Prompt 1: Insanity in Samuel Beckett's Waiting for Godot

Insanity in Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the term insanity means “condition of being insane; unsoundness of mind as a consequence of brain-disease; madness, lunacy.” Because of the overuse of this term in today’s culture, I feel that this term has come to be defined more loosely in that people employ the term in a manner that suggests that anything that seems to be outrageous in regard to what is socially “correct” or what the norm is, is insane. Given this, the term has come to define actions that are out of the ordinary without the individual demonstrating any logic in his or her decision making and thinking. One of the most obvious signs of  insanity appears to be the individual’s inability to see anything inherently wrong or odd about his or her behavior. Because of this, insanity’s definition has come to mean the instability of the mind with no regard or understanding for one’s own being, surroundings, or what is socially acceptable; the manner in which people utilize the term proves to be subjective in its usage. With this definition in mind and that the play was written during a time where existentialism was a popular topic, I believe that in Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot, Estragon and Vladimir do demonstrate signs of insanity due to their lack of sense of time and their constant waiting for a person who clearly will not arrive.

Estragon: If he came yesterday and we weren’t here you may be sure he won’t come again today.

Vladimir: But you say we were here yesterday.

Estragon: I may be mistaken. [Pause] Let’s stop talking for a minute do you mind? (Beckett 7)

In this scene, Estragon and Vladimir attempt to remember how long they have been waiting, yet they do not seem to possess the ability to know how long they have been waiting or what day it actually is. In other words, the two evidently have no concept of time. Time is a social construct as far as years, months, days, and hours go because the manner in which people measure time was created by people.Throughout the play, both characters clearly have no regard for time as they never seem to be able to determine how much time has passed. They demonstrate awareness for what time is, yet they cannot grasp how it passes. The fact that they never know how much time passed demonstrates insanity because they cannot see an issue with this inability, but someone of a sound mind would be able to. They never question their failure to determine what day it is or how much time goes by, they continue to simply wait for Godot.

Vladimir: We’ll hang ourselves tomorrow. [Pause.] Unless Godot comes.

Estragon: And if he comes?

Vladimir: We’ll be saved. (Beckett 84)

Here, at the end of the play, both characters revisit the same idea of killing themselves they explored in the beginning of the novel. This demonstrates that their only reason to live is Godot’s arrival, yet he never arrives. Godot’s failure to appear drives Vladimir and Estragon to the point where they feel the need to hang themselves. Because they cannot distinguish how much time has passed, they cannot tell how long they truly have been waiting for Godot, so they continue to await this being who never seems to appear. They rely so heavily on someone who does not present himself at all throughout the play, and this person drives Vladimir and Estragon to the point where they want to commit suicide because they wait and have been waiting for an unknown amount of time. Clearly, Godot may never come to Vladimir and Estragon, and the evidence throughout the play appears to point to that he will not. Still, the two characters ignore any reasoning behind Godot’s absence which supports them being insane. Their own existence relies on a figure’s existence that has yet to be confirmed.

Vladimir and Estragon demonstrate that they are insane due to their irrational and outrageous thoughts that occur while waiting for someone whose character is unknown and presence is nonexistent. This play explores existentialism, a popular concept during the time Beckett wrote the play, so it oddly makes sense for the characters to exhibit signs of insanity because people experiencing an existential crisis often feel that they are insane. The characters live in an endless cycle and constant state of not knowing or understanding anything that occurs around them or that they experience allows Beckett to create a piece that represents the time period’s feelings of insanity. Overall, Vladimir and Estragon do appear to demonstrate insanity due to the idea that the intended audience likely felt that they were also insane.

Names in The Crying of Lot 49

Samantha Tellez

ENL 10C – Blog Post #2

            Throughout the novel The Crying of Lot 49, we get introduced to, and in most cases brief glimpses of, various characters. The characters of the novel have been given ridiculously unrealistic names by the novel’s author, Thomas Pynchon. However, it’s possible that the names themselves carry on a deeper meaning, a more symbolic meaning. This symbolic meaning would then influence the reader as they work to uncover what is occurring throughout the novel. For example, do these names offer us insight into the lives of the characters? Do they mean something deeper or are they simply a form of satire that Thomas Pynchon uses throughout the novel? Or is the author simply trying to confuse the reader and the names mean nothing at all?

