Journal of Contemporary Literature

The best fiction is far more true than
any journalism. William Faulkner
April 7th, 2015 | Volume 1 | Issue 1
Stories
for Life
Journal of Contemporary Literature
William Faulkner
Source: WikiMedia Commons
Table of Contents
4
Letter From the Editors
They + We = Me
Julie King Johnson | Formalist Analysis
10
The Only Freedom From Heartache is Death
14
The Burden of Love
18
What the Boy Really Saw in the Sea
22
Childhood is Truly a Magical Time
26
There is No Romance Like a Failed Romance
31
The Power of Words
42
To Kill a Hoodlum or Not to Kill A Hoodlum
Amy Standage | Formalist Analysis
Marta Hatch | Formalist Analysis
Anth Stokes | Theory-Based Analysis
Sam Pearson | Theory-Based Analysis
Sara Alfaro | Theory-Based Analysis
Melanie Gibson | Researched Analysis
Adam Mellor | Researched Analysis
Journal of Contemporary Literature | 3
From the Editors

Dear Reader,
Stories for Life is proud to showcase a genre that becomes more
relevant as the world expands our view through technology, travel,
and communication. The writing in this journal depicts a diverse
landscape. We subscribe to the great contemporary author William
Faulkners adage, The best fiction is far more true than any
journalism. It is our goal that through an examination of these
articles, the readers understanding of reality, as presented from
different perspectives, will broaden and deepen.
The Journal strives to explore issues that both unite and divide our
modern world. We have chosen the best representation of literature
from numerous entrants. The articles found within this Journal have
been selected based on insightful analyses. They are carefully crafted,
well-thought out, and presented in an organized manner.
We hope you enjoy this edition of Stories for Life.
Thank you!
Patricia Worsley
Formalist Editor
Anne Golladay
Research Editor
Katherine Smith
Theory Editor
4 | Stories for life
Editor-in-Chief
Formalist Analysis
THEY + WE = ME
J ulie K ing J ohnson
ho am I? This is, perhaps, one of mans most oft asked

questions. We have been in a quest for identity and meaning
for as long as recorded history can remember. Pablo Nerudas
We Are Many explores this question and finds that identity is subject to
our dual nature, outside influences, and even our own inconsistent desires.
Neruda intertwines juxtaposition, irony, diction, and form to create a
paradoxical motif which suggests that we cannot isolate our identity because
we are pieces of a whole.
From the use of the plural word we in the title, and by continually
using the words I, we, and they to refer to the speaker throughout the work,
Neruda establishes a motif. The repetition of plural words to describe a
singular being establishes the idea that we cannot isolate a singular identity
because it is dependent upon the pluralities in our nature. The poem opens
with the words, Of the many men whom I am, whom we are, / I cannot
Ironically, in a
poem that seeks
to identify true
self, we learn that
true self may not
exist at all
settle on a single one (1-2). The word I suggests someone singular, so when
we becomes a part of I, it becomes unclear who I really is. This idea grows
in dimension with the introduction of they in the next line, which reads,
they are lost to me (3). Neruda uses they to refer to those who used to
be part of the I/we equation but are no longer identifiable as part of the
whole. This creates tension and confusion and suggests that it is not possible
to identify our real self, in part, because we are ever-evolving. As we find
and lose the pieces, we change the whole. Ironically, in a poem that seeks to
identify true self, we learn that true self may not exist at all. In one passage,
the speaker introduces a part of himself that emerges as what he calls, a
coward completely unknown to me (12). If there are parts of us that even
we cannot know, we can never assemble the pieces and identify the whole.
Formalist Analysis
Neruda expands the motif created by using the words I, we, and
they by juxtaposing the inconsistencies between human action and human
intention. When the speaker prepares to say something intelligent, he claims,
A fool takes over my talk and occupies my mouth (7). The words takes over
and occupies conjure up images of an enemy conquering and infiltrating a
country in times of war. Our speaker is left with no jurisdiction over his own
actions. In exploring this juxtaposition between action and intent, Neruda
uses the word summon twice, which means, to call upon to do something
specified (dictionary.com). Both times this word is used, the identity that
he calls upon fails to rise to the occasion. When he summons courage, he
is swaddled in cowardice. When he summons a firefighter, an arsonist
bursts forth (11-17). The word swaddle means to bind, while burst
We are in a
constant
battle
between who we
intend to be and
who we really
are.
means to enter forcibly (dictionary.com). While the word summon suggests

some degree of authority, the more powerful words swaddle and burst topple
this authority. This suggests that if a true self exists, it is manifest in those
moments when what we do is determined not by what we intend to do, but
by what surges up and bubbles over against our will. The speaker throws his
hands up in these moments and cries, there is nothing I can do (18). We
are in a constant battle between who we intend to be and who we really are.
While the preceding argument implies that we can examine our
actions to unearth our identity, this is not entirely true because both our
actions and intentions are constantly modified by outside influences. We
live in a world where books and movies, lionize dazzling hero figures, /
brimming with self-assurance (22-23). The word lionize means to treat as a
celebrity and finds its etymological roots in 19th century England. Lions were
kept in the Tower of London and every visitor was drawn to this attraction
(dictionary.com). The word lionize is used to refer to anything that has that
same kind of mass appeal. This brings up images of modern day paparazzi
glorifying every moment of celebrity life, which further detaches the rest of
us from reality or identity. Our speaker talks of his envy of heroic characters in books and movies, which leave him feeling so inferior that when he
Formalist Analysis
watches western films he is, left admiring even the horses (27). We are not
happy with who we are, because unrealistic images of celebrities, brimming
with self-assurance, are being fed through the electrical veins in our homes
and landing right in our blood stream. We try to be more heroic and self-assured to match the worlds description of strength and beauty. The more
connected the world becomes, the more disconnected man becomes from his
true identity.
The damaging effect of the worlds influence on our identity is further developed as our speaker mourns the loss of pieces of him that no longer exist by saying, They are lost to me under a cover of clothing, / They
have departed for another city (3-4). We are constantly reinventing ourselves as we jet set from city to city adopting the accepted manner of speech
and dress in each new place and era. The fact that most people conform to
fashion trends, even when the latest one contradicts the last, indicates that
we are not acting entirely on our own desires but on what the world decides
is currently acceptable. While clothing can be viewed as a literal hiding place
from our identity, it is also a metaphor for anything we hide our true selves
behind in the interest of fitting in and keeping up.
Fitting in and keeping up present another reason why our identity
is so hard to decipher. We want to know who we are while still retaining our
While clothing
can be viewed
as a literal hiding
place from our
identity, it is also
a metaphor for
anything we hide
our true selves
behind in the interest of fitting in
and keeping up.
place in the collective identity. Our speaker says, While I am writing, I am

far away; / and when I come back I have already left (36-37). Even when
we attempt to sequester ourselves from the world, the minute we get one toe
back in the door, the world immediately envelops us again and we have to
run to catch up to our place in it. While the speaker claims to want to know
his identity, he also wants to know his place in the world. He wonders if other people experience the same things he experiences and feel the same way
he feels (38-41). There is irony in wanting to know who he is but always spot
checking to make sure that who he is fits in with the world.
Further evidence that he is paradoxically trying to both embrace
and escape the modern world is revealed in the lines, I would like to be
Formalist Analysis
able to touch a bell, / and call up my real self, the truly me, / because if I
really need my proper self, / I must not allow myself to disappear (31-34).
He claims the need to find himself and elicits a sense of fear with the word
disappear, which is, to pass away, or cease to exist gradually (dictionary.
com). Earlier in the poem, the speaker refers to the parts of himself that
are no longer part of the whole as departed, which means, to pass away
from life or existence (dictionary.com). If he does not keep searching and
ultimately find himself, he will cease to exist at all. These words invoke a
sense of urgency, and yet, in the same breath he conveys the desire to ring
a bell and have his identity handed to him. We live in a modern, automatic
Ringing up a
pre-packaged
identity would
not tell us who
we really are,
but rather who
the world thinks
we are.
world, where everything is provided at the touch of a button. Ringing up a

pre-packaged identity would not tell us who we really are, but rather who the
world thinks we are. We want to know who we are, but are not willing to let
go of our place in the herd to find out. By seeking for this identity within the
race, we suffocate the identity of self.
Throughout the poem, the paradox of wanting to know who we
are and wanting to be part of the whole is reinforced through diction. We
have already considered the desperation conjured up by words like departed and disappear. We have discussed how forceful words like swaddle and
burst convey the idea that we are powerless to become who we want to be.
But perhaps the most telling word in the poem is the final word, geography.
Geography is the study of the earth and its features, including human life
and human activity. It is also defined as, the arrangement of features of any
complex entity (dictionary.com). Both of these definitions offer evidence
that geography does not just define the earth as a whole, but rather defines
the earth as a composite of all its ever-changing parts. The poem concludes
with the following lines, When this problem has been thoroughly explored,
/ I am going to school myself so well in things / that, when I try to explain
my problems, / I shall speak, not of self, but of geography (42-45). Even
if the speaker finds his place, it will still be dependent upon all of the other
pieces that fit around him. Through this one word, the speaker offers accep-
Formalist Analysis
tance and resignation to being part of the whole.
Along with the words Neruda chooses, the way that he uses them
speaks volumes about the meaning of this work. In a poem that is so free in
form that it almost reads like prose, the one break from the norm becomes
even more pronounced and drives home the motifs created throughout the
poem. All capital letters are sometimes used in headlines, and can also be interpreted as someone screaming in print, which draws great emphasis to the
following words. But when I call upon my DASHING BEING, / out comes
the same OLD LAZY SELF, / and so I never know just WHO I AM, / nor
how many I am, nor WHO WE WILL BE BEING (28-31). Lest we miss
the point, Neruda screams out the headline to us through the words that he
chose to capitalize. These words once again spell out the motif that we are a
composite of our dashing being and our old lazy self, as well as who we are
and who we will be being.
As it turns out, humanity is no different from geography. Isolating
any one element will change the whole, and so the only identity we can find
individually is tethered to who we are collectively. We are brave and cowardly. We are intelligent and foolish. We extinguish and ignite. We want to be
stand out and we want to blend in. We are all that we have been and all that
we will be. We are not any one of these things independently. We are all of
these things. We are not one; we are many.
Works Cited
Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 24 Jan. 2015. <Dictionary.com http://
dictionary.reference.com/browse.
Neruda, Pablo. We Are Many. Poemhunter.com. 24 Jan. 2015 Web.
Formalist Analysis
THE ONLY FREEDOM FROM
HEARTACHE IS DEATH
A my S tandage
n most stereotypical situations, people wouldnt equate England, an

umbrella, or the universe to romantic love. It is possible, however, to
relate them to its absence. The poem An Umbrella from Piccadilly
by Jaroslav Seifert is an expression of heartache from lost love, portrayed

through symbolic references to English archetypes, the metaphor of a
black umbrella, and the personification of the universe. All three tie into a
Though small,
the countrys history spans over
two millennia and
is replete with
symbolic historical archetypes.
sparkling bouquet (30) of misery and the attempt to avoid it.

