1984:Julia and Winston ... who gave in first?

When I read the ending of 1984, my first interpretation was that Julia had been the first one to cave in to O’Brien’s demands—very suddenly, at that—and renounce her love towards Winston. Thus, when I read the denouement, the chance meeting at the pub, I felt somewhat contemptible towards Julia. After all, according to O’Brien, she betrayed Winston “immediately - unreservedly.”

At the pub, Julia explains to Winston as to the reason of her betrayal: “Sometimes...they threaten you with something - something you can't stand up to, can't even think about. And then you say, 'Don't do it to me, do it to somebody else, do it to so-and-so.' ... And after that, you don't feel the same towards the other person any longer.” I interpreted Julia’s explanation as being contrite, guilty for giving in first.But upon closer inspection, it made me doubt whether she really did give in unequivocally. It was easy to scare Winston because he was scared of rats, but what could Julia be possibly be afraid of? She seemed to have more bravado than Winston. Julia was described as having “a long scar, partly hidden by the hair, across her forehead and temple.” I mean, after Winston gave in, he was still scratch-free, but Julia probably had to endure the pain of those scars.

Could it be that psychological shock wasn’t enough, and the State perhaps run out of ideas and had to resort to physical violence or mutilation in order to quell down Julia’s desires? Perhaps they tampered with her brain in the literal sense?

Catch-22: Nazism in the American Army?!?!

Chapter 8 featuring Lieutenant Scheisskopf in Catch-22 contained a lot of symbols pertaining to Nazism. I believe that these references, apart from taking a crack at Hitler, also highlights and parodies the similarities between the American army and the German army--such as petty bureaucracy.

1. The name Lieutenant Scheisskopf is German, although Scheisskopf is an American soldier. Note that sometimes his name is spelled as "Scheiss-kopf." One of the lower-ranked soldiers call him Lieutenant "Shithead." "Scheisse" means "shit" in German. Could this be the possible meaning of Scheisskopf?
2. Lieutenant Scheisskopf was obsessed with parades with a zeal almost or as tantamount to Hitler's.
3. Scheisskopf neglects his wife in a similar manner Hitler neglected his mistress, Eva Braun.
4. According to Scheisskopf, his wife is incapable of looking beyond her own dirty, sexual desires to the "titanic struggles for the unattainable in which noble man could become heroically engaged." - Sounds pretty much like Nazi ideology.
5. Scheisskopf hatches a "brilliant" idea in which the soldiers at the parades march without moving their arms. The other generals that were watching look at him with shocked faces, and one general was blue in the face. Were these other generals offended at the Nazi resemblance or were they mad because they knew they'd lose to Scheisskopf's idea? That's what makes it funny.

Catch-22: My kind of humor.

As it turns out, Catch-22 is a very random, rambling book that goes off into all sorts of complicated tangents faster than Colonel Cathcart can increase the required missions to fifty. Someone better be glad that I like Monty Python, because the humor between the two is very similar--spontaneous, downright illogical, stream-of-consciousness like. Thus, a reader like me who likes structure in a novel but finds little in Catch-22 still finds the book very captivating because of the utter random circumlocutory hilarity that alights the following pages. When I read it in the train I could do nothing but suppress my smile or else be shot down with stares by other passengers. When I read it in the comfort of my own house I find myself laughing at intervals. The book is brimming with sarcasm and witty irony I just couldn't find myself to put the book down because it was my kind of humor. This lighthearted humor, when juxtaposed with the graphic images of death and destruction, such as The Soldier in White, makes me think of the absurdity of the war and of the events in this book.

To quote as evidence, this is one of the lines that never fails to crack me up:

"Who is Spain?"

"Why is Hitler?"

"When is right?"

"Where was that stooped and mealy-colored old man I used to call Poppa when the merry-go-round broke down?"

"How was trump at Munich?"

"Ho-ho beriberi."

"Balls!"

All rang out in rapid succession, and then there was Yossarian with the question that had no answer:

"Where are the Snowdens of yesteryear?"

Genius.

Catch-22: Plot and Conflict

Catch-22 starts in medias res and is chronologically disjointed throughout. I guess you could say the disjointedness mirrors a soldier's disordered life in combat. It's almost difficult to discern the overall plot of the story because the narrative seems to jump from one time frame to another with no goal or end in sight. In the beginning, the plot seems unclear, as it seems that we're merely endlessly following Yossarian and Friends through their antics within the 27th Air Force Squadron. However, when you analyze the motives behind Yossarian's actions, you realize that Yossarian's doing what it takes--however unscrupulous it is--to get out of the war alive and unscathed. Also, will there ever be an end to this endless cycle of military incompetence? The conflict in this story is not between the Allies and the Axis (in fact, for a war novel I find it peculiar that the Germans, the enemy, have made no appearance in the book as of yet, and I doubt they will), but between Yossarian and the state--including the highly incompetent people that surround him, and the useless bureaucracy.

