You might think about the questions: how do external changes affect our relationships with each other? What happens when authors use fantastical-allegorical elements alongside realistic elements in a story? How does the catechistic (question-answer) form of the story influence the effect the story has on the reader?
You might respond analytically by showing the relationship between how it's written and what it means. You might evaluate the story: does it succeed in what it seems to try to do? Do you like it? Respond to the short story personally: can you relate? How? Compare the story to others you've read. You might think about As I Lay Dying and King Lear (or other literary works or films). Respond by extending the story in someway: a sequel and prequel. Write a letter or poem or script in response.
Show that you have read the story, have thought about it, and have understood something about it (or even have made of use of it in some way).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Emily Castro
Because there is no prompt to which we are supposed to respond, I guess I'll just write about what I was thinking while, and after reading the story. When I realized that the sun was taking a permanent hiatus, as opposed to a weekend get-away, I decided that Andrew Sean Greer's short story was kind of a social commentary. I think Greer used “Darkness” to express his disappointment in what humanity has become. Humans have become so obsessed with amassing wealth for personal gain that the lack of care and love for others has blanketed the world, bringing misery not only to the selfish and greedy but also to the people that are compassionate, selfless, and kind. Existence is a common trend among all the books we have read this year, and “Darkness” fits in rather nicely among other works of literature that we have analyzed; I think “Darkness” implies that when individuals choose to spend their time “seeking out their gold and sitting on it” (Gardner) the light, hope, purity, and true happiness of existence fade into the darkness of greed, ignorance and selfishness. I think Louise and Helen are symbols of what Greer would like to see more of in the world. Louise and Helen are a couple whose lives are far from perfect, but they love and depend on one another; each is the other’s light amidst a never ending darkness.
I noticed that Louise repeatedly quoted a poem written by Lord Byron, and I became curious. I found which poem she was quoting; a poem entitled "Darkness". After reading the poem it became obvious that Greer drew his inspiration almost completely from Byron’s poem. Lines 16-17 of the poem read as follows "Happy were those who dwelt within the eye/ Of the volcanoes, and their mountain torch" Generally, in literature, fire is symbolic of either evil or hell. With that association in mind, what I understood those two lines to mean is that those who thrive on greed and ill will towards others are happy in the darkness and enjoy staring into the light that is fueled by destruction and need not the light from the sky that rises and sets daily, shedding it’s warmth on humanity.
Both pieces seem to be expressive of the sadness the authors feel about the dwindling state of human existence, but what is most interesting is that one was written roughly two centuries before the other.
Greer throws us in the world in which the sun has disappeared, either for a short time or forever the reader is not sure. Not only that but he writes it in a way that makes the reader think that there is an all-knowing viewer of the events trying to explain what has happened to the people of this world. The story also shows how the author must feel about society and the way the world is today, not even two weeks after the sun is gone and the people have started to riot in the streets. Showing the madness of the people with both the riots and then later on when Helen and Louise are trying to get out of the city they see the fire the people have set, trying to get some kind of semblance of normalcy. The relationship between the two women is interesting to follow, how they met and the way they react towards one another. It is refreshing to see that Greer didn’t write the two any different then he would a heterosexual couple, he didn’t seem to think that their love was any different than any other kind, and the last entry in the story how Peter sees the two of them in the back and he recalls a childhood memory of a comb in a brush. And the moment that lead to this when Louise started to realize that soon they will start to burn books after they run out of other things to burn, books seems to be a recurring theme in the story it is mentioned earlier that the women had to leave things behind and Helen left behind a list of things but when Louise is asked she just responded with “my books”.
The story seems to fit with what we have been reading, one of the connections I can make is to As I Lay Dying and how both parties go on a journey and are faced with hardships along the way.
I was deeply saddened at the thought of civilization lacking daylight. With that said, what Andrew Sean Greer has written is actually eye opening. Sight is so clearly taken for granted yet so important to our livelihood. The sun is so important in so many ways, that it is easier not to address the thought of ever living with out it. What Greer has written relays a common message found in literature: appreciate what you have. Very often what we have is taken for granted until it is taken from us. The way to measure how much we want need or desire something is how we go on without it. One way to look at it is through memories as said on page 9 "And in these memories...Glowing dimly in every memory:the sun."
Louise and Helen react in different manners to the loss of their sun. Louise is a more private person who bottles up her true feelings in order to give herself a strong appearance. Helen is more open. She generally appreciates everything for what it is. Helen is an optimist. Though the story is about the two women, I would label Louise the main protagonist and Helen a lesser-supporting protagonist. I would also label the conflict as a woman (Louise) struggling to let go of her world by pretending to be a practical and decisive strong woman. The loss of the sun deteriorates the world she knows. She tries to keep emotion from it, and remain calm at all costs. Helen looks to the future rather than dwelling on the past. Louise also references Byron's pom "Darkness" a few times. I believe this tells a lot about Louise because she is always trying to find a reasonable answer for things. Reciting the poem is her way of coping. If Byron had previously written of what is happening, then it could be a prophecy. She also mentions that she believes that if she learns French, everything will go back to the way it was. This pleases her and gives her reason to go on. Byron's poem is also very dark and upsetting, which is probably why Helen seems to squelch Louise's intentions of reciting the poem, each time Louise begins. Helen prefers to look at the brighter side of things.
The interesting aspect of losing sight is the ability to understand things more coherently once it is gone, as in King Lear, Gloucester's world is opened up immediately after his eyes are gouged out. Louise in this case is much like Gloucester. Louise doesn't show emotion and keeps herself "in the dark" about the future, until the magnitude of the situation seems to dawn on her and she breaks down, where Helen is then there to comfort her.
I found these passages interesting, because they explain the relationship between the two women, and also Louise's nature as understood by Helen: page 111 " she was like a painting...madness in her eye," page 114 "And Louise...ridiculous creatures," and most of page 118.
Post a Comment