The first piece of the bouquet is England. Though small, the countrys history spans over two millennia and is replete with symbolic historical
archetypes. The speaker of An Umbrella from Piccadilly uses these iconic English archetypes to express heartache and even frustration from lost
love. The first can be found in the opening lines of the poem, with the most
prominent of all English figures: the Queen herself. Her features are on every postage stamp / of that ancient kingdom (5-6). So why not, as the poem
suggests, fall in love with her? This hyperbolic proposition represents the
futility of falling in love. In lines 7-10, it states that to ask for a date with the
Queen would be pointless. In the end, well be wait[ing] in vain. Whether
the object of affection is the most famous woman in the world or a neighbor
in the village, to even try for love will leave us standing alone in the rain.
Hyde Park, the second icon in Englands geography, is mentioned in
lines 10-14 when the speaker suggests asking the Queen for a date in Hyde
Park (8). This landmark is a large, beautiful area where there is much to
see and doideal for a date. Unless, of course, its raining. Rain is typical
weather in London, so the chances of it ruining a romantic rendezvous are
high. Hence, planning a date in Hyde Park is as futile as asking the Queen
to meet there. The poem again portrays an avenue that leads to disappointment.
Formalist Analysis
Another British icon in the poem that represents a theme of love
and loss is the mention of Shakespeares sonnets in line 27. The speaker
assuming it is a heterosexual malecarries the volume of Shakespeares
sonnetsin [his] pocket. Carrying a book of English sonnets could only be
the work of a Shakespearian scholar or a hopeless romantic. Furthermore,
the speaker conceals this book of sonnets from the outside world in his
pocket (28), rather than sharing them with someone beloved.
The final archetype is Piccadilly Square, derived from the poems
title. The speakers son bought him an elegant umbrella (17) here. Why
Piccadilly Square? It is in the heart of London, full of life and commerce,
and is famous for the fountain that was installed here at the end of the
nineteenth century (www.aviewoncities.com). That fountain is the fountain of Eros. As the Greek god of love, Eros suffered at one point from the
loss of his paramour Psyche (www.greekmythology.com). The speaker in An
Umbrella from Piccadilly references the romantic woes from mythology
and the only figurative souvenir is loneliness in the form of a black umbrella,
purchased in the place where Eros stands.
The black umbrella itself is also a major metaphor throughout the
poem and the next flower in the bouquet. In lines 18-26, the umbrella is
a place to hide, described as the speakers own small sky (20). Black, stiff,
and strong it acts like a conductor, from which Gods mercy may be flow-
The speaker
needs
that mer-
cy, that shield, to

protect him from
the pain that
rains down on
him even when
its not raining.
ing like / an electric current. (23-24). The speaker needs that mercy, that
shield, to protect him from the pain that rains down on him even when its
not raining (25). As further evidence of this, the speaker also claims this
umbrella bought in Piccadilly is a canopy over the Shakespeare sonnets
mentioned earlier. It covers the sonnets and any romantic notions he may
also carry. But the umbrella does more than shield the speaker. It protects
from the possibility of love and the very universe overhead. It creates a new
little world, his own little sky, smaller and less threatening than the real sky
above. According to the poem, however, the power of the umbrella is not
working, for what use is a fragile umbrella / against the universe? (47-48).
Formalist Analysis
The personification of the universe makes up the final flower in the
bouquet and the theme of heartfelt melancholy in An Umbrella from Piccadilly. The universe in its infinite blackness is threatening, (32, 35) and
reminiscent of the sleep of death (34). It is personified as a treacherous
woman in many instances. The first, lines 37 and 38, state that the universe
deludes us / with their gleam, which could be compared to the deluding
or misleading gleam in the eyes of an unloving woman. The stars are also
described in feminine terms as a sparkling bouquet that frightens and
outstrip[s] its beauty (30-31). Another major comparison of the stars to a
woman is when one star is referred to as Venus, or the goddess of love. This
Even the
temptation
of
love is undesireable with the likelihood of a heart

being broken.
star the speaker calls downright terrifying. (39). Its surface is described as
boiling, with burning sulfur falls (44), and even names it as the location
of hell. We always ask where hell is. / It is there! (45). These temperature-based descriptions parallel those further along in the text, where the
speaker describes the love of a woman and seeks that paradise through her
lips and in the curves of [her] skin / when it is warm with love (59-60).
The warmth of love, the heat of hell, and the void and frostiness (35) of
the stars are all vivid embodiments of the unfathomable universe that is the
female.
The speaker would rather stay as far away from that universe as possible, clinging close to the ground / as a nocturnal moth in daytime / to the
coarse bark of a tree (52-54). He clings to an uncomfortable surface like a
creature meant for the night but forced to live its life during the day. It is not
as though the speaker particularly wants to remain on the scratchy bark of a
tree, crouched and hiding beneath a flimsy black umbrella. In lines 60-61 it
states all my life I have longed / for freedom. But in despair comes the following admission: At last Ive discovered the door / that leads to [freedom].
/ It is death. (63-65). The only freedom from the sadness experienced from
the feminine universe pressing down and the disappointments surrounding
him is death.
Even the temptation of love is undesirable with the likelihood of a
heart being broken. When the face of some woman draws any kind of inter-
Formalist Analysis
est, he prefers to turn away, as evidenced by the repetition in the final lines
of the poem:
Shyly I turn my head
and remember the Queen of England,
whose features are on every postage stamp.
Of that ancient kingdom.
God save the Queen!
Oh yes, I know quite well:
its raining in Hyde Park today. (70-71, 74-76).
Translation: if ever I see a pretty lady, I feel a stir of attraction, but
then remember its doubtful to win her heart. Theres a constant reminder
in front of my eyes that love can never be mine. And even if I do win some
lady, itll start raining one day and the love we once shared will be in vain.
Through the use of symbolism in notable English landmarks, metaphorical protection from a black umbrella, and a sparkling universe depicted
as a hellish temptress, the speaker of An Umbrella from Piccadilly discloses the inmost sadness of his heart. Not only does it reveal sadness, but also
complacency and resignation to a life of loneliness. Its clear he once had
love in his life, because he has a son who bought him a little black umbrella.
But the umbrella is futile against the constant reminder of that despondency from which he will never be liberated until he steps through the door to
freedom. It is death (65).
Works Cited
Jaroslav Seifert - Poetry: An Umbrella from Piccadilly. Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB 2014.
Web. 3 Feb 2015. <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1984/seifert-poetry-umbrella.html>
A View On Cities. A View On Cities. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Feb. 2015.
<http://www.aviewoncities.com/>.
Greek Mythology :: Greek Gods :: Greek Goddesses :: Greek Myths. Greek Mythology :: Greek
Gods :: Greek Goddesses :: Greek Myths. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 Feb. 2015.
<http://www.greekmythology.com/>.
Formalist Analysis
THE BURDEN OF LOVE
M arta H atch
ver the decades thousands of poets have written poems regarding

love. Some poets are in love with the idea of love, others
are depressed over losing it, but Jaroslav Seiferts poem, An
Umbrella from Piccadilly, expresses neither of these themes. The speakers

resolved tone throughout the poem paints the picture of a man who has
The Queen of
England . . . is
simply given up and wishes to be free of the burden of love. He uses this
tone in allusions to the Queen of England and Venus, coupled with the
symbolism of an umbrella, along with other traditional romantic symbols, to
the perfect object of affection

for a man dispassionate about
pursuing a real
love interest
help the reader draw this conclusion.

From the very beginning there is a sense of the speakers resolve over
love through an allusion in which he suggests that the Queen of England
would be the best prospect for a date If youre at your wits end concerning
love (1). He suggests, If youve any sense at all / youll wisely tell yourself
(2) not to hope or expect her to show up. The Queen of England is a highly
improbable suitor, so famous that her face is on every postage stamp (1,
12), and therefore the perfect object of affection for a man dispassionate
about pursuing a real love interest. The phrase why of course, I know: its
raining in Hyde Park today (2) may give the impression that the speaker is
trying to look on the bright side, that the rain is what keeps the Queen from
appearing. In actuality, this is the speakers sarcastic invention of an excuse
and his way to avoid feeling rejected. It is clear to see from the last stanza
of the poem the real meaning of this allusion, when the speaker repeats the
phrase, but his tone shifts from hopeful to resigned. In fact, in stanza 12 he
says that he turns his head away from a charming (11) woman who has
caught his eye and does not even try to pursue her because he remembers
the unattainable Queen of England. He uses the same excuse for not pursuing this woman as he uses with the Queen, Oh yes, I know quite well: its
Formalist Analysis
raining in Hyde Park today (13). Therein, he finalizes the idea that love is
not acquirable.
The resolved tone of the poem is further expressed through the
symbolism of the umbrella. When we are first introduced to the umbrella,
it is described as elegant, with Gods mercy . . . flowing like an electric
current through the wire spokes (3). The umbrella acts as a shield from
rejection, open . . . as a canopy over the volume of Shakespeares sonnets
(4), which the speaker keeps safe in his pocket.
Shakespeares sonnets are the traditional expression of romantic
love. Stanza 4 suggests that when the speaker reads these sonnets, he has his
umbrella, or guard, up to protect his heart against the lure of love. Ironically,
this symbolism can be further evidenced by taking a look at the actual sonnets themselves. Shakespeares Sonnet 130 is a parody of the conventional
love sonnet . . . the poets pragmatic tribute to his uncomely mistress . . . The
dark lady, who ultimately betrays the poet (Mabillard). If the speaker is to
avoid having his heart betrayed as Shakespeare did, the shield must be up,
even when it is not raining (4), to protect his heart against the idea of love.
He keeps these sonnets with him to remind himself of what a fool hed be to
try to love again.
Likewise, the umbrella shields against the beauty of the sky, or
universe, which threatens us with its infinity (5). Again, traditionally, the
The umbrella
shields
against
the beauty of
the sky, or universe, which
threatens us with
its infinity.
skies, specifically the stars, have been used as romantic symbols of love in
poetry. In the poem Bright Star, John Keats uses a star metaphor as an example of his love for Fanny Brown. Even Shakespeare, in sonnet 65, alludes
to love as a star when he says, That in black ink my love may still shine
bright (Mabillard). This is especially poignant imagery when compared to
the speakers description of how the umbrella creates a small black sky above
his head (3). But then the speaker has to admit that a fragile umbrella (8)
is no use against the void and frostiness of the universes thousands of
stars which at night delude us with their gleam (5). The stars gleam may
penetrate the shield, but they are deceiving and there is no love to be found
in them.
Formalist Analysis
The allusion to Venus in the text gives us another example of how
the universe fools us into dangerously believing in the illusion of love. The
speaker says, Venus / is downright terrifying. (6) The poem is referring
to the volcanic planet of Venus with its boiling lava rock and sulfuric atmosphere. Though this does suggest dangerous things in the universe, there is
a hidden meaning in mentioning this terrifying Venus. The Evening Star
is the secondary name for the planet Venus, because it is so bright and
discernible in the nights sky (Garcia). Synonymously, it is also what the
The allusion to
Venus in the text
gives us another
example of how
the universe fools
us into dangerously believing
in the illusion of
love.
Goddess Venus is called in her celestial form. In Roman mythology, Venus