How to Read Literature Like a Professor - What I've Learned (Chapters 19-26)

Here is the last set of the notes I took for How to Read Literature Like a Professor:

19. GEOGRAPHY: The type of land a story takes place in (e.g. hills, plains, valleys) usually implies something important in the story. The unique, specific location of the story (e.g. Eyjafjallajokull, Iceland for example) is also important because of the political, social, and economical ramifications. Oh, and when characters go South, they go hedonistic and berserk.

20. SEASONS

a. Fall – harvests, reaping what we sow, oldness and expectation of death, tiredness

b. Winter – death, cruelty, harshness, resentment, coldness

c. Spring – birth, rebirth, childhood and youth

d. Summer – romance, growth, adulthood, fulfillment, passion

INTERLUDE: All stories come from one single story – the story of humans being humans.

21. MARKS: When someone stands out from the others either physically or psychologically, they’re marked for greatness (or infamy). Try to figure out why that part of the body.

22. BLINDNESS: It’s funny, but blindness in literature usually is a big huge marquee sign that tells the reader, “PLEASE LOOK AND EXAMINE CAREFULLY.” If you want your audience to know something important about your character (or the work at large), introduce it early, before you need it.

23. HEART DISEASE: Heart disease usually means sickness of the heart, emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually.

24. ILLNESS:

a. Rules of diseases in literature:

i. Not all diseases are created equal. Mostly due to image.

ii. It should be picturesque.

iii. It should be mysterious in origin.

iv. It should have strong symbolic or metaphorical possibilities.

v. Every age has its special disease. (TB in Victorian Era, AIDS in the 1990s)

25. DON’T READ WITH ONLY YOUR EYES, OR THEIR EYES: Try to mix your perceptions with the context in which the literature was written for the best possible enriched reading.

26. GUESS WHAT?!?! IRONY DOESN’T FOLLOW ANY OF THE RULES I STATED ABOVE!!!! IT’S JUST THAT AWESOME!!!

Intertextuality in cliched Asian Dramas and "chick flicks" - How to Read Literature Like a Professor

In How to Read Literature Like a Professor, Foster urged us readers to think of intertextuality in terms of movie westerns. However, as a teenager, I couldn't really relate to this genre (I do love Clint Eastwood though). Then I had a brilliant idea: being a sucker for the romantic and the melodramatic, what if I applied this whole intertextuality idea to a familiar realm -- Asian drama and romance movies? Success.

So one day this past summer, I took the liberty of digging through my movie archives and listing at the numerous Asian dramas and American "chick flicks" I've watched. I've found numerous similarities between Asian and American movies alike, but here are three of the most common and really obvious romantic/dramatic movie archetypes I've noticed:

1. Girl/guy gets amnesia, but nevertheless the heart prevails and they fall in love all over again and all that jazz (or the amnesiac regains his/her memory)

American movies: The Promise (1971 movie), The Notebook
Asian dramas: Stairway to Heaven, Endless Love 2: Winter Sonata, Meteor Garden II, Save the Last Dance for Me

* Creepy similarities: The amnesia in all these dramas are caused by a car accident, with the exception of The Notebook

2. Girl and guy love each other to bits, but girl/guy (mostly the girl) dies from some tragedy

American movies: A Walk to Remember, Atonement
Asian dramas: Endless Love 1: Autumn in My Heart, Windstruck

* Creepy similarities: The girls from both A Walk to Remember and Endless Love 1 both die from leukemia.

3. Guy falls in love with the less attractive/less desirable heroine instead of the other, more attractive (usually self-absorbed and condescending) girl he used to love

American movies: Ugly Betty, Bridget Jones's Diary
Asian dramas: My Name is Kim Sam Soon

* Creepy similarities: The protagonists in both Kim Sam Soon and Bridget Jones's Diary are both in their thirties.

4. Guy and girl fake their relationship and eventually fall in love

American movies: The Proposal

Asian dramas: Lovers in Paris, Full House

* Creepy similarities: They all fake marriage because of some ulterior motive. Moreover, the dynamics between these couples are usually very antagonistic at first, then slowly it melts into love.

It's funny how intertextuality rings true even between movies from completely different cultures. Moreover, even though the stories in much of these American and Asian romance/dramas are pretty much the same, I find that I never get tired of them! Much more, when one needs a moment of catharsis, fascinatingly, these movies never fail to serve their purpose. I suppose we owe Foster and his book for the explanation, that these cliches "[set] off vibrations deep in our collective consciousness, calling to us, alarming us, inspiring us to dream or nightmare, making us want to hear it again. And again and again and again."

