I finished this play and the first thing that came to my mind was boredom. I remember mentioning this in my first blog about Uncle Vanya where boredom seemed as a key factor in the development of this play. In fact, Voinistky ends up reacting in a violent way after the energy that had been bottled up for the lack of work exploded outwards. Some people may argue that what made Voinistky react was the fact that he had dedicated his entire life to Aleksandr and he had received nothing in return; however, I oppose because if Voinistky had continued on working for the estate as he did in his previous days, he wouldn’t of had noticed that Aleksandr was really a bad literate. It is because Vanya had so much negative energy inside of him that he finally erupted. With this aspect of boredom in mind, I believe that the author wanted (really) to depict the image of what a utopia would be for some people. Well, many might argue that in a utopia you wouldn’t work, because everything that is there to do is already done. This idea of a utopia was demonstrated by Chekhov in its most sensationalist way, where boredom (taking over) ends up causing the exact opposite reaction (violence) to the alleged peace that the utopia would have. When I realized this (if it is true) I felt connected to the author because I basically depicted what I more or less though of a utopia (perfection leading to boredom).
I’d like to quote a small speech given by Uncle Vanya in the play which I thought alluded to the world in which we live with great exactitude:
"Strange. I attempt to commit a murder, and they don’t arrest me, don’t bring me to trial, which means that they consider me insane. [With a bitter laugh] I am insane, but those who conceal their lack of talent, their stupidity, their utter heartlessness under the guise of a professor, a learned sage—they are not insane. People are not insane who marry old men and then openly deceive them. I saw you, I saw you with your arms around her!" (216).
In this quote Voinistky mentions that even though he tried to commit a murder, nobody cares right now for the fact that they believe he is insane. But then he starts mentioning a list of characteristics in other people who he questions if they are insane. Insane in the way that they hide their real life, their real character, they hide their true identity. I myself thought of this as a true occurrence, where the people who secretly (and openly) despise life and the things they have in it should be considered insane to the upmost degree. I openly agree with Chekov’s point of view in this aspect.
This is For Me, This is For Me and This is For You --Vanya III
“But I understand so little of all this …” (201). Elena to Astrov said this when he was explaining her about his forest projects. Astrov then gets annoyed at the fact that Elena apparently doesn’t pay much attention to what he says. This seemed weird due to the fact that ever since the play started, I have noticed that the characters react to what other characters say in odd ways, as if they weren’t listening to their dialogue partner. In act one for example, Astrov begins speaking to Marina about his life, but Marina, instead of commenting about it, she simply keeps on offering the doctor something to eat or drink. She seems uninterested by what Astrov has to say about his life as a doctor. Naturally, people react more interested and excited to what others have to say when they have been absent for such long periods of time, like the doctor and the nurse. Eventually, still during the same conversation, Marina, when the fact that Astrov wants nothing to drink or eat, responds to what the doctor said about him killing a patient due to the fact that he was drunk in a calm serene way. She even offers him Vodka later in the play knowing that he is an alcoholic who has come to treat her employer Aleksandr. As a reader, if I had been in the same situation, I would have tried to keep Astrov from the booze while he is in the estate. The fact that the characters apparently pay little attention to what the others have to say is a very similar situation to the communication between humans in the present. Messages are constantly manipulated or miscarried from mouth to mouth. This event has been perfected as time has passed; however it is still not perfect. Back in Chekhov’s days, communication issues may have been even greater to the extent that he saw pertinent to illustrate this through the use of words in this play, Uncle Vanya.
Unequal distribution of land is probably the biggest aspect treated in this act by the author. Uncle Vanya tolerates the fact that he has absolutely nothing to do, but when he is told that Aleksandr planned to sell the estate in which he had worked his chops off to maintain, he explodes in violence: “The estate is free from debt and in good condition only because of my personal efforts. And now that I’ve grown old, I’m to be kicked out!” (208). This is basically an allusion made by the author about the apparent inequalities that the capitalistic society in which we live has built. He demonstrates how people, do everything to conserve what land is theirs to the extent that they are willing to commit murder to salvage what they have. This violent reaction is seen throughout the history of mankind, where revolutions are created as a consequence of the inequalities of society (the French Revolution for example). This revolution was created by the despotism of the king towards his people. To a certain extent, it can be interpreted as a consequence of the inequalities that the king held in comparison to his people, and how he did nothing to narrow down this gap.
