Record Scratch Meme Discovered What Happens Next Will Amaze You

I keep thinking back to the prologue how it’s like a classic comedy film/ Adam Sandler beginning. A dramatic event occurs, I suppose in this case, his “mugging” escapade, or even his description of him sitting in his room zoning out hard to his record player under his 1,000 lights. Then we get the record scratch (maybe the Armstrong song is over lmao) and the freeze frame of our narrator facing the camera, with a voice over asking “wonder how I got in this mess? If I’m gonna tell you, we’ve gotta go way back.” (Some twenty years, to be exact (Chapter 1 page 1 line 1)) And that is when “Invisible Man” flashes across the movie screen.

If you’re having trouble visualizing this, here is the best example I could find. I don’t really watch this show but it pretty accurately parodies the trope, which, after doing some research I guess is never really used how everyone thinks it is… It’s not used in an Adam Sandler movie, nor is is typically used at the beginning of a movie, in fact, the only example of it being used at the beginning of a movie is in The Lion King ½. That’s not super important, though.

What I’m trying to say is, each chapter of the book is actually an individual anecdote grounded by a lesson on invisibility. It’s as if each chapter marks one step closer to the Narrator realizing his true self. The first few chapters are obvious, as they’re disconnected, and clearly hold “morals” to each event. For example, Chapter 1 is shows his grandfather giving his advice and the battle royal, which illustrates the invisibility the narrator experiences when the white men disregard his actual speech, and the actual reason he is even there, for entertainment. Chapter 2 shows Trueblood’s invisibility through black on black crime, and how little the white population is concerned with internal issues. Except that Trueblood seems to know how to pull on the heartstrings of the rich white men who want to “elevate” the population, and receives donations, similar to how Bledsoe manipulates his demeanor to maintain his power. And Chapter 3 features the vet, who really sticks it to Mr. Norton, and gives the Narrator his two cents on how much of a walking zombie he is for not seeing the underlying facades everyone is putting up.

These stories help to show the Narrator how many people wear tinted lenses, and some are able to manipulate their skewed view. Although later chapters flow into one another, each of them has a unique event that further enlightens the Narrator to the reality of ignorance, and how to control it to his favor. For example, chapters seven through ten seem to progress linearly, but each one has a “lesson” to learn. Chapter 7 has the Narrator on the bus with the vet and Crenshaw. The two discuss crime in the north, and the vet tells the Narrator he needs to forget the Mr. Nortons, not just “Mr. Norton” but the Norton’s. As if he will meet more people like him, and need to avoid them for his own sake. Chapter 8 is pretty open to interpretation because there isn’t any climactic event to unpack, but maybe it could be enlightened by Chapter 9, with his visit with Emerson. If that is the case, then maybe Chapter 8 is meant to show the hidden influence of Bledsoe as well as the “hidden” bosses in the chapter conspiring against the Narrator. Emerson shows the Narrator this in Chapter 9, and the Narrator finally begins to develop a conscience and a sense of defiance against the hidden bosses. Chapter 10 in the factory’s black and white imagery make commentary on the whole “there is no white without black” power structure in the U.S. at the time. Even further, though, we see how the Narrator’s new personality is dangerous. His lesson in this chapter may be that he is allowed to be violent.

I’m sure there are plenty other possible lessons the Narrator has learned in other chapters. Maybe you can think of some! I’m curious to see how our Narrator becomes the guy from the prologue.

An Intersection of Morality and Fear

Hi friends! This blog post references the novel The Stranger by Albert Camus. A lot of people in our class took 20^th Century Novel last year, and will be able to understand what I’m going to be talking about when I discuss the novel (which we read in that class). You should be able to understand the post without having read The Stranger, though, so stick around!