The novel itself begins with the introduction of our main character, Oedipa Maas. Oedipa coming from the name Oedipus. Oedipus was a mythical Greek character, a king, in Sophocles’ tragedy of three Theban plays. The story of Oedipus illustrates as he accidently fulfills a prophecy in which he unknowingly kills his father and marries his own mother. The fact that Oedipa’s name comes from the name Oedipus could mean that she too is destined to fulfill a prophecy, she has a route she must take in order to uncover the truth. This prophecy could be similar to Oedipus’ in the fact that she may uncover a horrid truth. However, in the case of the novel, it is quite possible that the truth she must uncover comes in the form of her ex-boyfriend Pierce Inverarity, who makes her executrix of his estate after his death. Her ex-boyfriend’s name could also mean many things, a “variety” of things you could say. For one his name sounds similar to “pierce variety,” which could simply account for the many different voices he would use and imitate, the last time he spoke to Oedipa, he was using various voices in order to speak with her. His name, specifically the “variety” part, could also account for the many different estates he holds. His name could also stand for “pierce the verity,” verity meaning truth, otherwise known as pierce, or uncover, the truth. This could be a sign to the reader that Oedipa is uncovering something far bigger than she expected. However, Oedipa Maas’ name could mean the exact opposite and she is not destined for anything. In fact, her last name could be read as “Mas,” which is Spanish for “more” which could mean that is Oedipa is meant to be “more” than her namesake, or she rather, she isn’t meant to be like her namesake at all.

As mentioned prior, there are also names used throughout the novel which are simply examples of satire that Pynchon is using. For example Dr. Hilarius, who we learn, after he goes insane from taking LSD, is a runaway Nazi doctor. Pynchon may have given Dr. Hilarius his name as it can be taken in two ways. One being that Pynchon finds Dr. Hilarius’ story funny, similar to the way he simply brushes off the fact that he was a Nazi in the novel. Another explanation could possibly be found by taking the beginning of Dr. Hilarius’ name, the “Hi-“ part, and using is as another form of satire as Pynchon mock/laughs at Dr. Hilarius’ ultimate addiction and insanity from taking LSD, which we first get an idea of when he calls Oedipa asking her to be a part of his “bridge,” “The bridge…being his pet name for the experiment he was helping the community hospital run on effects of LSD-25, mescaline, psilocybin, and related drugs on a large sample of suburban housewives” (Pynchon, pg. 8). Another character whose name could be a form of satire, is Mucho Maas, Oedipa’s husband who by the end of the novel, becomes addicted to LSD. Mucho, according to Oedipa, “…was a disk jockey who worked further along the Peninsula and suffered regular crises of conscience about his profession” (Pynchon, pg. 3). Similar to the way Oedipa’s name was interpreted, his name could be interpreted as “Mucho,” meaning “much” and “Maas” meaning “more.” This would make his name mean “much more,” as he struggles with his profession, Mucho sees himself as capable of doing much more, possibly succeeding in a different career or a different field.

Ultimately, it seems as though it is up to the reader to interpret whether or not the names given by Pynchon to his characters carry any sort of significance. If they do carry some significance to the reader, it is quite possible that these names can help uncover the truth that Oedipa is searching for. 

Socially Insane

Word Count: 751

Insanity is well understood as a “condition” or a “consequence of brain disease,” relying on formal testing and observation to deem someone terminally insane. Culturally, this definition relies too heavily on diagnosis, completely negating the fact that some areas of the whole may not have access to neurological medicine. Also, it fails to acknowledge cultural perception, that is, it depends on the society itself to label the action or the individual as “insane,” and it differs across each social group. Not to mention, there are various conditions of the mind that do not necessarily cause madness and the side effects vary case to case. Personally, I witness insanity as the idea of repeating the same action while expecting different results, lacking better judgement to acknowledge the action itself is flawed. My cultural surroundings demonstrate that an individual becoming an inconvenience to the general public, despite obvious social cues is mentally incompetent and the best possible conclusion is to either ignore or humor the individual to maintain the peace. In Waiting for Gadot, by Samuel Beckett, Vladimir and Estragon desperately find means of entertainment while expecting the arrival of a guest that has guaranteed them a reward for their patience. Though they are not the only questionable characters in the text, their odd distraction tactics and unreasonable investment in an unfamiliar person demonstrate Vladimir and Estragon are not mentally sound.

When initially deciding a way to pass the time, Estragon suggests hanging themselves, sparking interest from Vladimir who lets his companion in on an interesting “fact.” Vladimir informs Estragon of the possibility of an erection, further exciting Estragon to proceed with the hanging (Beckett 10).  Rather than refusing to wait for this unknown character, the men suggest suicide as a reasonable method in escaping boredom. Estragon and Vladimir disassociate from the fact that if they are successful in their attempts, they will not be able to feel anything at all, highlighting they are not capable of understanding the potential consequences. After arguing about which of the two should hang themselves first, Estragon advises Vladimir to “use [his} intelligence” in understanding Estragon’s reasoning for not being able to go first to which Vladimir responds, “I remain in the dark” (Beckett 11). Estragon is suggesting his friend to think intellectually about an unnecessary act, placing Vladimir in a reflective state. During their chaotic thoughts, the characters frequently reside to these moments of darkness they try to avoid. The extreme fluctuation of emotions further extends the definition of insanity since, often, it is emotions of the individual that are telling of their mental status. Though is seems Pozzo and Lucky have their own questionable attributes, it is how Vladimir and Estragon respond that is the most off putting.