Unequal distribution of land is probably the biggest aspect treated in this act by the author. Uncle Vanya tolerates the fact that he has absolutely nothing to do, but when he is told that Aleksandr planned to sell the estate in which he had worked his chops off to maintain, he explodes in violence: “The estate is free from debt and in good condition only because of my personal efforts. And now that I’ve grown old, I’m to be kicked out!” (208). This is basically an allusion made by the author about the apparent inequalities that the capitalistic society in which we live has built. He demonstrates how people, do everything to conserve what land is theirs to the extent that they are willing to commit murder to salvage what they have. This violent reaction is seen throughout the history of mankind, where revolutions are created as a consequence of the inequalities of society (the French Revolution for example). This revolution was created by the despotism of the king towards his people. To a certain extent, it can be interpreted as a consequence of the inequalities that the king held in comparison to his people, and how he did nothing to narrow down this gap.
A Changing Society? --Vanya Act II
As I started reading the second act of the play Uncle Vanya, I realized of an allusion that the author apparently makes about humanity (applying this text to the present world). In our society, our race has created facilities where the old-aged humans are taken care of daily by nurses who, most of the time, have no relationship with the family of the old being. Chekhov successfully depicts how the old become such an unbearable burden (allegedly) to the youth that surrounds it: “But wait a bit, soon I shall set you all free. I shan’t drag on much longer” (178). In this play, everyone is exhausted due to the fact that they have been taking special care of Aleksandr, an old man who apparently sits day and night in his room writing and thinking about life. As a reader, I don’t understand how taking care of an old man who apparently has little to no social activity in his life could be exhausting. The author could be simply demonstrating the burden that elders are for their younger family members, or he could be mocking the laziness and inconsideration of families by sending their old family members to retirement houses.
“A woman can become a man’s friend only in this sequence: first an acquaintance, then a mistress, and then a friend” (185). What is the author trying to say about women, or men in this sentence? In my opinion this order could be first an acquaintance, then a friend, and last a mistress, but never a mistress before than a friend. I was really perplexed when I read this expression, I had never thought of a woman in this way, and I had never heard someone refer to one as such. In a sense, Chekhov might be trying to express the importance of a friendship. The author may be saying that having a love life doesn’t necessarily mean that your relationship with that person is intimate and valuable; however, a friendship is always when this relationship turns to be an intimate relationship held together by trust. When this trust is incorporated in a relationship, according to the author, it becomes a friendship, whether is incorporates intercourse or it doesn’t.
As I kept on reading, I encountered an even more stunning expression than the one above: “As a rule I get drunk like this once a month… I don’t stop at anything! I undertake the most difficult operations and do them beautifully; I draw up the most far-reaching plans for the future…” (186). This expression, applied to the present day fits perfectly when speaking of people who state that when they are drunk or high on drugs they feel enlightened; although there are few people who state this, this expression will fit them completely in a mocking sense, well, no surgeon can perform an operation drunk, without killing his/her patient. Some people may argue, however, that Astrov did feel sorry and moral stricken for killing a patient under the effects of chloroform as a consequence of being drunk. But he never intended to perform a surgery on that patient, while he mentions that he did perform surgeries when being drunk in this quote. Seen in another perspective, Chekhov might have been trying to reflect through this character that although he is most of the time drunk, and he performs surgeries drunk, people don’t seem to care. This reminds me of a book I recently read called Slaughterhouse-Five where Vonnegut mocks the fact that people despise a robot for his halitosis and not for the fact that he had dropped napalm on other people.
“A woman can become a man’s friend only in this sequence: first an acquaintance, then a mistress, and then a friend” (185). What is the author trying to say about women, or men in this sentence? In my opinion this order could be first an acquaintance, then a friend, and last a mistress, but never a mistress before than a friend. I was really perplexed when I read this expression, I had never thought of a woman in this way, and I had never heard someone refer to one as such. In a sense, Chekhov might be trying to express the importance of a friendship. The author may be saying that having a love life doesn’t necessarily mean that your relationship with that person is intimate and valuable; however, a friendship is always when this relationship turns to be an intimate relationship held together by trust. When this trust is incorporated in a relationship, according to the author, it becomes a friendship, whether is incorporates intercourse or it doesn’t.