                  Let’s get basis of The Stranger out of the way here. The main character and our (very) good friend, Meursault has a very bleak outlook on life and as a result tends to be a little “insensitive.” On a day at the beach with one of his friends, he quite irrationally commits a murder by shooting an Arab man 5 times. Without any remorse or fear he is indicted and tried for premeditated murder and sentenced to death as the jury finds him an abomination to society for being so cold. We see in the second half of the novel how Meursault wrestles with existentialism and freedom. Albert Camus wrote The Stranger as an existentialist novel to discuss the significance of perceived morality and emotion in society. According to the citizens within The Stranger, to act against the norm is punishable by death. I guess you could call The Stranger a protest novel of sorts (?) though not as loaded as Native Son.

                  For those of you who have read Meursault’s story, hopefully reading the jail cell scenes in Native Son reminded you of some events in The Stranger. Bigger Thomas has his own episode of existentialist struggles. Some key differences between Bigger and Meursault stem primarily from their philosophy of life and what had commanded their actions. Meursault killed out of rage from the sun (the rage of a thousand suns actually lmao) and Bigger killed from panic and terror. Fundamentally, these two emotional motives are completely different and provide a base that will skew these two character’s stories in opposite directions with ultimately the same tragic ending.

                  Bigger Thomas is consumed by fear for what he has done to Mary. Nothing would please Bigger more than to escape to his life before he killed Mary, but, at the same time, he would lose out on the individuality he claimed by committing an unforgivable crime. He seems to find himself by killing Mary, but he also finds an uncontrollable need to escape. He knows that being caught would mean certain death, but he thinks also about the press coverage and the media attention he would receive. He seeks to relish his actions, a similar desire felt by Meursault before he is executed.

                  (On that note, actually, it seems like Bigger’s fear is present since the very moment he steps into the Dalton’s residence, whereas Meursault doesn’t fully feel the ramifications of his actions until he is sentenced to death. Both seem to be on extreme ends of the spectrum (Bigger less so than Meursault, but still). Tell me what you might think about that it seems like Bigger’s fear fades and Meursault’s hits him like a truck.)

                  Bigger is brought to jail and talks with his lawyer who slowly begins to understand his actions as he explains his fear of being in such an imposing white world. Meursault’s lawyer is alienated completely as Meursault has a blank personality and virtually no emotions and kind of acts like a robot and wont explain himself so his lawyer hates him.

                  Throughout their jail sentences they both meet with a priest who they both totally flip out on out of fear or hate. There is no god, they say, how could there be if this is what life is like! Upon being sentenced to death, Bigger is like “Yeah, I'll take it.” and Meursault freaks out hardcore. Bigger has had plenty of time to talk with Jan, Max, the Daltons, and his family. Meursault, on the other hand, doesn’t really have friends. His girlfriend visited him, but he ignored her the whole time, which is kind of a bummer for both of them tbh.

                  Anyways, it seems like these novels have a lot of similarities, but in each similarity, the role is reversed in a way. Can you think of other stories about people who murder people and then go to jail and get executed? I’m sure there are quite a few.

Hi it is i

this is where african american literature starts hi everyone i hope we will have a good time c:

Like Mother Unlike Daughter

The two mother figures in Wide Sargasso Sea hold similarities and differences that add dimension Milkman’s character as well as providing insight into the demeanors of their daughters, who react to Milkman in nearly opposite ways. 

Milkman’s mother is presented first in the novel as a frail, battered woman who is desperate for affection. We see her breastfeeding Milkman far after the age that is seen as socially acceptable in a pathetic attempt at connecting with her son. From the beginning we see that her purpose is defined by Milkman and his wellbeing.  

Her image is frequently tarnished by comments on her prominent sexuality and sexual desire. Her interesting and incredibly vague moment with her dead father and the implications of her relationship with her father before his death gave Macon Jr an incredibly negative opinion of her. Later in milkman’s life, he would pursue a relationship with his cousin, but this relationship would not be as unwelcome as Ruth’s. 

Perhaps one of the more interesting aspects of Ruth’s impact on her children is on Lena. Ruth’s whole life once Milkman is born is to tend to him. She ensures that Lena and First Corinthians tend to him too. Once Milkman begins to seriously abuse his privilege we see Lena lash out at him viciously as not only a way to put Milkman back in his place, but as a sort of defiance of her mother. 

