Fear and Loathing and The American Dream

After reading "Fear and Loathing" I am still trying to figure out what Hunter Thompson is trying to say about the American Dream. It is a central issue in the book and it is the reason why Thompson and the Attorney go on their journey to Las Vegas in the first place, but as a reader I sometimes forgot this because their insane drug use and manic escapades overshadowed his attempt to find the American Dream.

In the end, I think Thompson is saying that the American Dream does not exist anymore. He never finds what he is looking for, and the journey ends as abruptly as it started. At the end of the book he does not really reflect on his failed journey to find the American Dream, but he casually moves on to his next adventure. On the surface, Thompson ends the book without getting any closer to understanding what the American Dream is and what this means for the future of America.

However, I started to ask myself what it meant that Hunter was unable to find the American Dream. If he made an attempt to find the American Dream in America, it really shouldn't be that hard to find it. The American Dream should be embedded in the lives in Americans, and the conversations that Thompson had with people about the American Dream make a powerful statement that I didn't think about when I was first reading. The conversation that I especially have in mind is when Thompson and the Attorney are ordering five tacos for a dollar and they ask the waitress if she knows where the American Dream is. Thompson is clearly making fun of them for misunderstanding his meaning, but I think there is much more going on than that. The fact that typical Americans do not know where the American Dream is or even what it is suggests that it simply does not exist. I think Thompson realized this. In the movie Gonzo, Thompson admits that his search for the American Dream is a wild goose chase because he knows that he will never find it. So, what does it mean that an American can't find the American Dream in America? Did the American Dream ever really exist in the first place?

My understanding of the American Dream is a colonial Benjamin Franklin-like figure's ability to pick himself or herself up by their bootstraps and change their class standing and their life. The famous story of Benjamin Franklin starting life as a poor and penniless boy who changes this life solely based on hard work and determination has motivated immigrants to move to America for centuries, but America doesn't work like this anymore. Professor Urrea said that Hunter Thompson was filled with rage throughout Fear and Loathing and I definitely agree with this; Thompson is enraged and disappointed in America for letting him down.

One of the scenes that intrigued me the most throughout the book was Thompson's conversation with Bruce about finding the American Dream. Bruce is surpised that Thompson found the American Dream and especially that he found it in Las Vegas. Thompson replies, " You remember that story the manager told us about the owner of this place? How he always wanted to run away and join the circus when he was a kid?" (191). Even though Thompson tells Bruce that he found the American Dream in this man who wanted to join the circus when he was young, I don't believe that Thompson believes that he actually found it. He is actually mocking the American Dream in this conversation. Bruce responds, "Yeah, I see what you mean . . . Now the bastard has his own circus, and a license to steal, too" (191). The man that Thompson and Bruce are referring to is clearly not the model for the American Dream, but I still haven't figured out the point that Thompson is trying to make here. Is he saying that only children have the courage to believe in the American Dream? What does Bruce mean that the man who wanted to join the circus has a "license to steal"?  Maybe Thompson himself is unsure about the existance and the future of the American Dream, and is, therefore, just as confused and troubled as his readers.

Explosives w/ Hunter S. Thompson

At the risk of becoming the guy who always posts videos on the blog, I've always stood by the theory that - in writing, reading, any kind of storytelling - one of the best ways to learn about someone is to hear what people say about them when they aren't around.

Months after Hunter's suicide, friend Johnny Depp (while a guest on the Graham Norton Show) recalls the first time he ever met Hunter S. Thompson. Funny story. Hope you enjoy it.

Fear and Loathing: The Blurred Line

Reading Hunter S. Thompson's "Fear and Loathing" has been at the top of my bucket list since last Wednesday - which, coincidentally, is the same day that I wrote out my bucket list. And now that I have read the book, I can't help but ask the same question that many of you already have: what was the point of that?

For those of you reading who were fans of the book, please understand. I liked it. I appreciated the wild, kinetic, the-train-is-comin'-best-hold-on-tight pacing that Thompson implemented throughout this "non-fiction" narrative. The quirky side characters that Thompson and his attorney meet along the way added to the humor. And, of course, there were the animated bats. All of this felt like a story that proved that truth really is stranger than fiction.

... And then we discover that Thompson wasn't on acid, LSD, crack cocaine, heroin, crystal meth, or anything relatively stronger than marijuana while on the road trip around which this book is based. Like others here have cited, Thompson hoped to communicate to his readers the experience of a road trip like this seen from the point of view of someone on drugs, even if that someone wasn't Thompson himself. In other words, he fabricated the drug experience described in vivid detail in the book. One might shrug this realization off, until he or she realized how prominent a role that drugs take in this novel. Thompson revealing that he created the drug references in "Fear and Loathing" is, for me, the equivalent of Truman Capote coming back to life and explaining how the Clutters never existed, and that he (Capote) had made up the entire crime. Like the murders in "In Cold Blood," the acid trips in "Fear and Loathing" are central to the book's cultural significance. If those are fake, what else can the book offer?

One might argue that the novel's slew of characters make the story worth reading, only to ask themselves the next logical question, "How many of themare fictional?" Throughout this brief semester, we have read numerous non-fiction novels whose authors have admitted to stretching the truth. Capote constructed the Clutters' final days. John Steinbeck never took his dog on the title travels. But Thompson inventing the iconic drugged-out scenes, the ones that gave both the book and film cultural relevance? That's a bit too much of a stretch for me.

This is the one time that I wish the author had really said "yes" to drugs.

Fear and Loathing - Fact or Fiction?

Before reading this book, I read a letter from HST in which he claimed that he didn't do any drugs while on this assignment - he wrote the story to give the 'feeling' of a weekend of heavy drug use. I tend to believe that simply because it seems impossible to do the amount of drugs they did and still be able to function.

