Blog #7:

The line that sticks with me even now: "Happeningness is irrelevant. A thing may happen and be a total lie; another thing may happen and be truer than the truth." All our lives we are taught to tell the truth, find the truth, know our true selves, but what if none of it suffices? There is no definite truth to anything because reality is not one dimensional and is not meant to generalize.
War is grotesque- this is a given, but O’Brien touches on a fascinating idea when he says it can also be beautiful and we are never more alive than when we are nearly dead. When the war is over-when the lines are redrawn, the bodies are counted, the land left to heal itself- we may also ask what is the point? The reason and the outcome almost seem superfluous to the experience. What matters is what the survivors are left with: grief, bewilderment, helplessness, profound understanding of what is important. Each soldier has a different story to tell, not truth or lies, but the imprint war has left on them. It only matters that each one who proffers his memory is heard. The greatest decency we can have is to listen, which not many do or can. No judgment, no questions, no doubts or accusations, only the opportunity for the words to be spoken and the experience to live again morphing when necessary.
O’Brien believes truth is a tenuous concept. What is true one minute can be realized to be imagination or hallucination the next minute. More importantly, truth should not be sought after as a means of justification/clarification, but recognized as an inherent part of every human utterance. Sometimes we cannot not even identify our own truth so who are we to look for someone else’s? So what is true about O’Brien’s story? Maybe everything, maybe nothing; the message is understood.

Blog #6: Some Thoughts About My Personal Essay

Getting the ball rolling is always so hard for me when I’m writing. I know what I definitely don’t want my essay to sound like, but that’s only half the battle.
Montaigne’s style is definitely out- that flamboyant language and references to philosophers is neither appropriate for most contemporary writing nor does it appeal to me. On the other hand, I don’t want my writing to be so succinct and straightforward that it’s boring to my audience. Orwell’s piece was enjoyable, but the form was a little to smooth and predictable for me; an unconventional, quirky form is always more interesting. I do like the idea of accumulation and also find it practical to write in “blocks” because it is easier to reflect on what is written if there is space/time between each portion.
I also really love Jamaica Kincaid’s style in Biography of a Dress. While some people thought it was redundant and uneventful, I found it to be rich in culture and personal history. It was fascinating how Kincaid could recall one detail that would cause her to go off on a tangent about something else (which is how I associate things in my life) yet all the while everything circled back to that photo and the little yellow dress. One seemingly frivolous object has traces of hundreds of individual emotions and experiences. No event in our life is a solitary or static experience- it informs and affects everything else we do and say as humans. I would love to convey this idea in my essay.
I’m thinking of writing about the birth of my sister Colleen, and how she completely changed the dynamics of our family (probably saving it), but this will involve a lot of background story and personal exploration. Honestly, this will probably turn into an introspective therapy session, but even if everyone hates my story it’s something I have to write down for myself.

Blog #5: Structure/ Focus in Drummond and Danticat

Laurie Lynn Drummond (Alive) and Edwidge Danticat (Westbury Court) both examine human vulnerability and our constant struggle to feel secure. Although each woman is writing from a different context, their experiences parallel each other because each is forced to re-examine her own mortality. Laurie approached the idea as if we are constantly keeping death at bay and nothing can prevent it, only prolong the chase (not even having experience in law enforcement and the knowledge to guard oneself). Drummond’s final statement about being vulnerable simply because we are alive is striking, but somewhat hopeless. If we all had this mentality, would life even be worth living in the first place. Laurie’s final thought is a tragedy because in a way she is letting the stalkers/murderers/perverts of the world win by poisoning her mind.
Danticat’s take on the idea is somewhat more optimistic, which is ironic because here the author did confront death and for a while actually felt responsible for not hearing the screams of her burning neighbors. She gives the impression that death is random and indiscriminate. It could have been Edwidge and her younger brothers who were overcome by smoke, but they were unharmed despite being the last tenants to evacuate. After this incident the author is tainted in a way, and becomes hypersensitive to other crimes and tragedies around her (murders, illnesses, the theft of her father’s camera), but I never detected an air of desperation of hopelessness. Yes there is evil in the world and we all experience pain at times, but that is part of being human- to escape all pain is to stop living.
Alive has an ominous tone and the pace seems to speed up as the story progresses. Drummond forms the paragraphs in a very interesting way, larger blocks at the beginning followed by alternating single sentence “blocks” and slightly longer ones. The shorter statements give the illusion of rapid movement as Laurie is trying to flee from her stalker. If I had to identify this particular form I would say it is a combination of parallelism and pattering, but I’m not completely sure. I say parallelism because most of the blocks start with a personal action (“I grab”, “I stop”, I reach”) and I guess this is simply repetition so maybe I’m still not clear on the forms yet? Danticat’s piece does not have an unusual form but this might be considered accumulation because she builds upon each scene to reach the climax with some reflection thrown in.

