Shut the Door! Slam the Door! Boom!

In the final act of A Doll's House by Ibsen, the main character Nora slams a door in her husband's face and leaves the house and subsequently leaves their marriage and family behind. Nora's action of slamming the door brings with it a lot of significance both in the plot line of the book in general and also in Nora's character development individually. 

The significance of Nora's final action in the story takes the plot line to a whole other level when considering Nora's leadership position in her relationship with Torvald, her husband. In the beginning of the book, Nora was the "socially-expected" subservient wife to Torvald. Her life was dictated by the superior role her husband and her father had and her "meek" nature. Torvald told Nora how much money she could spend, what she could eat, how to dress, and basically outlined her entire life for her. He always thought that he had Nora under control and that he had the upper hand in the relationship. In today's terminology, Torvald thought he was wearing the pants in their relationship. However, throughout the book, we learn that this is simply not the case. Nora was the one who had spent money under Torvald's nose in order to save his life. She had a secret job and secret debt. Torvald was the one who was under Nora's leadership in a certain way because SHE had saved HIS life. She had taken action in their relationship where Torvald hadn't. Nora slamming the door played into A Doll Houses' plot line development because it shows that Torvald, even at the very end when he tried to regain the upper hand in their relationship, was unable to do so. He was left dumbfounded on the other side of the door (which very well could have been an iron and locked prison door for all that mattered). Nora had made her decision and Torvald was "locked" into a place where he no longer had control over Nora because Nora was solely in control of herself. 

Nora's character developed hugely over the course of this book. She went from being a subserviant person to literally slamming doors in peoples faces. The slamming of the door is almost relatable to the saying, "when one door closes another door opens". Nora not only closed one door, she basically nailed it shut. The slamming of the door made her decision permanent. She was through with her life with Torvald and on another path. Nora has always been under someone else's authority in her life, whether it being her father or her husband. Instead, at the end of the book, we can see that Nora is now in charge of Nora. She isn't influenced by any other sources except her own voice of guidance. Her last act was defiant of the wishes of Torvald and the time's social standards. To put it frankly, Nora didn't care at all about Torvald or society's wishes...She didn't only shut the door, she slammed it. 

Live With Love or Die

Bright Star by John Keats is a lovely poem about love. Before we first tackle the poem, it is interesting to note John Keats background in the land of love. Keats met and fell in love with Fanny Brawne. However, when the two met and became engaged, Keats was too poor to support the engagement.  Therefore, the couple kept their engagement a secret from all but their closest friends. His poem about love describes a torn relationship between his everlasting love for a woman (who we can assume is Fanny) and being close to her. 

In the poem Bright Star, Keats, in the first line, establishes his longing to possess the characteristics of a star. "Bright star, would I were steadfast as thou art--". This literally means he wants to be as steadfast as the star. Steadfast has multiple meanings such as: 1. firmly fixed in place: immovable and not subject to change. 2. Firm in belief, determination, or adherence: loyal. Another word for steadfast is faithful. In the context of the poem, it is clear that Keat's wants a love for his woman that is fixed and that will never fade away. This is jsut like how the stars are always shining and never moving. He will be eternally faithful to Fanny. 

The next seven lines describe the characteristics of a star that Keat's does not desire. "Not in lone splendor hung aloft the night/ And watching, with eternal lids apart,/ Like nature's patient, sleepless Eremite/The moving waves waters at their priestlike task/Of pure ablution round earth's human shores,/Or gazing on the new soft-fallen mask/Of snow upon the mountains and the moors". The faithful star also has to be way up the sky and watching from afar all these aspects of life. Even though he is able to watch all of them, he is separated from them because he is way up in the sky. Keat's doesn't want to be far away from his Fanny. 

After this realization of the separation that accompanies being like a star, there is a change in tone. "No- yet still steadfast, still unchangeable, Pillow'ed upon my fair love's ripening breast./To feel for ever its soft fall and swell,/Awake for ever in a sweet unrest/ Still, still to hear her tender-taken". He wants to be with her. Next to her. Feeling her presence next to him. In conclusion, he longs for a immovable and changeless love that he will be able to feel everyday. He never wants to be separated from Fanny. "And so live ever--or else swoon to death", The final line of the poem is very strong. Keats states that if he is forced to live without Fanny, he would rather die. He wants to live with love or die without it. 