If the ongoing drug imagery, which occupies about half of the book, was made up, what was Thompson's purpose? It seems to me that he wrote about incredibly transgressive  behavior in an over-the-top style as a contrast to the ridiculousness of ordinary society he encountered. Certainly the girl who painted Barbra Streisand portraits, the cops giving silly lectures on drugs, the self-important news reporters all seem absurd, and perhaps they wouldn't have appeared quite so strange if they weren't juxtaposed with HST and the attorney's actions.

I struggled with myself while reading this book. Some of the scenes were laugh-out-loud funny and all of it had a manic, redlining strain to it. I kept wondering what outrageousness was coming next, which I think was HST's goal. At the same time, I kept wondering how much of it was true. I had difficulty accepting the scene in which the attorney threatened a waitress with a knife, and their callous treatment of a girl they had drugged and raped was horrifying. If they really had destroyed two rental cars and several hotel rooms, these are despicable acts also. I was able to enjoy the story only with a suspension of disbelief, an assurance to myself that much of this probably didn't happen and if it did, no one apparently was hurt too badly.

Joan Didion

Didion certainly is a huge jump from Steinbeck and Capote. I enjoyed reading "Some Dreamers of the Golden Dream"and was thrilled to reach the ending because it was masterfully done. I like how she uses the subjectivity we as readers have of Lucille only to prove that our narrow mindedness ultimately leads to  a clouded judgment of her. In other words, we as readers are easily manipulated. Which is funny because I am sure all of us, by now, have our guards up with these writers. 

Normally I love reading sarcastic material but even I thought Didion was too dry sometimes. I mean, I know she was "warning" us. She just sounds better than us. And as Luis said, she really is, so that's where my comment ends haha. Also, her life is so heartbreaking. I cannot imagine losing my husband and daughter within months of each other. How terribly sad. :(

On a lighter note, I think I would read this collection again in the summer. Maybe my opinion might change. 

Thompson's Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

Hi, All!

I''m attaching the official trailer of Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. I'm sure that quite a few of you have already seen the movie, but I haven't seen it yet and I thought that some of you might enjoy this clip. I honestly never hear of Fear and Loathing or Hunter S. Thompson before taking this class, but I think he's a fascinating guy. At first I didn't like the book at all because it's just so bizarre. But now I'm happy to say that I'm a convert! I'm going to have to read his book on The Hell's Angels sometime. Oh, so much to read, so little time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_9tZ3aPCFo

Joan Didion

Good Evening, Lincoln 205!

I found a great photo of Joan Didion and her family that I wanted to share with all of you:



I wasn't a big fan of Slouching Towards Bethlehem; I honesty would have preferred to read The White Album or The Year of Magical Thinking instead. I think that the individual essays in Slouching Towards Bethlehem didn't complement each other well; they seemed randomly placed in the same collection without being united by a common theme or idea. I'm really interested in Joan Didion now and her work, and I plan to read The Year of Magical Thinking on my own sometime.

Capote and In Cold Blood

Hi All!

I know we are on Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas right now and we just watched part of Gonzo in class yesterday, but I feel like I need to share some of my thoughts on In Cold Blood since I haven't done that yet.

One of the things that really concerned me about the book was the apparent lack of interest that Mr. Clutter's eldest daughters had about the trial and Perry's and Dick's eventual execution. I was surprised that they weren't present during the trial or at the executions; I think they owed it to their family to represent them. It doesn't surprise me that Perry seemed disappointed that none of the Clutter family was there to see him die because I didn't know who to direct his apology to. What did surprise me was Dick's apparent disappointment; for some reason he wanted the Clutter family to get their revenge, and I have the feeling that Dick thought his death was a waste because the people he hurt most weren't there to see him die.

The second thing that bothered me in the book was Perry's claim that he actually killed all four of the Clutters instead of just Mr. Clutter and his son, which he admitted to in his first confession. Even though Perry said that he shot the whole family by himself and that Dick didn't kill any of them, I just can't believe it. I think Perry was trying to protect Dick as well as Dick's mother. Dick must have killed Mrs. Clutter and Nancy. I have been thinking it over and over in my mind, and I just don't want to think that Perry was the one to kill them all; however, I guess it doesn't really matter who killed who because both Dick and Perry were at the house that night and they committed the crime together regardless of who pulled the trigger. Maybe Capote's love for Perry has made me biased towards him, but I feel sorry for the guy. He seems more like a victim than a villain to me.

Taking Yourself Out of the Story

Taking Yourself Out of the Story
by Daniel Tucker
Review: In Cold Blood by Truman Capote (Random House, 1966)

After reading about the 1959 murders in Holcombe, Kansas depicted in In Cold Blood by Truman Capote, the feature which stands out most prominently to me as a piece of writing is the total absence of Capote from the narrative. As Rupert Thompson writes in the introduction to the 2011 Folio Society re-issue, Capote knew he had to “get the damn writer out of the way” for a story like this.

The memoir and first person account is so central to creative non-fiction works that it stands out in its absence from this genre-defining book. How might In Cold Blood have been different if Capote wrote self-consciously about his experience of navigating small town life as an eccentric reporter from New York City? While it would give us greater insight into the behind the scenes story that was undoubtedly rich and fascinating, it wouldn’t have been the “non fiction novel” that Capote used to manipulate millions of readers into caring about the deceased, the towns-folk and even the killers. And it would not have garnered reviews like this one from the time of its original publishing: “There may never have been a perfect crime, but if there ever has been a perfect reconstruction of one, surely this must be it.”

Seriously Late...

If you guys think you guys were late, then I most certainly am tardy to the “party”, since it has taken me forever to post.  At this point, I kinda feel like I’m a spectator at Truman Capote’s infamous masquerade ball.  Looking, and appreciating, but not exactly participating.  Hence, I, like the others before me, do also solemnly “swear” (*note the quotation marks) that I will be much more prudent in posting because I definitely want an “A” by midterm.