Her mother’s overprotective behavior elicits aggression just as Pilate’s indifference elicits obsession. 

This “role switching” is prevalent in Hagar’s pursuit of Milkman as well. Pilate understands that men in general are going to be unwieldy and difficult. We see her skillfully handle Reba’s boyfriend, however it shows how much she has had to deal with situations like that because of how clean the encounter was. Though Pilate is a caring and protective figure for Milkman, Pilate’s priorities are with her daughters. 

Hagar’s obsession with Milkman defies Pilate’s indifference and potentially drives Hagar further into madness as she knows she is going too far but can’t help it. 

It’s interesting how much all of the characters affect each other in this novel and I wonder what other connections we may be missing, but it was especially interesting to me to see these two demeanors take opposites. It’s a lot like the common trope in TV and movies where the teenager is trying as hard as they can to not be like their parents. 

Antoinette's Claim 2 Fame (Open Genre Project)

Hey guys! Mr. Mitchell advised that we post our open genre projects on our blogs if possible, so that’s what I’m gonna do. I can also talk through my reasoning a little more clearly here, since I got a little hot (those lights man) and nervous in front of the class. 

The first piece I presented should be posted below. 

What I chose to depict is Antoinette’s fight scene with Rochester after she returns home and locks herself in her room after Rochester so scandalously cheated on her, pushing Antoinette into a drunken rage. Woo hoo!

I started this one on Sunday. I intended to be true to the text 100% to make it super authentic. Unfortunately I quickly realized by sketching some poses that Antoinette’s face would not be fully visible if she were to bite his arm in a still image. Rochester would be in front of the “camera” or Antoinette’s body would be in the way. No matter how you sliced it, I wasn’t going to be able to draw her biting his arm if I was going to emphasize her expression & give this piece some much needed emotion. 

So I painted and I painted, settled on the idea of Antoinette biting his ring finger. To bite the finger that holds his wedding ring would symbolize the emotional destruction of the marriage that was solidified in this scene.  

As 10pm on Thursday grew nearer, I decided it would be a pretty good idea to start drawing in the arm Antoinette would be chowing down on. (A very important part of the image!) Unfortunately, I had left too much space between Antoinette and the un-seen Rochester. To have an arm sticking out from the left side of the painting would be super awkward and sad. 

I did not want to draw in rochester because he would not only take way too much time, but he would likely cover a lot of the hard work I did in the previous days. He would also cover the light source and he would probably screw up the color palette I had going for me so I just cropped the image I had and emphasized the most important part of the scene. 

I’m actually pretty satisfied with the final product. It had a lot of room for improvement but it is unsettling and emotional enough for my tastes so I’m happy!

Stop Bullying 2k15

Antoinette’s fall into insanity is a result of her environment imposing insanity upon her before she loses her grip on reality. By being told a lie that can’t be officially disproven by people for so long, the person being lied to will accept it as reality. Though Antoinette wasn’t destined to become insane like her mother, the Jamaican society and her husband pushed her over the edge and caused her to act irrationally. 

Antoinette’s childhood was essentially defined by the abuse she faced by the community and her mothers distanced demeanor. Even those who were supposed to be her friends were cruel to her (thanks, Tia). Mental development is affected heavily by how a person is treated, with childhood and teenage years being the most sensitive to these interactions with other humans. The cold and cruel environment Antoinette was raised in may have predisposed her to the aggressive behavior (or insanity, i guess) she displays later in the novel. 

After Rochester begins to realize there are rumors about Antoinette’s family history and past, he begins to despise her for something that isn’t exactly her fault. Though I suppose she could have told him from the start all about her crushing backstory, that doesn’t seem realistic since they probably didn’t trust each other the first time they met each other, and her story was not relevant until it was too late for her to influence his opinion significantly. He takes his anger out on her passively for reasons she clearly does not understand (because she repeatedly asks him why he is ignoring her) and it becomes frustrating and abusive. Imagine having the person you love slowly start to lose interest and ignore you :c 

These actions may have triggered/ supplemented Antoinette’s insecurities from her childhood and caused her to act irrationally, especially under the assumption that the one person who ever made her want to live now despises her. 