All About Nelly

Throughout my reading of the last part of the book, Wuthering Heights, I realized how big of a character Nelly really was. Up until my final reading, I had focused mostly on Heathcliff and Catherine. Not to say that Heathcliff and Catherine weren't two of the main characters because they were, but I never realized the importance of this story being told through Nelly. Nelly has the power to change details and twist plot lines however she wants and we would be none the wiser. 

In the later sections of the book, it seems as though Nelly plays a huge part in almost everyone's actions. Nelly plays a leading role in Catherine's developing relationship with Linton because she isn't able to stop Catherine's hanging out with him and most importantly doesn't tell Edgar of their interactions. It almost is though, if Nelly weren't so worried about her job, a lot of the drama with young Catherine wouldn't have amounted. I say this because Nelly was so afraid of losing her job or of making Edgar mad that she didn't notify Edgar of the whole situation. If Nelly had notified Edgar, he would have been able to better control young Catherine and put distance between Thurcrush Grange and Wuthering Heights. However, because Nelly is afraid and doesn't step up, the two households become more intertwined.

It is also interesting to note that Nelly literally wrapped Edgar's hair and Heathcliff's hairs together in old Catherine's locket. She foreshadowed the intermingling between the two households better then any other character could have predicted. Some examples about how closely involved Nelly is with the other characters includes her conversation with Heathcliff at the end of the book. Heathcliff confides in Nelly that he no longer plans to exact revenge on young Catherine and Hareton. Also, Heathcliff literally puts Nelly in charge of Wuthering Heights, so she has moved away from Thurcrush Grange. It is key to note and understand that Nelly is also the only character that goes in between the two households freely. Every other character in the book is rooted to either Thurcrush Grange or Wuthering Heights. However Nelly seemingly gets along with every character even though her actions lead to a bunch of the drama with the other characters.

By saying she causes the drama in the other character's lives, I mean that, she either requites to inaction even though that might not be the right answer for anyone but herself pr is present at all major events. Nelly is always there it seems during the key plot points in the book. Whenever something major happens, Nelly is there as a bystander. For example, when Edgar’s health grows consistently worse and Catherine is worried for her father, Catherine reluctantly rides to her meeting with Linton on the moors. Nelly comes with her.

Only in the last section of the book did I realize what a big character Nelly was. She was the main storyteller so everything was always told from her perspective and she was also involved in every big event in both households. Nelly is a character that deserves a deep analysis because she serves an under-appreciated large role in the story. 

Hurt People, Hurt People

This blog post is probably going to be in stark contrast to my first blog post on Wuthering Heights. In my first post, I sided with Heathcliff and believed that his actions were purely the result of others wrongdoings upon him and not a result of his own blackened-heart. However, after reading further, I believe Heathcliff has not only far exceeded the hardships others have placed upon him but multiplied his own brash actions three fold. He is not acting purely in response to others actions upon him now, but instead acting as a manipulator to everyone around him.

In my first blog post, Heathcliff was mentioned as a manipulator when it came to using his close relationship with his adopted father as bait for others to treat him well and gain extra benefits. However now after more reading, Heathcliff is manipulating people for his pure enjoyment. He has become a very spiteful person. For example, Heathcliff marries Isabella only for revenge on Catherine. He doesn't truly love his wife. In fact, Isabella and Heathcliff's son, Linton Heathcliff, is shunned from his father until he becomes profitable to Heathcliff. Heathcliff ignores his son for the first thirteen years of his life and refers to his mother as a slut. Isabella was mistreated by Heathcliff and ran away to England to escape Heathcliff's wrath upon her. She was anything but a slut. Heathcliff should not speak so harshly about his deceased wife. 

I find it interesting that one of Heathcliff's main goals in life, is creating little Healthcliffs. By this I mean, Heathcliff raises children exactly how he was raised even though he hated his upbringing. For example, Hareton and Linton are both Heathcliff's sons and neither of them receive formal education. Harteton, especially is a exact representation of Heathcliff's revenge against the wrongdoings others have done upon him. Hindley raised Heathcliff as an uneducated worker and, to release his spite against Hindley, Hetathcliff treats Hindley's son the exact same way. Hareton is raised as an uneducated worker. He is ill-literate and has very little future because of his lack of education. Heathcliff has purposely tried to ruin Hareton's life, just as Hindley did to Heathcliff.