Some facts about me…I overuse commas, quotation marks, and parenthesis when writing.  See example above, and I’m sure below.  I am a senior at UIC, hoping to graduate this December. I am an English major for the simple fact that I love to read and because prior to majoring in English I felt like I was at the top of that iceberg that Urrea drew on the board this past Thursday.  In other words, I did a lot of surface reading with little understanding of what laid underneath.

Something else I like to do …I love writing letters to companies to tell them what I think about their products.  Case in point, this morning I went to Walgreens and noticed that they changed the formatting of their weekly sales paper. I thought that was cool, so I wrote to them and told them that.  It’s kind of weird that I do this because I never feel the urge to comment on anything that I have read or bought on the internet. Go figure.    

Another quick fact…I am a magazine “whore”, who because I have read tons of different magazines ever since I was able to read (My fave is Vanity Fair), I now know a little bit about a lot of things. Enough to vaguely recognize familiar names, places, references but not enough to have a deep conversation about them (I also hold my poor memory accountable). Believe me, it’s very frustrating.  Especially since my dream has always been to be on Jeopardy.  Oh, well, I guess I will never be able to admire Alex Trebek’s fake tan up close. C’est la vie.   

Well, I think I have imbedded this post with enough parenthesis for now, so I will leave you.  I will in the next few days post about what I think about John Steinbeck, Truman Capote, and Joan Didion.  In three separate posts, of course (gotta get that A )

Veronica

Truman's intentions.

I enjoyed the book. I didn't know I could be fascinated by a murder book.

The conspiracies that surround Truman toward the end of his career really are terrible. For someone to tell Truman that he will go to hell for writing a book, (which started this new genre of writing). I think that Truman had intentions of publishing his book with the help of the two murderers, but when he got to know them he may have changed his mind. After all, he did do 5 years of research during the trial and spent time with the people of the town to hear their opinions. It was almost as if he cared about the family as much as everyone else did. Somewhere along those lines, I do feel that he did want to boost up his chances for a successful book.

Truman spent most of his time as a journalist and he had the knowledge of what would be successful and what was a waste of time. He even states in an interview, that he had to choose a promising subject.

http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/12/28/home/capote-interview.html

Didion

I found Didion's writing to be very interesting. The first story was my favorite. The only complaint I have is that the stories ended too quickly. After watching the Youtube clips, I almost felt obligated to read more of her work...which I plan to do. Her life seemed so happy and then poof...the happiness is gone. So many people can relate whether it's death, money or health. I think Didion shared a lot of wisdom in her writing and I was happy to be introduced to her.

Thursday Feb 16

I hope some of you check this website before class. I forgot I had to go to Florida! How do you forget a trip to Florida? Hmmm. Senility?

I am so sorry, but I won't be there. If you get this, stay home! I'll make it up next week. PASS IT ON!

With apologies,
Luis

Steinbeck on LOVE

In the spirit of Valentine's day, I thought some of you might be interested in Steinbeck's letter to his son on the topic of LOVE:

http://www.lettersofnote.com/2012/01/nothing-good-gets-away.html

(This is an amazing website with "CORRESPONDENCE DESERVING OF A WIDER AUDIENCE"... Many of the letters are by famous authors, so it may be of particular interest to you all---- including some inflammatory ones by Mr. H.S.T.!)

Didion's Clarity

At first, yah, Didion BUMMED me out, as we say in Lincoln 205. After the first chapter, I wondered if I should keep reading or not- I was already feeling a little down on life and it felt like Didion might be a kind of TOXIC character- who can't see any romance or beauty in the world. As we began discussing the environment of the time- the "everything goes" and "it's your trip, man" attitude, I began to really appreciate her. Maybe I need romance/beauty right now, maybe WE need romance/beauty right now because we know everything is totally FUCKED-- 2012, economic collapse, gentrification beyond control, right? We need something to keep us from sitting down and dying, to be proactive-- some HOPE even within the DOOM---- even IF everything is screwed, we have to TRY. We have to believe to try. But, in Didion's heyday, there was nothing BUT romance. There was a naivety. But then, there were FIVE YEAR OLDS ON LSD, as she disturbingly ends one chapter. That can't be a good sign.

As, I kept reading, I began to think: sure, she is a little distant, "cold" in that she remains uninvolved (though she begins to use first person plural "WE" more as the book progresses- and, in these rare instances, it is extremely touching), but more than anything, her images are CRYSTAL CLEAR. The boy turning the marble in his fingers in the Baez piece "Where the Kissing Never Ends", etc. They are images that stay with me in their clarity. There is beauty in the unadorned details. Beauty in things as they are. Without the rose-tinted glasses. She's kinda Zen, right?

Cinematic in Capote

Being a filmmaker, "In Cold Blood" particularly appealed to me for the cinematic environments Capote created. He really is a master of environment. What makes the book cinematic is Capote's ability to capture a physical space/landscape and his characters' physiques in such detail... we forget that we are readers and are instead just "THERE". Take the opening section, for example: one can imagine moving through the orchards and river clearly-- I was not so much judging the characters or observing them from a distance, but moving through space with them as they walked and went about their morning routines... I can imagine a lot of crane shots floating from just above/behind the characters as they walked about. It makes sense why we are able to empathize/sympathize with the characters then: the bad leg that makes walking difficult, etc. Also, because we are not kept at a (physical or authorial) distance, are present with the killers, see their weaknesses, it is harder to remain emotionally distant or critical. We can understand and sympathize because, in a way, we were there.

Review: Travels with Charley

Lifestyles of the Rich and Nameless
by Daniel Tucker
Review: Travels with Charley: In Search of America by John Steinbeck (Viking, 1962)

The way Steinbeck wrote about attempting to disappear and reject his fame, his professional as well as his personal responsibilities struck me a very dated. In a way that makes me nostalgic for something I never knew.

