his feeling, not shutting down or shutting people out, he allows himself to feel. He is not numb to the pain and turmoil within him and, although only through alcohol acknowledges, the strife and chaos within. When seen in this light the listed above instances suggest that although hurt and confused, Holden is by no stretch of the imagination a lost cause; rather, he is doing pretty well. This “pretty well” is taking into account where he came from, what he has been through, and the fact that although he has had some guidance, much of life he had to figure out himself. I wish I could believe I could have done as well as Holden if I had started from his situation.

Another point worthy of attention when concerning the persona of Holden and his inner workings is the idea of “catcher in the rye” itself. Holden tells his younger sister, whom he loves dearly, that if he could be anything and could do anything he would like to be a person that stands in the rye and catches children as they run and fall of the cliff.

“Anyway, I keep picturing all these little kids playing some game in this big field of rye and all. Thousands of little kids, and nobody's around - nobody big, I mean - except me. And I'm standing on the edge of some crazy cliff. What I have to do, I have to catch everybody if they start to go over the cliff - I mean if they're running and they don't look where they're going I have to come out from somewhere and catch them. That's all I do all day. I'd just be the catcher in the rye and all. I know it's crazy, but that's the only thing I'd really like to be.” (Salinger, 93)

First of all, I would like to note that this dream, this idea of being there to help out kids when they need him most is one of the noblest ideas ever. The fact that this is a sixteen year old’s dream is even more notable. What amazes me the most is that Holden has this dream of “catching children” even though throughout his life, his sixteen years, there were very few people that were willing to “catch” him. Rather it seems like most adults let Holden fall, time after time. Neither his parents nor teachers seem to be there to break his fall. The adults in Holden’s life primarily act as “the observer in the rye” and “the judger in the rye.”

Holden believes this idea of him being “the catcher in the rye” is something he gets from a poem by Robert Burns, however his sister tells Holden that Burns never wrote about any “catcher in the rye” and Holden is misremembering a line from the poem, “if a body meet a body, coming through the rye.” Holden remembers the poem as saying, “if a body catch a body, coming through the rye,” which suggests that “the catcher in the rye” is a product of his own imagination. Perhaps this could be something like a Freudian slip, just in his head, not a spoken one. This in turn would suggest that Holden wishes, deep inside, that there would be someone ready to catch children when they are falling, perhaps because he saw his classmate jump out of a window and commit suicide without anyone catching him, or perhaps because he feels like he himself is in free fall ever since his brother Allie died and no one is there to break Holden’s fall.       
            If we are to add up all the points made above I believe there is more to be said about the novel than it being “a filthy, filthy book” (Bookczuk, CSUN, “Banned Books— The Catcher in the Rye”). Sure there is swearing and there is alcohol and a lot of sexual references, yet they are all true to the state of a young man who, although lost, injured and traumatized, is in search of himself, hungry for a purpose and striving to save and serve others. My deeper examination of Holden in the pages above, my analysis of his actions and words points to the fact that, although he is broken and confused, he is still emotionally developed, socially aware and his moral compass, though lapses do happen, still points north. 

Lock and Key or My Very Own Literary Hypothesis

Every time I pick a book up I: examine the cover, read the title, flip through the pages paying attention to page numbers and font, turn it over in my hands, examine the back, read the short synopsis and then I… put it back on the dusty shelf or I wipe the dust off and open it. What instigates me to place the book back on the shelf? What prompts me to open it and dive in? I obviously have expectations that the book has either met or has not, but what are they? Honestly, I never thought about it before, probably because a lot of my book-picking happened under the hood, in the subconscious and never required much deliberate thought. There are, inside me, profile contours and bitting cuts that the book had to match for me to leave it in my hand. But what are they and where did they come from?

In Italy, in the last century BC lived a man, Horace. He wrote many things, but among the most famous was the Epistolas Ad Pisones De Ars Poetica or Epistles to the Pisos, The Art of Poetry. He was not the first man, nor the last to dwell on the abysmal world of poetry. Yet it was his words and his beliefs, that I realized, gave birth to my own. Horace said, “It is not enough for poems to be beautiful; they must be affecting, and must lead the heart of the hearer as they will.” This means that literature is not to only have aesthetical value, but it must be deeper and touch the most secret parts of a reader’s heart. However he also pointed out the importance of a lesson in literature, reaching back to Plato and setting trends for both Plotinus and Boccaccio. “The aim of the poet is to inform or delight, or to combine together, in what he says, both pleasure and applicability to life. In instructing, be brief in what you say in order that your readers may grasp it quickly and retain it faithfully. Superfluous words simply spill out when the mind is already full. Fiction invented in order to please should remain close to reality.” To summarize, Horace expands on his first assertion and claims that a poet’s goal is to teach or entertain, or better yet, do both.

