Reflective

The way we think...

            We all have memories and experiences that lead us to the way we think and interpret things in a unique way. I began to ponder why I interpreted Annie Dillard’s “Total Eclipse”, Lynda Barry's “Common Scents”, and Zadie Smith's “Speaking in Tongues” the way I did. Experiences have a major part of everyone's life and I will begin to demonstrate why I interpreted the essays I wrote of the aforementioned articles the way I did.

           

Being enrolled in English 101 during summer has had a great influence on me and I have been more productive than any other summer I can recall. I have never taken a summer class before and I have learned that it is great to focus on one class and take in all the class has to offer. On the other hand, I have struggled with all of the social influences that are simply a part of being summer.  It can sometimes be quite difficult to focus properly.  I have learned to overcome these difficulties by using my time wisely.

           

My interpretation of Annie Dillard's "Total Eclipse" was that I felt that the story relates to a nuclear tragedy because of a couple of different factors.  I have both personal experience with potential nuclear tragedy and also because of the timing the piece was written. The main question that needs to be addressed is how my life led me into thinking this particular way?  Well, I had a uncle that was part of the Islamic Revolution in Iran and he frequently told me horrific stories about it.  He would talk about the fear he felt that his country would be demolished by a bomb. He felt so much uncertainty because there were rumblings among the community that nuclear forces could be used at any time.  The Dillard text made me think of the stories that he had told me. The only date written in Dillard's piece was February 29th, 1979.  She writes of the 'eclipse', "From all the hills came screams. A piece of sky beside the crescent sun was detaching. It was a loosened circle of evening sky, suddenly lighted from the back. It was an abrupt black body out of nowhere...seeing this black body was like seeing a mushroom cloud."  Given the date reference that Dillard gave I felt it was compelling to compare this to the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

 

 

            During the late 1970's, a major political issue was occuring. The United States was involved with trying to dismantle the uprising of a fundamentalist regime in Iran.  There was no option off limits.  Dillard's piece can be interpreted in many different ways but I enjoyed reading this piece mainly because the readers have different perspectives. "The world which lay under darkness and stillness following the closing of the lid was not the world we know...the event was over.  Its devastation lay round about us.  The clamoring mind and heart stilled, almost indifferent, certainly disembodied, frail, and exhausted.  The hills were hushed, obliterated"(Dillard 167).  I feel Dillard makes it very clear in this statement that she is not simply talking about a simple eclipse.  She describes the devastating aftermath of a nuclear attack.  Every word chosen in this quote was carefully contemplated to best describe the horror left by the events of a tragic nuclear bombing.  "The hills were hushed, obliterated" (Dillard 176).  She described the hills earlier as "screaming".  Now they are hushed and obliterated.  This perfectly displays the tragedy of such an event.   

 

As I started to interpret Lynda Barry’s essay "Today's Demon: Common Scents", I found it more difficult to express my writings about this text.  The key terms and quotes helped me get through my interpretation of the piece.  My impression was that Barry was trying "to demonstrate the importance of accepting others for who they are and their background.  I believe that Barry is trying to make a statement by saying you should not look at people and judge them by the way they look or ‘smell’”  (Qureshi 1).  Similarly, in Zadie Smith’s "Speaking in Tongues", she writes about how society has to be more understanding or "flexible" of the differences that people have. 

The reason why I interpreted in these ways was mainly because of the quotes given in these essays and the importance of getting to know someone before making assumptions of who they are.  It is important to me as a person growing up in a society where we give everyone a equal chance.  "I have always noticed the smell of other peoples houses, but when I was a kid I was fascinated by it.  No two houses ever smelled alike, even if the people used the same air freshener" (Barry 52).   Barry wants to show us that we are all different, and no one is the same, so do not judge people by their "scents".   We are all human beings but we have unique differences that make us who we are. It shows that we have to be accepting of the way people are.

Both Barry and Smith attempt to demonstrate that it is OK to live in your own skin.  Smith takes a quote from President Obama, in which he is describing a ‘black’ girl who happened to have multiple ethnic backgrounds.  "I'm not black...I'm multiracial...Why should I have to choose between them?" (Smith 5).  The lady the president describes appears to have trouble living in her own skin.  She is looked at as simply a black girl, but she wanted to be seen for what she was really made of, which happened to be Italian, French and Native American.  President Obama "ridiculed" this girl because he felt she should simply be happy in her skin.  Obama, himself, has been extremely successful doing just that, taking pride in his origins and not hiding from any of it.  I think he President perfectly symbolizes how Smith and Barry feel we should live with the aforementioned example.

Lastly, I enjoyed reading all three of these texts but at times they were difficult to read.  I can say that I can relate to the Dillard text most because of my personal connection to my interpretation of the story through my uncle.  Throughout this summer English 101 class at University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, I have developed a greater appreciation of these texts and the way I can interpret ideas now.  In past English classes I had a difficult time expressing my thoughts and putting them onto paper.  I have now learned to "critically interpret a text by identifying key terms" and "provide context for readers, such as background information".  I hope I have demonstrated how my interpretation of the text was formulated from my personal experience and the timing it occurred and from also a critical evaluation of the papers. 