Writing in 1960 while he travels the country, he recalls a time when he was young when contact while traveling was non existent. He admits that even though he downplays it (how much he downplays it is a different story all together) that “three times a week from some bar, supermarket, or tire-and-tool-cluttered service station, I put calls through to New York and reestablished my identity in time and space. For three or four minutes I had a name, and the duties and joys and frustrations a man carries with him like a comet’s tail” (p.88).

Part of Steinbeck’s ability to disappear was linked to the wealth he had accumulated towards the end of his life. He really had no responsibilities but to write and innovate within that field. This is not reproducible for people with other forms of financial or familial responsibility.

When I travel I am unable to make breaks in communication. That is not an option anymore with the state of telecommunications. That “identity in time and space” is always present. This means the experience of traveling has dramatically changed: No longer can you disappear into exploration and adventure. This changes the nature of travel writing and travel in general. With the option to conceal and re-establish your presence in the world having been taken away, how will authors convincingly tell stories of immersion in the unknown?

Again with that truth thing again

So Truman Capote and In Cold Blood bring up the same ideas of truth- this time bringing memory into play.

Capote claims that everything written with his non-fiction novel is the truth, YET labels the work a novel, implying crafting and manipulation of the writing, which obviously means he's shaping the facts to suit his purpose. Which is what any writer does whether creating fiction or writing a front page news report.

I don't know why I'm such a sucker, but I believe Capote. I believe he is telling the truth when he says that he is telling the truth. I also think that many people believe their memory to be better than they actually are. People forget things all the time like how I forgot what I was trying to say just now.

Capote believes that he's writing with 100% accuracy and I believe it too, it's just that he's perfectly accurate about his own recollection of all he saw and heard. So in the end, he's mostly right. Plus the way the whole novel is structured and written is so masterful, that it hardly matters whether it's fact or fiction.

I don't think that someone that was this obsessed over an event, someone who would sit on an amazing novel until someone he had befriended had been killed to finish writing and publishing it, would go about wanting to distort the truth as he saw it just for the paycheck. The whole point of writing something is in some form, self-serving- so I do not get the argument that he wrote things/made things up to better serve himself. That's what writer's do. They write- for money, for a grade, or even just for self satisfaction. But you always are serving yourself.

I'm still surprised that this is the same writer who came up with Holly Golightly and is the reason that Moonriver is stuck in my head right now. What a jerk.

Truth

Hey Lincoln205!

Hop into your '85 Delorean and push that baby to 88 mph because we're heading back to the first/third week of class to talk about Travels with Charley. Or at least I am.

Throughout our class discussion I couldn't shake the feeling that I was alone in thinking that the fact that Steinbeck fabricated some/much/all of his "non-fiction" travelogue wasn't much of a big deal. This was no Million Little Pieces. Steinbeck was already a recognized ("oh what's my nobel prize doing over here, silly me!") author. Steinbeck was in failing health and really a dying old man should be allowed to do what he's always wanted to, even if he had to make it up.

Stephen King famously said that "fiction is the truth inside the lie." So Steinbeck is writing fiction- telling the truths that he wants to tell the best way he knows how. What's important is the message, right? The "truth" is what is important.

But the other truth? Meh. I'll take emotion, thought, passion and introspection over being a slave to the other truth. The "truth" is what is important here. Are you following me here?

No? Good. As long as we're on the same page.

As a journalist I'm appalled, but as a writer, I'm going to go with cranky ol' John here. I mean, he wrote The Grapes of Wrath. That should give him a little leeway.

It's like when I accidentally watch a Based On True events movie. I know it's not the whole truth (read: all made up), but goddamn if Denzel Washington and Chris Pine didn't stop that Unstoppable runaway train. THAT SHIT REALLY HAPPENED.

I apologize for comparing Travels With Charley with Unstoppable, a movie about a train that CAN'T BE STOPPED. But I enjoyed that movie. And yes I am aware that that statement just invalidated all of my past, present, and future opinions.

Anyway, people lie. Sometimes lying is good for you (this is what I tell myself so I can sleep at night).

Sorry for rambling, thanks for playing!


Best,
Christopher James

Rodolfo Walsh

Hey guys,

I found something that I thought was a bit interesting. We all know that "In Cold Blood" is considered to be the "first" non-fiction novel. However, there is this Argentinian writer that wrote "Operación Masacre" (Operation Massacre), which was published in 1957, nine years before "In Cold Blood". Walsh's book is considered a non-fiction novel. So, does that make "In Cold Blood" not the first non-fiction novel? Have we been lied to by another author once again?

Anyway, I could not find a good article about the book in English, so I will resort to wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operaci%C3%B3n_Masacre

In Cold Blood and Truman Capote

Reading "In Cold Blood" reminded me all too well of shows like Dateline, 20/20, Cold Case, etc, that I am completely obsessed about. The beauty of this book and his masterful skills in creating such environment with such intrinsic details made me feel like I was THERE. I was there talking to The Clutters, with Smith and Dick, etc. It was beyond eerie and wonderfully done. The very "psycho" structure made it seem all too real. But in a way, I like to believe that Capote was not doing this for theatrical gain but more as a respect for The Clutters. He gave them a voice, he made them come alive just one last time. I felt that he wrote this out of affection, a weird affection for someone or a family that you have never met. I also can't help but to mention that ever since that clip we saw in class, I read the book hearing Capote's narration. It makes me feel like he's retelling me everything personally, in the same room....but not in a creepy way.

