I have to say, I really like this book. The dialect is fun to work with and the topic of this entry, figurative language, is really nice to think about.
First "Point"
I think the sitters were workers, my reasoning stemming from "Mules and brutes had occupied their skins" (Hurston 1) relating the sitters to beasts of burden. Further reinforcing my belief that those individuals were workers, is the meaning I can derive from the sentence directly proceeding the one I just mentioned. Being "tongueless, earless, eyeless" (1) can be seen as meaning that laborers do not need to say, hear or see anything unrelated to their tasks. Now that they are off work, evidenced by "the sun and the bossman were gone" (1), they become "lords of sounds and lesser things" (1) and free to speak their mind. I think this is an excellent way to categorize the many unnamed people who make judgments about Janie throughout the novel.
I wonder why Hurston chose to make these sitters/workers only 'masters' of "sounds and lesser things". Lesser things being the more peculiar of the two. Why can't they be masters of more than that? Does this have to do with a sense of low social status? Also, why use such gruesome imagery when the words 'mute, deaf and blind' would work?
Second "Point"
One of my favorite instances of figurative language is used to describe the thought process of the sitters directly before they begin chattering about Janie. Thoughts in the back of one's mind are generally there to be ignored right? You probably wouldn't want to go around telling the world about what's back there either. But at that moment in the story, those people "chewed up the back parts of their minds and swallowed with relish" (2) Well for one, thank goodness this wasn't literal. I'd puke. I see the concept of "chewing" in this context to possibly mean 'enjoy' or 'think about'. It was mentioned that "envy they stored up from other times" was the thing in the far recess of their minds. Probably should have mentioned that first, but it evokes a 'evil' sort of personality for those sitters.
Now then, why write an entire paragraph when it would be simple enough to say that those people were harboring ill thoughts and made voice of them? This is quite similar to what I ask myself when confronted with figurative language anytime in this story: "Why go the the trouble?". My belief is that perhaps Hurston is trying to turn us (readers) against those people in the background right from the start. They're apparently 'evil' after all. Also worth mentioning, is why does the author use "from other times" when we haven't actually seen those "other times" yet? That's a question about the story chronology though, and I won't go too much into that crazy deep topic. Finally, why does Hurston have a fascination with using grisly imagery to describe things? Style? Or are all those 'gross' moments supposed to be a motif of sorts?
Third "Point"
"Janie's first dream was dead, so she became a woman." (Hurston 25)
I thought this single sentence was powerful enough to deserve a line of its own, and italics for that matter! The death of Janie's dream (nice personification) refers to the way she saw love. The sentence directly preceding this even says "She knew now that marriage did not make love." (25). On to the second half of the sentence, "so she became a woman" obviously cannot be taken literally. Unless for some reason the author decided Janie was actually a man and... forget it, let's not go there because I think I've made my point. This takes some serious thought. Culturally, the transition between childhood and manhood/womanhood is an incredibly important ritual: also known as 'coming of age' (which happens to be used quite often in stories). I think this is what Hurston was going for. However, the only way to fully appreciate this line is by referring back to the second paragraph of the first chapter. "Now, women forget all those things they don't want to remember, and remember everything they don't want to forget. The dream is the truth. Then they act and do things accordingly." Oh the connections I could make with this... In a nutshell, Hurston is a genius. On a more serious note, Hurston marked a momentous change in Janie. What that is? It's up for interpretation beyond the 'oh she grew up' idea.
Why did Hurston add 'first' to the sentence? It would come across as being much more despairing without that one word, giving the idea of it being her only dream. At the same time, the word 'first' is ominous. Does this mean she will have more dreams and that those will be destroyed as well? Now that I think about it, maybe the inclusion of 'first' was a good call. The idea of being crushed over and over is rather depressing. Finally, since Janie's dream is gone, does that mean that her "truth" is gone and therefore she has lost her ability to "act and do things accordingly" e.g she is without a path in life?
Yikes, this book is amazing.
No comments:
Post a Comment