After a brief departure from the men, Pozzo and Lucky return frantic and tumble to the ground. Before even deciding to engage with Pozzo at all, Estragon suggests to Vladimir they should ask for a favor from him and “if he refuses [they’ll] leave him there” (Beckett 71). They sense no wrong in receiving a payment for their services. Because Pozzo is revealed to be disabled, their actions are not only cruel, but it reveals the characters are lacking a proper conscious. Pozzo is now begging the men to help them regain their composure; however, Estragon and Vladimir become annoyed, deciding to “kick him in the crouch” (Beckett 75). Without warning or reason other than frustration, the men strike the helpless man only to assist him a short time later. This rise in temperament explains why the public avoid those in a severe mental state to not only avoid conflict but injury.

Towards the end of the play, Vladimir and Estragon once again find themselves alone and impatiently waiting for Gadot, throwing around suicide to calm their minds. This return of their initial plan to escape the madness that has become their lives: pointless and repetitive, shows that they too wish to end the insanity. However, being a prisoner to their minds, they maintain a lighthearted attitude toward their situation, Estragon jokingly using his belt as a noose of sorts (Beckett 87). Finding tranquility in their insanity is another aspect of the definition that is unacknowledged. Because these individuals are so removed from their reality, they are also separated from the tragedy of the world. It is easier for Vladimir and Gadot to reside in their illnesses for a moment the feel they have a greater purpose and that they can potentially reach it someday.

Blog Post #2

The story, Crying of Lot 49 is quite an eccentric reading. The plot and setting at times can be quite arbitrary and ambiguous, but Pynchon within the ambiguity and arbitriousness uses his many different themes; one specifically being that of sex, sexual authority and gender stratification to convey certain messages-- which show the disparing worldview of the story. The overarching plot is that the main protagonist, Oedipa, ex-boyfriend has passed but has named her the executor of his estate, and with this she feels the duty to execute-- to where she meets the lawyer to whom were the reader is made aware of one of the themes which shows the despaired world view within the story. How this is shown is by the main protagonist lack of authority and or ownership of her own body-- and in general her sexual identity.

When the lawyer (Metzger) showed up and after they had more than a few drinks they decided to have a game/wager on a show that Metzger was apart of when he was a young boy and stated that everytime that Oedipa was wrong on an answer she would have to strip a piece of clothing(and vice versa) and also she placed a wager that everyone on the boat would die. Yet, Oedipa had been suspicious of what Metzge knew and what he had planned-- especially after their initial counter when Oedipa was weary of the knowledge given by Inverarity, but Oedipa had  a “Marvellous idea” as she describes it, that would help her win regardless and so,

“Oedipa skipped into the bathroom, which happened to also to have a walk-in closet, quickly undressed and began putting on as much as she could of the clothing she could of the clothing shed brought with her: six pairs of panties in assorted colors, girdle, three pairs of nylons, three brassieres, two stretch slacks, four half-slips, one black sheath, two summer dresses, half dozen A-line skirts, three sweaters, two two blouses quilted wrapper, baby blue peignoir and old Orlon muu-muu. Bracelets then, scatter pins, earrings, a pendant. It all seemed to take hours to put on and she could hardly walk when she was finished.” (Pynchon: 24)

This initially signifies that the worldview of the story was alluding to a more optimistic- positive stance because it shows Oedipa taking ownership of her body. Oedipa doesn't throw herself at Metzger whom she says she finds handsome; she does the opposite and makes him work for it-- playing hard to get because she is unsure of Metzger as an individual and also because she wants to assert her authority of not only her body but also over Metzger. She could barely even walk after putting on all of that clothing, but her inability to move meant nothing if she could exert her power. She wanted Metzger to understand the power structure in play and that he would have to allow her amendment of the rules of the game for him to even have a possibility of achieving what he set out to do, which he thought was cleaver. Arguably Pynchon thoroughly describes this setting; stating every clothing item because he wants the reader to understand the importance of what Oedipa is doing for she is acting out of many conventional stereotypes of women, during the modern-post modern era, when faced against a man whom they find attractive. Each piece of clothing she put on to possibly irritate Metzger and yearn for something out of his reach and also every piece of clothing acting as act of rebelance.

Yet this is where almost immediately after the dynamic of the world view of the story changes and shows its true countenance of being bleak and or disparaging. Oedipa is winning the game/wager because after finishing adding more clothing to herself in the bathroom to further tease and assert her authority she sees that he is pretty much naked and decides that she wants to have sex with him. This at first it seems that she still is in control but when she found out that the story didn't end well for the protagonist within the story and that they actually had a gruesome ending. So, “Oedipa had leaped to her feet and run across to the other wall to turn and glare at Metzger. “They didn't make it!” She yelled. “You bastard, I won.” (Pynchon: 30) The countenance of disparity now is shown because in response to Oedipus outburst he smiled and stated that she won. And then after Oedipa asked Metzger what Iverarity had told him and he stated, “That you wouldn't be easy.” (Pynchon: 30) So the chapter ends with crying and with Metzger in the end. This truly shows the disparity pertaining to the world view of the text through the theme of sex, sexual authority and gender stratification because in the end even though Oedipa worked so hard to have this complete authority she was deceived and led to believe that she had authority not only of the situation but also her body. She went through an entire process and worked extremely hard to assert the matriarch in that current situation-- going through far lengths-- even not being able to walk from her adding clothes to have control. Yet this control was a fiction. And even though she won the game she still gave herself to Metzger thinking that it was her decision but all along Metzger would have won with either outcome of the game, which was rigged with knowledge and or resource which he possessed. So the solemness of the worldview can be argues that to be solidified by the relaity of Oedpia losing the game.

