I am reading a book titled The Other, written by David Guterson. The basic premise of the story is that two high school boys have formed an unusual friendship. The boys, John William Barry and Neil Countryman, are from very different backgrounds, and the first chapter of the book describes how these differences affect them and their friendship. Neil Countryman is from an average Seattle family. As the narrator of the book, he portrays himself as rather ordinary in the book’s first chapter. Neil describes his role on his high school’s track team by telling readers that he is “someone intimate with the middle of the pack,” and this description seems to fit other areas in his life, too (3). Neil doesn’t seem bitter or unhappy with his commonplace background and life. Instead, he focuses more his friend John William’s atypical life. John Williams is the opposite of Neil in high school: Neil goes to a public school, while John Williams attends an elite prep school in Seattle. Neil’s family is big and traditional, but not college-educated. John William, on the other hand, comes from a family of prosperous and famous Seattle businessmen. John William is the only child in a broken family: his mother has moved away after going insane, and his father is often away on business trips. Neil’s nuclear family, however, seems to be caring towards him and his younger sister.
One thing that these polar opposite boys have in common is a love of adventure. They meet during a track meet, when they race neck-and-neck during their 800 meter run. Although neither Neil and John William have any chance of winning the race, they share a drive to push themselves to their physical limits. Neil explains that half mile runners are “in search of deeper agony than they can find elsewhere (5).” This common search also leads John William and Neil to extended and rugged camping trips in the backcountry areas of the North Cascades. John William and Neil become reckless during this trip and get lost, spending a long time without food and with no knowledge of how to get out of the backcountry. This, combined with their experimental drug use, makes the pair seem like stereotypical rebellious teens. However, the author uses an interesting technique to keep readers from dismissing the book as boring because of this: he writes the story from Neil’s perspective as an adult. This doesn’t make much difference in a lot of the telling of the story, but Neil does add occasional observations from his point of view as an adult. For instance, Neil and John William decide to steal coins from a fountain in a park in Seattle one night while they are high. This scene isn’t very original, but Neil’s bewildered comments on it as an adult make it more unique. Neil says, “But I can’t explain why we were stealing coins at the SeattleCenter. It makes no sense to me now, though it must have made sense to me then. I just don’t recall what the logic was…” (12). These observations add depth and interest to the story, and give the reader clues about what kind of a person Neil is as an adult. I am excited to continue reading about the intriguing characters and their adventures in The Other.
Work Cited:
Guterson, David. The Other. New York: Random House, 2008.
In the last section of Angela’s Ashes, Frankie is now a teenager, and spends most of his time holding down jobs and saving for his fare to go to America. His extreme determination, discipline, and ethics became more apparent than they were when Frankie was younger.
Frankie’s family continues to be very poor, and Frankie is left to fend for himself as he has had to do his entire life. As he grows older, however, Frankie becomes more assertive in standing up for himself. He gets a job first at the post office delivering telegrams and then as a magazine delivery boy, and he saves up money from these jobs for his trip to America. He also has a job writing letters for an old lady named Mrs. Finucane, and takes the liberty of stealing some of her money for himself. He knows that Mrs. Finucane doesn’t need the money herself, and that she is only going to donate it to the church anyhow, so he justifies his actions to himself with these thoughts. Frankie also reminds himself of the ways that others have kept him from succeeding and getting ahead in life as he takes money from the Mrs. Finucane. He explains, “There will be less money for the priests and their Masses but how many Masses does a soul need and surely I’m entitled to a few pounds after the way the Church slammed doors in my face?” (332). Although by common standards, Frankie’s action would be classified as unethical stealing, I don’t think that it can be dismissed as this quite so easily. Frankie knows that what he is doing is wrong, and he regrets having to do it. However, he has also learned over the years that he will not be able to pay for food or save money for his future if he doesn’t steal. In a way, Frankie is forced to fight fire with fire.