Blog#4: Form and Focus in Schwartz

The overall themes of Mimi Schwartz's essay, My Father Always Said, include memory, the importance of family history, and the difficulties faced/gaps left by cultural assimilation or cultural translation. Mimi focuses on her journey "through time" to visit the Rindheim of her father's pre-Nazi Germany childhood, as well as the impact her father's history had on her growing up as a first generation American. Mimi eventually learns to accept and appreciate the rich though seemingly irrelevant traditions of her parents after seeing the suffering and displacement they experienced and the loved ones they had to leave behind.
The prose, simple yet impactful, reads like a typical autobiographical novel/essay, and closely resembles the structure/tone of Beard's Out There. Schwartz uses her parents’ harrowing experience of the Holocaust to make a commentary on the strength of familial love and the bonds that flourish despite the hatred that surrounds us.
Schwartz uses gaps in the storyline to indicate either the passage of time or the movement from real time events to exposition and reflection. The first section introduces readers to Mimi’s German-American household, where she struggles to reconcile her Jewish extraction with her Queens environment. She is frustrated that she has to forgo outings with friends to honor the Sabbath and embarrassed that her parents cannot say “moder” and “fader” without showcasing their non-American origins. The following sections include an account of the family's return to Germany and Mimi’s introduction into the world of family graveyards, cannon fodder, and Kristallnacht. Something shifts inside Mimi when she sees the stone remains of her family, multiple generations, some who led fulfilling lives and others who were robbed. Those who perished at the hands of Hitler's Germany have no legacy; their daughters will never wear lipstick at twelve or go bowling with friends, and more tragically, never honor the Sabbath or know the story of their people. These scenes bridge Mimi's "gap" on two levels: the first is the transition from child to young adult, the second is the incongruency between a disconnected German-Jewish girl and her ideal American self.
Mimi continues by punctuating the story with her father’s bittersweet memories and the ride through his hometown, then shifting to events taking place 40 years later where, in hindsight, she can thoroughly evaluate the situation and understand things on a deeper level (such as the realization that present day Rindheim is not all that different from the illustrious Forest Hills Gardens). I think this particular form is extremely useful and gives the effect of a camera rolling through the scenes of Mimi's life. Readers are drawn in and can both visualize and perhaps empathize with this Jewish -American girl's plight, the yearning to belong to the present without sacrificing the history of self.

Blog #3: How Do Montaigne and Orwell Compare to Others?

Modern prose does not follow nearly as stringent guidelines as during Montaigne's sixteenth century or even Orwell's early/mid twentieth century. Although these authors come from very different periods and contexts, there writing reflects a certain understood etiquette that existed when writing or speaking formally.