Works Cited

Barry, Lynda. “Today’s Demon: Common Scents.” In One Hundred Demons. Seattle: Sasquatch Books, 2002. Print.
Qureshi, Sophia. “Do you smell that?” University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee: English 101. Summer 2009. Print

Qureshi, Sophia. “Aftermath of problems conclude with a glimmer of hope.” University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee: English 101. Summer 2009. Print
Dillard, Annie, “Total Eclipse.” In Teaching a Stone to Talk: Expeditions and Encounters. New York. Harper and Row, 1982. Print.
Smith, Zadie. “Speaking in Tongues.” The New York Review of Books. Volume 56, Number 3. 26 Feb. 2009. Online

1.8

In her story Total Eclipse, Annie Dillard writes a cryptic tale about her title event, a total eclipse of the sun. During our class we have spent hours attempting to interpret this confusing story. I feel Dillard has written a story that can be interpreted in many different ways by a wide audience. She purposely writes in a metaphorical manner so that her audience can interpret the 'total eclipse' in their own way. The story outlines in four sections her experience of going to see an eclipse of the sun. It is clear to all who read this essay that the 'eclipse', itself, is some major life altering event. The purpose of her story is to attempt to demonstrate any major life changing event into a seemingly simple story of going to see an eclipse of the sun. In the context of this story she reaches out to the audience by discussing a relatively routine event as a metaphor to a life changing event that commonly occurs to an everyday audience. She writes about how things go on after the event and she shows a glimmer of optimism in her final section. An additional purpose of the story is give the audience hope after a major life changing event. She uses many strategies to convey her message of a tragic event. She writes in a very dramatic and dreary manner. The clearly distinct four sections of the story allow the reader to follow the event. The first two sections lead up to the event, the third section describes the event, and the final section discusses the happenings after the event. In this story, I feel she could be writing about a personal tragic event that may have occurred to her. However, I feel given the timing of this event, the late 1970's, and the uncertainty of the times with the Islamic Revolution in Iran, I believe she could be discussing the events of a potential nuclear tragedy. I will proceed to answer if Dillard could be discussing such events? 

Their was one whole date given this this text and it was Febuary 29th 1979. 

Dillard starts off her story with a dramatically dreary introductory quotation, "It had been like dying..." This introduction automatically sets the tone for the entire story as a serious, melancholy piece. Dillard is using this tone to begin to get the audience ready for the tragic event that lies ahead. In section two of her story Dillard speaks of the crowd gathering to see the eclipse as follows, "People were climbing the nearby hills and setting up shop in clumps among the dead grasses. It looked as though we had all gathered on hilltops to pray for the world on its last day." This quotation continues the tone as very dreary. The words she chose are, again, quite dramatic, "pray for the world on its last day." I feel that she is discussing the occurrences of a potential upcoming tragedy. She is describing the fears of people who were experiencing the conflicts of the U.S. and Iran of 1979 during a tremulous time with so much uncertainty.Prior to the 'eclipse' she describes how she once saw a partial eclipse and how different a partial eclipse is to a total eclipse. She writes, "I had seen a partial eclipse in 1970. A partial eclipse is very interesting. It bears almost no relation to a total eclipse. Seeing a partial eclipse bears the same relation to seeing a total eclipse as kissing a man does to marrying him..." She mentions the year 1970. Could she be referring to the Vietnam War which ended that year? She describes the stark contrast between a partial eclipse and a total one. She explains that she has witnesses first hand, the simplicity of a partial eclipse and goes on to describe the complicity of a total eclipse. While Vietnam was a long and tragic war there was hardly a discussion of nuclear weaponry. While Iran's hostage taking of US diplomats did, indeed, lead to the discussion of potential nuclear attacks. She is discussing how much more serious the upcoming potential war could be.

Dillard goes on to describe the events just prior to the 'eclipse'. Not surprisingly she keeps the tone grim. "From all the hills came screams. A piece of sky beside the crescent sun was detaching. It was a loosened circle of evening sky, suddenly lighted from the back. It was an abrupt black body out of nowhere;" I feel here she is describing what could be the witnessing of an actual nuclear attack. People actually experiencing the horror of seeing the potential mushroom cloud or "abrupt black body out of nowhere" and other consequences of an attack. She writes that the screams came from "all the hills". I think she uses the word "all" to discuss the wide consequences of such an event. People watching from all over the world, possible from their TV sets at home in dismay and terror. She goes on to write "seeing this black body was like seeing a mushroom cloud. The heart screeched. The meaning of the sight overwhelmed its fascination." This further reinforces the impact of such an occurrence. "The heart screeched", a simple sentence following the description of witnessing of the mushroom cloud. The devastation is clear in the way she writes. 

Dillard continues to write in section three, "The world which lay under darkness and stillness following the closing of the lid was not the world we know. the event was over. Its devastation lay round about us. The clamoring mind and heart stilled, almost indifferent, certainly disembodied, frail, and exhausted. The hills were hushed, obliterated." I feel Dillard makes it very clear in this statement that she is not simply talking about an eclipse. She describes the devastating aftermath of a nuclear attack. Every word chosen in this quote was carefully contemplated to best describe the horror left by the events of a tragic nuclear bombing. "The hills were hushed, obliterated" She described the hills earlier as "screaming". Now they are hushed and obliterated. This perfectly displays the tragedy of such an event. After such a disturbing description of the "eclipse", Dillard goes on to discuss the events that occur after. She writes of things return to normalcy. "At once the yellow light made the sky blue again; the black lid dissolved and vanished. The real world began there." I feel she is trying to convey a message of hope here. Despite the disasterous occurences of the "eclipse", there seems to be light at the end of the tunnel. She intends to send a message that life will go on no matter what hurdles will be faced.

In this story, I feel Dillard writes of the devestating events of nuclear attack. She talks of the events leading to the event and the "eclipse" itself, and a small glimmer of hope at the the end of her tale.  She uses a very common event and relates it to a very devestating event that we all dread.  She makes a point to discuss the gruesome details of a nuclear event by the quotes I have outlined in this paper.  At the same time she discusses that life will go on afterwards.  She uses a return to basic life at the end of her story to demonstrate a promise of normalcy after such an event is possible.