As I kept on reading, I encountered an even more stunning expression than the one above: “As a rule I get drunk like this once a month… I don’t stop at anything! I undertake the most difficult operations and do them beautifully; I draw up the most far-reaching plans for the future…” (186). This expression, applied to the present day fits perfectly when speaking of people who state that when they are drunk or high on drugs they feel enlightened; although there are few people who state this, this expression will fit them completely in a mocking sense, well, no surgeon can perform an operation drunk, without killing his/her patient. Some people may argue, however, that Astrov did feel sorry and moral stricken for killing a patient under the effects of chloroform as a consequence of being drunk. But he never intended to perform a surgery on that patient, while he mentions that he did perform surgeries when being drunk in this quote. Seen in another perspective, Chekhov might have been trying to reflect through this character that although he is most of the time drunk, and he performs surgeries drunk, people don’t seem to care. This reminds me of a book I recently read called Slaughterhouse-Five where Vonnegut mocks the fact that people despise a robot for his halitosis and not for the fact that he had dropped napalm on other people.
Work, Work, Work, Will You Ever End, Please Don't --Vanya Act I
“Come now, I believe you envy him” (Act I. 198)… “I do envy him!” (Act I,168). Envy is such a powerful feeling against someone. Feeling envious about another person may result in the killing of that person, or in even worse, the torture of another. In the book The Count of Montecrist for example, Dante seems to have everything in his life, but the envy that Danglars and Ferdinand feel against him lure them into torturing him by messing completely his life. Now, since Vanya feels this way against the old professor Serebyakov it makes me think that he will probably due something. The professor is now sick, so he may take advantage of this situation, and kill him and then blame the sickness which apparently is gout.
From this first act Chekov clearly pictured an image of the life that this people were living. They lived in a countryside in Russia, where everything seemed good, even the harvest; however, the envy and love that characters such as Vanya feel, and the pain and stubbornness that the professor experiences lead to the eventually unbalance of the life of these people. From what I have read, although the characters of this play do insignificant and rather boring chores like taking care of an old man, they feel exhausted. This feeling of tiredness, I believe, is caused by the simple inactivity that Vanya, Elena, Aleksandr, Sonya, and Waffles live. Chekov might want to demonstrate to the working class of Russia what a simple chore-less life may lead to, total desperation. Chekov might want to express how work and having an active life keep you from becoming crazy and sick (working under safe conditions). This play, if interpreted in this form, will actually incentivize hard, tired workers to keep on going.
“A fine day to hang oneself…” (Act I, 172). What is interesting about this is not only the mere fact that the line is left with three points at the end of it (…) incentivizing the possibility that suicide might actually happen, but the fact that the boredom, passion, and envy may actually lead to eventual suicide, strengthening Chekov’s cause, if it is the one mentioned above. This small quote form the play captures so much, due to the fact that it actually presents the possibility of suicide in this calm environment as the one that the characters of this play are living.
Through this first act, Chekov also expressed some communist views against the big, powerful capitalist industries. “…you all recklessly destroy the forests, and soon there will be nothing left on earth. In the same way you recklessly destroy man…” (Act I, 175-176). Through the doctor Astrov, the author represents the proper conservation of Earth (Using only what it is needed); however, Vanya is the Capitalistic pig that doesn’t care about anything but his own satisfaction. Vanya is presented as the bad aggressive character of this play, just like the communists presented the capitalistic profiteers.
From this first act Chekov clearly pictured an image of the life that this people were living. They lived in a countryside in Russia, where everything seemed good, even the harvest; however, the envy and love that characters such as Vanya feel, and the pain and stubbornness that the professor experiences lead to the eventually unbalance of the life of these people. From what I have read, although the characters of this play do insignificant and rather boring chores like taking care of an old man, they feel exhausted. This feeling of tiredness, I believe, is caused by the simple inactivity that Vanya, Elena, Aleksandr, Sonya, and Waffles live. Chekov might want to demonstrate to the working class of Russia what a simple chore-less life may lead to, total desperation. Chekov might want to express how work and having an active life keep you from becoming crazy and sick (working under safe conditions). This play, if interpreted in this form, will actually incentivize hard, tired workers to keep on going.