1984: Emmanuel Goldstein, Jesus, and Religion

In 1984, the Party seems to use Emmanuel Goldstein in the same way people use religion: as an emotional outlet, as well as a way to explain the events that go on in their lives.

1. The name "Goldstein" sounds Jewish. Heck, even "Emmanuel" sounds holy.
2. Emmanuel Goldstein is the focus, or absorber, of hate for the party during the "Two Minutes Hate." Just like Christ sacrificed himself to save the people from their sins.
3. Goldstein's book, "The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism," which exposes what goes on behind the Party and its totalitarian ideology, is considered heresy. Like the teachings of Christ were considered heresy.

What is the What: Quests.

How to Read Literature Like a Professor says that quests are used for attaining self-knowledge and/or self-improvement, usually by novices/naïve people. In What is the What, Valentino’s quest is about surviving and finding out what “the What” is. As a result of the horrendous events he has experienced, in many ways he was enriched with an outlook that many of us in our very privileged worlds will never get to experience. He has a vast tolerance that contrasts with the impatient attitude of our society. He has gone through suffering unlike any that we have experienced, causing him to become stronger and more enduring. He has seen many things we have not, and this has made him all the more wiser than any of us.

Catch-22: Violence, or the lack thereof.

Catch-22 comprises of many violent scenes that add to the overall message that is presented in the book. Among are a few, and interestingly, these (totally unnecessary) acts of violence are "friendly fire," rather, committed by the Americans on themselves:

• "And Snowden lay dying in back." Probably one of the most powerful, heartwrenching scenes in the book, wherein Dobbs loses his mind mid-air and causes the death of Snowden in Yossarian's arms.
• Kid Sampson is cut in half when McWatt flies his plane too low to the ground.
• Milo bombs his own squadron by conspiring with the Germans, clashing their army with his own. (All for the syndicate!)

According to How to Read Literature Like a Professor, “Violence, one of the most personal and even intimate acts between human beings, always means something in literature.” There are many violent scenes Although Catch-22 is an antiwar novel, Heller presents his message in a way that is ironic and sarcastic, paradoxically using the black comedy of absurd and unheeded violence to go against violence.

What is the What: Running = Flying.

A notable scene in the novel is when Valentino imagines his perfect day. Valentino’s perfect day, in summary, comprises of simple moments in which he spends time affectionately with the various people in his village. One of these is running towards the river to get water for the girl of his dreams. I think Valentino’s act of running—even to the act of stumbling in front of his “crush,” falling, and getting up again—is symbolic of flying and freedom. Valentino tells the reader that he imagines this day whenever he feels dismal, which is in itself a desire for freedom and escape from the confines of poverty in the current reality with which he is subject to.

What is the What: Valentino - A Christ Figure.

Let me enumerate some of the symbols that signify why Valentino is a Christ figure:

1. He talks to those who have wronged him with self-sacrificing forgiveness and even a trace of sagacity.
2. "We refugees can be celebrated one day, helped and lifted up, and then utterly ignored by all when we prove to be a nuisance." - People treated the refugees the way they treated Christ--abusing, betraying, and trampling him as if they didn't need him.
3. Valentino was baptized not when he was a baby, but when he was older, just like Christ.

1984: Newspeak and the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis

Reading about Newspeak in 1984 reminded me of a concept I learned during a college Sociology class I took last spring: The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis theorizes that language is not simply a way of voicing ideas, but is the very thing which shapes those ideas. In other words, language defines the society. For example, the word “wifebeater” may mean a shirt, but the fact that people colloquially use this term reflects a somewhat androcentric and/or misogynistic society. Now applying this theory to Newspeak: what aspects of Newspeak reflect the kind of society Winston lives in?

The language of Newspeak is terse and simple as opposed to the complexities and long-windedness of Oldspeak, and purposely so. Likewise, the thought processes citizens of Ingsoc are diminutive and bare because that’s what Big Brother wants them to think. Moreover, the language of Newspeak is full of meaningless words which contribute to the lack of logical thinking, another way of stopping citizens from forming ideas. Newspeak is one of the methods that the State employs to subtly control its people. By reducing words to their bare meanings, they limit the ideas that one can express or even think of. For example, by removing the contexts of “political freedom” and “intellectual equality” in Newspeak words, rebellion is impossible because Ingsoc citizens do not even know what it means to be free—it doesn’t exist in their heads. These don’t think because they have nothing with which to think about.