Multiple Narrative of Jazz by Toni Morrison

In Jazz by Toni Morrison, the central narrator is not explicitly stated--rather, readers are given purposeful ambiguity that leaves the point of view up to interpretation. Because of this, I feel that the narrator is an omniscient, often 3rd person narrator due to their birds-eye view over many events of the novel. Alongside this, the mysterious narrator include moments of 1st person interjections to carry the story along in a way that exudes emotions likened almost to a diary entry. Although bias is shown towards characters and the story is told in a non-linear form, these elements intertwine with facts only an omniscient narrative could reference, indicating a presence outside the characters that tells the story. In an interestingly created stream of consciousness narrative, the author settles on a combination between 1st person and 3rd person omniscient to provide a personal yet all-knowing view on the story’s events, overlaying story on story in a melodic harmony reminiscent of the novel’s title itself.

This stream-of-consciousness, omniscient narrative is greatly impactful when discussing each character’s actions--better immersing the reader through the narrator’s own sympathies and explanations. For example, as Violet is introduced the narrator takes an omniscient point of view to explicate her thought process of winning Joe back through jealousy as it would “dry up his tears and and give her some satisfaction as well” (Morrison 4). Her plans come from her own head, but the narrator addresses Violet through the third person, making it clear that they are not the same person. While Violet is given her own chance at narration later on, the tale of her running through the snow in combination with the ability to know her plans before they happen provides ample evidence that this narrator takes on an omniscient view.

In the first three pages, the narrator also uses their 1st person point of view to insert their own attitude and sympathies to the story, in comparison to the typical neutral 3rd person  After addressing Violet’s wild schemes of romance, the narrator sarcastically remarks “good luck and let me know” (Morrison 5). These sorts of out of pocket statements are threaded constantly throughout the novel. By including such remarks, the narrator is able to have the best of both literary worlds--personal ideals of the first person, and the all-knowing presence of the third person. The addition of such comments is a more personal approach to narration, and is used to both sympathize and belittle the characters to twist the reader’s biases. 

This combination of the omniscient and personal is incredibly impactful for how readers interpret the text. Even when describing the city of Harlem, the narrator uses their personal voice to insert their own opinions on the city whilst leaving holes for readers to decide the true meaning of the text. This is most notoriously present as they feel “alone, yes, but top notch and indestructible-- like the City in 1926 when the wars are all over and there will never be another one” (Morrison 7). The narrator describes the city as unbeatable, and at the time period of the novel another World War wasn’t apparent to most. Despite these seemingly positive and all-knowing thoughts, there are several gaps within the narrator’s claims that leave readers questioning their true intentions. By qualifying the sentence with the word “alone” and implying no knowledge of future events, the first person concepts are increasingly present as if it were fully omniscient, the narrator would likely know peace was far from home. 

The holes left in the narrator’s statements explicate a more personal, stream-of-consciousness kind of narrative in comparison to an all-knowing, godlike presence of traditional third person points of views. The insistent personal sympathies and often sarcastic attitudes provided towards many of the characters indicates that the narrator is fully immersed in the story rather than watching from afar. That said, the consistent knowledge of character’s thoughts and actions is tradition to an omniscient viewpoint. The combination of these two aspects leads me to believe that the narrator is not a character readers learn by name in  the story, but rather a mysterious third party that is within the story yet allotted a bird’s eye view of events. Though not a traditional narrative by any means, I believe that this combination of viewpoints is incredibly impactful for leading readers to their own observations and interpretations--especially when meeting characters like Violet, who is deeply complex.

Catch-22

Word Count: 826

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, insanity is defined as being the “condition of being insane; unsoundness of mind as a consequence of brain-disease; madness, lunacy”. In this condition “a false action of conception or judgement, a defective power of the will, or an uncontrollable violence of the emotions and instincts, have separately or conjointly been produced by disease”. This definition of insanity is limited to the concept of brain-disease, disregarding the temporary instability that can be found from the emotional turmoil that surrounds us. This emotional turmoil, created from overarching societal flaws, remains the backdrop for the disintegration of reason in the face of adversity. Insanity molds itself to being not simply the result of a serious brain disease, but also serves as the outcome from when the pressure of society becomes too large to bear, forcing individuals into roles that their nature rebels against. Cultural ideas of sanity surround the concept of being able to serve your role in society without deviating from your purpose. Due to this, sanity becomes a measure for how accepting a person is to their environment, rather than a portrayal of the mental state of the person. However, if a member of society is able to meet their role without questioning the wrongs within the institution, then they should be considered insane. The concept of a Catch-22 epitomizes this idea. This concept is a situation where an individual cannot escape their problems due to the institutional powers that play upon them, deeming them insane until they recognize the evils in institution.  In A Streetcar Named Desire, Blanche struggles with the chasm between her reality of misfortune and her desired position in society as a respected woman, leading her to go insane as she never recognizes the evils of living in a man’s world.