“A fine day to hang oneself…” (Act I, 172). What is interesting about this is not only the mere fact that the line is left with three points at the end of it (…) incentivizing the possibility that suicide might actually happen, but the fact that the boredom, passion, and envy may actually lead to eventual suicide, strengthening Chekov’s cause, if it is the one mentioned above. This small quote form the play captures so much, due to the fact that it actually presents the possibility of suicide in this calm environment as the one that the characters of this play are living.
Through this first act, Chekov also expressed some communist views against the big, powerful capitalist industries. “…you all recklessly destroy the forests, and soon there will be nothing left on earth. In the same way you recklessly destroy man…” (Act I, 175-176). Through the doctor Astrov, the author represents the proper conservation of Earth (Using only what it is needed); however, Vanya is the Capitalistic pig that doesn’t care about anything but his own satisfaction. Vanya is presented as the bad aggressive character of this play, just like the communists presented the capitalistic profiteers.
All Hail the Human Race, That Will Betray Hereafter! --Final Reaction to Macbeth
After reading Macbeth by Shakespeare I, naturally, love it. It is not only the tragedy itself that catches my attention, but the human nature that it is reflected from Macbeth’s actions. Through Macbeth, Shakespeare is able to depict different sins such as greed, extreme ambition, and betrayal. Shakespeare also makes special allusions to Greek mythology as he evokes The Weïrd Sisters and their ability to foresee the future. In Greek mythology such ability was very praised since knowing your future will enable you to take it into your own hand and manipulate it to your own accord. In some cases, the heroes of Greek mythology heavily relied in the soothsayers in order to slay the monster that awaited them. For example, Perseus was able to slay Medusa thanks to the divine help from the gods and from some soothsayers.
Greek mythology, although it is only manifested through The Weïrd Sisters, it plays a fundamental role in the development of Macbeth as the protagonist of this play. “All hail Macbeth! Hail to thee, Thane of Glamis! ... All hail, Macbeth! Hail to thee, Thane of Cawdor! … All hail, Macbeth, that shalt be king hereafter!” (Act 1 sc. Iii, 51). Thanks to this prophecy of Macbeth’s destiny, Macbeth, seeing that they spoke the truth, saw that the only way that he could become king was by slaying Duncan. Basically, thanks to The Weïrd Sisters, Macbeth murdered the king to become one himself, and killed many others to ensure his kinship. Macbeth’s decline as a humble, good soldier of the Scottish king began due to the power that was entrusted to him by The Weïrd Sisters (the knowledge of his destiny). Because of this, I could say that Macbeth alone isn’t to blame for the kinship he violently secured, The Weïrd Sisters also deserve part in this. If they hadn’t told Macbeth such a thing, he would of probably become king when the time was fit, and not by his ambition and greed.
Speaking of greed, Shakespeare is able to clearly depict such a human emotion through Macbeth. Clearly, Macbeth isn’t satisfied with being Thane of Cawdor and Glamis for more than a week –no—he has deliberately kill the king. Then, being king himself not enough, he wants to secure his heirs by killing Banquo, his soul companion in battle, due to the fact that The Weïrd Sisters told them that although Banquo was not going to be king, that he will beget kings: “Thou shalt get kings, though thou be none. So all hail, Macbeth and Banquo!” (Act 1 sc. Iii 70).
Another yet huge trait of the human nature is treason, betrayal. As I spoke to a friend, I noticed that I had coincided with him about how Shakespeare reflects treason in its purest form (Juan M. Venegas). Macbeth committed the purest, most primitive act of treason that you could commit. Some may argue that the worst case of treason is betraying your wife or country; however, I believe that betraying someone’s trust by killing him is the most indecent betrayal of all. But what shocks me the most is that this play was written nearly 402 years ago, and still we haven’t advanced morally in terms of treason. In the present day we keep seeing every kind of treason, including Macbeth’s one. Not too long ago, a guerrilla leader was savagely betrayed by his personal guards due to their greed. The guards wanted money from the Colombian government, so they decided to kill their boss and collect the ransom for his head.
Finally, after reading this work of literature, I found that humans may have advanced in terms of technology, but in moral aspects, we are still the primitive blood eating, violent race we used to be.
