Barchester Towers

Barchester Towers

Barchester Towers by Anthony Trollope follows the dramatic lives of those living within Barchester, the event of a bishop’s death and the resulting confusion in a struggle for power. Trollope has a very engaging writing style, often taking time to address the reader directly in order to explain why he must go into detail on a particular conversation, or avoid the conversation all together. Trollope reassures the reader time and time again that the protagonist, Eleanor Bold, is not so simple minded as to fall for the triad of disrespectful men vying for her attention; although she is too naïve to understand their underlying motivations. One feels a great distress in what will happen to Mrs. Bold, will she unknowingly fall for, become entrapped, by one of these undeserving weasel like men? As Trollope eludes that surely the reader will be disgusted if she is, she is also very unaware to their true nature.

Trollope’s use of language and satire creates a unique reading experience. One cannot help but feel a greater connection to the story through his direct address to the reader. Although when you stop and reflect on what you have read, you find that time and time again Trollope has told you how you should feel, that you should feel distress over Mrs. Bold’s fate, anger at the thought of the slime ball Mr. Slope succeeding in anything he does; yet Trollope does so in a way that the reader is not offended at being told how to feel, rather, the reader feels as though one is being let in on a secret and takes great pride in this privilege.

Although this book starts a bit slow, and bounces back and forth through the story after the introduction has been pushed through the novel picks up speed, the pages turn quickly as one gets drawn into the drama which is occurring in Barchester, to all the characters, hoping the best for Mrs. Bold, the worst for Mr. Slope, conflicted at who will become the warden at the hospital unable to with clear conscious root for either of the candidates. The final conclusion is a bit dry, but again Trollope has addressed the reader directly and admits the difficult nature of a conclusion, unable to satisfy every reader, the ease of ending too quickly, or dragging it out too long. Trollope succeeds in sufficiently wrapping up his novel, each character is complete and no fate is left hanging for the reader to wonder at. If one can get through the introduction to this novel I would recommend reading it as it is thoroughly engaging and thought provoking.

Bleak House

Bleak House

 

            Bleak House by Charles Dickens is a very refreshing read. Dickens perfectly balances tension, drama and day to day living. The protagonist and narrator in this novel is Esther Summerson, Esther is an interesting narrator as she is reliable, she does belittle herself, and her intelligence but frequently adds throughout her narration others compliments of her. Esther’s journey is a unique one and she gains sympathy from the reader from her opening lines, feeling she is not the appropriate person to tell this story as she definitely is not, clever.

            The reader grows and develops with Esther as she moves through life, leaving the negative atmosphere of her godmother’s house where she is told she is a disgrace and arriving at Bleak House where she is intrusted with the housekeeping keys. From this point Esther begins to grow and develop into herself she is loyal to her friends and her main objective is to guide them and aid them in whatever they need. Esther is not a character who struggles with her morals as, even despite her objectionable upbringing, she is very sure in her ways and does not appear to question what she knows to be right.

            There are a few moments in Bleak House where time is of the essence; when the characters are rushing to save a woman’s life or get to the aid of a friend. In these moments the genius descriptions and long winded speeches which Dickens excels at become tedious: I found myself wanting the characters to simply spit it out and hurry up, as they have mentioned they are in a great hurry and no time to explain…half a page later they have finished explaining that they have no time to explain. This for me dampened, though no entirely ruined, the effect of the situation. It did however leave me yearning for Hemmingway’s writing style, simplistic and to the point.

            Overall I found this novel very enjoyable, the last 200 pages were the most intense and brought the story together, and although some descriptions were a bit long winded that was the style of Dickens and of the time period in general. I enjoyed growing and learning with Esther and being witness to her development though she often put herself on the backburner, she is the epitome of selfless: Although, in contradiction, she is sure to mention this throughout the novel, in the case, of course, that another character has observed it.

Frankenstein

Frankenstein

 

            Frankenstein by Mary Shelley is an iconic novel. Although there are some details which are lost from the original novel to the more commonly known Frankenstein. In today’s world when someone refers to Frankenstein they mean the actual monster, who actually remains unnamed but was Frankenstein’s creation. Beyond the misconception of the names I found the novel carried an important message which seems lost in the current media.

            Frankenstein begins with letters from a Robert Walton, who has set sail to the North, to his sister back home in London. Walton and his crew are locked in the ice and feel they are doomed when they see a creature dogsledding across the ice a great distance away, not long after they also discover a man adrift on an ice flow, this man is Frankenstein who relays the incredible story of the monster he created.

