While Song of Solomon mainly details the struggle of the northern African-American community, it also narrates the struggle of women through Ruth Dead and Pilate. These two women are in nearly identical situations, where they must struggle to support both themselves and their families. Ironically, Pilate, an independent and resourceful woman who casts off her lover in favor of a strong family, comes out ahead of Ruth, who stays with her husband even after he kills her father. Morrison uses this contrast to provide insight into the fact that men are not the source of a woman’s power. Despite how little this fact may be recognized in society, it is ultimately up to the woman to look into herself for strength. Pilate is a perfect example of this fact, and this is made even more evident by the contrast Ruth provides in her pitiful existence under Macon Jr. Ruth (clearly) cannot separate herself from her husband no matter what the circumstances; she is so pathetic because she has come to rely on him to such an extreme degree. Pilate, on the other hand, seems to live an overall happy life with respect from her peers. “They knew right away that the man was a newcomer to the city. Otherwise he would have known…not to fool with anything that belonged to Pilate, who never bothered anybody, was helpful to everybody, but who also was believed to have the power to step out of her skin, set a bush afire from fifty yards, and turn a man into a ripe rutabaga.” Pilate is independent, self-reliant, and the stronger woman.

Post #5- The horror...the horror

"What greatness had not floated on the ebb of that river into the mystery of an unknown earth!" Heart of Darkness

“In this war, things get confused out there; power, ideals, the old morality, and practical military necessity . . . because there’s a conflict in every human heart between the rational and the irrational, between good and evil. And good does not always triumph.” Apocalypse Now

The similarity between Conrad’s novella Heart of Darkness and Coppola’s film Apocalypse Now points out an unfortunate, and thus far universal, theme throughout history: the connection between war and insanity. Just as Marlow fades from his methods of “trade” and “civilization” to practices considered “unsound,” Willard begins to lose sight of his original purpose, even his original self, as he begins to slip into the same moral conundrum that drove Kurtz to insanity. Both works explore through a firsthand experience how war erodes the very moral foundation that keeps our psyche stable in day-to-day living. Whereas we are able to make morally questionable decisions on occasion in our “regular” routines, like telling a white lie to avoid hurting a friend’s feelings, our minds are unable to cope with many of the decisions that must be faced in wartime- especially the ultimate decision of what side we are really on. Both stories demonstrate just what kind of effect results when a human is forced to make inhuman decisions in the war. Should Marlow continue to follow in the corrupt path of the Company’s “trade,” or should he end the imperialistic hypocrisy in his life and openly accept the status-quo for what it is the way that Kurtz does? Should Willard continue to engage in the paradoxical fight for democracy in the current and opposite pandemonium? Both characters do seem damaged, even broken, and definitely permanently and dramatically changed from exposure to their perverse worlds. However, both seem to retain a small sense of self at the very end, even if they remain unsure whether the ends have justified the means in their respective wars. This could be because they have rejected ultimate darkness, or accepted their sins as the horrific byproduct of war.
Ultimately, Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now bring into question the purpose of war initiated by a more “civilized” country and the end result such a war brings about. The end result appears to be total chaos, isolated anarchy, and the destruction of morals and sanity. “The horror” indeed.

Post #4- I can't stop writing about Metamorphosis

When I read the phrase "resists interpretation" I can't think of a more fitting short story than Metamorphosis. Kafka's story probably has about 10 million different interpretations, and most of them are probably valid. The title Metamorphosis draws attention to the transformation itself. Perhaps this is what is key to the story's meaning. The story's unusual structure, with the climax (transformation) at the beginning of the story, and continued narration after the death of the main character (a transfer from following Gregor to a more omniscient point of view) can be reasoned, but not with certainty. There are many ideas about the economic implications of the story and the personal implications of the story. Kafka seems to manipulate the story to create infinite questions in the reader's mind, and then to purposefully avoid answering a single one of them. Gregor transforms, but why? Why does the story continue after his death? Why isn't his transformation a bigger deal? Why does his father throw the apple at him? The events are there in the text, but the reasons behind them are not, and the reader is left to come up with his/her own opinions about the story. If Kafka's personal life is examined, it seems deceptively simple to connect Gregor's relationship with his father to Kafka's own relationship with his father, but the story is much to complex to lend itself to this one oversimplified interpretation.

Post #3- setting morals aflame

"Iago, as Harold Goddard finely remarked, is always at war; he is a moral pyromaniac setting fire to all of reality.......In Iago, what was the religion of war, when he worshiped Othello as its god, has now become the game of war, to be played everywhere except upon the battlefield."
--Harold Bloom

Harold Bloom first remarks that Iago is always at war. This is certainly true, in more than one way- Iago is constantly and infinitely at war with himself, as the evil and hellacious character in Othello. Though he is extremely able to manipulate his peers, he is constantly uncertain of himself and his motives, and is "always at war" with himself. He is also at war with the other characters of the play and is constantly innovating ways to manipulate those around him. Indeed, the image of Iago as a "moral pyromaniac setting fire to reality" seems appropriate, ignoring the redundancy of the diction. As he proceeds through the play and manipulates his wife, his superior, and his peers, Iago has in fact burned reality to the ground in an attempt to create his own reality. Unfortunately for Iago , in the end he loses control of the fire that he has started. Though we as the audience do not witness Iago's "religion of war, with Othello as its god," we are aware of it. And when things do not go Iago's way in this religion, there is a shift created by Iago himself into Iago's own self-created war of manipulation and deceit. And, of course, manipulation and deceit have no place on the honorable battle ground.

Post #2- Oedipus Rex

This play left me to consider the idea of free will, its limits and its opposition with the idea of fate. Since reading Oedipus Rex I have been debating the very idea of free will in my mind. Essentially, it seems, one could regard the situation either way. There is no denying that things will happen the way that they will happen, exactly, but at the same time we are left to fill in the pieces that complete this infinite puzzle. The decisions we make are still our choice, even if there is only one possible outcome- the outcome we choose. In any case, I now have a mind-boggling paradox to occupy my mind with when I am sitting in an elevator.

Post #1- Personal Passages

Maybe they come by land
Maybe they come by sea
Maybe they've already come
Maybe they come by me
Slipping into the twilight
I ride the broken wave tonight
An old song on the radio
You knew a long time ago
An old song on the radio
Going out over the ocean

Maybe it's World War I
Maybe its World War III
Maybe it's Vietnam
Maybe we're on TV
Falling into the tall grass
Melting into the tall grass
Spilling out over the lip and
Into the ocean
Into the ocean
-Carry by Patty Griffin

It's like I'm paranoid lookin' over my back
It's like a whirlwind inside of my head
It's like I can't stop what I'm hearing within
It's like the face inside is right beneath my skin
-Papercut by Linkin Park