The point I’m trying to make here is that although Antoinette may be acting a little crazy, up until she becomes aggressive after her husband transgresses on the purity of their marriage, she hadn’t done anything wrong. It was her reputation that tore her life apart, not her actions. It’s like the very bad version of image over substance. It’s even more disturbing to think that the only person who’s truly been by Antoinette’s side has been Christophine (thanks Christophine we love you), not her mother, or her husband. It’s better than nothing, but really Rochester? 

AND NOW special opinions from Lark (BONUS CONTENT)

The scene where Antoinette tries desperately to tell Rochester about her past was honestly hard to read. He didn’t care at all and you could tell from every response he gave it was emotionless and sassy and disrespectful and I wanted to cry. Here look at this: 

“'…Yes, it was my fault, it was my fault that she started to plan and work in a frenzy, in a fever to change our lives. Then people came to see us again and though I still hated them and was afraid of their cool, teasing eyes, I learned to hide it.'

‘No.’ I [Rochester] said.

‘Why no?’

‘You have never learned to hide it,’ I said.

‘I learned to try,’ said Antoinette. Not very well, I thought.”

Not very well, huh? Well, Rochester, YOU don’t try very WELL at not acting like a tool. Antoinette is telling him about a really emotional and hard time in her life and all he can think to do is contradict her and not consider that she had it rough in comparison to him. 

I understand that it’s hard to overcome the influence of the community (we know Antoinette and Anette couldn’t) but he could have at least tried to get a primary source for his lil insanity & betrayal thesis he had in his head.

I’m grossed out like & comment please. 

The JUSTICE Machine

This novel is a very serious man versus man case that is not necessarily Meursault versus the Arab but Meurault versus the world in a twisted dream in which he is not tried by his crime…. or is he?

His character is put on trial, not the actions that landed him in court. We see that in the eyes of the jury, his personality and demeanor seem to be a crime in itself. They serve looks to him, laugh at him, seem to cringe when he confesses that he smoked at his mothers funeral. The jury in this novel, and the courtroom as a whole may represent society as a whole. Society wants Meursault to act like everyone else, society wants everyone to blend in and be approachable, and nice, and fit this cookie cutter shape of what a man and his feelings should be. But Meursault doesn’t do this,and this makes the jury very uncomfortable. Could his indifference and “defiance” be the crime punishable by death?

Is his unique display of grief and a lack of emotion that makes the jury squirm in their seats something that defines a monster? Maybe it is the advertisement of this man as a monster that convinces the jury of his undeniable guilt of not being just a murderer, but of being cold, and soul-less. Is it that because Meursault does not fit into the cookie cutter of society’s expectation of behavior, he was condemned even before he killed the Arab? 

The death of the Arab, though the catalyst for his confinement, is not what Meursault is being punished for, and he seems to know it. He never considers the family of the Arab, or apologizes, or thinks much of it at all even during the trial. Perhaps if he had committed some other crime, his peers would find him to be unsatisfactory, and punish him severely for his crime against the French people. The crime which is not so much his transgression versus the law, but his transgression versus acceptable behavior. Behavior that is not ridiculously unacceptable in the context it was performed in, however when compiled it creates a person who is so inhuman that the jury feels no empathy for the man who is grieving the most, or perhaps, as some people have argued, not feeling anything at all. 

I find it even more concerning to think that Meursault was in grief while he was free. When someone is grieving, the react uniquely, and no one is supposed to judge how you react because it is so unique and personal, however by judging Meursault’s grief by determining he is emotionless, the strip from him the one thing that made him seem human to the jurors, and drive the verdict towards guilt without even considering the fact that grief can drive people to depression and blackouts and a plethora of other things that are incredibly unique. Unique is what Meursault IS and by stifling him, the jury, and society is stifling the diversity of the population.