was the goddess of love, sex, beauty, and fertility (Garcia). This particular
Star was known to delude (5) a man or two. Venus had two main divine
lovers: her husband Vulcan (Hephaistos) and Mars (Ares). There is a myth
concerning Venus and Mars love affair and how Vulcan cunningly trapped
them in bed with a net (Garcia). Venus had plenty of mortal lovers also.
One in particular, a prince from Dardania and ally to Troy, was seduced
by Venus. She disguised herself as a Phrygian princess and . . . nine months
later . . . she revealed her divine identity. She presented Anchises with their
son Aeneas (Garcia). Thus, the mention of Venus presents a deep-seeded
fear of being deceived by a woman. The exclamation, We always ask where
hell is. It is there! (7), holds a double meaning. Hell, typically represented as
a place of fire and brimstone, is juxtaposed with the hell of loving a deceptive woman.
Diction used in stanza 3 confirms the argument in stanza 8 that the
umbrella, the hearts one line of defense against the frightening sparkling
bouquet of the universe (5), cannot always be effective, especially if one
has given up and does not even use it. Why does the speaker say in stanza
3, Gods mercy may be flowing (emphasis added), instead of using more
concrete words, such as is flowing or does flow? The answer to this
conundrum lies in stanza 8 where Gods mercy is contingent upon using the
umbrella, the shield. Yet, the speaker does not desire to continue the fight,
as is evidenced by this statement, Besides, I dont even carry it. / I have
Formalist Analysis
enough of a job / to walk along / clinging close to the ground (8). Thus,
God may provide some relief, but the speaker will no longer use the tools he
has been given in order to be comforted.
Finally, the speaker further uses diction as proof of his resolve to
give up on love and embrace the freedom (10) that death offers. Based on
the two times death is mentioned in the text we can conclude that the speaker considers death the door (10) that frees him from this limbo between
hell (7) and paradise (9). So, if hell is classified as loving a deceitful
woman, what is paradise? According to stanza 9, paradise is being able to
kiss and hold a woman who is warm with love (9). He no longer desires
to be caught in the middle of these two extremes and instead gives in to the
universe or the sleep of death (5).
All of his life the speaker has sought paradise in a faithful, loving
woman, but it has escaped him. He says, it used to be here (10), but Now
that Im old (11) I know quite well (13) that it is unattainable. The symbolic umbrella is his only protection against a broken heart. Yet, the umbrella is too weak of an instrument to conquer the universe, with its infinity
that is all too similar to the sleep of death (5), and he is too tired to fight
any longer. Death is preferable to the torture of waiting on the Queen of
England or being deceived by Venus. In the end, he exclaims, God save the
Queen! (12), but the speaker is no longer in need of saving. He has found
the freedom he has longed for (10), and he is giving up.
Works Cited
Jaroslav Seifert - Poetry: An Umbrella from Piccadilly. Nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB
2014. Web. 26
Jan. 2015. <http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/literature/laureates/1984/seifert-poetry
umbrella.html>
Mabillard, Amanda. Analysis of Shakespeares Sonnets and Paraphrase in Modern English.
Analysis of
Shakespeares Sonnets and Paraphrase in Modern English. Web. 26 Jan. 2015. <http://www.
shakespeare-online.com/sonnets/>.
Garcia, Brittany. Venus. Ancient History Encyclopedia. 27 Aug. 2013. Web. 26 Jan. 2015.
<http://www.ancient.eu/venus/>.
Theory-Based Analysis
WHAT THE BOY REALLY SAW
IN THE SEA
A nth S tokes
n J.M.G. Le Clzios short story The Boy Who Had Never Seen the Sea,
Daniel doesnt say much.In fact, throughout this story our protagonist
is almost completely silent.He does not utter a word of dialogue
to another person and only really speaks to Wyatt the octopus, with the
The best way

to understand
Daniel is to turn
to the object of
his infatuation:
the sea.
exception of short, primal outbursts directed at the sea itself. All the reader
can know for certain of Daniels thoughts is that they learn with the help of
narration from a member of his school classmates.He didnt have friends,
remarked the narrator. He didnt know anyone and no one knew him.
Perhaps he preferred it that way. (Le Clzio)How are readers expected
to understand the fears and motivations of such a deliberately inscrutable
character? The fears and motivations of the deliberately inscrutable Daniel
are illustrated through the use of personification and symbolism.
Daniel does not come across as someone who is overburdened by excessive thoughts.He is obsessively focused and single-minded.The narrator
supposes that the big red book about the sea that Daniel carries with him
everywhere is probably the only book he has ever read.His whole being is
dedicated to the sea.Anything that is not connected to it is of absolutely no
interest to Daniel.The narrator says of Daniels disinterest that he didnt
talk about it; he didnt even yawn to express his boredom. Hed just sit in
one spoton a bench or on the stairs overlooking the courtyardand stare
into space. (Le Clzio)Daniel cannot be understood through conversation,
dialogue or exposition.The best way to understand Daniel is to turn to the
object of his infatuation: the sea.
Daniels first oceanic encounter reveals what it represents to him
and how it makes him feel. When he finally spots them, he runs towards the
waves with a nervousness and a kind of wild abandon that would normally
be reserved for a lover or close friend from whom one has been long sepa-
rated. Indeed, the sea is described in exactly these kinds of intimate terms.
He embraces it completely, thinking to himself that It was really the sea,
his sea, for him alone, and he knew that he could never leave it.(Le Clzio)
Daniel and the sea spend the majority of the story in a kind of give-and-take
as each reaches out to the other and as they almost seem to each become
acquainted. It has all the hesitant and awkward elements of a loss of innocence narrative, but certainly with a more unusual pairing than most. He
dances for the sea and lets it crash over him. He tells it that it is beautiful.
Daniel treats the sea like a person, and in doing so exposes his intense loneliness. The ocean is a like an imaginary friend to Daniel, upon whom he has
misplaced his unconscious desire to love and be loved. We know from the
narrator that he is the youngest of several brothers, that his parents are poor
and removed, and that he did not have any friends in the world. Nowhere
in the story is it mentioned that Daniel has a mother, a noteworthy omission
given the specific mention of his father and brothers. This lack of maternal
nurturing is a very likely reason for Daniels strange love affair with the sea.
It strongly indicates that on some level Daniel is dealing with an unresolved
Oedipal complex. The absence of any kind of basic, healthy human connection surely must have been responsible for creating a void in Daniels life
that he needed to find a way to be able to fill.
Another symbol that is worthy of mention is the cave to which Daniel retreats to as he makes his desperate escape from the water once it has
It has all the

hesitant
and awkward elements
of a loss of innocence narrative,
but certainly with
a more unusual pairing than
most.
betrayed him. In Freudian analysis, caverns are most typically considered

symbolic of the safety and comfort of the womb. When considered within
the context of the already strong Oedipal implications previously addressed,
it seems very safe to surmise that this cave is thus an obvious symbol for
Daniels unresolved issues with his mother. In the moment that he knows
he is safe in the cave, the reader is told that Daniel had never known such
happiness. (Le Clzio) Daniel sleeps in the cave with the same calm and
trusting demeanor more often associated with an infant as it is rocked to
sleep. His unspoken need for maternal protection and comfort is shown by
the use of this glaring symbolism. When the sound and fury ends, the waters calm and Daniel understood that it was over. (Le Clzio) The Daniel
who emerges from the cave is one reborn, expulsed from the womb and free
to chase the never-ending dreams his classmates always imagined would be
in store for him.
His classmates certainly remembered him, but mostly as an uncompromising eccentric, never as a friend. Daniels need to compensate for this
lack of friendship is made obvious in his interactions with Wyatt, the octopus. He befriends the octopus and immediately gives him a human name.
He talks to Wyatt but the reader is told how Wyatt didnt answer, but
Daniel never
knew
friendship
so he had to create a friend for

himself.
continued to caress Daniels feet and ankles, very gently, as if with strands
of hair. Daniel loved it. (Le Clzio) If the ocean is a stand-in for a romantic or Oedipal relationship for Daniel, then Wyatt is clearly a stand-in for
the normal platonic friends that Daniel never had. The narrator even firsts
introduces Wyatt as Daniels octopus friend. Daniel never knew friendship
so he had to create a friend for himself.
When the sea retreats and the tide goes out, Daniel is fascinated to
see everything he can of what is underneath it. The enigmatic nature of the
sea is more than provocative enough to draw him down away from safety, if
it means he will get to know it better. He needs to be able to understand the
sea in order to ever have a chance at understanding himself. This self-discover does not come easily or without its anxieties for Daniel. The narrator
makes note of the uneasiness seeping out of all the fissures and secret
holes[Daniels] heart beat harder in his chest, as it had the first day he
arrived at the sea. The more he discovers of himself and the sea, however,
the quicker the defenses of his subconscious come into play. His ego springs
into action in the form of the rising ocean tide, which then chases him away
from any further self-discovery that his superego may have otherwise allowed
him. It is made apparent that the sea is not only used as a personified incarnation of his repressed desires, but also as an obvious symbol for Freudian
layers of consciousness.
Despite Daniels silent demeanor, the reader is thus able to gain a
complex understanding of the psychological components of The Boy Who
Had Never Seen the Sea. Earlier, when the others talk about the sea, they
talk about many of the same activities Daniel practices when he gets there
himself. On the surface then, it then makes no sense when the reader is told
how that wasnt the sea he wanted to hear about. He was interested in a different seawe didnt know which one, but a different one. What really interests Daniel is not the sea at all, but what it represented to him. Through
personification and symbolism, the reader comes to understand the layers
of displaced anxieties that trouble Daniel and drive him to behave with such
recklessness. Because these literary devices work so well, the reader is able to
learn things about Daniel that his family and friends never could. It is made
clear that the sea is not just the sea, but it is instead a grand symbol upon
which he has projected his most basic unconscious needs. The octopus is not
just an octopus, but it is his only friend Wyatt, a representation of the friendship he never knew at home from his brothers or peers. The cave is not just
a cave, but it is instead also a symbol of Daniels need for maternal warmth.
When Daniel wants to talk to someone about a different sea he unconsciously just wants to talk to someone who understands him, who can see the
sea for all it means to him. These psychological peculiarities are expertly
demonstrated not just by what is portrayed, but how they are portrayed. It is
because of this that the reader is able to understand what Daniel sees in the
sea.
Works Cited
Le Clzio, J.M.G. The Boy Who Had Never Seen the Sea.The New Yorker. Web. 21 Feb.
2015.
CHILDHOOD IS TRULY
A MAGICAL TIME
S am P earson
At some point
one inevitably
has to grapple
with the reality of
magic and reconstruct its existence in his or
her life.
n All That by David Foster Wallace, the speaker brings a unique,