Frankie’s ethics are also demonstrated when he works as a telegram delivery boy. He has been strictly instructed by his bosses not to stop delivering telegrams for any reason, and not to do favors for the people that he delivers telegrams to. However, his conscience forces him to help some of the people he encounters. Frankie tells of coming upon people who receive money orders, but are too sick to get out of bed and cash them, or buy themselves food. In these circumstances, Frankie breaks the rules of the post office and helps out the needy people. Frankie describes his situation by saying, “…and there’s a pile of rags on a bed in a corner the pile saying who is it and you say telegram and the pile of rags tells you would you ever go to the shop for me I’m starving with the hunger…”(316). I think that Frankie’s reaction to people in need demonstrates his strong ethics and his compassion for helping others.
By the end of the book, Frankie has accumulated enough money to take a ship to America. He chooses to do this because he believes that he will find a future in America and will be able to move beyond the way of life in Limerick, Ireland. However, he has mixed feelings about his decision. As much as he hated things about Limerick, he knows that he will miss it, simply for its familiarity. Additionally, he sometimes feels like he should have helped out his mother and brothers more, instead of saving his money only for his future. Frankie perseveres with his plan to go to America because he possesses a very determined will to succeed in his life. He has never let anyone, from the discouraging priests at church to his cruel bosses, convince him that he can’t achieve what he wants to in life. The book ends as his boat is arriving in America, and readers feel assured that he will not let any challenge in America get the better of him.
Works Cited:
McCourt, Frank. Angela’s Ashes. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996.
In the latest section of Angela’s Ashes, many important events happen in the lives of the McCourt family. Frank spends two extended stays at the hospital, first for typhoid fever and then for an infection in his eyes. Mr. McCourt makes a difficult decision to relocate to England, away from his family, and find work in a factory. The plan is that he will send money back to his wife and children in Ireland, but he brings his drinking habits to England with him, and doesn’t send any money to his family. Mrs. McCourt also spends some time in the hospital with pneumonia, and Frank and his three brothers are taken care of by their unpleasant Aunt Aggie. Finally, Frank gets a job helping his neighbor, Mr. Hannon, deliver coal.
Poverty continues to plague the McCourt family. When Mr. McCourt goes to work in England, though, it seems as though this problem might come to an end. The McCourts dare to believe that “surely our troubles will be over” (221). This is because the other poor families in the McCourts’ neighborhood equate a father working in England with boundless happiness. The reader can’t know whether Mrs. McCourt truly believes that Mr. McCourt will be able to hold a steady job in England and earn wages that keep the family satisfied, but perhaps it doesn’t matter if she believes this or not. The mere idea of having enough money raises the McCourts’ spirits and makes them happy for a few days. Mrs. McCourt talks about having “new boots and coats…” (221) and “eggs and rashers on Sunday for breakfast and ham and cabbage and potatoes for dinner” (221) and “electric light” (221). When no money arrives from England, though, the McCourts’ dreams are crushed. Mrs. McCourt is ashamed of her family’s poverty and often laments the fact that other families on their street have more than the McCourts.
However, Frank and his brothers learn that having enough money doesn’t always bring happiness when they stay with Aunt Aggie. Aunt Aggie isn’t rich, but she has a nice house and enough food. When the McCourt boys stay with her, though, she is stingy in sharing with them, and she bullies them constantly. Frank is puzzled over how someone so fortunate could be anything but happy. He says, “I don’t know why she’s always angry. Her flat is warm and dry. She has electric light in the house and her own lavatory in the backyard” (246). The McCourts take actions opposite from Aunt Aggie: though they have less than she, they are generous even to strangers. Mrs. McCourt feeds dinner to women and children who come off the street occasionally, and Frank’s brother Michael brings homeless men to their house to spend the night. On this topic, Frank says that “The bread she gives them always means less for us and if we complain she says there are always people worse off and we can surely spare a little from what we have” (273). The McCourts’ selfless attitude shows that they are compassionate and good-hearted people. They must make an ethical decision between saving their food for themselves and letting others go hungry, or feeding people with greater needs than their own by sacrificing some of their food. Their choice shows their generosity and desire to help others.