Overall, as we've heard in class, this book, this journey, this literature, basically broke Capote down. After reading such an inhumane action towards a family, it strikes me impressive that something so human happens to Capote himself. Real life, no matter how crafted in the literary form, is just as moving. That's also why I think that he wrote it out of respect, affection, and love. It is evident that he comes to feel closer to the characters he writes about. This isn't just reporting. It's not journalism, or a reconstruction of characters and interviews based off "100%" of memory. It's about the fact that Capote couldn't help but have a human reaction with everything. I think apart from his skillful writing, this is the other element about the book that I really enjoyed.

Extra Extra Late Post

I thought I was going to be the only late member to the blog, but I see we all are connected much more than we expect in this world. My future posts will be much more timely and hopefully much more interesting than the factoids that I'm about to lay out in front of you all.

My name is David Larry and yes, I'm well aware that those are two first names. I'm a fourth year student, hopefully graduating in the fall, or I may just stay here forever. I'm starting to get the hang of this here college thing. Journalism was my initial interest entering college and I'm beginning to return to such with my internship with the Athletic Department here on campus, but creative writing is starting to capture my eye like beauty from across the room.

I'm open to dabbling in short stories, poems, or any means through which my way with words can convey my emotions and opinion so hopefully I serve as an interesting, interactive member of this blog. Write to you all again soon and see you sooner.

Extra Late Intro

Soooo, I am a senior (graduating in December UGH!) and my major is Creative Writing. I actually don't know what I plan to do with my degree yet. I know I'm moving from Chicago as soon as I'm finished though. Um, I liked reading until I began college when I was forced to read material that I didn't like. Now, I can only read during the semester. It may get better after graduation though. I've always had an interest in writing but it became serious once I read material that wasn't keeping my interest. That forced me to write my own stories and a book that I have yet to finish editing.

Something about me, my middle name is UniQue. My car's name is Allen. I count money as a part-time job (bank). I am interning at Young Chicago Authors. I love shopping and will have a pet monkey some day. That is all. ^_^

Greetings!

Hello everyone, 

My name is Marialuisa Gonzalez. I am an undergraduate going into Teaching of English. I will be student teaching next Fall which I am so ready for. Fun fact, Luis Urrea taught my older sister and have been dying to get in a class with him so I'm happy that FINALLY happened! Another fun fact is that I play guitar and sing. 

 I look forward to reading these books and getting to know everyone :)

-Marialuisa

Introduction!

So I'm pretty late to the party here.

I have plenty of excuses as to why, but they're all still excuses. So all I can do is apologize and get on with it.

Hi! My name is Christopher James Palafox. I'm a sixth year senior, an English major with a concentration in American Literature, and finally graduating this semester barring the early coming of the Mayan Apocalypse. I was formerly a Teaching of English major, but after spending much time in the classroom and some time interning at Time Out Chicago, my original love of journalism and reporting has changed my major, my career path, and essentially my life.

I work 45 hours a week at two jobs, plus 15 more hours at my internship so I am almost always sleep deprived and highly caffeinated. I'm pretty sure, coffee has saved my life (I think I'll put that on my tombstone as my famous last words). I'm into comic books, video games, sports, cooking, and interior decorating. I don't like talking about myself and I'm not huge on public speaking, but I am always thinking (hopefully) and always looking out for a good story.

Thanks for reading and I hope I can add to the already stellar conversation that I'm butting into.

Best,
Christopher James

Didion as an Oceanographer?

This is pretty interesting...

http://flavorwire.com/257272/joan-didion-wanted-to-be-an-oceanographer

 

Didion as an oceanographer is an interesting concept, particularly considering that her written subjects deal primarily with personal, political, or cultural observations and steer clear of plunging the ocean’s depths, even if through nature writing. If I read that Annie Dillard aspired to be an oceanographer, I would not be surprised. However, I suppose with Didion’s aptitude for reading and relating the human psyche, the idea of her studying oceanography is not an all too far off endeavor.

The Flavorwire post includes the link to the interview in which Didion reveals her passion for oceanography. In case you don’t want to read the entire interview, I’ll paste below the relevant transcription:

BLVR: Do you think if you hadn’t written, hadn’t been a writer, could there have been some completely other—

JD: Oh, I wonder. I wanted to be an oceanographer, actually. And when I was out of school and living in New York and working for a magazine, I actually went out to the Scripps Institute, which is now UC San Diego, but then it was just the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, run by the University of California, and I asked them what I would have to do to become an oceanographer. And basically they said I would have to go back to high school, you know. I hadn’t taken any of the science courses that would enable me to take the science courses that I would need to take in order to go to… any place. So I abandoned the idea of being an oceanographer, but I can see myself still as an oceanographer, if I could get to that point.

BLVR: Does it seem like a happier life?

JD: A happier life? I don’t know. I’ve liked being a writer.

BLVR: It’s a different way of going underwater.

JD: It’s a way of going underwater, yes. Well, I’ve always been interested in how deep it was, you know.

In her writing, Didion does not merely glaze the surface of her subject. Rather, she goes underwater and portrays what lies beneath. She studies the topography of a cultural attitude or personal belief and analyzes the qualities and tendencies of its inhabitants. Didion, in a sense, is a social scientist with her writing, attempting to reveal truths about society as conducted through studies and observations.

Didion as an oceanographer is a fantastic metaphor and one that I find entirely plausible. She may not have been able to achieve this alternate career, but I think her passion for it has guided her writing in a way that has made it entirely distinct and perceptive.

Thomas Steinbeck Talking About Dad

I fear that, with my past post, I suggested that Charley wasn't real. As it turns out, Charley the Dog did exist, but that the roadtrip of Steinbeck and Charley might not have.

Below is a video of Thomas Steinbeck telling funny stories about his father and the title canine.



On a similar note, can you imagine growing up as the son of the guy who wrote Of Mice and Men? Think of all the crap you would get on the playground, with all the punks asking you, "Where are the rabbits, Tom? Where are the rabbits?"