yet relatable perspective about magic that is brought to the readers
attention though memories. After reading this short story, my initial
response was that there was little stability; the speaker seemed to jump
from one tale to the next with little transition and no particular theme.
My overall impression was that the speaker seemed like a child who could
not sit still. After rereading the story several times, I realized that was the
point. In a story about a childs fascination with magic and other whimsical
memories, the reader is exposed to his or her own childhood fantasies. Using
the characterization of the speaker, the conflict between the speaker and
magic, and my own experiences that parallel the speakers, All That is a
representation of how at some point one inevitably has to grapple with the
reality of magic and reconstruct its existence in his or her life.
The speaker is quickly characterized to be a man who enjoys reminiscing, yet struggles to get his thoughts together. At first glance, the story
seems to be about a young boy and his favorite toy, a cement mixer that
you pull with a string. Relatable enough, I had my favorite toys that I can
still remember. The first few paragraphs introduce specific details about the
speaker, although we never learn his or anyone elses name. Hes obviously
older and is intricate in detailing the time of his flashbacks It was when I
was the age where you can, as they say, hear voices. He will also pause in
the middle of a story because he suddenly remembers what he had forgotten
earlier. For example, as he describes the cement mixer, he says, Im ninety
percent sure it was a Christmas gift. As he continues his illustration in the
next paragraph, he suddenly breaks from the conversation and says, For
Christmas, Im positive it was. These frequent interruptions from his stories
makes the speaker seem more personal, as if I were sitting down with him
and simply having a conversation.
Along with the initial characterization of the speaker, the reader is
quickly introduced to his main conflict. The story takes an interesting turn
when we get to why the cement mixer is important: the magic. His parents
trick him into thinking the drum of the mixer turns only when he is not
looking. . . . No doubt making sport of me in the bored half-cruel way
that adults sometimes do with small children. This is the beginning of the
speakers observations of the tricks parents often play on their children. I still
have not forgotten a similar experience I had when I came home from school
one day and Buddy, my golden retriever who was still a puppy, was suddenly
not in my backyard anymore. I was eight or nine at the time. When I confronted my dad, he told me that a mother and son had driven by and seen
Buddy, and the little boy wanted him more than anything. Because the boy
was in a wheelchair, my dad could not refuse. I never doubted him. It was
not until I was much older that I realized that people driving by cannot see
our backyard, or that my dad hated the puppy because he dug holes in the
yard. At a young age, children believe their parents blindly. This is why it is
that adults and even parents can, unwittingly, be cruel: They cannot imagine
doubts complete absence. Unlike his parents who know the reality of the
cement mixer and have pulled this cruel trick, the speaker is now fixated on
the conflict he shares with the toy. He is obsessed with finding the magic.
The conflict between the cement mixer and the speaker address-
with
theAlong
initial char-
acterization of
the speaker, the
reader is quickly
introduced to his
main conflict.
es the topic of magic and the hold it has in a childs life. For months our
speaker tries to catch the cement mixer in its magic act, never questioning
that the magic might not exist or that his parents were lying. He is still at the
age where magic is a reality. Another magical reality for the speaker were the
two voices he heard until he was thirteen. He does not go into detail about
the voices, Because they are both not directly vital to this and also very
hard to describe or convey adequately to anyone else. I find this ironic because of course, as a child, I had the same kind of voices. Like the speaker, I
did not worry about my mental health because the voices, Never spoke of
anything that wasnt good, happy, and reassuring. Some people might call
them voices, imaginary friends, or something else. Regardless, I believe that
most people have some variation of these projected companions. Looking
back, my magical companion acted as a projection of my conscience, much
like Jiminy Cricket was for Pinocchio. Because reality is harder to grasp as a
child, it is important that children have these magical channels.
The conflict of the cement mixer and the speakers description of his
voices are an affirmation to the existence of magic: . . . The ecstatic feelings
they often aroused doubtless contributed to my reverence for magic and my
faith that magic not only permeated the everyday world but did so in a way
that was thoroughly benign and altruistic and wished me well. It is difficult
Because reality
is harder to grasp
as a child, it is
important that
children have
these magical
channels.
not to believe in something that elicits nothing but joy. He often would be so
joyful that he could barely stand it, . . . and I would lie on the pile of large
pillows in our living room and roll back and forth in an agony of delight. I
could not help but smile as I read this line and the further illustrations of his
fits of joy. The speaker truly was a happy child, as evident in how his father
diagnosed him with antiparanoia, which is the intricate universal conspiracy to make [him] so happy [he] could hardly stand it. This illustration of
the speakers character demonstrates how before one has to grapple with the
reality of magic, it is a major source of happiness.
As happens during most childhoods, it is the parents who begin to
turn children away from magic. Although he was an unequivocally happy
child, there were still plagues of sadness and longing when it came to magic.
Instead of relishing in his fathers stories of attempting to capture magical
creatures such as the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy, they upset him. I
was crying with sadness, imagining how devastated my father would have
felt as a child had he been successful in trapping the Tooth Fairy. He felt
the same reasoning as he tried to crack the magic of his cement mixer. He
did not try so that he could capture the magic; rather, he wanted to make
sure that he could not. Subconsciously he must have known that magic was
not as he thought. If I had ever been successful in outsmarting the magic, I
would have been crushed. I know this now. Personally, I have only ever tried
to capture the Easter Bunny, putting a pile of skittles in a squirrel catcher
and waking up on Easter to a closed trap and a colored egg left inside. I too
would have felt terribly sad if I were to actually capture the Easter Bunny,
feeling guilty for keeping him locked up when he had other children to bring
eggs to. It seems that these types of tricks pulled on children are a tradition
among parents. Parents toy with their childrens magical beliefs, not understanding that they are slowly sucking away the magic from their children and
forcing them into the real world.
Sooner or later most people have to struggle with the existence of
magic. I say most people because there are plenty who still hold on to a
child-like fascination with magic. For the speaker, this confrontation became
more of a transformation than pure doubt. He puts it best: The toy cement
mixer is the origin of the religious feeling that has informed most of my
adult life. What the young speaker thought he felt for magic was really the
reverence he had for spirituality. I understand this concept well since I had
a similar confrontation with magic. I was twelve (one year younger than the
speaker) when I came to the conclusion that it was not magic that performed
miracles and explained the unexplainable, but what my religious sect calls
The Spirit, or Spirit of God.
Although there is little known about the speaker, he has more in
common with the audience than I originally realized. I had to seriously self-reflect on what I used to believe was magic because he brought up
experiences that were vastly similar to my own. As I took this journey with
the speaker through his childhood and his religious beginnings, I was able to
review my own childhood and grow up again as he did. It was the development of the speakeran ecstatic child who learns to have reverence for the
phenomena of the worldthat illustrates to his readers how magic is defined
and experienced in ones own life.
Works Cited
David Foster Wallace. All That. The New Yorker. The New Yorker. 2014. Web. 26 Feb.
2015
THERE IS NO ROMANCE LIKE
A FAILED ROMANCE
S ara A lfaro
The narrators
journey is paralleled with the
readers discovery that this story
is not the romantic story they anticipated.
ontemporary literature typically aims to turn traditional literature

on its head. Amundsen by Alice Munro is no exception. What
seems at first glance to be a story of unrequited love is rather a
journey of a narrator from a romanticized version of love to the realities

of the harsh and self-serving world. The narrators journey is paralleled
with the readers discovery that this story is not the romantic story they
anticipated. Munro uses setting and characterization that seems familiar to
classic literature, as well as diction that rushes through unexpected twists
to set up readers expectations, only to pull the rug out from under their
feet. These literary devices cause readers to make predictable mistakes that
ultimately lead them to realizing the romance found in classic literature is
rare to come by in reality.
Readers may notice that the setting of this short story feels much like
a classic piece of literature; the gloomy and mysterious grounds of the sanatorium seem to be the ideal place for something unexpected and romantic
to happen. The narrator even tells Dr. Fox that the woods are beautiful and
being there is like being inside a Russian novel (Munro). While I cannot
say that I have read many Russian novels, this allusion brings to mind the
idea of a romanticized landscape where some unlikely love story takes place,
or at least some beautiful tragedy occurs. Even the narrators descriptions of
the landscape, when she first arrives, are highly figurative. She describes:
Brittle-looking birch trees with black marks on their white bark, and
some small, untidy evergreens, rolled up like sleepy bears. The frozen lake
not level but mounded along the shore, as if the waves had turned to ice in
the act of falling. And the building, with its deliberate rows of windows and
its glassed-in porches at either end. Everything austere and northerly, blackand-white under the high dome of clouds. So still, so immense an enchant-
ment. (Munro)
This lovely description of the landscape gives the impression that
there is something extraordinary about this place and this story. It sets up
readers to believe that this is going to be like most classic stories. Readers
tend to accept this, as it is something that they often find in classic literature,
and are willing to fall under the same enchantment that the narrator, Ms.
Hyde, finds herself in.
However, there are clues from the author that this is not going to be
a romanticized version of reality. Immediately after the beautiful descriptions
of the landscape surrounding the sanatorium, Ms. Hyde notes that the birch
bark is not actually white as she first thought, but rather upon a closer look it
is, grayish yellow, grayish blue, gray (Munro). This discovery that her first
idealistic view of the white birch trees are not actually white, should indicate to readers that things are not always as they first appear, particularly the
romance between Ms. Hyde and Dr. Fox. Another clue that this story does
not fit the mold of classic literature is in the exchange between Ms. Hyde
and Dr. Fox. After she tells him that the woods remind her of being inside
a Russian novel (Munro), he asks her which Russian novel. Ashamed she
cannot remember any other titles, Ms. Hyde tells him War and Peace (Munro). The name of this novel is a clue for readers if they are familiar with the
name of
thisThenovel
is a
clue for readers

if they are familiar with the work,
because it is a
novel full of failed
romances.
work, because it is a novel full of failed romances.

The subtle clues can be easily overlooked because most readers are
caught up in the characterization of Ms. Hyde and Dr. Fox. Ms. Hyde, at
first, fits the mold of what we expect for a female protagonist of classical
literature: the governess figure that is different from her peers, thus winning the heart of male lead. Ms. Hyde portrays the characteristics that I,
and other readers, have come to associate with heroines in classic pieces of
literature, such as Jane Eyre and Elizabeth Bennet from Pride and Preju-
dice. The first of these characteristics is a romantic view of life. When Ms.
Hyde first arrives to the sanatorium, she looks around the forest and lake
and romanticizes the landscape, saying it is under an immense enchantment
(Munro). Such a view of the world, sets many readers up to think that Ms.
Hyde is special and different from her peers, much like heroines in classic
literature. Further evidence that Ms. Hyde is different from her peers is the
way she describes that the other nurses didnt have the least interest in me
(Munro). Because Ms. Hyde does not fit in with her peers, it is easy for a
reader, such as myself, to fall into the mentality that Ms. Hyde is unique from
her peers and as such, is destined to have an epic love story or adventure or
such.
It is easy for
a reader to fall
into the mentality that Ms. Hyde
is unique from
her peers and as
such, is destined
to have an epic
love story or adventure or such.
This mentality is further heightened by the characterization of Dr.