Blanche’s descent into madness is characterized by her inability to recognize the larger institutional forces that impact her own self image. Blanche sees herself as being the perfect Southern belle, a reflection of grace in a chaotic world.  She tries to find this same grace in her environment, as she is constantly trying to mold her modest surroundings into something that reflects an image of elegance. When talking to her sister Stella, she tries to find refinement in her clothing, attempting to remain the belle that she needs to be. She reflects on her appearance, stating that she will wear her cool yellow silk and a turquoise pin, and reminding Stella to “[t]ry and locate a bunch of artificial violets in that box too”. Her constant need to uphold this persona is due to the larger male focused world that she lives in. In reality, her past is burdened by her gay dead husband and her lack of wealth. Like the violets in the box, Blanche needs to seem everlastingly lovely in order to be desirable.

Without her persona of refinement, Blanche becomes unneeded in society, as she is unable to provide men with anything due to her complex past and older age. This is shown through her brief relationship with Mitch. In order to create the relationship with him, Blanche resorts to her false persona, and refuses to sleep with him in order to gain respect within the male sphere. When Mitch finds out about her past, she becomes an object to him, desiring sex regardless of the connection that they have made. He approaches Blanche wanting “what [he’s] been missing all summer” and deems her “not clean enough to bring in the house with [his] mother”. What Mitch was missing all summer was sex, and his realization of her false construction of herself makes him treat her like a prostitute. Without Blanche’s Southern belle attitude, she becomes subject to the scrutiny of men, putting her in danger’s way. The shattering of her shield leads to her rape, as Stanley recognizes her insignificance in society. Without wealth or a man, Blanche becomes the plaything of the men around her. She becomes object-like, as a girl with no man and no future suddenly is placed in the role to satisfy the sexual urges of men.

Blanche’s madness is characterized by her inability to be the person she truly is without being targeted by men. She is unable to grieve, to have her own past, or to reveal any truth in her statements. If she does, she becomes the property of men as a collective. This contradiction, a Catch-22, becomes a situation in which Blanche cannot escape her hell without recognizing the evil in the men around her. By being unable to recognize the falseness of men, she becomes too naive, and drowns herself in the hope that a man will save her. She cannot be saved by a man due to her own past, nor can she be financially independent. This inability for Blanche to be herself leads to her own type of insanity, as she is trapped within the claws of a man’s world.

Jazz, the City, and Violet

Based on the first section of Toni Morrison's Jazz, I argue that the narrator of the story is Violet. Though the narrator addresses Violet through the third person, I believe that this only serves as a story element which serves to reinforce the mental instability of Violet. The story’s introduction leads readers to believe that the story is told through an omniscient third-person narrator. “Sth, I know that woman. She used to live with a flock of birds on Lenox Avenue. Know her husband. He fell for an eighteen-year-old girl…” (1). I argue the opening lines of the book drop the reader straight into the fractured narrative of the story. The story follows a non-linear progression. Major plot events are dropped second handedly to the readers as the narrator works to further expand on them later in the story. For example, we look at the introduction of Dorcas, who we find out later is the girl whom which Joe has fallen in love with. Continuing from the introduction quotes earlier, Morrison writes, “He fell for an eighteen-year-old girl with one of those deepdown, spooky loves that made him so sad and happy he shot her just to keep the feeling going” (1). Furthermore, the narrator mentions that the wife, who we now know to be named Violet, she mentions the stabbing of Dorcas’ corpse at her funeral by Violet.

Establishing these plot events, which one can assume to be the climax of the novel, at the beginning of the novel allows for Morrison to shift the focus of the reader from the physical events of the characters to the mental and emotional workings of the characters instead. This is evident through the fractured temporal nature of the story’s narration. Morrison introduces the reader to the moment of Violet’s mental break in order to work backward and explore the events which led to that moment.

Furthermore, the role of the narrator shifts between Violet’s third-person perspective and her third-person omniscient perspective. The reader is able to read the feelings and thoughts of various characters in the book such as Malvonne, “But Malvonne was not interested in them; she simply noticed. Her interest lay in the neighborhood people.” (41) and Joe, “Convinced that he alone remembers those days, and wants them back, aware of what it looked like but not at all of what it felt like, he coupled himself elsewhere” (36). These objective representations of character thoughts and feeling are accomplished through the “cracks” in Violet’s perception of reality.

