Power Struggle

          Power struggles in literature are common as they serve a portrait which exemplifies issues we face in our day to day lives that deal with conformity and societal pressures trying to mold something out of the individuals we so inherently are. Two contrasting figures match up here as conformity collides with outright rebellion, both dueling the power structures attempting the harsh rule and control over these two characters.          
          Bernard, in Brave New World, serves to demonstrate the idea of an outcast in order to present the pursue for individualism in a homogeneous society. He is confronted with the issue of being an Alpha, or an intellectual leader of society, troubled by physical defects which set him aside from the rest. This leads him to cast away and be one of the only members of society that doesn't find happiness in the "orgy porgy's" or other community activities. But how can he fight the establishment then? What can he possibly do to change peoples thoughts regarding society? He can't do anything. Or at least he doesn't do anything. Instead he simply molds to society and like the rest, he conforms. If society is hard on him because of his differences he rejects and criticizes them, but if they promote him and express positivism he concludes life in this world isn't so bad after all.
          There is a strong difference outlined between Bernard and other characters I've come across in literature, but one with which he strongly contrasts and differentiates is that of McMurphy from One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest. He too, is faced with being an outcast in a homogeneous society not only in the ward but outside in the real world aswel. Being one of the few who openly stands against the establishment, the natural reaction is that of locking him up. He, unlike Bernard, doesn't conform to anything. The rules or guidelines or procedures, they all fly past him because of his strength and determination to fight the controlling powers that try to take a grip on his life. It doesn't necessarily serve him well as the louder he is and the more resistance he gives to Nurse Ratchet the harder they are on him and the closer he is to his own destruction. Knowingly, he still fights on.
          At the end each of these is trying to break away from the same invisible controls society has laid on them. McMurphy extinguishes all his possibilities as destruction and death meet him but he is able to serve freedom to Bromden, Harding, and several other patients in the ward. He sacrificed his life and was successful. Bernard was left behind by society once again as the love and interest they had in him drifted away as soon as their interests where fulfilled. Once again he hates life, society, and the world he's forced to cope with. Fortunately he still conserves his life, and the struggle is still on. So I leave it to you, my readers, to decide. A life of pain and conformity or a martyr's death and ultimately freedom?

          

Project Human

          Hatchery: Facility where eggs are hatched under artificial conditions, especially those of fish or poultry.

          In Aldous Huxley's Brave New World we are introduced to the works of a society that, through experimentation, has been able to develop a scientific process which allows for the creation of life without the act of sex. Even without the need of a surrogate mother. The positive aspects of said development are fairly interesting as the family structure is broken apart and the apparent main focus given to the people is that to live in community to achieve stability. If society is seen through the eyes of a single unit which machines everyone together how is the individual present in this world?

          The answer up to this point in the novel is very simple. There is no individual because each member of society is predestined to fulfill a specific role to which they will not only conform, but ultimately enjoy, greasing up once again this idea of society as a whole. When the world teaches you seclusion is wrong, or as a matter of fact even alone time is negative, you are bound to seek company at all times. Your happiness and comfort will only be there surrounded by others, giving your effort to that of the greater good without even hesitating.
          Wouldn't it be great to have a society living in such harmony? The issue with that is that as humans we simply can't all be the same. Even through the "bokanovsky process" there are bound to be differences which altogether form the individual and break away from societies uniformity. I'm eager to see how the novel develops this idea and how tensions build up between this important issue of individuality.  

          

Hamlet's Prison

       Men in prison live out there lives reflecting on the crimes they committed in the past. Many come back, rehabilitated, to live in our society. Others, who have committed such atrocities hide behind concrete walls in four by four cells for the rest of their lives.

     The men in this Missouri state penitentiary are acting out Hamlet. A play that touches on revenge, honor, and even crime itself. In Shakespeare play, Hamlet, ponders long hours on his duty, on his vengeance, and on the consequences involved in the acts he plans to commit. Here we face tough criminals trying to learn his lines. Men who no longer have the chance of going back in time and making the right choice. As Hamlet thinks, these men live out the consequences. They are the future of Hamlet's actions and no matter how bad they want to convince Hamlet to stop his plan, they can't. Its all written in the book, his fate is set and as they go scene by scene they find themselves identified with the different characters present. It was shocking to see how guilt rushed through the inmates as they read Claudius's repent. When they recalled the names of the men they'd murdered their voices broke down. Claudius and Hamlet were just like them, they saw themselves within each one of those characters like if they were just self portraits. Would they be forever prisoners of their actions? No. I could hear in their voices how this endeavor and the time in prison had affected them. They were new men with dreams and hopes just like us. Even after they recognized how they had been rehabilitated the question still popped back up. Did they deserve to come back to society? To be our neighbors? Our friends? Most said they didn't deserve it, they didn't owe society an apology. They owed just what they had taken, a life. Their life.

Prufrock's Choice

     Life is all based around a series of choices. They range from important decisions to quick uneventful ones. People often times complicate themselves with whether they should wear red or black shoes, long or short hair, ignoring the important things in life. The truly important decisions. Others make big issues of small ones, fight endlessly with themselves and others over decisions that shouldn't require as much thought. They too, miss on the beauty of life. Two characters are here confronted with both big and small decisions and its their inability to make choices what spirals them into failure. Indecision becomes their worst enemy.