Fox. He seems much like the characters of Mr. Darcy from Pride and
Prejudice or Mr. Rochester from Jane Eyre. His often harsh reactions,
contrasted against Marys memories of his softer side, bring to readers
minds the archetype of the tragically misunderstood hero. He is shown as
the charismatic man who quiets the children in Ms. Hydes class through silly
antics that cause them to laugh. Moments later, however, he is harsh with
Ms. Hyde and undermines her every word. Readers may dismiss these flaws
quickly, because we anticipate and even hope for Dr. Fox to be the tragically
misunderstood hero. Readers may try to find a reason for Dr. Foxs behavior, such as Anabels death. Reading Marys descriptions of Dr. Fox before
Anabel died, gave me reason to believe that, like other tragic heroes in classic
literature, Dr. Fox could be healed by the heroine, Ms. Hyde.
Yet Dr. Fox is not saved by Ms. Hyde for one large reason: neither
Ms. Hyde nor Dr. Fox fit entirely into their molds. Dr. Fox, in particular,
was the most surprising character. Perhaps because readers are following
Ms. Hydes perspective, we come to expect an idealistic version of this story,
but Dr. Foxs behavior does not fit into that expectation. Male leads such as
Mr. Darcy and Mr. Rochester show virtue and restraint against sexual
encounters with the female protagonist. Dr. Fox, however, rushes to take Ms.
Hydes virginity with no indication that he stops to consider the affect it may
have on her later. Such action is startling, as it does not fit in the mold of
what readers come to expect. Likewise, when Dr. Fox broke off the wedding
and dropped Ms. Hyde off at the train depot, it felt like the rug had been
pulled from under my feet. These actions do not fit into the expectations
that I, and other readers, have formed from classic literature. Any remaining
hope that Dr. Fox may redeem himself by coming back for Ms. Hyde are
smothered when the train pulls away with no sight of Dr. Fox.
As if to reflect this contrast between the romanticized expectations
set up earlier in the story and the harsh realities of what actually happens,
these scenes are written with a different feel to them. This different feel is
created by a change of pace from the rest of the story, as well as different
organization of wording. Most of this story moves along at a normal pace,
but the paragraph in which Dr. Fox takes Ms. Hydes virginity, is short and to
the point. This caused me to do a double-take, so to speak, and reread the
paragraph to make certain that I had read correctly. Munro gave no clear
Any remaining
hope that Dr. Fox

may redeem himself is smothered
when the train
pulls away with
no sight of Dr.
Fox.
indication what was going to happen before the line He took me to bed
(Munro). This quick jump from Ms. Hydes inner thoughts to the abrupt
description of Ms. Hydes lost virginity is jarring, and caused me to rethink
Dr. Foxs character. Even more jarring, however, was the description of the
scene when Dr. Fox breaks off the wedding. This scene is not even romantically tragic, as it is interrupted by a delivery man knocking on the window
to tell Dr. Fox to move the car out of the way. This reflection of ordinary life
interrupting the tragic is not typically found in classic literature, however it is
found in reality quite often. This scene serves as a wake-up call to most read-
ers, who realize that this story is not going to end in romance, despite Ms.
Hyde attempting to hold onto the hope that Dr. Fox will realize his mistake
before the train departs.
This story can have quite a strong effect on most readers, much in
the way a failed romance may have affected their view of romance and reality. This story contains both the romantic expectations we have for literature
and our lives, as well as the unfair and harsh realities of this world. This
contrast serves as a reminder for readers that life rarely follows the pattern
we observe in classic romantic literature.
Works Cited
Austen, Jane. Pride and Prejudice. New York: Modern Library, 1995. Print.
Bronte, Charlotte, and Margaret Smith. Jane Eyre. London: Oxford University Press, 1973.
Print.
Munro, Alice. Amundsen. Newyorker.com. The New Yorker, 27 Aug. 2012. Web. 16 Feb.
2015.
Researched Analysis
THE POWER OF WORDS
M elanie G ibson
athaniel Hawthorne said, Wordsso innocent and powerless

as they are, as standing in a dictionary, how potent for good and
evil they become in the hands of one who knows how to combine
them (Brockway). Words and stories hold tremendous value which suggests
that they are among the most powerful ways in which people connect with
one another. Words hold the power to spread ideas to inspire a nation to
greatness or to sooth a child waking from a nightmare. Words hold great
power for Liesel Meminger in the middle of WWII Nazi Germany in
Markus Zusaks The Book Thief. The books Liesel steals and reads are symbols
that shape her childhood and youth. Liesel learns that words of knowledge,
friendship, love and mercy can overpower words of hatred.
Liesel Meminger is the diligent, book-thieving, kind-hearted heroin
of the novel who starts out as an abandoned nine year old. She loves books
so much that she steals them, even before she knows how to read. At first,
Liesel can hardly read a single word and is forced to attend school with the
Liesel learns
that words of
knowledge,
friendship, love
and mercy can
overpower words
of hatred.
kindergarten children. Without her foster father Hans and his dedication
to teaching her, she might never have learned to read at all. At school, her
lack of education is mistaken for lack of intelligence. It is strange to think of
a nine year old girl having so little education, but during WWII there were
many families who were unable to afford the luxury of a good education for
their children (Kremer). It is never made very clear why Liesel cannot read
or write but it definitely has to do with Liesels fathers communist affiliations. The German Communist Party (KPD) was a legitimate and popular
political party in Germany when Hitler took power prior to WWII. The
Nazis saw communists as a threat. It is likely that Liesels father in some way
voiced his opposition to the Nazi Party and was arrested shortly after the
Researched Analysis
Nazis took power in 1933 (Geerling). His family was left without money, with
no way to make money, no medical treatment, and nowhere to live. Liesel
recalls memories of boarding houses and uncertain institutional settings.
Whatever the precise situation, education is simply not made available to
her. In a desperate effort to become educated and up to par with her peers
intelligence, Liesel persists daily in learning to read. The more she reads
the more she comes to love words and discover their power. Liesels story of
survival during WWII is told as she becomes a thief of many books.
The first book Liesel steals is called A Grave Diggers Handbook. This
book is just what it sounds like, a handbook for digging graves. It is not only
story
of Liesels
survival during
WWII is told as
she becomes
a thief of many
books.
the first book Liesel steals but the first book she reads. It is ironic that Liesel
learns to read using a book about death, for her story takes place at a time
in history that is laced with death. As with all the books she steals, this one
is bittersweet. It is bitter for obvious reasons. She steals the book from the
snowy graveyard where her little brother Werner has just been buried. Its
her only tangible memento of her brother, and also of her mother, whom
she never sees again after her mother gives her up to the Hubermanns in
January of 1939. For the Liesel, this book is a symbol of great loss, great
sorrow, and her feelings of abandonment. It represents the end of one phase
of her life, and the beginning of another.
The stolen book also represents Hans and the beginning of Liesels
loving relationship based on kind words and learning new words. Liesel has
nightmares about her brother dying almost every night, but the night Hans
finds The Grave Diggers Handbook she has the additional embarrassment of
wetting the bed. Hans does not just make this difficult situation easier by
comforting her and changing her sheets. He turns it into a life changing
opportunity for them both. His discovery of the book, hidden beneath her
mattress, inspires all their reading and writing lessons. While The Gravediggers
Researched Analysis
Handbook represents great sadness and loss, it also represents great friendship
and learning to read, which is life changing for Liesel. In learning to read,
Liesel realizes that understanding words makes her stronger and helps her
understand the world around her.
The Gravediggers Handbook also has some very positive associations
for Liesel and marks her transformation from illiterate to literate. As words
come together for her she is able to understand the slang terms painted on
the shops of her town. She can understand the hateful things they say and
what the words mean as Jews begin to disappear and parts of her village
become a ghost town. The Star of David and those words were painted on
their doors. The houses were almost like lepers. At the very least, they were
infected sores on the German landscape. (8.43) The second book that Liesel
steals is called The Shoulder Shrug. The novel does not give many details about
the actual contents of The Shoulder Shrug, other than that it features a Jewish
protagonist. This is why the novel is sentenced to burn in Hitlers birthday
book burning in Molching. Somehow, this book is too strong, or too wet, or
too lucky to burn up quickly. Its still smoldering when Liesel steals it from a
pile of ash left over from the large fire. President Theodore Roosevelt said:
Books cannot be killed by fire. People die, but books never die. No man and
no force can put thought through a concentration camp forever. No man
In learning to
read, Liesel realizes that understanding words

makes her stronger and helps
her understand
the world around
her.
and no force can take from the world the books that embody mans eternal
fight against tyranny. In this war we know, books are weapons. This powerful quote suggests that in times of war, revolution and social change, books
transcend their state of physical objects to become powerful symbols in war
of ideas and words (Ritchie).
Liesel steals this book from the bonfire after getting confirmation
from Hans that Hitler is likely behind the disappearance of her parents not
to mention the poverty that led to Werners death. The Nazi party staged
Researched Analysis
book burnings as a symbolic act. The bonfires were to cleanse the Germany of the undesirables and un-German influences or communism and especially Jewish thought. Their goal was to demonstrate that Jews had no place
on bookshelves, libraries and that there was no room for them in German
culture. The international media commented on the symbolic nature of such
an act. The world interpreted the bonfires very differently however, anticipating radical social change, war and even genocide, evoking the prophetic
quote by nineteenth-century German poet Heinrich Heine: where one
burns books, one will soon burn people (Von Merveldt).
In stealing The Shoulder Shrug, Liesel steals new words which fuel
In stealing The
Shoulder
Shrug,
Liesel steals new

words which fuel
her revenge on
her new sworn
enemy, Adolf Hitler.
her revenge on her new sworn enemy, Adolf Hitler. Her love of books and
learning inspire her to steal the book, but she also wants to take back some
of what Hitler is destroying. Stealing The Shoulder Shrug also opens the doors
to a whole word of books. Ilsa Hermann, the mayors wife, witnesses Liesel
stealing the book from the fire. This later inspires Ilsa to invite Liesel into her
home library where she has access to all the books she could want. Most importantly, perhaps, Liesels theft of The Shoulder Shrug, inspire[s] Hans Hubermann to come up with a plan to help the Jewish fist fighter (13.5). That
Jewish fist fighter is Max. Liesels very special friendship with Max comes to
define her in many ways. It certainly makes her a sympathetic character, but
more importantly, it helps her see the difference between right and wrong.
Liesel is forced to become a part of Hitlers Youth, as were all
German children in Nazi Germany. She is taught principles from Mein Kampf
(My Struggle); Adolph Hitlers infamous book (Geerling). He began dictating
it to fellow prisoner Rudolph Hess (Hitlers Deputy) in 1923 when they were
in Landsberg prison after a failed attempt to overthrow the Weimar Republic
(Brown). Liesel neither reads nor steals this book, but it is incredibly important to who she is. Liesel is living inside of Hitlers big lie, Make the lie big,
Researched Analysis
make it simple. Keep saying it and eventually they will believe it (Adolf
Hitler). Hitler has made his words come to life, and they shape Liesels
reality. Second, when Liesel is reading The Shoulder Shrug in Hans Juniors
presence he says, What trash is this girl reading? She should be reading
Mein Kampf (17.31) even though he doesnt know its a rescued book about
a Jew. This gives Hans Senior the idea to use Mein Kampf to help Max. He realizes that Hitlers book can be used as a shield, a disguise; it can be used for
the exact opposite of its intended purpose. Holding Mein Kampf in his hand is
the best way for Max to deflect suspicion.
For Liesel, she associates Mein Kampf with Max and his life, but the
connection goes even deeper. Max comes up with the idea of painting the
pages of Hitlers book white and using the pages to write The Standover Man
and The Word Shaker. Liesel learns that kind words can be used to combat
hateful ones. These two books are about friendship and the power of words
to make a difference. Although this knowledge doesnt keep her family and
friends on Himmel Street from dying in bomb blasts, it pushes Liesel to act
as courageously as she can.
Liesel associ-
ates Mein Kampf