Greek mythology, although it is only manifested through The Weïrd Sisters, it plays a fundamental role in the development of Macbeth as the protagonist of this play. “All hail Macbeth! Hail to thee, Thane of Glamis! ... All hail, Macbeth! Hail to thee, Thane of Cawdor! … All hail, Macbeth, that shalt be king hereafter!” (Act 1 sc. Iii, 51). Thanks to this prophecy of Macbeth’s destiny, Macbeth, seeing that they spoke the truth, saw that the only way that he could become king was by slaying Duncan. Basically, thanks to The Weïrd Sisters, Macbeth murdered the king to become one himself, and killed many others to ensure his kinship. Macbeth’s decline as a humble, good soldier of the Scottish king began due to the power that was entrusted to him by The Weïrd Sisters (the knowledge of his destiny). Because of this, I could say that Macbeth alone isn’t to blame for the kinship he violently secured, The Weïrd Sisters also deserve part in this. If they hadn’t told Macbeth such a thing, he would of probably become king when the time was fit, and not by his ambition and greed.
Speaking of greed, Shakespeare is able to clearly depict such a human emotion through Macbeth. Clearly, Macbeth isn’t satisfied with being Thane of Cawdor and Glamis for more than a week –no—he has deliberately kill the king. Then, being king himself not enough, he wants to secure his heirs by killing Banquo, his soul companion in battle, due to the fact that The Weïrd Sisters told them that although Banquo was not going to be king, that he will beget kings: “Thou shalt get kings, though thou be none. So all hail, Macbeth and Banquo!” (Act 1 sc. Iii 70).
Another yet huge trait of the human nature is treason, betrayal. As I spoke to a friend, I noticed that I had coincided with him about how Shakespeare reflects treason in its purest form (Juan M. Venegas). Macbeth committed the purest, most primitive act of treason that you could commit. Some may argue that the worst case of treason is betraying your wife or country; however, I believe that betraying someone’s trust by killing him is the most indecent betrayal of all. But what shocks me the most is that this play was written nearly 402 years ago, and still we haven’t advanced morally in terms of treason. In the present day we keep seeing every kind of treason, including Macbeth’s one. Not too long ago, a guerrilla leader was savagely betrayed by his personal guards due to their greed. The guards wanted money from the Colombian government, so they decided to kill their boss and collect the ransom for his head.
Finally, after reading this work of literature, I found that humans may have advanced in terms of technology, but in moral aspects, we are still the primitive blood eating, violent race we used to be.
No, literally Carpe Diem! -- Seize the Day
Now that I have recently finished the book, I now know that Wilhelm doesn’t commit suicide, but he does explodes in an incontrollable cry, where his tears keep dashing out of his eyes without him being able to suck them in. This typical human reaction to the compilation of all the misfortunes that Wilhelm has gone through is explainable with the theory I posed in my previous blog about serenity. Maybe, if Wilhelm had cried constantly by himself every day, he wouldn’t of have exploded when he saw the old man in his coffin and the funeral. “He heard it and sank deeper than sorrow, through torn sobs and cries toward the consummation of his heart’s ultimate need” (114).
The meaning of seize the day/ carpe diem shifted completely to a literal meaning. When I finished this book and read the feedback that the “Chicago Sun—Times” in the back-cover of the book it suddenly hit me the relation between the title and the book itself. Bellow instead of trying to make his characters seize the day in a carpe diem way, he literally seized the day by describing every single detail in it from the moment it starts to the climax of it. He literally captures every moment of it; however, Bellow doesn’t only “seize” any day, he seized Tommy Wilhelm’s day. This awkward relation that the author makes with his book and the famous carpe diem phrase is basically a parody of it, it is an absurd interpretation of it. In a sense, its like interpreting literally the meaning of the phrase “you’re full of crap”.
“the mask of kindness” (90). Once again Bellow does an allusion to human’s discipline. He mentions not only kindness, but the mask of kindness. By it being a mask, it means that kindness is covering the real truth, which, in my interpretation, means being a hypocrite. By mentioning this, the author’s allusion may be towards the “hypocracy” in which humanity lives in, where humans betray and kill people from their own species. This mask of kindness is even shown by Bellow in the book through Dr. Tamkin and how he managed to defraud Wilhelm by investing his money, if he ever did, in the worst commodities of the commodities market. He was wearing the “mask of kindness” the whole time he swindled Wilhelm before he took off with his money.
