Borderlands - Gloria Anzaldua

In Gloria Anzaldúa’s novel, Borderlands she portrays a sense of orphanage and loss for both women and the Mexican/American race. Her life, along with other women and Chicanas exists in a borderland, a third country in which she is a semblance of a fractured body and land. Living in a borderland creates the exact image that one sees when they hear the word border. Each day she encounters all sorts of barriers and borders which restrict her way of life.

Readers learn that since a young school child she was kept from using certain words and language when she spoke, for she must speak like an American. Anzaldúa truly is the embodiment of her language. She carries it where ever she goes and it bubbles inside of her, just waiting to be let free. Yet she must suppress both herself as a woman, Chicana and as woman, as well as the language that lets her express all of these identities of self. Her language, both inside and outside of her is representative of cultural collision and a violence that exists at the borders.

The concept of the borderland existing as a third country in this book reminds me a lot of the Langston Hughes’ poem, “Cross.” Both the speaker in “Cross” and Anzaldúa live with an everlasting internal feeling of confusion as to where they belong. When a person lives along the border or at a cross, there is always the question as to which side they belong to or identify more strongly with and whether or not these individuals make a decision one way or another, there still remains a burning inside which asks them daily whether or not they made the right decision.

Borders like those on a map mark off where certain states or towns exist. These borders help people define who they are and gives them a sense of belonging, but Anzaldúa and the speaker in “Cross” will never have that sense of belonging, comfort and definition because they exist in the gray area of the line that divides two nations and races.

Frank O'Hara

Unlike many of the other works we have read by other poets, I am still in the dark as to whether or not O’Hara himself is the speaker in his poems. Although he uses “I” in his writing, it is unclear as to whether or not “I” is him or another person that he is bringing to life. O’Hara like Plath, seems to be concerned with the creation of self in his poetry, yet unlike Plath’s poems, it does not seem that the experiences occurring in the first set of poems we read are happening to him. Sometimes I think that his writing is either meant to be a sort of play on words or a joke or even a criticism of other poets and people. For instance, in the poem “Autobiographia Literaria,” O’Hara gives his readers this childish and rather obscure outcry that seems Sylvia Plath like when he writes, “If anyone was looking for me I hid behind a tree and cried out ‘I’m an orphan.’” The images of these four lines create in the readers head remind one of the crazy and outlandish images that Plath’s poems create.

Later, in the second group of poems we read there is another reference or mimicking of another poet. In the poem, “To the Film Industry in Crisis” the very long and list like style of writing O’Hara uses is very similar to Whitman. These similarities seen in both poems seem to make me think that he is trying to utilize another person’s voice to either poke fun at that writer or to use the other writer’s voice to criticize society. Perhaps O’Hara is afraid to criticize another using his own voice, thus removing a somewhat personal aspect from his poetry. Rather than embodying the I in his poetry a sense of sarcasm and negativity is established instead.

Giovanni's Room

James Baldwin’s representation of his main character David in his novel, Giovanni’s Room reminds me a lot of Henry in the Red Badge of Courage. Both characters, having left their homes, seem to be lost boys struggling to stay afloat in a man’s world. Henry and David experience a sense of inner and outer war in their lives.

David is at war with his self over whom and how he loves. Inflicted with an uncertainty of his outward social sexuality he becomes a cruel character to the people, especially the men he truly loves. This is seen in the way in which he treats Joey after the consummation of their love and relationship. David states, “I picked up with a rougher, older crowd and was very nasty. And the sadder this made him, the nastier I became” (10). He then goes on, ultimately to hurt Giovanni and Hella as well. This nasty outlash that David has on those he loves is a spawn of societal mores. David cannot overcome the shame that he feels as a homosexual man, because it is not socially accepted. As a result he bottles up his shame, no pun intended and turns to alcohol to try and take the edge off of his pain and the feeling of constant war that he feels within his mind and body. This inner conflict makes David a tragic character that readers sympathize with throughout the novel. Readers just want David to be able to be happy and at peace with his self.

All of these feelings, except those homosexual ones, can also be seen in Henry in The Red Badge of Courage. Henry too left home to find his self and become a man. Even though Henry does not want to be in war and struggles with his urge to flee, he stays in the battle because he longs for a badge of courage. This badge however causes him a great deal of physical pain and leaves him lost and confused for a time being. And like David, Henry being in a battle situation loses some of his comrades to death.

William Faulkner Stories

I find the readings of “A Rose for Emily” and “That Will be Fine” by William Faulkner that we did in class to be very interesting stories to contrast and compare, especially via the portrayal of the main characters and the narration.

Emily the “fallen monument” in, “A Rose for Emily” is a very intriguing and mysterious character that I can’t seem to get enough of. The vague gossip like narration of her and her life makes me want to meet Emily and have a conversation with her and learn more about all of the sufferings in her life that drove her to “insanity.” Obviously the town feels the same way as well or they would not spend so much time gossiping and creating this story of her life. I also, I guess in a sick way, find it honorable and endearing in the way that she kept her lover Homer Barron locked up in a room in her house in order to keep him close to her and never have to be apart from him. An act like that is not something to be done by the faint of heart. As much as I wish that I could have gotten to know Emily through her own mind and story, I think the mystery is what keeps the story interesting.

On the other hand, I think that the fact that, “That Will be Fine” is told through the eyes of the main character is part of what aggravates me about this story. No matter how much people may argue that because Georgie is a young naïve child who doesn’t know any better and therefore tells the entire truth of the story, I think that his telling of the story is actually more skewed than that of the town gossip in, “A Rose for Emily.” The gossip narration in, “A Rose for Emily” keeps the story true to itself in that it is focused on unearthing the mystery of Emily. Georgie, who is completely oblivious to what is going on around him in the actual story because he is so blinded by money doesn’t capture the meat of the background and dirt in, “That Will be Fine.” I think that Georgie’s narration takes away from the story because he is not actually interested in what is going on.

I think Faulkner does a much better job of capturing the thoughts and heart of his readers in creating a story like, “A Rose for Emily” that is told through the eyes of gossiping town. I think that a narration like this also makes the story more fun and interactive because the reader feels like they are part of the snooping that is going on amongst the town folk and as a result it almost makes the reader feel naughty or guilty!