with Max and
his life, but the
connection goes
even deeper.
These three books also point to the development of Liesels secret

life during most o her time on Himmel Street. The fact that she was able
to keep these books and Max a secret is a testament to her courage and
strength. The Word Shaker also alludes to Liesels own calling, shaking words,
shaking them from books, from her own lips, and from the lips of others.
Liesel shakes words until she understands them, meaning she researches them and applies them to something real in her world. The Word Shaker
reminds her to plant and shake words of friendship and love, especially where
hate is thriving. The best word shakers were the ones who understood the
true power of words. They were the ones who climbed the highest. One such
word shaker was a small, skinny girl. She was renowned as the best word
Researched Analysis
shaker of her region because she knowhow powerless a person could be
without words (Zusak, 446).
Liesels thievery continues with The Whistler, a book about a murderer on the run from the police. This book is important to Liesels character
in several ways. This is the book shes been reading in Ilsas library when
Ilsa breaks the news that she can no longer pay Rosa to do her laundry. She
is the last customer they have, and Liesel is furious. She uses words against
Ilsa and refuses to take The Whistler when it is offered. This marks another
change in her life. She will no longer enter Ilsas library through the door. Instead, she starts coming through the window to steal the books. The Whistler
the majorityFor
of the story,
they have a close

friendship and
the reader sees
their relationship
start to bloom
into something
more.
is the first book she steals from Ilsa. In part, she steals it for Rudy. In general,
the reader sees this book as connected with Rudy and Liesels relationship.
Books create a reason for Liesel and Rudy to spend time together and offer
an escape from the horrible realities surrounding them. For the majority of
the story, they have a close friendship and the reader sees their relationship
start to bloom into something more.
When Rudy victoriously rescues The Whistler from the Amper River,
where its been thrown by Viktor Chemmel, he shows Liesel his love for her.
Death tells us, He must have loved her so incredibly hard. So hard that he
would never ask for her lips again and would go to his grave without them
(44.42). As the end nears, Liesels feelings for Rudy do grow stronger, but
Rudy is killed before we can see whether shell act on them. In bitter irony,
Liesel finally kisses Rudy when hes dead. This stamps something painful on
her character regret. Its not the first or the last time shell feel it, but probably one of the most intense. The Whistler is also the first book Liesel reads to
the residents of Himmel Street to the bomb shelters. These public readings
help Liesel see that her passion can be used to help those around her on a
large scale.
Researched Analysis
The Dream Carrier, a book about an abandoned child who wants to
be a riest (48.51), is another one of the books Liesel steals from Ilsa Hermanns library. Even though Rudys with her when she steals it, its more
closely associated with Liesels relationship with Max. She steals this book in
1942 when Max is gravely ill and in a coma. For obvious reasons, no doctor
can be called, and Liesel offers the only cures she knows prayer, gift-giving
and reading to him from The Dream Carrier. The combination of reading The
Dream Carrier and spending all her free time with the comatose Max changes
Liesels dreams. One night, Maxs face and body take the place of her brother Werner in her recurring nightmare.
All of these intense situations point to Liesels increasing sensitivity
and ability to draw parallels between seemingly disparate situations, like a
six year old boy dying on a train and the comatose young man before her.
Shes also feeling a deep burden of guilt. By bringing snow to the sub-zero
basement-bound Max, she contributes to his current state of illness. Liesels
regret is evident as she ponders her actions, Why did I have to bring all that
now down? and her papa answers, Lieselyou had to (Zusak, 316). But,
as Maxs writings and words later show her, the gift of snow was worth it.
Perhaps Maxs
comatose state is
a relief from his
own guilt and suffering, giving his
body a chance to
heal a little.
Perhaps, just perhaps, Maxs comatose state is a relief from his own guilt and
suffering, giving his body a chance to heal a little.
The Dream Carrier also alludes to the fact that Liesel has been having
the same nightmare, of her brother dying on the train, every night for over
two years. And then. There is death. Making his way through all of it. On
the surface: unflappable, unwavering. Below: unnerved, untied, and undone
(Zusak, 309). She is literally carrying the moment with her in her dreams.
A year later, when shes able to stop carrying him in her nightmares, and
instead carry him in her heart, we can see her reaching deeper levels of psychological maturity in spite of her trauma.
Researched Analysis
The Complete Duden Dictionary and Thesaurus, an invaluable reference
book, is a gift to Liesel from Ilsa Herman. It marks an important phase in
their relationship. Ilsa leaves it in the window of the library for Liesel to
steal. Liesel sees Ilsa watching from inside the library as she takes it, and the
two share an awkward wave. This opens the window for a future friendship
between them and a healing of the old wounds theyve inflicted on each
other.
Throughout the novel, Death often gives definitions of certain words
connected with different events. Death is telling the story the day after Liesels death, and hes using her book as a reference. When Liesel begins writ-
theThroughout
novel, Death
often gives definitions of certain
words connected with different
events.
ing her book, she already has the dictionary. Shes using it while she writes
one of the most difficult parts of her story a scene in which Hans gives
bread to a Jewish prisoner who is being marched to the nearby concentration
camp, Dachau. This is painful for her to write about because the incident
leads to the Jewish man and Hans being whipped on the street, Max fleeing
the house on Himmel Street, and Hans being drafted into the military. It
leads to Liesel losing two of the most important people in her life. When
Liesel is writing, Hans is back home, but Liesel doesnt know if Max is alive.
The use of the dictionary definitions in this section highlight the fact
that Liesel is searching in anguish for the right words to use in telling this
most painful part of her story. Sometimes the words and the definitions fail.
When Max leaves the house, there is Schweigen Silence (59.11), which
the dictionary defines as The absence of sound or noise (59.11). However, with the Related words: [] calmness, peace (59.11) Liesel runs into
a problem. Liesels awareness of words and their nuances sharpen as her
character deepens and becomes more defined. In addition to a gesture of
friendship, Ilsa Herman is giving Liesel tools to pursue her calling as a word
shaker when she gives her the dictionary.
Researched Analysis
The Last Human Stranger, shares a powerful quote with the reader.
There were people everywhere on the city street, but the stranger could
not have been more alone if he were empty (72.14). This is the last book
that Liesel steals from the mayors library. The title and the quote tell plenty
about the books content. They sum how Liesel is feeling as the number of
days since Max left pile up, and as she finally lets go of the nightmare of
Werner. Shes frustrated with her world and is having trouble keeping up
hope. There are also allusions to Hans, Rudy, and Liesel giving bread to Jewish prisoners marching to Dachau. Each Jewish person walking is a stranger,
surrounded by people but all alone. Similarly, people publically resisting,
with even something as small as a crust of bread, are strangers in a crowd of
indifference. Being strange in this context means being alone, being lonely,
being alienated, being hungry and cold, as so many people are during these
times (Ritchie). But, being strange also means looking for unusual ways to
cope in the strange world.
The books title, The Last Stranger, is significant to the story line. Once
the last human stranger is no longer strange, no human will be strange to
any other human. But there is another way to interpret this. Assuming that
all humans are strangers, when the last human stranger is dead, there will
The complexity
of this books title

alone alludes to
the growing complexity of Liesels
way of looking at
and living in the
world.
be no more humans. Put another way, if Hitler succeeded in killing all the
people on his current strange list, he would make another list, and then
another, until no one is left. The complexity of this books title alone alludes
to the growing complexity of Liesels way of looking at and living in the
world, in addition to her loneliness and alienation.It again conjures images
of Max. The book prepares her to make contact with him, at all costs, when
she sees him marching to Dachau after being captured by the Nazis. In that
scene, Liesel risks her life when she tries to follow him. This is a complicated
moment for her. On the one hand, shes being brave and making a stand
Researched Analysis
against injustice. On the other hand, her behavior could have cost her and
Max their lives. Luckily, Rudy intervenes. The irony here, of course, is that
Max survives the war and Rudy does not.
The Book Thief is the name of the book Liesel writes over the period
leading up to thebombing of Himmel Street. Its the book Death rescues
from the garbage and returns to Liesel when she dies. Its the book that
literally saves her life. If she hadnt been editing it in the basement on the
night of the Himmel Street bombing, she would have died along with everyone else. The concentration Liesel summons points again to her strength
allows
theLiesel
words of her
books to flow
through her, as
she sees each of
them for the first
time.
of character. Her ability to find a positive outlet for her emotions also says
a lot about her. Of course, she didnt just decide to write a book all on her
own. She has a little help from Ilsa Hermann. This points to the irony of the
title. Ilsa gives her the blank book after Liesel has given up book thievery and
books in general. Though she is sure to read many more books in her future,
this book marks her graduation from reader to serious author.
In recent decades, educational professionals and parents have debated over the topic of teaching the about the Holocaust in public schools.
Some believe that it is too violent and gruesome a subject for youth to
swallow. One can argue that any writing about the Holocaust for children
breaks a strict taboo: that children are not to be frightened (Adams). However, in Germany there were many children who where frightened, yet they
survived. For Liesel Menninger, her survival was her shield of books and
words. Her childhood like many was stolen away and she was forced to grow
up in a war torn world. Ernest Hemingway said, All my life Ive looked at
words as though I were seeing them for the first time (Goldberg). Liesel
allows the words of her books to flow through her, as she sees each them for
the first time, shaping her into a strong young woman in the face of hatred
and sorrow.
Researched Analysis
Works Cited
Adams, Jenni. Into Eternitys Certain Breadth: Ambivalent Escapes in Markus Zusaks
The Book Thief. Childrens Literature in Education 41.3 (2010): 222-233. Academic Search Premier.
Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Brockway, Laura. Inspiring Quotes About Words and Writing. Ragans PR Daily. Ragan
Communications, Inc., 29 Sept. 2011. Web. 24 Mar. 2015.
<http://www.prdaily.
com/Main/Articles/12_inspiring_quotes_about_words_and_writing_9620.aspx>.
Brown, Daniel A. For all the children who were thrown away. Educational Leadership Apr.
1998: 72. Academic Search Premier. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Geerling, Wayne, Gary B. Magee, and Robert Brooks. Faces Of Opposition: Juvenile Resistance, High Treason, And The Peoples Court In Nazi Germany. Journal Of Interdisciplinary
History 44.2 (2013): 209-234. Academic Search Premier. Web. 16 Mar. 2015.
Goldberg, Martin. Childrens Auto-Biographies and Diaries of the Holocaust. Teaching
History 83 (1996): 8. Academic Search Premier. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Hirsch, Marianne. (1999). Projected Memory: Holocaust Photographs in Personal and Public
Fantasy. In Mieke Bal, Jonathan Crewe, & Leo Spitzer (Eds.), Acts of Memory: Cultural Recall in the Present (pp. 223). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
Kremer, S. Lillian: Childrens Literature and the Holocaust Childrens Literature: annual
of the Modern Language Association Division on Childrens Literature and the Childrens
Literature Association (New Haven, CT) (32) 2004, 252-263,286. (2004)
Maughan, Shannon. Its A Wonderful (Sales) Life: The Staying Power Of The Book
Thief..
Publishers Weekly 257.34 (2010): 16. Professional Development Collection. Web. 26 Mar. 2015.
Ritchie, J. M. The Nazi Book-Burning. Modern Language Review 83.3 (1988): 627-643. Academic Search Premier. Web. 16 Mar. 2015.
Von Merveldt, Nikola. Books Cannot Be Killed By Fire: The German Freedom Library And
The American Library of Nazi-Banned Books as Agents of Cultural Memory. Library Trends
55.3 (2007): 523-535. Academic Search Premier. Web. 28 Mar. 2015.
Zusak, Mark. The Book Thief New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2005. Print.
Researched Analysis
TO KILL A HOODLUM OR NOT
TO KILL A HOODLUM?
A dam M ellor
he book of Job begins with the phrase The Lord gave, and the
Lord hath taken away. This pretty much sums up Blindness by
Jose Saramago. The story in the bible is about Jobs endurance
through pain and suffering and how his relationship with God grows through
various trials. His unexpected suffering is like that of the characters in
Was the doctors wife justified