     Prufrock's most important difference with Hamlet is the fact he makes an issue out of all his decisions. His final thought is always to wait. Wait for the room to clear, for the "yellow smoke that slides along the street" to pass, and for his life to slip away into time. He's frustrated at points by his inaction but as the years go by he avoids change. Just sitting around in the same place wondering when will he be able to ask the girl out, maybe its this other girl, maybe this time its going to happen, but ultimately it never happens. He grows bold and his optimism fades. He says "And indeed there will be time to wonder 'Do I dare? Do I dare?'", unfortunately that time no longer sits there wating for him to act. The time is gone and so is his life. Betrayed by his own inaction he has now grown old.

      On the other hand there's Hamlet, who sits on the most important decision of his life. For him its not even a decision, the decision was taken long before. He's chosen his path. To avenge his father, killing his uncle and taking back what it his by birth. The throne of Denmark. But whats the hurry says Hamlet. Is he or is he not ready to execute his plan. This inaction, rather than indecision troubles him throughout the play. How can so much happen around him, so much death and violence and how is it possible for him to still doubt his actions? Just as Prufrock, time moves fast but Hamlets life isn't slipping away. Better yet not in the same sense, because ultimately his life expires as he's poisined by Leartes's sword. His inaction granted him death, nothing more and nothing less.

      Time is futile and life is short. More often than not, its too short. Sitting around pondering on "What if?" makes your life dull and useless. You have to enjoy life, taking advantage of all the possibilities it presents. Avoid the Hamlets and the Prufrocks. Take her out to dinner, do your homework, wake up to go to school etc. Don't let yourself be tricked into inaction. Ultimately, you decide. 

Conrad's Africa

      Heart of Darkness finally comes to its closure after diving through the dense, African, jungle taking us deep into the idea of darkness itself in our journey to the unknown. Conrad does an excellent job describing the mysterious jungle by giving life to it through detail and imagery bringing an interesting paralel in the setting of the novel.

      Conrad writes the book as a story within a story. In both occasions we are set in a river, at one point in the Thames then the story unfolds in the Congo.  The beginning of the novel brought the idea of the magnificence of the Thames river and how it'd led explorers to meet great destinies across mysterious and dark places around the world. Then it touched a very interesting paralel that could be related to that of the Congo. England was a dark and mysterious place once and this same river led explorers hundreds of years before to discover a land full fog, scary darkness, uncivilized natives, and mystery. The Romans here where the explorers bringing civilization to what was considered a dark place. Then he showed us a different darkness.

     There was a description I considered important in shaping my final definition of darkness. Conrad relates it to the unknown as we see the deeper we go in the jungle the heavier darkness we find, He then makes a distinct exception to introduce a profounder darkness. He makes reference to "the heart of an immense darkness" leading up through the Thames. This leads us to another crucial idea portrayed across the novel. The european thought of superiority and excellence and their lack of knowledge and interest in the natives is in itself the greatest darkness of all. The ignorance with which they live with lays deep in the heart of darkness of a world which few take time to understand and all take time to judge with outright ignorance. The African stereotype and the single story in European mentality is the heart of darkness.

Inhumane to Humane

    As Heart of Darkness progresses, so do our characters. We now see open criticism to imperialism as the idea Marlow had embedded in his head is challenged by the true reality of the natives he's come to meet. To his surprise these cruel demon spawns that live in this despicable place have much more to them and we now find strong contradictions between what Marlow wants to believe and what he's experiencing around him.

"He was an improved specimen...He ought to have been clapping his hands and stamping his feet on the bank, instead of which he was hard at work...full of improving knowledge."

     Marlow is referring to the steam operator in his boat. The native or poor devil, as he calls him, is challenging the African stereotype of ignorance and erratic behavior. As his own thought process in obscured by this strange fellow he comes back to justify this explaining the man has been instructed and thats all to it. It doesn't come to his own merit as he is still a local devil, it was the europeans that taught him and took advantage of this naive creature. What Marlow can't see is that his own ideas are struggling to keep the colonial mentality weaved together and maybe as he progresses through Part III he'll understand reality in its true perspective. 

Conrad's Racism

      Reading Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad has brought up many speculations over the true reality of racism and what it represents to me personally. Part 1 of the novel only comes close to introducing the true idea over such a matter and leaves a certain ambiguity over what Marlow, our main character, thinks of this issue.

    I've never really seen myself as a person confronted by hatred towards others based on their color, race or religion. It's not only unethical but it brings strong confrontations with my morals and values learned at home. Then again, the novel is set in a different context with a different set of ideals in a very different reality which end up making me question whether negative thoughts over racism are something connected to our post-modern world or where they always present in society. It's very interesting to see how Conrad extracts Marlow from this issue and really leaves it up to us to decipher whether or not there's irony in his words or whether he's just another believer of the empire. 

      The early 1900's were flooded with a steady stream of oppression and repression in the european colonies of Africa. A few decades earlier they'd cut out a map of Africa in the Berlin Conference changing the history of the continent forever, leaving the people under cruel regimes looking only for raw materials and an exploitable work force. This makes the concept of racism really obscure at the time the book was written. It was the reality known to the world. As I continue the novel maybe Conrad's standpoint will be clear on this issue but for now it'll remain in the darkness.