The Following is a (Fictional) True Story

I was halfway through Steinbeck's "Travels with Charley" when I discovered that the entire story was, in fact, fabricated. To say that I felt betrayed would be slightly over-dramatic (but only slightly). I would venture to say that "disappointed" is a more accurate way of describing how I felt about the minor revelation. After all, "Charley" is supposed to be the story of an author meeting people in the heartland of America, people that the readers themselves will probably never get the chance to meet. He is invited us on a ride-along, for lack of a better phrase. But to find out that the ride-along never took place, that these various unique characters living alongside our country's backroads were fabricated by a man sitting at a desk ... for me, it was the equivalent of receiving an invitation to the hottest party of the year, only to discover that, not only have I been assigned to door-greeting duties for the duration of the night, but I've also showed up at the wrong venue.

It's while reading books like "Charley" that I wonder: why did the author make themselves the story's protagonist? Why did it have to be Steinbeck himself who traveled with Charley? Why couldn't it have been John from Connecticut? Or Mark from Arkansas? Or Gary from Indiana (actually, that's really corny)? By making a fictional man and his equally-fictional dog the protagonists of the story, Steinbeck would not have been doing a disservice to his story. In fact, it might have heightened the material. Consider this: Rather than hearing the story as told by the author and then discovering that the entire experience was imagined, wouldn't this have been a more enjoyable read had we entered the story knowing that the protagonist was fictional? In a sense, it would have invited us readers to put ourselves in the shoes of the main character, making him a stand-in for the American Everyman. I would love to read that story.

Honesty with Dishonesty

I felt that John Steinbeck did a great job of portraying the American ideals (or lack of) in Travels with Charley. However, I felt betrayed in that most of his story was fictionalized. In my opinion, there is a fine line between non-fiction, creative writing and fiction. What he did here was fiction. The book lost all its authenticity when I heard what actually happened. I guess it's ok to say, for example, that a man was driving a porsche instead of his beat up camry but to fictionalize the very basis of a story is just tasteless to me.

On a more positive note, I did feel that my knowledge of parts of America (its history and people) were enchanced. The world Steinbeck sees was beautifully crafted for us and that is something I will give to him regardless of where he spent most of his nights.

Phil

Charley and co.

I have a couple of thoughts on the topic of whether one should be upset upon learning that Steinbeck fabricated a good deal of "Travels with Charley". First, I think it's important to put the whole purpose of his trip into context. So he got a fancy custom made camper fabricated and then the idea was to drive to different towns, spend a couple hours there interacting with a person or two before shipping out and expect to derive some truth about America from these extremely brief encounters? There is something to be said about an outsider's view, unembedded, a survey of the country (hell, my films are all about being an outsider)... but from just HOW little time he spent in each place it seems a bit preposterous to think one could really get a sense of the town that was anything beyond superficial. This is all to say, I really don't think it makes much of a difference whether he was staying in hotels with his wife or not.... I don't think him in his camper really gets us closer to "AMERICA". Secondly, the book seemed to me to be less about truth with a lower case "t" and more about truth with a capital "T" as we discussed in class. Less about these individual places and characters than in Steinbeck's insights into life- which is something he gained from having a few years on him--- the trip (or trip as a narrative strategy) was really just a spring board for thought.... at times very reminiscent of Twain. Unromantic, grumpy-sure, darkly humorous... but True! We know these characters. Okay... so the whole lying to us I don't quite get- obviously it was a move to sell books. But, why couldn't it just have been a fictional travelogue based on "research"... his insights into America through these characters he created or adapted from real life. Though, I guess it's fun to imagine a grumpy old man riding around the country looking for the "Truth" and yet kind of lazy about it. Or maybe just tired. That's kind of a sad note to end on.

mm

Hello, I am MMM

Hello All,

I am a second year MFA student in the Moving Image department. This means: I am in the final and craziest semester of my educational career, so bouts of stressed-out muteness and streams of sleep deprived ?insight? are events that you are likely to witness over in my direction of the classroom. As for where I began... I grew up on a dead end road in Vermont surrounded by state land: my neighbors were beavers, bears, and the occasional moose who would mistake my father's makeshift ice skating rink as a drinking pool. (My father couldn't bare to break the rink down in the spring once he saw the frogs had already come and made it their home.) I moved out to Chicago from Montréal where I studied film as an undergraduate and spent a few years living on cheap rent and croissants. Luckily, I live next to a café run by French-trained bakers now, so a tasty pastry still occasions my life.

Right now, I am working to finish my thesis film which will be on exhibition in Gallery 400 during the first week of April (come!), as well as working on the written component which will be an artist's book of sorts- a collage of critical writings on my work, prose, storyboard sketches, photos, and meandering thoughts of which I have a great many. I make work that focuses around landscape as a site of loss and longing... yah know, like Spielberg and shit.

You can check out some excerpts of past work on my website: http://mariannamilhorat.com/ or vimeo account: http://vimeo.com/tenderbuttons.

I am excited about this class because, along with making films and videos, I have a great passion for the written word. Yep, a good sentence is a damn sexy thing.

Anywho,
That's all for now.

Yer fellow classmate,
mm

Travels with Charley... ??

I didn't feel as if I was being lied to, a lot of the details in the story seemed a bit off to me. I enjoyed the story, nonetheless. I think that in a way, writers wish they can manipulate their life to fit something like the details they can create within their stories, sometimes it is possible and sometimes it is not. Given the history of what Steinback was going through in his life at this time, why not create a story of things that have happened within his lifetime? Even though they didn't happen all together, the experience is still good enough to write about. I was researching and found this article in the Washington Post, the author said "The truth of the book was in those memories and conjectures." Which, I can agree with. Just because a few minor details were adjusted doesn't make it false and a lie. It is just a version of the truth.