in killing the leader of the hoodlums?
Blindness, as they are victims of a sudden and completely unexplainable loss

of sight. This white blindness spreads like a contagious pathogen and passes
so quickly that it causes all organization within society and the government
to break down, bringing death and suffering. The first to lose their sight
are put into an inhumane quarantine, and the only one who can see is the
doctors wife. The ward soon becomes filthy and disorganized. But it is not
until the hoodlums arrive, that the suffering really begins. They take charge
by beginning to ration the food, take the possessions of others, and rape
women. They forced the women from each ward to come to their room on
a rotation to satisfy the carnal desires of the men. Because all are blind and
faces cannot be seen, none of the characters are named in the book. Was the
doctors wife justified in killing the leader of the hoodlums? Although killing
is not inherently unethical, it can become so depending upon the reasoning
for it. The doctors wife is justified in killing the leader of the hoodlums in
certain circumstances, but not in committing 1st degree murder as she did.
First degree murder requires the following three basic elements: willfulness,
deliberation, and premeditation.
There is often a lot of confusion between these three elements of 1st
degree murder, because there is such a fine line between them. Willfulness
means that there was a desire to commit the act. Deliberation refers to intentionally committing the act, and of considering the associated consequences
Researched Analysis
beforehand in order to follow through with it. However it is important to
note, that a deliberate act is not triggered in the heat of passion. And lastly,
premeditation requires that the killer think out the act before committing it.
Put more simply; you need to desire to kill the person, intend to do so, and
plan how you will accomplish your goal. (Segars 1) In order to discuss the
events in the story chronologically; I will examine deliberation and premeditation together, because these two aspects of murder are so closely tied. It is
fairly easy to determine if someone wanted to kill another, but understanding if they intended to do so and thought out the act is harder sometimes to
discern.
First and foremost, in any murder case, willfulness must be examined. Did the accused want to kill the plaintiff? Almost everyone seems to
agree that ones reasons for killing are important. The doctors wife was
raped and then forced to watch the raping of all the other women in the
ward. The doctors wife was especially humiliated when she was forced to
engage in oral sex with the hoodlum. This experience left her and the other
It is hard to
remain objective when you

have an example
of the doctors
wife.
women not only violated, but also physically bruised and battered. The men
did not just rape the women, they manhandled them. And just because this
happens in a fictional story does not mean that this isnt a common occurrence in the regular world. According to the U.S. Department of Justices
National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS)--there is an average of
293,066 victims (age 12 or older) of rape and sexual assault each year. Any
reasonable person would understand if the doctors wife loathed the hoodlum and wanted him dead. Not to mention, the hoodlum had been depriving
the doctors wife of food, leaving her desperate and with every reason to
want to kill (Saramago 138). It is hard to remain objective when you have
an example like that of the doctors wife where it is difficult not to sympathize with her situation. But killing is an epidemic; There are an estimated
Researched Analysis
17,000 murders in the United States each year (rocketswag 1). And just
because it happens a lot does not mean we should cut the doctors wife any
slack.
The first piece of evidence that the doctors wife willfully killed the
leader of the hoodlums is her response to the men when they came to jeer.
They paused for a moment at the door of the first ward to ask if the women there had yet recovered from the sexual orgy of the other night (Saramago 186). These men did not care about the women, and their insincere
concern only served to further humiliate them. This is probably where the
first piece
of The
evidence is her
response to the
men when they
came to jeer.
doctors wife began to contemplate murder. A great night, yes sir, exclaimed
one of them licking his chops (Saramago 186). This mans disturbing
comment may have been the final straw. Or perhaps, when one of them
asked laughing has one of you vamoosed? (Saramago 186) This choice
of words provided further provocation. Those seven were worth fourteen,
its true that one of them was no great shakes (Saramago 186). As if killing
one of the woman in the group was not enough, her memory also had to be
degraded by the hoodlums. What the doctors wife says next is perplexing,
and may serve as further evidence of intent. It wasnt much of a loss,
she was no great shakes (Saramago 186). It seems that the doctors wife is
utterly disgusted with these men.
However, some might argue that the doctors wife may have said this
in response to the mans comment that; oh hell, then you lot will have to
work all the harder next time (Saramago 186). The doctors wife may have
simply wanted to say that they had not lost anything of value, and thus the
rest of them should not be made to suffer more. Whatever the case, the unexpected reply is interpreted as sarcasm and causes the men to leave. If her
goal had been to simply kill the mood in the room and get the men to leave,
then she was successful. We know without a doubt that she wanted them
Researched Analysis
to, especially since, She recognized them, [and] she had been raped by all
three of them (Saramago 187). Seeing all three of those rapists in one place
must have given her a little push towards action.
Further evidence of willfulness to kill is seen in the things that the
doctors wife thinks and observes as she enters the room where the hoodlums
reside before killing the leader. Not only had she been forced to experience
and witness all of this wrongdoing the first time around, but seeing it again
probably only provided more justification for what she was about to do. The
doctors wife saw fifteen women sprawled on the bedsthe men going
from [one to another], snorting like pigs (Saramago 186). Watching as the
blind accountant went to the last one and put his eager hands up her
skirt (187) Lastly, hearing the men shout at the screaming women, If
you want to eat, open your legs further validated her decision (187). The
whole reason this was happening was because the hoodlums had all the food
and would only trade it for sexual favors.
One of the easiest ways to understand willfulness is to see a case
One of the
easiest ways to
understand willfulness is to see a
case where there
was a lack of it.
where there was a lack of it. The Philadelphia tribune covered a story of a
woman charged with murder in an egg-tossing incident. The woman was
home at the time that some men started to throw eggs at her while she was
on her porch. I thought they would hear the gunshot and run. I didnt aim
at them. I didnt know I had shot him until I saw him on the ground (Thomas 1). This woman had a young child and lived in a bad part of town. It is
very possible that she could have only intended to scare the men away, and
had accidentally shot one.
The recoil of a gun in a weak or untrained hand can cause the aim
to be off. The womans lawyer Timothy Booker said; She was petrified.
The area she lives in has a lot of robberies, rapes and drug deals...She was
trying to survive. (Thomas 1) A woman with a child against three men
Researched Analysis
who not only throw eggs once, but come back to do it again is bound to end
badly. This woman did not want to kill the man that she shot, only wanted
to protect herself and her child. However, the doctors wife had every reason
to hate and kill the leader of the hoodlums. These situations differ because
without willfulness, what could be interpreted as murder becomes manslaughter.
Another way to gage willingness is to see how much violence is
involved in the killing of the plaintiff. Unfortunately road rage or disrespectful driving is causing 800 deaths a year on the roads, according to a
Another way to
gage
willingness
is to see how
much violence
is involved in
the killing of the
plaintiff.
British survey (Woodman 1). And in a Millersville road rage trial, a New
Jersey detective Joseph Walker was charged with killing Joe Harvey, Jr. A
friend of Harveys Pidel, ...testified Harvey became agitated, sped up next
to the Walkers van and started yelling at them. Then Joseph Walker and
his wife, Marie, testified Harvey was cursing at them, threatening them and
using racial slurs. From this it is pretty clear that Harvey was upset and
confrontational but that doesnt mean he should have died. Later when both
had pulled over to the side of the road, Joseph Walker testified that Harvey,
unlike Pidel, kept coming forward even after Joseph had pointed his gun at
them. The reason the altercation occurred is somewhat unclear, but what is
clear is that Joseph Walker shot Harvey three times (Pratt 1).
Why Harvey did not stop when he saw the gun pointed at him is a
mystery to me. But more importantly, why was Harvey shot so many times
by Walker. This is a lot more force than is necessary to subdue someone.
Most people after being shot anywhere would stop because of shock, pain,
and fear of death. A trained detective would most likely not fire that many
shots into a man unless he was out of control. I think that it is likely that
Walker acted out of anger. The doctors wife chose to kill the leader of the
hoodlums in a horrific manner. She chose to stab him in the throat, which
Researched Analysis
was bloody, painful and frightening--when she could have easily taken away
his gun.
Another important question to ask ourselves is whether or not the
doctors wife deliberately killed the leader of the hoodlums. Deliberation
is one of the most important things that a jury or judge looks for in a case.
Most agree that whether or not a person intentionally kills another matters.
It is what separates manslaughter from murder, one being an accident the
other a calculated act. Right before the doctors wife leaves the ward her
actions make it clear that what she is doing must remain a secret. Murder is
usually something that a person does not want others to know about, because they are doing something wrong.
First the doctors wife removes her shoes, this is a deliberate act that
allows her to walk silently down the hall (187). Nobody cares about whether
others can hear them coming unless they are planning a surprise attack. She
went to reassure her husband, I wont be long, Im coming straight back
(187). At this point we know with almost complete certainty that she has
premeditated murder, because why else would the doctors wife want him
to know that she would return soon? It was a planned move, if someone
were to follow her they could make the doctors wifes presence known to the
hoodlums or find out what she was about to do. But since she was coming
right back, then everyone would think nothing of her absence.
Another im-
portant question
to ask ourselves
is whether or
not the doctors
wife deliberatrely
killed the leader of the hoodlums.
A great real world example of deliberation is the murder case of