The meaning of seize the day/ carpe diem shifted completely to a literal meaning. When I finished this book and read the feedback that the “Chicago Sun—Times” in the back-cover of the book it suddenly hit me the relation between the title and the book itself. Bellow instead of trying to make his characters seize the day in a carpe diem way, he literally seized the day by describing every single detail in it from the moment it starts to the climax of it. He literally captures every moment of it; however, Bellow doesn’t only “seize” any day, he seized Tommy Wilhelm’s day. This awkward relation that the author makes with his book and the famous carpe diem phrase is basically a parody of it, it is an absurd interpretation of it. In a sense, its like interpreting literally the meaning of the phrase “you’re full of crap”.
“the mask of kindness” (90). Once again Bellow does an allusion to human’s discipline. He mentions not only kindness, but the mask of kindness. By it being a mask, it means that kindness is covering the real truth, which, in my interpretation, means being a hypocrite. By mentioning this, the author’s allusion may be towards the “hypocracy” in which humanity lives in, where humans betray and kill people from their own species. This mask of kindness is even shown by Bellow in the book through Dr. Tamkin and how he managed to defraud Wilhelm by investing his money, if he ever did, in the worst commodities of the commodities market. He was wearing the “mask of kindness” the whole time he swindled Wilhelm before he took off with his money.
Mt. Despair -- Seize the Day
“…Wilky, don’t start this on me [Dr. Adler]. I have a right to be spared” (42). In this quote, the feelings that the father has towards Wilhelm’s problems are clearly stated. Dr. Alder doesn’t want to entangle into any new financial problems, he says that he has already lived that and that his son should start living independently: “There would be no end to it if I started” (51). The father also fears that if he gives his son a loan, his son will then stick with his dad’s loan for the rest of his pensioned life until he dies. This fear is so overwhelming for Dr. Adler that he doesn’t give Wilhelm a single penny although his son is in great financial stress. Personally, I would help my OWN son in an economic stress situation; however, as soon as he gets just above this situation, I would stop completely from lending him money until he pays even half of what he owns me. This I would do, because it not only gives my struggling son an extra boost in his life to keep on going, but it gives me a better relation with him.
Speaking of this, once Wilhelm even tells his father: “Keep it and enjoy it yourself. That’s the ticket!” (51). The ticket to what? When someone refers to a ticket, I usually think of it as a permission to be or participate in something that no everybody can. Applying this meaning into this quote, I would think of the ticket to death; however, everybody has one spot granted for a thing such as death meaning that death wouldn’t fit my definition of a ticket. Concluding, I ended up thinking of the ticket as the way for Dr. Adler to keep living in the “selfish” way he does, since he is the only one with the permission/ticket for living life the way he does.
“Here was a man, like Rubin, who knew and knew and knew” (56). “Wilhelm, in the city of his birth, was ignorant” (56). “A man like Rubin”, here Bellow compares two low-class workers to each other. Both workers, in accordance to the author, “knew” (I believe) about life due to the harsh experiences that, like most low-class workers, they had lived. Then, he continues to show how the people that come from poor backgrounds in comparison for those who come from wealthier economic backgrounds differ from each other. It is amazing, how the low-class immigrant knew more than Wilhelm who was born in that city. This irony is expressed by the author to demonstrate the reality of the economically unequal society which we have created. This event may also represent the author’s feelings towards the father due to the fact that because of him was that Wilhelm ended up knowing less from his city than the manager. This occurs because while Dr. Adler gives Wilhelm everything he needs when little, he became an ignorant worker, while the suffering low-class worker became fully aware of the city in which he lives in. By showing this, Bellow maybe wanted to state that this will be the same if Wilhelm’s father chooses to lend him money. If he does, probably his son will never fully learn how the world revolves.