Heathcliff is a very spiteful person and I believe his heart has been blackened beyond repair. He has become a mass manipulator. The common saying, "Hurt people, hurt people", is a good descriptor of Heathcliff because he is able to hurt people due to his disgruntled childhood. However, even though Heathcliff was abused as a child, this does not allow him to act in these spiteful ways as an adult. He has far exceeded the hurt anyone had ever placed on him and takes pleasure in the pains of others. Heathcliff is deeply scared and misunderstood. He is no longer a victim in the book, but the victimizer. 

The Temptations and Their Earthly Ponds

                       Countless temptations arise in both Jane Eyre and Wide Sargasso Sea. These many temptations include abandoning justice and social fairness. Although the way these two temptations present themselves in the books is different, the key values they posses in the books are the same. 

                       In Jane Eyre and Wide Sargasso Sea, the setting plays a huge part into both of these topics and the locations serve as huge clues as to how the characters are feeling and their actions. Wide Sargasso Sea takes place in Jamaica during a period of severe racial tension. However obvious the social injustice is, Antoinette chooses to ignore the disconnect between the races and tries to befriend all, no matter what their skin type. This idea does not go over well with the natives. The land is much to wild for these civilized ideas. The setting truly reflects this idea because Antoinette says, "Our garden was large and beautiful as that garden in the Bible — the tree of life grew here. But it had grown wild. The paths were overgrown and a smell of dead flowers mixed with that fresh living smell. Orchids flourished out of reach or for some reason not to be touched. One was snaky looking, another like an octopus with long thin brown tentacles bare of leaves hanging from a twisted root" (Rhys, 19). 

                     This garden encapsulates the racial and social tensions with imagery. The setting, as previously mentioned, is crucial to the understanding of the book. Here we see the garden that once was perfect, like the Garden of Eden, has grown wild. The harmony of the garden is now broken. The paths are covered with brush and the twisted roots are past repair. This garden literally is a picture of the social and political challenges in the book, Wide Sargasso Sea. Jamaica is totally wild and the natives have lost control. They even burn Antoinette's house in hatred. Antoinette is trying to be a gardener in this crazy garden, however she is too late. The roots have twisted and the roots are the foundation, but even they are twisted and deformed. The land is broken and this brokenness leads to Antoinette's severe unhappiness because it is due to this brokenness that she can't find friends.

                   In Jane Eyre, the setting is starkly different. Jane lives in England, an area ruled by justice and fairness. In comparison, Jane has a strong moral code that is unwavering. She has an undying loyalty to her God and King. She even refuses to marry her true love, until the moral dilemma is resolved in the book. As you can see, the orderliness of the setting is reflective of Jane's order and moral code. She is unfaltering and really encapsulates the strictness and fairness of England.  

Beaten to the Bone

                   One genuine question I have had while reading through the first eleven chapters of Wuthering Heights is, why do I feel the need to be so compassionate towards Heathcliff? Heathcliff is not a flawless character in this book, nor are in of the characters in the book truly blameless, but why do I feel as though the past wrongful actions of others towards Heathcliff allow him to be the “victim” in the book? How does Heathcliff's flawed past make his future bad actions acceptable in the reader's eyes?

                   The reason I ask this question is because normally while reading a book, I feel some animosity towards a character like Heathcliff. He is what others in the book call a vagabond who likes to cause mischief. As Catherine writes in her journal, “Hindley calls him a vagabond, and won't let him sit with us, nor eat with us any more; and he says, he and I must not play together, and threatens to turn him out of the house if we break his orders” (Bronte 22).

I feel like the quote from Catherine diary listed above show the tornness about my troubles for showing Heathcliff compassion based on the cold actions of others. Heathcliff's actions, were all premeditated because of the actions of others, such as Hindley. Hindley treated Heathcliff horribly and therefore I feel as though the hurtful actions of others, like Hindley, shaped Heathcliff into the person he later became. I am not saying that Heathcliff is blameless because of the actions of others, but I feel as though I can understand where Heathcliff's animosity is coming from.

                 Heathcliff walks a fine line between animal-like characteristics and human like desires when it comes to his relationship with the other characters in the book. For example, “I found him very intelligent on the topics we touched; and before I went home, I was encouraged so far as to volunteer another visit, to-morrow. He evidently wished no repetition of my intrusion. I shall go, notwithstanding. It is astonishing how sociable I feel myself compared to him” (Bronte 8). Therefore in this passage, we see Heathcliff as a well-natured, intelligent man who lacks some social skills. However, later in the meetings, Lockwood describes Heathcliff in a negative sense. Lockwood later said, “I no longer felt inclined to call Heathcliff a capital fellow” (Bronte 12). Nelly describes Heathcliff as, “rough as a saw-edge, and hard as whinstone! The less you meddle with him the better” (Bronte 35).