Georgina Eager, 28. Christopher Newman, 62, was charged with her murder
after stabbing Georgina in a frenzied attack slashing her neck and slicing
her spinal cord. (Lane 1) Georgina was hired by Newman to be an assistant
in his homeopathy clinic and massage parlor. The clinic had a high staff
turnover as many girls joined in the mistaken belief they could develop a career, but were horrified to find they would be expected to provide personal
Researched Analysis
services if they stayed. (Lane 1) Unfortunately this type of sexual exploitation occurs often at work. 15% of Women have slept with their bosses
-- And 37% of them got promoted for it (Shontell 1). Newman promised
Georgina he would hand over to her his business after they started an affair,
but she soon realized what was really going on.
But now Georgina was trapped in her bad decision. She wrote
confused letters to angels asking for guidance and admitted she did not
enjoy sex with Newman. She wrote: I really dont know what to do anymore. I really feel like crying, that I have made this stupid mistake. (Lane 1)
And when she began to exchange text messages with another man, Newman
became furious. Georgina decided then to leave but after a night of drinking
and gambling, somehow Newman lured her by telephone back to the clinic.
Newman stripped naked and attacked her while she slept, knifing
her 29 times and deliberately slicing her spinal cord. Newman left the knife
embedded in her neck as he fled to London and emptied her bank account.
(Lane 1) And what is worse is Georgina is not the only woman that has been
killed at the hands of an abuser. 4,000 women a year die at the hands of
their abusers75 percent of them because they are trying to leave (Vartan
1). When Newman murdered Georgina he did so with intent, because of
the way he ended her life. It is apparent that he was a very twisted and possessive man bent on revenge. Why else would he have stabbed her so many
times and then empty her bank account? In his mind he was most likely
enacting vengeance, because she had gone against his will and he could not
control her.
As the doctors wife entered the ward slipped slowly between the
beds, but she need not even have taken these precautions (187) The fact
that the doctors wife moved slowly and took precautions not to be detected
is a clear sign she was deliberately attempting to remain unnoticed. These
Researched Analysis
are the behaviors of someone who is preparing to murder another. The
doctors wife then thinks killing him was going to be easy (187). She
willfully and deliberately was preparing to murder the leader of the hoodlums, who was raping a women as the doctors wife stood there. The
doctors wife studied the movements of the man she was about to kill, how
he threw head back with pleasure (187) There is little doubt that she did
not intend to kill him, this was a man that she loathed and was fixated on.
And the fact that the leader of the hoodlums was raping another
woman must have only moved the doctors wife more to murder. Slowly [she] approached circled the bed and positioned herself behind him
(187) This sounds like the actions of a serial killer, everything the doctors
wife does shows very calculated intent. She slowly raised the scissors, the
blades slightly apart so they might penetrate like two daggers (187) The
fact that the position of the blades is mentioned, shows that the doctors wife
was doing everything in her power to guarantee the success of her mission.
The doctors wife wanted to ensure the leader of the hoodlums had
a quick and painful death. And her hate for him is made apparent when
The doctors
wife wanted to
ensure the leader
of the hoodlums
had a quick and
painful death.
she thinks the disturbing thought you wont have time to cumas she
brought her arm down with tremendous force (189) This quote may lead
some to think that it is evidence showing deliberation but it is actually an
example of premeditation. The doctors wife had chosen the exact moment
to kill him, right when he would be at the pinnacle of sexual pleasure. The
exact moment when she probably felt the most violated while being raped.
A very clear real life example of premeditation is a case covered in
the McClanchy-Tribune Business News. The suspect in this case was not
identified by police but was charged with premeditated murder. The 37 year
old man gunned down his daughter. The suspect supposedly committed the murder for reasons related to family honor. A source claimed that
Researched Analysis
the girl was walking in the street with another man, and when her father
saw this he drew his gun and fired multiple rounds killing her (13 specifically). The second suspect returned fire causing the father to flee, he was
later apprehended by police (Husseini 1). It is not hard to imagine what the
circumstances might have been that lead to this act. The parents probably
did not like the guy but their daughter would not listen. The father must
have thought that it would be a disgrace for his daughter to marry this man,
perhaps based off of religious reasons. The proof that the fathers actions
indicate premeditation is in the fact that; he happened to have a gun one
is not hard
to Itimagine
what
the circumstances
might have been
that led to this
act.
him at the time, catch his daughter in the act, and fire multiple rounds at her
instead of the man she was with.
Some of the best evidence from the book that the doctors wife
committed 1st degree murder is in what she says and thinks about after the
act. The doctors wife had no desire to kill, all she wanted was to get out as
quickly as possible not leaving a single woman behind (190). While this
is the narrator speaking, it is really the thoughts of the doctors wife. At a
glance it would seem this disproves everything that has just been discussed,
but in fact it is another piece of evidence. What is the first thing that an
individual does after committing a wrong act? They say I didnt want to do
it. It is the way that persons rationalize unethical behavior. If the doctors
wife had truly cared about the other women she would have acted before the
first raping.
We see yet another example of murder as she finishes off another
one of the hoodlums. This one probably wont survive, she thought as she
dug the scissors into his chest (191). We dont know for sure if this man died
or exactly why the doctors wife chose to attack him also but it seems she had
every intention of getting her revenge. In self-defense we dont strike another when they are not a threat, blind injured men are usually not consider
Researched Analysis
dangerous.
Only moments after the doctors wife kills the leader of the hoodlums do the other men figure out that something has happened. This is when
the doctors wife called out in rage, remember what I said the other day,
that Id never forget his face (191) The important point to notice is that
she called out in rage, thus indicating that the act had been one of hate.
And when the men reply that they will get her back she says the other
fellow said the same thing and now hes a corpseIve already killed and Ill
kill again if I have too (191). Some might argue that the doctors wife was
simply using fear tactics in an attempt to control the other men, but if this
had been her goal all along she would have taken control with her sight a
lot sooner. The leader of the hoodlums took control with his gun, but a man
with a gun is not hard to disarm when he is blind. If the goal of the doctors
wife had been purely to help her fellow detainees she would have acted differently, instead she chose to commit an act of revenge.
As the doctors wife leaves the scene of the murder tears such as
she had never shed in all her life [came down her face], Ive killed a man. I
Here we see
an admission of
willfullness as
well as a sign of
regret.
wanted to kill him and I have (191). Here we see an admission of willfulness as well as a sign of regret. While it is understandable that the emotions
associated with killing would overwhelm the doctors wife, the fact that she
cried large tears is because she knew she had done something wrong.
Old and a murderess, she thought, but she knew that if it were necessary she
would kill again. Even the doctors wife considers herself to be a murder.
Opponents would point out that she felt it was necessary to kill him and that
it was understandable that she might have to do it again. They would insist
that the doctors wife was like a cornered animal, and while circumstances
are important they do not excuse murder. If she had used the scissors while
the leader of the hoodlums attempted to rape her she would be justified,
Researched Analysis
however she chose to enact revenge later.
In conclusion, when, why, and how we kill is what separates self-defense from the unlawful taking of anothers life. The lines between willfulness, deliberation, and premeditation may be blurry at times but it is their
presence that indicates murder. The fact that all three indicators are present
in the case of the doctors wife is solid grounds for a 1st degree murder
charge. We cannot always know what is in another person heart but we can
see the signs from their actions. Just like the people in Blindness were often
morally blind, it provides us with an illustration of how we can be so to our
own motives. And if we are not careful to keep them in check, we can end
up making mistakes like the doctors wife.
Works Cited
Saramago, Jose. Blindness. Great Britain: Harcourt Publishers Ltd College Publishers, 1998.
Pratt, Tim. Millersville Road Rage Trial to Continue on Monday. McClatchy - Tribune Business News Jul 27 2014. ProQuest. Web. 24 Mar. 2015.
Thomas, Carmela. Woman Charged with Murder in Egg Tossing Incident. Philadelphia Tribune: 1. 21 Apr 1995. ProQuest. Web. 24 Mar. 2015.
Segars, Leigh. What is Premeditated and Deliberate Conduct? Nolo.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Apr. 2015.
Lane, Damien. MONSTER ; He Stabbed Irish Girl Georgina 29 Times, Deliberately Cutting Her Spinal Cord. Yesterday He Got what He Deserved.. LIFE.
The Daily Mirror: 5. Sep 07 2005. ProQuest. Web. 2 Apr. 2015.
Husseini, Rana. Man Charged with Premeditated Murder of His Daughter. McClatchy - Tribune Business NewsDec 07 2011. ProQuest. Web. 2 Apr. 2015.
How Often Does Sexual Assault Occur? RAINN Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network. N.p., Web. 2 Apr. 2015.Vartan, Starre. N.p., 16 Oct. 2014. Web.
2 Apr. 2015.
Crime Statistics Murder Vs Manslaughter. Collections of Awesome Information on the Web. N.p., n.d. Web. 2 Apr. 2015.
Woodman, Peter. Road Rage Causes Many Deaths: Survey. Drive. N.p., 4 Aug. 2010. Web. 2 Apr. 2015.
Shontell, Alyson. 15% Of Women Have Slept With Their Bosses -- And 37% Of Them Got Promoted For It. Business Insider. N.p., 25 Aug. 2010. Web. 2
Apr. 2015.

Journal of Contemporary Literature

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Journal of Contemporary Literature

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

The best fiction is far more true than

any journalism. William Faulkner

April 7th, 2015 | Volume 1 | Issue 1

Journal of Contemporary Literature

Source: WikiMedia Commons

Letter From the Editors

The Only Freedom From Heartache is Death

The Burden of Love

What the Boy Really Saw in the Sea

Childhood is Truly a Magical Time

There is No Romance Like a Failed Romance

The Power of Words

To Kill a Hoodlum or Not to Kill A Hoodlum

Amy Standage | Formalist Analysis

Marta Hatch | Formalist Analysis

Anth Stokes | Theory-Based Analysis

Sam Pearson | Theory-Based Analysis

Sara Alfaro | Theory-Based Analysis

Melanie Gibson | Researched Analysis

Adam Mellor | Researched Analysis

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 3

From the Editors

4 | Stories for life

ho am I? This is, perhaps, one of mans most oft asked

poem that seeks

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 5

means to enter forcibly (dictionary.com). While the word summon suggests

6 | Stories for life

place in the collective identity. Our speaker says, While I am writing, I am

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 7

world, where everything is provided at the touch of a button. Ringing up a

8 | Stories for life

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 9

n most stereotypical situations, people wouldnt equate England, an

by Jaroslav Seifert is an expression of heartache from lost love, portrayed

sparkling bouquet (30) of misery and the attempt to avoid it.

10 | Stories for life

cy, that shield, to

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 11

love is undesireable with the likelihood of a heart

12 | Stories for life

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 13

ver the decades thousands of poets have written poems regarding

Umbrella from Piccadilly, expresses neither of these themes. The speakers

the perfect object of affection

help the reader draw this conclusion.

14 | Stories for life

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 15

Goddess Venus is called in her celestial form. In Roman mythology, Venus

16 | Stories for life

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 17

The best way

18 | Stories for life

It has all the

betrayed him. In Freudian analysis, caverns are most typically considered

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 19

so he had to create a friend for

20 | Stories for life

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 21

n All That by David Foster Wallace, the speaker brings a unique,

22 | Stories for life

Journal of Contemporary Literature | 23