When reflecting back on my choices of books and my responses and reactions to them, I noticed a pattern and how could I not. I hate dystopian novels, despise works with inconclusive conclusions and loathe those that leave me stunned, empty and dubious. So what do I want? What do I believe about literature and what drives my choices? Here it is plain and simple. There are different types of literature, those that teach, entertain or involve. There are and should be those that do all three and there must be those that do one at a time. To break it down even more, a book must bring to its reader a lesson, satisfaction or hope. The books that teach will present a lesson. And… this is where I hear the protests rise from within my readers, so I will elaborate. The lesson that is presented does not have to be prescriptive, or in other words include a bunch of do’s and don’ts. The author could as easily have hidden a descriptive lesson within his work and this would mean we are placed before the fact of how things are. In Anna Karenina by Leo Tolstoy I believe the lesson is not “Thou shalt not cheat on your husband, for thou will end up under a train”, because that is not the sort of author Tolstoy is. Rather he teaches us of what it is like to have lived in a society back then, especially for women, having to live by double standards and being judged by every single member of society. Tolstoy writes it in such a way that we, readers, begin to judge Anna. This is crafted deliberately to strike us closer to home and present to us the reality of society, injustice and human nature.

The books whose purpose it is to entertain will bring satisfaction, whether by the means of allowing us to delve into a character’s life and letting us to live it out alongside them for a while or whether it is by the means of building mystery and conflict that is resolved in the end by a clever detective or a couple counselling sessions.

The books that involve the reader will leave the reader with hope. Period. Whether it is Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment or Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina or Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet there is always an aspect of hope hidden within. Sometimes it is as simple as the readers hoping the protagonist or antagonist will get the resolutions they deserve. Sometimes the text works more like a mirror and fills us with hope for ourselves, our families, our worlds and our futures. And then there is Romeo and Juliet which seem to bring down the validness of at least a third of my literary theory, because many will argue that tragedy does not give them hope. Yet, try to remember what you felt while reading the play and what emotions filled when you read the last act. It certainly was not all clear, light and sunlit, yet the Capulets and Montagues made up, century feuds were resolved and new opportunities were before those that learned from the mistakes of others. I believe that despite the sad ending for the two main protagonists, if I may rephrase the words of one wise man, “Hope can be found even in the darkest of times, if one only remembers to turn to the light” (any guesses who said this?).

These three components: lesson, satisfaction and hope, will, admittedly, exist in different proportions in different texts and these proportions will deviate from those in other works based on the purpose the author places in his work. When a novel, or a poem, possesses one of these characteristics disproportionally or solely, I believe it still has a right to existence in the literary universe. I believe that detective novels, science fiction and Harry Potter have the right to be christened literature. Some will argue that these types of texts do not really involve the reader, while others will argue that these text are not education or just plain shallow. My response is this. Some texts are like medicine. If we are to explore this analogy we must agree that the components of a certain prescription are much more concentrated in the bottle you hold, than in other of its manifestations. It is because this prescription, much like Harry Potter has a definite purpose and the disproportional components are to contribute to that purpose. This purpose is as noble, as the next because one way or the other it does cure the reader (or patient) of something. However, we must remember that medicine is prescribed to people with certain conditions and while it is necessary at certain times, overdosing on it often causes as much, or even more harm, than not taking it at all.  Therefore, I must conclude that the most powerful work of literature will involve a lesson, entertainment and hope, yet those works that focus on only one aspect at a time are still necessary components of the literary spectrum.

Earlier this year I disclosed my delight with Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. I believe that I got so much contentment and joy while reading this book because it fit perfectly into my literary theory.

Firstly, as readers we witness Elizabeth’s journey from a proud and prejudiced girl to a humble and gracious woman. The lessons she learns are there to teach us and Elizabeth to act as our guide. 

Secondly, the country setting, the family dynamics and the time period plunge us into the story, while the ending concludes Elizabeth’s journey and our adventure. As readers we cannot stay impartial or aloof. We become Elizabeth’s companions on her trips and we are her entourage at every ball.

And lastly, observing the evolution of the main character and her relationships, witnessing the timeless values lived out and seeing everyone get the ending they deserve fills us, readers, with hope for ourselves, our lives and the society we live in. 

Having reached back to Plato, Horace, Plotinus and Boccaccio in class and in my free readings allowed me to recognize the building blocks of my worldview and comprehend the reasons for my partiality to fairytales. I now understand what prompts me to flip through pages and look for pictures, or read the last sentence of the novel before reading the first or thirst for mystery in the works of literature I expose myself to. It is because I need to be taught. I want to be entertained and my curiosity needs to be satisfied. I want to find a ray of sunshine in the literature I read that could illuminate to me my life and the lives of those around me. I yearn for hope. I strive to see the best in people, while seeing the world around me the way it is. I want to be involved in a conversation and put “my oar in”. I want to be a reader. I want to be a writer. I want to be a hoper and make others hope for the best too.  