Mr. McCourt, however, doesn’t display this generosity with his own family. His failure to send wages to the rest of his family in Ireland causes him to be rejected by his family. Mrs. McCourt learns to cope financially by getting public aid and even by begging. Frankie finds a new father-figure in Mr. Hannon, the man he delivers coal with. In fact, Mr. Hannon is subject to much adoration by Frankie, who is “dying to go around with Mr. Hannon on the great float like a real workingman” (258). When a train conductor gives the McCourts a bit of food as they wait for Mr. McCourt at the train station, Frankie breaks even more ties to his father. He writes, “I wish I had a father like the man in the signal tower who gives you sandwiches and cocoa” (269). When Mr. McCourt visits his family in Ireland, his family is unforgiving about his failure to send them money. Mrs. McCourt and three of the McCourt boys accuse him, saying, “You drank the money, Dad” (270). The tension and anger in the McCourt family creates unhappiness and divides the family.
Frank continues to mature, and is now almost thirteen. He doesn’t have a very positive image of himself for a variety of reasons. First of all, he is made fun of at school by other boys. They tease him by calling at him, “Blinky McCourt beggar woman’s son scabby eyed blubber gob dancing Jap” (262). Frank doesn’t let it bother him too much, though. He does have friends, and he feels good about himself when he works for Mr. Hannon. He is more deeply humiliated when he sees his mother begging at a priest’s home for their dinner. Frankie says that seeing his mother beg is “the worst kind of shame” (250). Something positive in Frankie’s childhood is his love of reading. He enjoys Shakespeare and other books, and teachers at his school have previously noticed his good writing. It is fun to read about him discovering his passion when, in the back of your mind, you know that he grew up to write a book that won the Pulitzer Prize.
Work Cited:
McCourt, Frank. Angela’s Ashes. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996.
As I continue reading Angela’s Ashes, I enjoy watching Frank McCourt grow up. His life in Ireland is still rough and his family remains poor, so it’s comforting to remind myself that he survived his childhood and became a successful writer.
One important event in Frankie’s life that I read about was his First Communion. Frankie comes from an Irish Catholic family, and religion was highly valued in Ireland at the time of his childhood, so adults in his life are constantly reminding him how significant his First Communion is. However, I was struck by the lack of sincerity and genuineness in Frankie’s First Communion. The mechanical attitude toward religion was set by the teachers at Frankie’s Catholic school, who are in charge of teaching the boys how to receive their First Communion. The teachers force the boys to memorize the Ten Commandments and other facts about Catholicism, and threaten to beat them if they don’t remember these facts. The school acts as a factory of sorts for creating Catholics. Frankie describes this phenomenon by saying that the teacher “tells us we’re hopeless, the worst class he ever had for First Communion but as sure as God made little apples he’ll make Catholics of us, he’ll beat the idler out of us and the Sanctifying Grace into us” (118). Faith, God or what it means to be Catholic are never discussed in the preparation for Communion. Students at Frankie’s school respond by mirroring their teachers’ indifference to these aspects of religion. Frankie is mainly excited for First Communion because of a tradition in which kids walk through the streets of their town and collect money from other Catholics as a reward for taking their First Communion. Then, this money is spent on candy and films at the cinema, specifically those with James Cagney in them. Frankie is no exception to this custom. He has been told that First Communion is the “happiest day of his life” (127), and he echoes this sentiment by telling the reader, “First Communion is the happiest day of your life because of The Collection and James Cagney at the Lyric Cinema” (127). Of course, he gets the reason for his supposed happiness wrong, but no one really seems to care.