Here is the link to the article in the Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/steinbecks-true-enough-travels-with-charley/2011/04/14/AFE0pQkD_story.html

He goes on to give another side to the story that he wanted Steinback to have traveled to all the places that he did, but I like the way he put it, in that sentence that I quoted.

Travels With Charley: Not a Total Liar

After I read about the expose of Steinbeck's book, I went to the source and read what the other writer uncovered about Steinbeck's journey, and compared it with what Steinbeck actually wrote. I found that he lied about some things but not about others. It was a good lesson to me to be careful about what I read, the conclusions I draw, and what I believe from others.

The writer who investigated this estimated that he spent about 1/3 of the journey alone with Charley, and believed that Steinbeck didn't camp often. I noticed in the book that after the initial set-up of the traveling/camping theme in Steinbeck's first chapter, he doesn't exactly say he's alone all the time, and he doesn't state where he's sleeping every single night. So this is an omission for the sake of the story not an outright lie.

Would it make a difference to me to know that his wife was likely sitting next to him on the journey and that he stayed in nice hotels? I think it would have changed the flavor of the book slightly but I don't think it is a big deal by itself.

More important to me is the idea that he might have made up whole scenes. The writer who re-created his journey says a few of the episodes did not happen when and where Steinbeck said they happened, but no one can say whether they happened or not. I don't think that makes the whole book a lie, but it casts doubt on the book. Perhaps he had these experiences in different times and places and brought them together in this book, or perhaps he just misremembered dates and places. Or maybe he made them up altogether. We are never going to know.

I think about this issue in conjunction with the next book we read, "In Cold Blood". The book says the killer Hickock had a great memory, and I'm certain the police took excellent notes. However, there is so much of the book that Capote must have made up. How could he, for example, know that Mr. Clutter ate milk and an apple the day he died, when the man was alone at breakfast?

These details made me wonder how much artistic license Capote took as well. And how much of it matters?

I see what you did there, Travels with Charley!!

I don't feel like I was being lied to or a need to go yell at Steinbeck like Oprah did to that author, which was funny by the way. After we all found out, I looked around the room and some of you had your mouths open, some of you looked mad, and some didn't react at all. I thought he was brilliant. It didn't seem like a trick or an "ah ha! gotcha!" move. It just was made for you to step back and really think about it. Who cares if he left stuff out or worked with what he had to create a good book? That's the important part. He might have met those people or experienced those things during his lifetime. Crafting all of them to fit into this scenario still takes some skill. And that's what we should celebrate. And honestly, whether we believe it or not, we do the exact same thing. When you tell stories, you can't tell me that you haven't crafted some part of it to make it a little better, no? Exactly. Let the one with no sin cast the first stone. Yes, I went there. But seriously, lets give Steinbeck a break and celebrate the fact that this still takes skill. He wasn't hurting anybody. He was just an aging dude who felt left out of the real and literary world. Ya can't blame him. He was good. He was good. Plus, Charley? Ah, amazing.

Liar!

Even though we know that Steinbeck lied about everything, I am going to chose to forget that small detail. I really want to believe that Steinbeck ran out in the middle of a hurricane to save his boat. I also want to believe that Charley was with Steinbeck for the whole trip. Charley was by far my favorite character in the book. The parts that I enjoyed the most were the ones when the man and the dog were having conversations. Maybe I was enthralled by how smart Charley is, as compared to my dog who is very dumb.
I mean, who cares if Steinbeck did not really take the trip. It is still a great book. And, if you think about it, it's not entirely made up. He did, after all, meet the people in the book once during his lifetime. Lets give the guy a break. He was falling behind, getting forgotten, and he just wanted one last hurrah. Just enjoy the book.

Hello!!!

Hi everyone,

My name is Rodrigo. I was born and raised in Mexico, but I have been living in the United States for the past 13 years. This puts me in no-man's land. I am a child of two countries, or neither. I am not considered Mexican because I have been living in the US for so long. But I am not American because I was born in Mexico. It sucks.

I started as a Biology major, but eventually ended with a double major in Spanish with a concentration in Hispanic Linguistics and English with a concentration in creative writing, and a Biology minor. But now I am going to graduate school for Hispanic Linguistics.

Since June of last year until the Sunday before school started, I was out of the country. I studied abroad in Costa Rica, Buenos Aires, Argentina and Granada, Spain. I also spent some time in Mexico with my dad. Needless to say, it sucked being back. I went from wearing shorts during December in Mexico, to wearing a sweater, a hat, a jacket, a scarf, and gloves. I hate the cold. It was hard coming back to the real world after a seven month vacation. I love travelling. Experiencing other cultures and their food (I love to eat!) was awesome.

One thing that might be surprising about me is that I play the violin and the guitar. I bought a very pretty, though expensive, guitar in Spain. Now, I say I play them, whether I do it well, well, that's another question.

I love reading. I do believe that Amazon has not gone bankrupt thanks to me and the massive amounts of money I have spent on books. I don't like to lend my books, because, as it always happens, I never get them back. I am not a big fan of e-readers. There is nothing more satisfying then flipping the pages of a book until you reach the very last one, and then looking back and saying "Holy crap, I read all this?"My favorite book, I would have to say, is "One Hundred Years of Solitude", if only because it opened up the floodgates, and started my obsession with Latin American writers.

Heyy!

Hey Class!

My name is Katie James and I am a first year MA student in the English Lit program. Last May I graduated from Saint Xavier University with a BA in English and was since inspired to continue on in my education and immerse myself in the entirely fulfilling yet seemingly out-of-touch-with-the-real-world realm of academia—I’m not sure of this latter point is something I completely embrace or if I am in search of more “practical” work. I think perhaps a year or two off from school to do a little soul searching after I finish my Master’s is definitely called for.