These “cracks” which Violet mentions regarding her own psyche are what allow Violet to jump from her own perspective to that of the other characters of the book. When the narrator, Violet, introduces these “cracks” they are seen as a door to a sort of fugue state for Violet.These cracks are what called Violet to steal a baby (22) and to sit in the middle of a street in the middle of the day (17).  Regarding the cracks, Violet states “She wakes up in the morning and sees with perfect clarity a string of small, well-lit scenes. In each one something specific is being done…But she does not see herself doing these things. She sees them being done” (22). I argue that it is through these cracks which Violet narrates the events of the story. Thus she is able to give the reader such an objective narration of the events of the novel and the psyche of the characters in the novel.

Other than the space of mental objectivity which this narration style allows for Violet, I am not quite sure what other impacts this narration style has on the story. One purpose I can begin to see forming within the first section of the book is with the setting of the “City”, with a capital “C”. For about three pages straight, and after the short introduction to the plot-heavy events of Dorca’s funeral, the narrator describes the “City”. The motif of the “City” is something that I am sure will be further explored in the story, as well as the role of jazz as well. These narration techniques ultimately serve to subvert the personal experiences of the characters of the book to the almost sublime-like nature of the city and jazz. Thus, Violet gives us a very neutral and objective narration of the events of the story. The characters are not the main force at work in the novel, rather it is the power of the “City” and jazz.

Blog post #2

Word count: 751
When analyzing Blanche from a mental perspective rather than analyzing her from a characteristics/traits point of view it brings into question if Blanche was afflicted by some mental disorder or not. In face value one could argue that she had some loose screws but that is only looking at her in the surface and ignoring the facts that are given throughout the play. The word “Insane” has been used to describe people who are not well in the head or for lack of better words not sane. But the both those words have different backgrounds that could be used to explain both Blanche’s behavior and her ultimate demise.
To begin the analysis, it would be wise to define “sanity”, “insanity” and “sane”; to fully understand and not confuse how this analysis will investigate Blanche and her actions. Firstly, the word “sane” and “sanity” have rather extremely close definitions that could lead to someone making a mistake on its usage and its meaning. “Sane” is used as a state of mind to describe one’s mental balance; whilst “sanity” is the positive side of that balance in which one is rational and in a good mental state. Through that last definition one can assume that “insanity’ would then be the opposite of “sanity” thus it means: irrational, crazy or in a state of madness dealing with the mind. And while that is true, there are other definitions that have been forgotten in the more modern world because they are either incoherent or they don’t have a scientific bases backing its meaning. One of these definitions is that of being a disease one that is both physical and mental, depending on the country or cultural background the cause also differs. If looking at the word “insanity” from the perspective of an anthropologist that studies primitive societies or indigenous people, they would say that the cause of someone’s insanity is due to the spirits or a curse. Another definition that has long been forgotten is that of the bodily fluids or in other words their “Humors”, which is a theory that the Greeks had for a long time. Of course, such theories were forgotten about because of how baseless they were with absolutely no proof that they were true or correct.
Which leads to why only the first definition can be used to analyze Blanche, because it has the most logical and scientific sense. Although insanity is a state of mind that deals with madness and mental illness it can be used in ways to criminalize and or blame people if it fits the criteria. This criterion is what is most important when looking at Blanche, it is so open ended, and the wording is so vague and easy to manipulate to one’s situation that it may cause problems. That is why would looking at Blanche’s arrival one may say she is just a normal woman in her thirties that is just a tiny bit hysterical because her life is a mess at her age. Blanche’s age plays a huge part in trying to classify her sanity because culturally a woman her age should be happily married and with at least two or four children. This cultural pressure although she tries to shrug it off and act like she is fine plays a part in her overall breakdown as well as having so many things go wrong in a short amount of time for her. But of course, the final breaking point was one: losing Mitch and getting drunk in her sister’s house in her very lonely birthday and two: being raped/assaulted by Stanley.
After taking in account those two final events then one can look at Blanche and try to analyze her to finally decided whether she is insane or not. As someone with background knowledge in psychology and mental illness Blanche was in fact insane, only at the very end of the play. But one could argue that her anxieties from the very beginning count as already being insane and that perhaps she was just barely hiding her insanity by only acting out so cool and calm but only showing her worries to Stella or Mitch. Another reasoning to this argument is that she would hit on any men she saw or came across even Stanley, showing that she released her irrational desire for men at any given moment. In the end truly showing that she had no sense of control over herself or her desires leading to her eventual demise and insanity.

Want to Know The Meaning of Life? It's Nothing.

       Thomas Pynchon’s The Crying of Lot 49 takes a pessimistic and despairing worldview about humanity’s effort to find meaning in their individual lives. This is evident through the fairytale analogy of Oedipa and Pierce’s relationship, Oedipa’s initial skepticism about Metzger and Driblette’s frustration with Oedipa’s obsession over the meaning of Trystero. The uncertainty over whether Trystero is real at the end of the novel ultimately shows how the novel is implicitly accepting the status quo of hopelessness.