A recurring concept in this section of Angela’s Ashes is Frankie’s parents’ desire for Frankie to accomplish something. It seems that they want to make something out of him, perhaps to prove that their poverty will not get in the way of Frankie’s achievements in life. In order to do this, Frankie holds a few odd jobs, which include helping his uncle distribute newspapers, delivering a lunch to his grandmother’s tenant, and reading books to an old man. More significantly, Mr. and Mrs. McCourt first sign Frankie up for Irish dancing classes. Frankie, however, hates the dancing, and is afraid that others will think he is a sissy because of it. He describes himself leaving dance classes and “hoping my pals won’t see me with boys who wear kilts and girls with white teeth and fancy dresses from olden times” (142). Frankie is not outgoing by nature, and sometimes works a little harder than other boys to fit into the crowd at his school. Therefore, the embarrassment that dancing brings him, combined with his dislike of it, motivates him to spend the money intended for his dance lesson on candy and going to the cinema. Inevitably, he gets in trouble with his parents when they discover this, and then stops dancing for good.
Another attempt to make Frankie accomplish something comes when his father is determined that Frankie must become an altar boy at their church. Frankie memorizes the Latin that altar boys must repeat during church services, and is bathed and dressed in better-than-average clothes. There is an atmosphere of excitement as he and his father walk down to the church so Frankie can become an altar boy. However, the man at the church rejects Frankie and his father in one quick sentence, saying “We don’t have room for him” (149). This harsh refusal destroys the altar boy dream for the McCourts. Mr. and Mrs. McCourt also become convinced that Frankie couldn’t become an altar boy because of his family’s poverty. Mrs. McCourt spells out this idea quite plainly by saying, “’Tis class distinction. They don’t want boys from lanes on the altar. They don’t want the ones with scabby knees and hair sticking up. Oh, no, they want the nice boys, with hair oil and new shoes that have fathers with suits and ties and steady jobs” (149). This concept is terribly discouraging for Mr. and Mrs. McCourt, and it serves to further persuade them that Frank’s quest for success in his life will be significantly harder because of his social status.
Mr. and Mrs. McCourt themselves continue to struggle because of their poverty. Putting food on the table and buying coal to boil water are hard to do because they have so little money, and the McCourt parents seem to be losing their motivation to do these things. Mr. McCourt has made no progress on fixing his drinking problem. He can’t hold a job for long, because he drinks his way through his salary when he is paid, and misses work the next morning. Additionally, both parents have become somewhat addicted to cigarettes, and spend valuable money on them. However, Frankie discovers that there are people living in poverty that is even worse than his own when he spends a night with a friend from school named Paddy Clohessy.Paddy lives in a part of town called Arthur’s Quay, which is dangerous and has houses that “are old and might fall down at any minute” (163). Paddy’s house is in ruins, his father is very ill, and his siblings don’t get enough to eat for breakfast. In a previous chapter, Frankie had given Paddy a part of his lunch because Paddy looked hungrier than all the other schoolboys, and now Frankie says that he’s “very sorry for the Clohessys and all their troubles…” (169). These situations show that Frankie is a very compassionate person who can be friendly and helpful to those in need. Other boys from school would be more likely to make fun of Paddy, but Frankie makes friends with him instead.
Work Cited:
McCourt, Frank. Angela’s Ashes. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996.
Characters in the film On The Waterfront have a wide range of definitions for traitors and whistle blowers, and their differing opinions on this topic lead to the main conflict of the film. By the end of the film, Terry Molloy believes that a traitor is someone who acts in their own selfish interests. He thinks that a whistleblower, on the other hand, is someone who wants to benefit a majority of the people involved. Therefore, he believes that a whistleblower would be willing to risk their own lives for the sake of this majority. A traitor would never make such a sacrifice and would rather see others hurt for his sake. Based on this definition, Terry would classify himself as a whistle blower and a crusader for justice on the waterfront. It’s obvious that Terry is not standing up for the workers of the waterfront for selfish reasons, because Terry had opportunities to benefit from not testifying against Johnny Friendly. For example, he could have easily taken the job Charlie offered him in the taxi and chose to stay loyal to the mob—a choice that would undoubtedly have led to an easy life for Terry. However, Terry selflessly placed the futures of the dockworkers above his own future. Additionally, Terry proves himself to be a crusader because he is willing to risk his life for the dockworkers’ sakes. He knows that the mob will want to kill him if he testifies in court, and he does it anyhow. Johnny Friendly and the members of the mob have very different ideas about what a whistle blower is and what a traitor is. In fact, Johnny Friendly doesn’t even see a distinction between the two, because he believes that his mob’s rule should always be followed. Friendly doesn’t believe in justice or truth—if he did he wouldn’t have killed people like Joey and Doogan in the first place. Therefore, according to Friendly, anyone who is disloyal to his mob for any reason—even to restore justice or truth—is a traitor. In Friendly’s eyes, Terry is obviously a traitor, because he wants to turn the mob in to the police. However, Friendly also sees Terry’s brother Charlie as a traitor, not because he was going to testify, but because he disobeyed Friendly’s orders by not killing Terry. This opinion of Friendly’s shows us that Friendly truly felt that everyone must obey his commands or be considered disloyal.