            This novel touches on many important lessons but the one I feel most beneficial in today’s world is how the monster became true to his title. By all accounts this monster was very kind hearted, despite being abandoned by his creator upon first sight, and forced to live hiding from society, a lonely, desperate time. The monster had the ability to feel empathy and became close to the family living in exile near him, he assisted with chores at night while the family slept, never knowing who or what was bringing in their firewood. The monster finally makes contact, first to the blind old man, hoping to gain his confidence without fear of prejudice due to his looks, which works quite well, the man is sympathetic to the monsters situation but upon discovering the truth through his children’s eyes he and his family flee abandoning their midnight saviour. After many attempts to become accepted and consistently pushed away, and feared, the monster turned into the monster who murdered family members, and friends of Frankenstein in attempts to gain a companion and understanding.

            This novel is a great depiction on society’s ability to create the monster they see in someone who may have otherwise had no ill will to another living being; but is pushed to their limits and ultimately left with no choice but to become the monster society believes them to be.

Wurthering Heights

Wurthering Heights

 

                Wurthering Heights by Emily Bronte introduces us to the ‘Byronic Hero’. This is a classic novel from the Nineteenth century which closely follows the bizarre family dynamics which are isolated in the moors.  The main characters Heathcliff and Catherine who grow up together and despite their love for each other cannot seem to make the connection, possibly due to simple stubbornness and as a result Catherine marries Linton and creates an unbalanced world for her daughter Cathy to grow up in.

                Heathcliff is a very interesting character, as one reads this novel his character seems to pull at emotions of both sympathy and disgust. Emily Bronte’s creation of Heathcliff is genius; how is a character able to be both beloved and loathed? I found an internal battle going on inside as I read this book, why do I feel sympathetic for Heathcliff? How can I despite all the truly awful things he has done? Heathcliff by all accounts was not a nice man, coming back to the moors for one reason…to take revenge on the family that raised and segregated him, which he very successfully does: he forces Catherine’s daughter to live with him and torments her. The original Catherine is a less sympathetic character, she clearly uses people and torments anyone who loves her, from her husband Linton, to Heathcliff. Catherine carries many of the same unbalanced characteristics as Heathcliff but is unable gain sympathy from the reader as she comes across more as a spoiled brat than a person hard done by.

                Symbolism is strong throughout this novel, the creepy moors which must be traversed between the two homes is a clear visual of Heathcliff’s tormented nature just as the moors are creepy and easy to become lost in they can also be beautiful. There is the repetition of names: Catherine’s daughter Cathy who carries all her mother’s last names at one point, Heathcliff’s son Linton Heathcliff taking names from both his uncle and his father which suggests history is bent on repeating itself.

                Wurthering Heights by Emily Bronte creates a tug of war in the reader between the heart and the mind. The heart sympathizes with Heathcliff while the mind yells at the heart that he is a horrible man. This novel is worth reading for many reasons, but this character makes it an essential read.

Vanity Fair: A Novel Without a Hero

Vanity Fair

 

            Vanity Fair by W.M. Thackeray is a classic novel from the Nineteenth century. It follows the lives of two young girls as they “graduate” from boarding school. The girls have very different backgrounds and end up leading very different lives. This book begins with a lengthy introduction to the vast amount of ‘main’ characters and their relationships to each other. Vanity Fair is unique in it has no central protagonist, which as a result can make the story line difficult to follow.

The story line bounces back and forth from Rebecca and Amelia, the more central characters in a sea of other characters. As I read this book I tried to understand why it was considered a classic, the writing is descriptive, sarcastic and sincere all at once which is definitely an accomplishment in itself but not enough for the classification. I thought perhaps the book touched on a persons beginning’s not defining who a person became as Rebecca started life poor and weaseled her way into the rich crowds, while Amelia started out life secure and well off ended up poor and disowned from her in-laws. Could the underlying meaning behind this classic book be that good will always win out over evil? Rebecca and Amelia clearly portrayed one or the other. Yet in the end the both characters seemed to fair just fine and carried on with their lives despite the hardships they endured or caused.

Perhaps the genius to this story is the characters themselves, the sarcastic nature of the novel from beginning to end, even in the title. Rebecca is vain in her attempts to climb the social ladder and in her pursuit disregards anyone around her including her neglected offspring, which results in an unfair life for little Rawdon. Amelia, the heroine of the novel, who would never hurt a fly, is put through many hardships in life which is quit unfair in comparison to her dear friend Rebecca who is cruel and uncaring yet is seemingly rewarded for this behaviour.