I kept on reading when I stumbled with the title as a phrase: “Only the present is real—the here-and-now. Seize the day”(62). Here, the phrase “Seize the day” literally means Carpe Diem. Here the Seize the day of which the author is referring is two makes me think of a big event which is no longer suicide for the fact that Dr. Tamkin is directly referring to doing something that will “stop” time due to its great/positive impacts; however, I predict that the meaning of these three words will change, they will mean something else that is not the figurative meaning which is commonly known, but another meaning, a literal meaning. “At the foot of Mt. Serenity/ Is the cradle to eternity” (71). Taking this small quote out of the context of the book I would like to focus on “Mt. Serenity”. This analogy of serenity and a mountain make sense in every sense. Serenity is always the key factor in doing things well and effective. In the context of this book, when they refer to serenity, I really thought how that applied to Wilhelm, although he thought that this was just bullocks. This makes me remember how in every circumstance the winner is the serene one, the person who manages to bottle up their impulsive actions; however, now that I mentioned the bottling up of the impulsive actions, it makes me think that Bellow might have wanted to highlight I big irony about the effects of being serene. Some may argue, as I previously did, that being serene is the KEY factor for coming out triumphant in many stressful situations. But it is these serenity, this tranquility that keeps on pushing bottled up feeling upward until the person finally exploded and something terrible may turn up happening (in Wilhelm’s case, suicide). Maybe, Bellow might have referred to serenity as a negative thing, meaning that sometimes it is better to relief the pressure inside of you by following your impulsive actions. With this, the author may have done the analogy of a mountain and serenity in order to demonstrate their close relation. When climbing up a mountain, many people end up dying, just like the people who, obviously, commit suicide.
Speaking of this, once Wilhelm even tells his father: “Keep it and enjoy it yourself. That’s the ticket!” (51). The ticket to what? When someone refers to a ticket, I usually think of it as a permission to be or participate in something that no everybody can. Applying this meaning into this quote, I would think of the ticket to death; however, everybody has one spot granted for a thing such as death meaning that death wouldn’t fit my definition of a ticket. Concluding, I ended up thinking of the ticket as the way for Dr. Adler to keep living in the “selfish” way he does, since he is the only one with the permission/ticket for living life the way he does.
“Here was a man, like Rubin, who knew and knew and knew” (56). “Wilhelm, in the city of his birth, was ignorant” (56). “A man like Rubin”, here Bellow compares two low-class workers to each other. Both workers, in accordance to the author, “knew” (I believe) about life due to the harsh experiences that, like most low-class workers, they had lived. Then, he continues to show how the people that come from poor backgrounds in comparison for those who come from wealthier economic backgrounds differ from each other. It is amazing, how the low-class immigrant knew more than Wilhelm who was born in that city. This irony is expressed by the author to demonstrate the reality of the economically unequal society which we have created. This event may also represent the author’s feelings towards the father due to the fact that because of him was that Wilhelm ended up knowing less from his city than the manager. This occurs because while Dr. Adler gives Wilhelm everything he needs when little, he became an ignorant worker, while the suffering low-class worker became fully aware of the city in which he lives in. By showing this, Bellow maybe wanted to state that this will be the same if Wilhelm’s father chooses to lend him money. If he does, probably his son will never fully learn how the world revolves.
I kept on reading when I stumbled with the title as a phrase: “Only the present is real—the here-and-now. Seize the day”(62). Here, the phrase “Seize the day” literally means Carpe Diem. Here the Seize the day of which the author is referring is two makes me think of a big event which is no longer suicide for the fact that Dr. Tamkin is directly referring to doing something that will “stop” time due to its great/positive impacts; however, I predict that the meaning of these three words will change, they will mean something else that is not the figurative meaning which is commonly known, but another meaning, a literal meaning. “At the foot of Mt. Serenity/ Is the cradle to eternity” (71). Taking this small quote out of the context of the book I would like to focus on “Mt. Serenity”. This analogy of serenity and a mountain make sense in every sense. Serenity is always the key factor in doing things well and effective. In the context of this book, when they refer to serenity, I really thought how that applied to Wilhelm, although he thought that this was just bullocks. This makes me remember how in every circumstance the winner is the serene one, the person who manages to bottle up their impulsive actions; however, now that I mentioned the bottling up of the impulsive actions, it makes me think that Bellow might have wanted to highlight I big irony about the effects of being serene. Some may argue, as I previously did, that being serene is the KEY factor for coming out triumphant in many stressful situations. But it is these serenity, this tranquility that keeps on pushing bottled up feeling upward until the person finally exploded and something terrible may turn up happening (in Wilhelm’s case, suicide). Maybe, Bellow might have referred to serenity as a negative thing, meaning that sometimes it is better to relief the pressure inside of you by following your impulsive actions. With this, the author may have done the analogy of a mountain and serenity in order to demonstrate their close relation. When climbing up a mountain, many people end up dying, just like the people who, obviously, commit suicide.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)