“There is no good and evil, there is only power and those too weak to seek it.”

- Lord Voldemort, Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone

Something like this could only be said by a person or character who was, is or is certain of being in power in the near future. For a belief such as this can only be based on thoughts and ponderings about oneself. If we were to reword Voldemort’s statement we would be presented with something like this, “There is no good and evil, there is only me and what I can do and you and what you can not do”. To continue the thought, something like this could be added by Voldemort, “You weren’t lucky, I was. I received the power. If you were in my place you would be doing the same thing, making the same decision. Because you aren’t, you are jealous of me and what I own and so call it evil”.

People can hold on to such a repulsive belief only if they maintain faith in the fact that they can walk away unpunished after committing heinous crimes. For you can do whatever you like if you don’t think you have to pay for it.

Someone who could be and often is compared to Voldemort is Hitler, although Hitler might be thought of as a banal example, he is a more realistic and personally relatable figure. Hitler had points in his life when he was in power, made decisions, but did not have to personally face the consequences. This is the core reason he could keep on going, not because he had faith in the fact that his deeds were bringing virtue and integrity into the world. He recognized that what he was doing was evil. His suicide denotes this statement. When he realized that he would not get away with the atrocities he had committed if he was not the victor, he decided to take his life, rather than face the consequences of his actions. His precise words were, “If you win, you need not have to explain...If you lose, you should not be there to explain!” People cannot believe evil things to be good, they can, however, believe that they can avoid punishment for the evil they do. When in this belief, they will no longer call evil by name, but no matter how hard they try, they will still see it for what it really is.

1. Something- pronoun

2. By- preposition

3. Or- conjunction

4. Being- verb

5. Future- noun

6. Good- noun

7. And- conjunction

8. Evil- noun

9. Not- adverb

10. The- adjective

11. Jealous- adjective

12. I- pronoun

13. People- noun

14. Hold- verb

15. Repulsive- adjective

16. Away- adverb

17. After- adverb

18. Heinous- adjectives

19. Although- conjunction

20. Banal- adjective

21. Personally- adverb

22. Consequences- noun

23. Because- conjunction

24. Suicide- noun

25. Denotes- verb

26. He- pronoun

27. Atrocities- noun

28. Precise- adjective

29. If- conjunction

30. Beleive- verb

31. Avoid- verb

32. In- preposition

33. They- pronoun

34. Hard- adverb

35. Is- verb

Semester Exam

I love reading and writing! So when I am in the process of designing a creative piece or constructing an essay, I am hoping that people will love reading my writing and I myself will deem it lovable.

In order for me to love my own writing, and any writing for that matter, it must include the following three points: It must be intriguing and captivating. It must be pertinent and applicable. And it must be lasting in the minds of the readers.  If these three points have been achieved by the writer I will probably fall in love with the piece I am reading and then there is a very good chance others will too.

When I wrote Black Dahlia these three goals were already in place.

To intrigue and captivate with my story I added realistic details and described them in vivid, rich and dramatic words. I wanted to paint with words and that is what I did, although the most memorable painting was done in the introduction. For this reason the intro is all about intrigue and tension. The first sentence “The night was too serene” grabs the attention of the reader and places certain expectations into his mind, because “too serene” hints at anything but a happy resolution. The description of the silk breeze as it shattered against two dark figures was purposely built on a contrast to heighten the tension, raise the stakes and entice the reader to explore the story deeper. At the end of the introduction so much suspense is built up and the reader is sucked in so deep that withdrawal from the world he has entered will be painful and unsatisfying.

To make my writing pertinent to my readers and to myself, I lined my story with an important truth that applies to everyone. The idea of leaving important decisions off for tomorrow, when your tomorrow is not guaranteed to you is the backbone of Black Dahlia. The idea and my presentation of it, in a real life situation, confront the readers, help them to see themselves from the side and provide them with an opportunity, before it is too late, to change. To make my point clear I used the pastor, as the voice of wisdom, to plainly and simply state vital truths. For example, “You are given today to prepare for tomorrow” and “your tomorrow is not promised to you by anyone”, as well as “the greatest tragedy in life is that we realize things very late in our life and by the time we realize them, it’s too late.”

To make Black Dahlia enduring in people’s minds a combination of things was necessary, captivating language, pertinent ideas, but also a twist, an unexpected climax and leaving the reader with no definite answer. My short, one word sentences aided me in concluding the story without providing a recipe for a long and happy life, challenging the reader to fill in the blanks and write their own recipe.

In Black Dahlia I present an issue of hoping for tomorrow and question the people that turn away opportunities of change, but my trust in the readers, that they will find their own answers for life’s question without me spoon-feeding them, is what welcomes readers into exploring the proposition at hand. I hope that now you also feel trusted and lured into reading more of my writing.