Vanity Fair is considered a classic, and perhaps I just missed a significant aspect of this book, I will revisit it again and hopefully I will be able to gain a better understanding; as it stands though I found it confusing and difficult to follow. The characters intermingled and there seemed to be no climax to the story but rather a steady plot with insignificant dips and climbs.

Teach Like Your Hairs on Fire

Teach Like Your Hairs on Fire

“Teach Like Your Hairs on Fire” by Rafe Esquith explores various teaching techniques and pit falls. Rafe shows new and veteran teachers alike a new outlook which emphasizes that the children deserve only the best educational experience possible. This is something that is being overlooked in todays’ education system as the focus has shifted from comprehension to memorization and reiteration.  Rafe also warns against scaring children into submission that using a friendlier tone is more effective in the long run. While the points made are made well and draw on various incidents that have actually occurred in class rooms I find the overall tone of the book pretentious.

Rafe Esquith teaches fifth grade in a school in Los Angeles: Through his years of teaching he has seen the educational system fall into the disgrace that it is today. Rafe is keenly aware of the focus being shifted from comprehension level to a memorization and reiteration level. There are many factors that have a hand in the shift of focus; the importance of government tests is emphasized beyond what it should be which is putting an unnecessary pressure on the children. Rafe illustrates this shift in education by providing the reader with a time line from 1982, his first year, to 2004.  In the beginning there was a high level of importance placed on grammar, teachers received new crisp books every year, as the system deteriorated and declined this was one of the first things to go, the books became thoroughly worn and used and when they were finally replaced they were done so with far inferior books. Rafe’s description of this is most disturbing in 2004 when he receives his government tests with a note which is so riddled with grammatical errors it borderlines on incomprehensible. “Hear our you’re exams, Rafe. Their due Friday.” (48); this clearly and disturbingly illustrates the importance of taking the time to teach children proper grammar. While there are some teachers, like Rafe, who refuse to succumb to the pressures there are many young and new teachers who are too afraid to challenge the system. The state tests put an unbearable pressure on students; their classroom and classrooms to follow depend on how well they do, not to mention the quality of living they can expect in the future. This level of stress is unnecessary for students, creating problems where there shouldn’t be any. Rafe has a unique technique to dispel some of the stress holding onto his students, “first I laugh with them at the whole testing situation and ask to hear horror stories about teachers who have gone ballistic on them after poor performances.” (79) He claims this, “loosens them up.”(79) However it seems unnecessary to probe into the weakness of another teacher who is too afraid to challenge the system, or fail the system: It feels as though Rafe is trying to assert his superiority by drudging up bad past experiences which are best laid to rest.  While his intentions are good; to help the students relax. I think this would be better achieved without belittling fellow teachers to his students, after all what kind of lesson is this to teach? Rafe discusses the six levels of bettering yourself and boosting yourself up by mocking and belittle someone else is in direct conflict with these levels.

While reading this book one can feel the passion that Rafe has for teaching the children that come through classroom 56; you can feel that he honestly wants the absolute best for his students. It is however his depictions of the other teachers over reacting to situations that raises questions in response to Rafe’s argument; is it really much better to humiliate a teacher who has taken the wrong course of discipline by humiliating a student: Rafe disagrees with most discipline methods of other teachers, for example the young boy with a messy bag who was humiliated in front of his classmates. Rafe’s description of this puts the reader on edge. While one cannot help but agree with Rafe; that the teacher in question was misguided in the discipline taken, Rafe has taken the same course by making an example of the teacher. Rafe’s tone when describing the after effects is condescending, “…the teacher did not even comprehend the damage he had done.” (4) While he admits making mistakes in the beginning this makes it sound as though he is above that now, in contradiction to the second sentence in the book, “I am painfully aware that I am not superhuman.” (1) I get the impression while reading his list of ‘do’s’ and ‘don’ts’ that while in the beginning he may have made such irrational mistakes he now conveys that he is far superior to such immature errors.

Rafe Esquith is trying to persuade new educators to take a more positive teaching path; to encourage new teachers not to be afraid to challenge the system. While his reasoning is pure and he clearly has a passion for the wellbeing of his students, I find his method of making his point disturbing. Rafe seems unware that in educating new, prospective, teachers he is making the same errors as the teachers he is mocking; by making an example of past teachers errors in an unprofessional manner. Rafe does emphasize the importance of standing your ground for the wellbeing of the students; After all isn’t this the reason anyone wants to be a teacher? Rafe makes his point clearly that all too often the goal of educating for the sole reason of educating is lost.

Work Cited

Rafe Esquith. Teach Like Your Hair’s on Fire. New York. Penguin Group,2007.