       The Rapunzel analogy in the beginning of the novel highlights the hopeless perspective of trying to find happiness in life through Oedipa’s reflection of her past relationship with Pierce. While comprehending the process of executing Mr. Inverarity’s will, Oedipa notes the lack of intensity in her past life with Pierce:

“[She] had also gently conned herself into the curious Rapunzel-like role of a pensive girl…When it turned out to be Pierce she’d happily pulled out the pins and curlers and down it rumbled in its whispering dainty avalanche, only when Pierce had got maybe halfway up, her lovely hair turned, through some sinister sorcery, into a great unanchored wig, and down he fell on his ass” (Pynchon, 11).

This analogy shows how Oedipa’s love for Pierce initially “conned” her into thinking the relationship was a deep, happy love but eventually Pierce falls “on his ass” and into unhappiness before she can be rescued from her prison, leaving her trapped in disappointment. Neither Oedipa or Pierce take responsibility for the cause of this disappointment in their relationship but instead blame it on “some sinister sorcery” or outside influence for their eventual lack of love and happiness with each other. This reflects the idea that no matter how much effort and emotion a person initially puts into their relationship, it is always going to fail because the universe (or in the analogy’s case, gravity and “some sinister sorcery”) is working against them. In the end, Pierce and Oedipa are left helpless to the power of fate and its choices, witnessing their love turn “into a great unanchored wig” and watching it crash into the reality that they are unsatisfied. According to this analogy, any effort to find meaning in life – like through happy relationships with others – is futile and cruel because it gets someone’s joy and hopes up only to let them sink into sadness.

       Furthermore, Oedipa is taken aback when “[the lawyer Metzger turns] out to be so good-looking she [thinks] at first They, somebody up there, [are] putting her on. It [has] to be an actor” when they first meet each other (Pynchon, 17). Oedipa is in such disbelief and lacks so much self-esteem that she believes she is being “[put] on” since a handsome man would never come into contact with her. After her previous relationship with Pierce, Oedipa pities herself and adopts a hopeless, almost satirical viewpoint of her life, doubting she will ever find anything satisfying in romantic relationships. By calling Metzger an “actor,” it is being noted that he is playing a character as a performance and is adopting a character’s behavior and personality, thus becoming ingenuine to a certain degree by not showing his real personality. Furthermore, the idea that “somebody up there” is the cause for such ingenuine portrayals and twisted humor, not Oedipa or Metzger, points out how the world is despairing because it plays cruel games with people’s lives. Cosmic fates push people into a pessimistic mindset due to their letdowns in love and false personas, causing them to search for true meaning in life elsewhere.

       After watching the performance of The Courier’s Tragedy, Oedipa becomes infatuated with the concept of Trystero and seeks to know more from the play director, Mr. Driblette. After becoming increasingly annoyed with her persistence, Driblette tries to explain that sometimes there is no inherent meaning in things:

“‘So hung up with words, words. You know where the play exists, not in the file cabinet, not any paperback you’re looking for, but—’ a hand emerged from the veil of shower-steam to indicate his suspended head— ‘in here…The words, who cares? They’re rote noises to hold line bashes with, to get past the bone barriers around an actor’s memory, right?’” (Pynchon, 62).

This reinforces how the novel has a pessimistic worldview since Oedipa tries to find meaning in the phrase Trystero but is disappointed at the simplistic response of “The words, who cares?” and rejects his oversimplification, believing some things have implicit meanings in life. Although Oedipa continues to try to find meaning in her life by unravelling the Trystero mystery, the novel (much like Mr. Driblette) accepts that there is no meaning in the world by saying “the play exists [in the director’s head as a figment of imagination]”. This mimics the novel since sometimes novels only exist in the authors’ heads as figments of imagination and only the critics of the novel apply meaning where there sometimes is none. Therefore, critics’ “paranoia” over finding hidden meanings in the details of novels is reflective of Oedipa’s obsessive paranoia of the Trystero mystery, which acts as humanity’s desire to find meaning in their life (whether that be through relationships, mysteries, careers, and so forth).

       By calling words “rote noises to hold line bashes together”, Driblette is essentially saying words are insignificant sounds with no meaning whose sole purpose is to create sentences that may be potentially meaningful to the speaker and the listener. Words are only special because they act as a trigger for people to remember not only how they physically acted (“bone barriers”) but also how they emotionally and mentally felt in their past memories. The novel accepts the primarily functional role and lack of explanation behind words, and therefore life, by having the plot end with the Trystero mystery unsolved. It essentially says that, like Trystero, the mystery of life’s meaning will never be fully solved and that is okay.

Word Count: 984

Life is Pointless, Just Accept It

A stamp collection is the least likely suspect for instigating a downward spiral into an abyss of paranoia. Yet The Crying of Lot 49 proves otherwise. Inspired by a fascination with the estate left behind by a deceased former lover, Oedipa’s investigative expertise is put to the test. Despite her obsession, efforts to uncover the secrets of Trystero are executed in vain. Within his novel, Thomas Pynchon explores the bleak reality that attempting to grasp an understanding of the world is pointless. Rather than seek profound answers or escape via hallucinatory substances, one must embrace the harsh truth that life itself is void of meaning.  