I agree with Terry’s ideas, and I think that a whistle blower is someone who tells the truth when doing so will be good for the largest group of people. On the other hand, a traitor is someone who tells the truth (or a lie) for his own benefit or to deliberately hurt someone else. Therefore, I believe that the difference between the two really lies in the person’s motivation. For example, if a person caught someone stealing and wanted to turn him or her in to help the store and to try to make society more honest, then I think this person would be a whistle blower. However, if a person turned someone in because they would be given a reward from the police or because they wanted to see the criminal get in trouble, then I think this person would be a traitor.
Young Frank McCourt’s life has taken more turns for the worse in the most recent section of Angela’s Ashes. His younger twin brothers, Eugene and Oliver, die one after the other, which causes his parents a lot of grief. Frankie and his younger brother Malachy begin to attend Leamy’s National School, and his family moves twice to try to escape the memories of Eugene and Oliver that plague them. Also, Frankie’s mother gives birth to a new brother for Frankie, named Michael.
The McCourts continue to face prejudice in Ireland. Frankie is made fun of at school for being from the United States. Upon discovering that Frankie and his brother Malachy are from America, one boy asks them whether they are cowboys or gangsters. When Frankie gets in a fight with the boy, the headmaster of the school says, “You little hooligan…Is that the kind of behavior you brought from America?” (79). Then he punishes him by forcing him to say, “I’m a bad Yank” (79). Frankie is already a quiet and reserved boy who is often overshadowed by his brother, so this makes him feel even worse and decreases his confidence in school. Mr. McCourt also continues to face prejudice for being from the North of Ireland, and is turned down from job opportunities when employers hear his Northern accent. Mr. McCourt copes with this discrimination much differently from Frankie, though: instead of submitting to others’ opinions and letting others get the better of him, Mr. McCourt maintains his pride in his Northern roots. Mrs. McCourt even suggests that he disguise his accent to get a job, but Mr. McCourt refuses and “says he’ll never sink that low” (94).
Although some degree of pride can help people in the McCourts’ situation maintain their dignity, it seems that Mr. McCourt is taking his pride too far. He is so intent on not disgracing himself that he becomes unreasonable and stubborn. For example, Frankie tells the reader, “Even if Dad came he wouldn’t be much use because he never carries anything, parcels, bags, packages. If you carry such things you lose your dignity. That’s what he says” (98). His pride also hurts his family and their efforts to escape from their poverty, because he believes that the family disgraces themselves when they ask for help from charity or pick coal up from the streets. If Mr. McCourt wasn’t as opposed to getting help, their family might have a better chance of improving their very poor living situation.