Elements such as colloquial speech and fragmented sentences/non-sequential ideas seem more typical of contemporary authors, which makes sense because that is how the mind thinks. Montaigne uses lofty prose which was more common in his time than it is today (if someone wrote like that in 2009 we would say he is pretentious or antiquated).So what exactly makes these two pieces CNF? The authors' ability to make their own stories resonate with the audience. The shortcomings and anxieties of the men are illustrated to comment on a larger sphere of human concern and folly ( the devastation of imperialism and the apparently tenuous concept of happiness).
Montaigne's piece is historically founded rather than springing simply from a personal event (although pondering his own death couldn't be more personal). He also quotes scholars and philosophers, which I don't think we've seen in any other writing so far. Also, Orwell's piece was much more politically charged while at the same time commenting on his own nature and that of the "white man in the East." This technique falls in line with Lott's idea that one should write about himself in relation to an experience or larger population, not just list the facts as they occur. Actually, all the pieces that we have examined so far meet this criteria, whether the author is front and center or positioned as a casual observer, the pieces are all telling about aspects of the human condition.

Blog #2: Kincaid's Yellow Dress and Lott's Guidelines

Everyone has a story to tell, no matter how small or spectacular. Each day and each interaction we have shapes us as human beings, and more importantly leads us to discover things about who we are both as children and later as adults. Jamaica Kincaid makes this clear in her short story Biography of a Dress and she sets a much different tone than we have seen in the other readings. Kincaid gives the impression that she is writing for herself alone, but more precisely writing from the perspective of a mature self to a younger Kincaid. The author has a wisdom and understanding of the world she did not posses(obviously) at two years old or even at 20 or 30 years.
Kincaid's account of her second birthday and her mother's excursion to buy materials for the yellow poplin dress is not about entertaining her audience so much as recording the facts and examining them. Elements such as repetition seen in the story mimic human memory- we remember minute details over and over and they seem to resonate in our heads, yet we may have no recollection of other more important events. Kincaid is writing about herself in relation to an object(dress) rather than a situation, as seen in other readings. However, within that object there is a lifetime of secrets, misunderstandings, and family history waiting to be examined. Something as commonplace as a birthday dress and a worn black and white photo evoke powerful emotions equal to those in, for example Jo Ann Beard's Out There, yet the premise has a subtler appeal. The material is understated yet the prose is somehow haunting/ magical.

Brett Lott presents an amalgamative definition of CNF for us, but what we should remember is there is no perfect definition, only certain guidelines those writing should consult. As Lott points out, the only way to unequivocably know what CNF is, is to actually try it. His discussion on the definition of CNF reinforced the idea that writers should not feel compelled to embellish their lives to make them traumatic or something other than the truth. A CNF writer should not feel deprived of material simply because they had an ordinary or uneventful life because every one's story is worth writing down and sharing. It often takes greater skill to develop a seemingly mundane story into one that , as Lott explains " shapes and forms what it is to be seen". Self is the creative element in CNF and because we all have a self to write about, this genre is a powerful and universal means of communication/self examination.

Blog #1: My Definition of CNF

When I hear the phrase "creative nonfiction" I automatically picture a columnist or some other Carrie Bradshaw-esque character jotting down thoughts about...anything really- work, sex life or lack thereof, or how they cheated on their low- carb diet yet again. It can be serious and philosophical or light and facetious, but the most important element is the creativity and value of what is being written. Obviously I would be more inclined to read about somebody's near death experience than I would be to read about their trip to the grocery store. So that raises another question for me- is all nonfictional writing (diary entries, love letters, suicide notes) considered creative non fiction, or are there specific criteria for CNF?
Until now, I have never bothered to start my own blog because I have a hard time believing that my daily musings are of any interest/importance to others, and I admit that I view "blogging" to be in the lowliest echelons of writing and I'm not really sure how I came to feel this way. Maybe its all the stupid live journal entries my friends made me read in high school,but I hope that I change my mind by the end of this class. What I'm trying to say is that a nonfictional creative writer should have a greater agenda than simply offering her audience a slice of self glorifying monotony. All great writing, whatever genre, strikes a chord within us, shifting the way we see ourselves or those around us, even if the change is imperceptible to anyone but us. If I write -I want it to mean something.

Testing Blog

First Blog...hi guys!