In terms of my literary pursuits, I am enthusiastically interested in twentieth century literature and have developed a fond affinity towards the works of Vladimir Nabokov, John Barth, Robert Coover, Julian Barnes, and Jeffrey Eugenides, among others. I am a self-declared bibliophile who looks forward to piecing together a library someday, but until then I find comfort in sleeping amidst piles and piles of books in my room. To make amends for my lack of space, I have been in the (slow) process of creating my virtual library on Shelfari—a website that I would definitely recommend to all you other bibliophiles who want to keep track of your books and see what other people own and are reading.

I’m really looking forward to this class and can’t wait to discuss the readings with you guys!

Greetings!

How it is going class!?

Hey,
My name is Emiliusz. I am a undergraduate student here at UIC majoring in English Brit Lit and if all goes well, I will graduate in December, 2012. I do not have a fruitful history to share with you guys, sorry! But, I will say this. I am here to learn and use the knowledge I learned to guide my life in one way or another. English has been my inspiration from the day one (about 3 years ago, when I stated College) when my first English professor showed me the "Golden Apple" of the English language which I happily took a bite from. Now, I am paying the price because I am not a lover of books, but strangely enough I love reading some of them and losing myself in them. I do not have a favorite non-fiction book as of yet, but I have one particular book-fiction-that I felt like I was completely immersed in, mind and body, and that book's name is Paradise Lost by Milton... then again, The Faerie Queene was there, some Shakespeare; let's say that I enjoy immersing my self in all these old crazy books. The crazier things get the better! I dislike boredom... especially when there is no imagination involved, therefore, imagination, some vulgarity/obscenity like in Beaumont and Fletcher's Maid's Tragedy, etc., humor, and most importantly a beautiful mythical world is gold to me, repeat, beautiful mythical world. Hence the name eMyTh I suppose, but there is a story behind that too. If you are really interested, ask me in person, bring beer too. :D Kidding! Seriously though, in short I chose this nick because it starts with "e" so it is personalized to my name and myth is just what I love, stories, and aren't books just a bunch of myths? Stories that taste just right with enough added ingredients (untruths) in them? Don't get me wrong, I like good tasting food. Anyway, my name is Emiliusz. I am here, I want to learn. I want to graduate. I want to teach. Those are my goals. Sounds dry... but you have not heard the myth of it.

See you in class! ;)

Hello...

Class,

So a little about me...

I have an open mind about things that I encounter in my life and I enjoy meeting people and getting to know their stories, people are really interesting sometimes. Majoring in English (I hope that gets me somewhere in life). I really want to travel, so I might teach English as a Second Language in another country, I know it'll all fall into place. I have been keeping journals since I was little and I have written almost everything that I have done since then. On my free time I enjoy running, I just ran my first race this past November, 9 miles. My favorite food dish to eat is Enchiladas, my mom always makes them for me on my birthday and I love her for this. I have an older sister and younger brother. Along with running as a hobby, I also like to bake and take long naps.

Something you wouldn't guess about me is I sing.

Looking forward to the conversations with all of you and anything I can help you with, just ask.

-Natalia

_Travels With Charley_: John Steinbeck is a Liar!

Hi, Class!

After hearing in class that Steinbeck didn't actually go on a grand tour across America with his dog Charley I didn't want to believe it. I thought that it just couldn't be true that he would write a nonfiction book about a journey that never actually happened. I think it was wrong to do this. I feel like Steinbeck deceived and lied to me. I realize that writers need to take a few creative liberties when they write nonfiction and that some facts and dates may not be completely correct due to human error, but Steinbeck flat out lied. I think the reason he felt out of touch with America is because he was out of touch, but he didn't make a legitimate effort to get back in touch with America and its people: he just wanted to write another best seller before he died. Consequently, I think Steinbeck's motivations to write Travels With Charley were pathetic and low, for he wanted to give America another reason to remember his name and to listen to his grumpy old man opinions, but he didn't really learn anything new about America. Does anyone else feel this way?

This issue with _Travels With Charley_ reminds me of a play called _Bee-Luther-Hatchee_ that I read when I was an undergraduate. Here is some information about it if you're interested:

http://www.english.upenn.edu/~cmazer/bee.html

Introduction

Hi everyone!

I'm Caitlin and I'm looking forward to learning more about nonfiction with all of you this semester.

For starters, I am a first year MA student in the English program. I graduated in May 2011 with a Bachelor's degree in English from Carroll University in Waukesha, Wisconsin. I am originally from Illinois, so it has been an interesting challenge getting used to going to school in my home state again. I decided to take this class because I never took a nonfiction class during my undergraduate career; the majority of my undergraduate course work focused on fiction, especially Victorian literature and Shakespearean drama. I am also not an avid reader of nonfiction because I usually associate nonfiction with newspapers and boring topics; fiction has always seemed to be more fun and entertaining to read. My favorite nonfiction writer is David Sedaris. I have read most of his books, but my favorite is Me Talk Pretty One Day, and this book made me reconsider my views on nonfiction.

Ok, now for my fun fact: Gone With The Wind is by far my favorite book and movie. I've read the book twice and seen the movie at least ten times!

Well...hello!!

Hi Class!

I'm Bryan, MA student in English Ed.  I grew up in Aurora, IL, about an hour due west of Chicago, and completed my undergraduate studies at NYU where I studied dramatic lit.  After graduating (oh so/not so many really...) years ago, I was restless and moved to Thailand to teach English as a foreign language.  I planned to stay for about a year but ended up getting a job as a drama & art teacher for over-privileged Thai kids, and four years later I moved back to the States.  After a few unglamorous years working in a dental office in lower Manhattan, I realized that I really missed teaching; hence the move back to Chicago and enrollment at UIC.  In addition to my English and ed classes, I'm also completing an ELL endorsement and will be student-teaching next spring.  Here's my favorite quotation:

"Pretty isn't beautiful, mother, pretty is what changes.  What the eye arranges is what is beautiful." --Stephen Sondheim