Because Frankie is still a young boy, he doesn’t have that many major ethical choices to make in his life. However, one decision that Frankie had to make recently in the book came when his father was out drinking in pubs again. Mrs. McCourt had sent Frankie along with his father in an effort to prevent Mr. McCourt from spending all night drinking at the pub. Once at the pub, Mr. McCourt tells Frankie to go home, but Frankie knows that if he does as his father says, it is very likely that his father will be drinking all night long—just the situation Mrs. McCourt wanted to prevent. Frankie says that his father said, “Don’t be disobedient. Go home to your poor mother. I said, No, and he said I was a bad boy and God would be displeased” (83). Despite opposition from his father, Frankie quietly insists on doing the right thing, and finally succeeds in getting his father home early in the evening. This example shows that Frankie had a very clear sense of right and wrong and wasn’t easily influenced by others’ opinions. Even his father, who he admired a lot, couldn’t get Frankie to do what Frankie believed was the wrong thing. Also, Frankie risks making his father mad by staying in the pub, but he stays anyhow, because he knows that motivating his father to come home early from the pub will benefit the entire family. Letting Mr. McCourt stay in the pub would only benefit Mr. McCourt. Clearly, Frankie is concerned with what he can do to help his entire family, rather than just one person. This idea is also supported with countless examples of Frankie making sacrifices to help his family—he frequently runs errands for his mother, collects coal on the street so they can cook dinner, and takes care of his brothers.
Work Cited: McCourt, Frank. Angela’s Ashes. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996.
*I wanted to underline all the "Angela's Ashes" titles in this post, but blogspot wouldn't let me.
Characters in Arthur Miller’s play All My Sons are divided into two sides: those who believe actions should benefit family, and those who believe actions should benefit society. Joe and Kate Keller belong to the former group, and base their decisions off what will help their family most. Joe in particular has a strong belief that being able to pass something on to his family justifies hurting society. He acts on this belief when he ships the cracked cylinder heads to the army: he knows that this action will hurt others in society, but he does it anyhow, because it will help his family. When he escapes punishment for this crime by blaming it on his partner, he again sacrifices society for family, because he harms someone else while upholding his own family and business. Joe sum up his belief that his family’s needs trump his society’s needs when he is desperately trying to explain to a furious Chris why he chose to ship the bad parts. Joe says, “Chris, I did it for you, it was a chance and I took it for you. I’m sixty-one years old, when would I have another chance to make something for you?” (70). Kate agrees with Joe on this issue. Additionally, she strongly believes that actions of a family affect only that family and do not matter to the rest of society, and she thus justifies valuing family over society. For example, Kate believes that Larry is still alive, and that because Larry is alive, Joe’s crime is erased and does not matter to anyone else. This is part of the reason that Kate clings so adamantly to her denial of her son’s death—Larry alive means Joe innocent to her. On the other side of the argument are Chris and Annie. Chris’s views are opposite from his father’s, because Chris is deeply ashamed that his father would ship out broken parts for his family’s sake, without regard to his impact on society. This difference between Joe and Chris causes a lot of conflict in the play, because Chris is furious with his father when he discovers Joe’s guilt, feels ashamed to benefit from the business that killed pilots, and wants Joe pay for his crime. Chris summarizes his point of view at the end of the play by telling Kate “You can be better! Once and for all there’s a universe of people outside and you’re responsible to it…” (84). This proclamation clearly shows that Chris feels that society’s needs should be prioritized above those of his family’s. Annie’s opinions are similar to Chris’s on this issue, and she was very ashamed of her father when she still thought that he was guilty. Her shame and anger at her father are so extreme that she doesn’t even write him, and this action shows her placing more importance on society’s needs than on her family bonds. When Ann says about her father, “It’s wrong to pity a man like that. Father or no father, there’s only one way to look at him. He knowingly shipped out parts that would crash an airplane” (31), her severed ties with her father are very apparent.
In my opinion, society should be prioritized over one’s family, because everybody is a member of society. Therefore, if an action benefits the entire society, it benefits the family in that society a bit, too. Society depends on people to give up personal wants or needs so that we can all live together: this is the concept of a social contract. If this idea was not obeyed, everyone would do only what benefited them and those very close to them. Though it seems that this could make people happy, in reality it would destroy everyone, because everyone’s wants would clash and harm each other. For example, if everyone obeyed like Joe Keller does in All My Sons and killed others’ sons for their own sons’ sake, nobody’s sons would survive. For this reason, I agree with Ann and Chris that society is more important than individual families, and I disagree with Joe and Kate.
Work Cited:
Miller, Arthur. All My Sons. New York, New York: Penguin Books, 1947.
*I wanted to underline all the "All My Sons" in the post but couldn't.
