Friday, August 31, 2007
The Curious Incident of the Blog in the Night Time
Often, the most recognizably human characters in a story are the most recognizably flawed or inadequate characters. What I mean is that we can identify with a non-perfect character. While most of us admire or even strive to emulate a “perfect” or model character, we are not perfect and therefore do not identify with these characters. For example, I admire and try to emulate “Jack Bauer” from “24” but he is indeed perfect in every conceivable way, and I am not, so I can not possibly identify with him on his level.
We can, however, come closer to identifying with a less perfect or flawed character. Using flawed characters, an author can allow us to identify with a character or at least recognize them as fallible human beings.
In “The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time”, Mark Haddon uses flawed characters and their actions to contrast the relatively insignificant peculiarities of Christopher. For example, throughout the book, Christopher’s behavior seems strange or foreign or even violent within the context of normal and conventionally proper human behavior. In the context of the society in which we live, Christopher’s hiding in the luggage compartment of the train or punching the police officer for grabbing him seems unacceptable. However, when compared to the flaws of his mother or father or the other characters around him, his idiosyncrasies become harmless or meaningless and Christopher’s character becomes less threatening to conventional sensibility of the reader. The contrast between Christopher’s nature and the more “serious” mistakes or flaws of the other characters such as his father’s deceiving of Christopher or his mother’s abandoning of Christopher, combined with the deeper understanding Christopher gives us of himself and his own reasoning allows us to look past his strange behavior and compare his trivial peculiarities with our own. Using these methods, Haddon allows us to identify with Christopher through the book in a way that we might not be able to do so quickly with a similar child in real life.
Haddon also comments on human behavior by using Christopher to perceive the true unaltered actions of his characters. Haddon uses Christopher’s point of view to cut through the rationalizations of characters in the story. Christopher perceives only the action, not the rationality or excuse behind the action. For instance, Christopher focuses only upon his father’s action of killing Wellington. He does not give credence to the excuses of rationalizations of his father and therefore associates his father’s murder of the dog with the possible ability to murder human beings as well. To the conventional human mind, this connection is not necessarily apparent. Christopher views his surroundings with a lack of bias in this respect.
This viewpoint may not necessarily reflect the human condition, but it does, in my opinion, set up one of the greatest ironies in the text, the irony that Christopher comes to distrust his father, who has cared for him his entire life and been completely committed to his development, and trust his mother, who abandoned him in his developmental time of need. So in the end, after a long, convoluted path of logic and examination, we realize that even this aspect of Christopher’s character is flawed and recognizably biased. An unbiased point of view may be a foundation of our civilization (or legal system) but it is ultimately impossible for us to achieve. In this respect, we see that Christopher is still recognizably human. (573)
We can, however, come closer to identifying with a less perfect or flawed character. Using flawed characters, an author can allow us to identify with a character or at least recognize them as fallible human beings.
In “The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night Time”, Mark Haddon uses flawed characters and their actions to contrast the relatively insignificant peculiarities of Christopher. For example, throughout the book, Christopher’s behavior seems strange or foreign or even violent within the context of normal and conventionally proper human behavior. In the context of the society in which we live, Christopher’s hiding in the luggage compartment of the train or punching the police officer for grabbing him seems unacceptable. However, when compared to the flaws of his mother or father or the other characters around him, his idiosyncrasies become harmless or meaningless and Christopher’s character becomes less threatening to conventional sensibility of the reader. The contrast between Christopher’s nature and the more “serious” mistakes or flaws of the other characters such as his father’s deceiving of Christopher or his mother’s abandoning of Christopher, combined with the deeper understanding Christopher gives us of himself and his own reasoning allows us to look past his strange behavior and compare his trivial peculiarities with our own. Using these methods, Haddon allows us to identify with Christopher through the book in a way that we might not be able to do so quickly with a similar child in real life.
Haddon also comments on human behavior by using Christopher to perceive the true unaltered actions of his characters. Haddon uses Christopher’s point of view to cut through the rationalizations of characters in the story. Christopher perceives only the action, not the rationality or excuse behind the action. For instance, Christopher focuses only upon his father’s action of killing Wellington. He does not give credence to the excuses of rationalizations of his father and therefore associates his father’s murder of the dog with the possible ability to murder human beings as well. To the conventional human mind, this connection is not necessarily apparent. Christopher views his surroundings with a lack of bias in this respect.
This viewpoint may not necessarily reflect the human condition, but it does, in my opinion, set up one of the greatest ironies in the text, the irony that Christopher comes to distrust his father, who has cared for him his entire life and been completely committed to his development, and trust his mother, who abandoned him in his developmental time of need. So in the end, after a long, convoluted path of logic and examination, we realize that even this aspect of Christopher’s character is flawed and recognizably biased. An unbiased point of view may be a foundation of our civilization (or legal system) but it is ultimately impossible for us to achieve. In this respect, we see that Christopher is still recognizably human. (573)
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
The Letter
Hello Mr. Coon. The story of my reading history would be a short book. Therefore, I would probably enjoy it. Let me highlight two important pieces of information regarding my reading habits for you. First of all, I naturally read for comprehension. Yes, I do forget stuff but I try to acquire an understanding of the information presented in the text. However, my style of reading combined with my being a slow reader makes me a really slow reader. A long text can quickly become a grueling marathon of imaginative exercise and deep vein thromboses. And I do believe that your imagination and mind can easily be overworked and sometimes needs to be numbed by a concentrated dose of downtime.
Second, as a result of this clash between the thirst for knowledge (or stimulating entertainment) and the brain’s cry for help, I tend to read in spurts. Like many people I think, I go through a period where I want to read a bunch and then period where I want to read nothing at all. Usually, the former is triggered by a certain subject matter that I, of course, find fascinating, and the latter kicks in when exhaustion begins to take hold. I continually fluctuate by reading way more than the average amount and then way less than the average. I guess my “reading goal” is to minimize the amplitude of that change and come closer to reading a consistent amount that will not erode my desire for written entertainment over time.
I do like to imagine the world of the story in my own terms and play out the plot in my mind, but I certainly do not need any stimulus in order to drift off into my own little “happy place”, a place that would probably scare most of you. In fact, most of the time I have to make myself focus on the present or the task at hand. I guess that makes me a daydreamer even though my dreams are not necessarily all ponies and rainbows. Anyway, I look forward to taking your class this year. I think it’s going to be a great time. (359)
Second, as a result of this clash between the thirst for knowledge (or stimulating entertainment) and the brain’s cry for help, I tend to read in spurts. Like many people I think, I go through a period where I want to read a bunch and then period where I want to read nothing at all. Usually, the former is triggered by a certain subject matter that I, of course, find fascinating, and the latter kicks in when exhaustion begins to take hold. I continually fluctuate by reading way more than the average amount and then way less than the average. I guess my “reading goal” is to minimize the amplitude of that change and come closer to reading a consistent amount that will not erode my desire for written entertainment over time.
I do like to imagine the world of the story in my own terms and play out the plot in my mind, but I certainly do not need any stimulus in order to drift off into my own little “happy place”, a place that would probably scare most of you. In fact, most of the time I have to make myself focus on the present or the task at hand. I guess that makes me a daydreamer even though my dreams are not necessarily all ponies and rainbows. Anyway, I look forward to taking your class this year. I think it’s going to be a great time. (359)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