                  In the eleven chapters as a whole, I think Heathcliff is more the victim from the poor actions of the other characters. For example, when Mr. Earnshaw brought Heathcliff home, “Mrs. Earnshaw was ready to fling it out of doors: she did fly up- asking how he could fashion to bring that gypsy brat into the house” (Bronte 37). Right from the beginning of Heathcliff's stay with the Earnshaw family, I feel compassion towards Heathcliff because he is immediately unwelcome and Mrs. Earnshaw refers to him as an it. No one should ever be referred to as an it, and I feel as though Heathcliff's actions are in response to this feeling of unworthiness and it-ness that started from the very beginning of his family life with the Earnshaws. I think Heathcliff was a kind soul who was mistreated and later became a “hard” person in response. I think his personality is a reflection of others actions because of multiple stories in the book, but one in specific would be Nelly's story about how Heathcliff acted when he was sick when he was younger. “Heathcliff was dangerously sick, and while he lay at the worst he would have me constantly by his pillow; I suppose he felt I did a good deal for him, and he hadn't wit to guess that I was compelled to do it. However, I will say this, he was the quietest child that ever nurse watched over. The difference between him and the others forced me to be less partial: Cathy and her brother harassed me terribly: he was as uncompelling as a lamb; though hardness, not gentleness, made him give me little trouble” (Bronte 39). From this little episode, I feel as though Heathcliff, if he had been treated right would have been the most loving, gentlemen in the household.

                 However, like I have mentioned, Heathcliff also acts poorly. Because Mr. Earnshaw was the only one who ever showed him any favor, Heathcliff used this advantage to use others. “ As an instance, I remember Mr. Earnshaw once bought a couple of colts at the parish fair, and gave the lads each one. Heathcliff took the handsomest, but it soon fell lame, and when he discovered it, he said to Hindley, 'You must exchange horses with me; I don't like mine, and if you won't I shall tell your father of the three thrashings you've given me this week, and show him my arm, which is black to the shoulder” (Bronte 39). Heathcliff manipulated others and used with his close relationship with his father as the bait.

                 In conclusion, my feelings are more compassionate towards Heathcliff because I feel like his problems are due to the mistreatment others show him. He isn't a mean person, but simply hard. His hardness was acquired from the cruel actions of others calling him an it and beating him both physically and emotionally. An abused person shouldn't have to treat their abusers with care, so instead Heathcliff is understandable in not retaliating but becoming hard and coarse. I still feel as though Heathcliff is the victim in the book and his bad actions are caused by others wrong doings against him.

Just a Little Slice of Life with Some Imagination

                  The Plain Sense of Things by Wallace Stevens is, on the surface, a poem about a once grandiose house that has turned to ruin. However, once the poem is more thoughtfully looked at, a whole new meaning appears. The poem is depicting sadness, depression, and despair as a reflection of the house. The author Wallace Stevens, wants to show how pitiful life can be. For example, "For this blank cold, this sadness without cause", leads the reader to a hopeless future. "A fantastic effort has failed, a repetition in a repetitiousness of men and flies" reinforces this idea of a depressing future. The title The Plain Sense of Things is a symbol for the ugliness of the house and how it needs help. Wallace states, "The great pond, the plain sense of it, without reflections, leaves, mud, water like dirty glass, expressing silence of a sort, silence of a rat come out to see, the great pond and its waste of lilies". The great pond is not great. It is disgusting and filled with muddy water which ruins the beauty of the lilies. The rat is the only living thing who is willing to come near, and rats are ugly. This scene of the house is one of disgust. Wallace Stevens wants to leave the reader with a clear message, life is disgusting and depressing at its core. Without all the pretty fluff of life (as per the falling leaves), humanity is broken and ugly (as per the ruined house).

              The arrangement of the poem is one that balances concrete references and abstract thought. The concrete consists of vision and evidence for the imaginative references Stevens depicts. The beginning stanzas pose a problem and the ending stanzas reach a resolution. There are five stanzas. Each stanza has four lines. The title is a reoccurring phrase in the actual poem because it shows the authors main idea that once you strip the world to its core and disregard the pretty exterior, it is ugly and depressing. 

Question: What conclusion is Stevens trying to reach with his talk of the imagination? I am confused with this part of the poem.