Pynchon’s depiction of the world is marked by its apathetic, systematic functioning. The author utilizes the initial sexual encounter between Oedipa and Metzger as a metaphor for the mechanized organization of society. Indicating the female protagonist’s lack of control, Pynchon describes Oedipa as being “so weak she couldn’t help him undress her...as if...he were some scaled-up, short-haired, poker-faced little girl with a Barbie doll,” eventually awaking “to find herself getting laid...like a cut to a scene where the camera’s already moving”(Pynchon 42). Rendered defenseless from excessive alcohol consumption, she is involuntarily subdued by Metzger. Though he radiates charm and intrigue, the lawyer symbolizes the oppressive and misleading nature of the society in which each character is engrossed. This particular incidence of rape and dehumanization of the lovers allows the author to capture the indifference society displays towards the human condition. As impotent subjects to a mechanized and unsympathetic world, Pynchon implies, acceptance of inferiority is imperative.

Despite resistance from individuals who reject societal conditions, industrialized structures and their influences remain inescapable. Although members of the Peter Pinguid Society believe the underground Yoyodyne mail system to be “a calculated withdrawal, from the life of the Republic, from its machinery...unpublicized, private”(Pynchon 124), such behavior merely perpetuates an overarching obedience to systematic functioning. Blind ignorance compels them to place the entirety of their focus upon the physical act of their resistance to authority, rather than the intention behind it. The absence of meaning contained within the letters furthers this counterintuitive agenda, as the members become enslaved to the system they themselves have created. Thus, Pynchon projects a despairing worldview, embodied through the hollow state of the characters’ existence.

Yet as Pynchon implies, those who question the authority to which they have been subjected face the threat of insanity. Yearning to partake in the pyramid of knowledge offered by the W.A.S.T.E. organization, Oedipa wishes to identify as a “sensitive.” However, she dreads that “the central truth itself” is unattainable, since it “must somehow each time be too bright for her memory to hold”(Pynchon 95). Pynchon suggests that the free will she believes she is capable of exercising under the label of “sensitive” is futile in accessing the knowledge she pursues. Her inferiority is only magnified by the system she aspires to unravel; rather, it is her own sanity that is gradually unraveled. Oedipa claims that “the true sensitive is the one that can share in the man’s hallucinations”(Pynchon 107), reiterating the idea that comprehending the organization will result not in enlightenment, but distorted reflections of the real world. The futility of Oedipa’s efforts are made evident as Pynchon highlights the absurdity of their expected outcome.

Dwelling upon the impenetrable course of life, however, leads many to embrace drugs as a outlet for the monotony of their lives. This response allows Pynchon to offer a despondent outlook towards societal conditions maintained by those who choose to resist, rather than submit to, the inevitability of their fate. After Oedipa offers money to a forlorn sailor, he expresses his intention to “spend it on booze” (Pynchon 128). Reflected by his anguish, “years of uselessness” have resulted in a “sure decay of hope”(Pynchon 128). In the eyes of the sailor, an existence dominated by intoxication is preferable to one of astute awareness of its futility. Similarly, after acquiring an addiction to LSD, Oedipa’s husband, who “used to hunch his shoulders and have a rapid eyeblink rate” reports relief from each ailment (Pynchon 141). Pynchon includes Mucho Maas’ psychosis as an extension of the sailor’s condition; both men treat their coping mechanisms as substitutes for life itself, as they struggle to tolerate the burdens of a meaningless world.

Ironically, a slightly optimistic worldview is offered to those who accept the futility of life. Although “always just that little percent on the wrong side of breaking even,” a poker player Oedipa encounters continues to gamble, despite acknowledging that he will “never get ahead of it”(Pynchon 122). By embracing the emptiness of life, he opts for taking risks, recognizing that he has nothing to lose. Similarly, peace of mind becomes a possibility for Oedipa if she admits that the series of coincidences with which she is obsessed are “all a hoax, maybe something Inverarity set up before he died”(Pynchon 167). In fact, she goes so far as to wish that “she [i]s mentally ill”(Pynchon 171) in order to avoid the notion of a deeply problematic world. Through the reasoning of these characters, Pynchon offers a positive world view, attributing complications to the individual rather than society itself.

Exemplified by Pynchon within The Crying of Lot 49, the world bears no inherent meaning. Sprinkled throughout the novel, the motif of the Trystero muted post horn is a symbol of the characters’ inability to voice discontent with the futility of existence, or redirect the course of the world. As one of Bortz’s grad students states, even the “historical Shakespeare...the historical Marx. [and] The historical Jesus” ultimately face death, no matter the extent of their societal accomplishments (Pynchon 151). Those who choose methods of resistance in reaction against their despairing worldview are ultimately consumed by self-destructive attempts to seek truth and purpose. However, as Pynchon suggests, succumbing to the mechanized functioning of the world provides freedom from insanity.

Word Count: 997