Sunday, May 10, 2009

The Crucible & The Book of Lost Things

Writers spend a significant portion of their time fleshing out characters for a novel, book or a stage play. Not only is this done for a sense of realism, but the characters are a powerful component of any piece of work. Some series of novels revolve around an iconic protagonist, while some movies gain massive profits through a fleeting yet charismatic character. Arthur Miller’s The Crucible and John Connolly’s The Book of Lost Things are composed of a similar cast of characters. Their purpose and intention distinctly label them as being good or evil. Notable comparisons include Abigail Williams from The Crucible and the Crooked Man from The Book of Lost Things; The Afflicted Girls in The Crucible, and the Loups in The Book of Lost Things; David from The Book of Lost Things and Reverend Hale from The Crucible.

A solid piece of work often requires an antagonist capable of getting under the reader’s skin with their malicious intentions. Such an antagonist is found in Abigail Williams, a young girl from The Crucible who goes on a rampage across the town of Salem. As an act of revenge towards the protagonist of The Crucible, John Proctor, Abigail is determined to make every opportunity count in labeling the townsfolk as witches. By pretending that she is able to see a person with the Devil, or by feeling the Devil’s cold presence near the person, Abigail is able to do as she likes, with no one to question her actions. A prime example of this is when Elizabeth Proctor, wife of John Proctor, is taken away as a result of being accused as a witch by Abigail Williams. A very similar situation exists in John Connolly’s The Book of Lost Things. Its main antagonist, the Crooked Man, also conducts every action for no one but himself. As he needs to eat a young, pure heart in order to stay alive, his actions are solely geared towards obtaining that young heart. Deceit, lies and trickery are just some of the methods employed by the Crooked Man in order to gain what he desires. An instance of such action is shown throughout the novel, as much of the story revolves around the Crooked Man’s quest to obtain the heart of David’s little brother. In either case, each antagonist is set out to gain everything for only themselves, regardless of the pain, damage and suffering inflicted on other beings.

There have been numerous cases whereby the antagonist of a literary work has been accompanied by a band of cohorts who believe in the same ideals as the antagonist. This is especially evident in The Crucible, whereby The Afflicted Girls, a group of young women thought to be able to see the Devil and those who have contracted with him, follow the actions of Abigail Williams in doing everything possible to instill mayhem in Salem. When Mary Warren attempts to expose Abigail Williams, and once Abigail starts behaving as if she senses the Devil, the Afflicted Girls act the same, going into a trance and fooling Judge Danforth into believing that Mary Warren is in league with the Devil. Although less of a band of ‘cohorts’ but nonetheless present, the Loups in The Book of Lost Things are another group of evil characters hell-bent on overthrowing the current ruler of the land, Jonathan Tulvey. They do not necessarily team up with the Crooked Man, but they are a continuous evil presence in the novel that forces David to move through the world and find the King. The Loups are also self-interested, and do not care if they have to slaughter towns and villages to get to the King. When the Loups and all their followers attack the Woodsman and take him down, it is clear that they will stop at nothing in order to seize the throne of the land. Once again, these characters’ intentions are clear, and their intentions set themselves apart from the good characters of both, The Crucible and The Book of Lost Things.

It is also not uncommon to see the protagonist or another main character go through a transition through the course of the literary work. It may be a transition from a child to an adult, or it may be one that changes the values and beliefs of a character, but by the end, it is clear that these characters have changed for the better. This development prevails in both, The Crucible and The Book of Lost Things, as David and Reverend Hale experience life-changing transformations through the course of the novel and play. Reverend Hale, upon his arrival to Salem, carries with him an air of importance and knowledge that he alone can solve the accusations of witchery. Initially, he questions and succeeds in obtaining confessions from girls who are thought to have been in contact with the Devil. However, as he interacts with John Proctor and his wife, he comes to realize that this is, in fact, nothing but a farce that has taken over the entire town of Salem. It was too late when he realizes this, of course, as his pleas fall on the deaf ears of those in charge of the trials. Hale also realizes that the state is inept in handling this farce. When Reverend Hale first came to Salem, he had thought that Reverend Parris and Judge Danforth were good people. However, by the time John chooses to be hanged, he realizes that John Proctor was the good person, and that Reverend Parris and the state/church were the ones that were truly evil. David, the young protagonist in The Book of Lost Things, also goes through a transition during the course of the novel. A young, lost child when he first enters the alternate world, David slowly matures and gains a set of values and ideals that help him overcome the temptations of the Crooked Man. He gains these values through nothing but experience, as he encounters and overcomes obstacles, riddles and monsters. The pinnacle of his maturity occurs when he is faced with the option of revealing his step-brother’s name to the Crooked Man. Should he choose to do so, the Crooked Man would devour Georgie’s heart, granting himself a new life. In return, David would be in charge of the land, replacing Jonathan Tulvey and becoming the new King. However, he realizes in time that he should be cherishing his step-brother and his step-mother. Subsequently, he does not reveal Georgie’s name to the Crooked Man, choosing his family over the temptations of ruling an alternate world. Upon entering this new world, David was filled with hatred and jealousy towards his newfound family. By the end, he is filled with love for his family, and is eager to see them again. In either case, both the individuals come to differentiate the truly good characters from the evil ones as the novel and play go on. It is through this transition of Reverend Hale that the audience of The Crucible is able to see that the state is committing wrong acts, and without David’s transition from a child to an adult, it is very likely that the Crooked Man may still be alive and thriving at the end of the novel.

Having the right cast of characters can add an extra dimension to a movie or novel. The audience can relate to the characters if they possess the right qualities and emotions. In both, The Crucible and The Book of Lost Things, the audience can relate to almost every character, regardless of whether they are good or not. Their actions, motives, intentions and vanity are all used to define the circle of good and evil. However, while many authors and writers have tried to distinguish the boundaries between good and evil, they cannot help but overlap the two, creating an inevitable patch of gray in the middle.

Saturday, March 7, 2009

Are there clearly defined roles? & Is it a matter of one versus the other; or is there more of a gray matter?

I think the answer to both of the questions can be combined into one post because if there ARE clearly defined roles, then there is a BLACK versus a WHITE. However, if there are NO clear roles, then it starts to become a GREY matter.

I believe that clear, defined roles do not exist for ideas such as 'good' and 'evil'. Many people have stepped into either world and then come back to their starting place. For example: Hitler had planned on seeing his country become the most powerful country in the world through 'evil' actions. However, for some time, he had stepped into the 'good' side in order to advance his ultimate goal. In the end, however, Hitler and his actions were seen to be 'evil' by the whole world.

Similarly, and this happens in movies very often, a character starts out as being 'good', steps over the line a few times just to strive towards the ultimate triumph over their adversaries. In either case, there was no law that restricted a person from going outside the circle of 'good' or 'evil.

It again falls back on the topic of whether or not 'good' and 'evil' are subjected or not. What one person views as being 'evil' can be viewed as being 'good' by the person beside them. When differences like those run through 6 billion people, there is a VERY low chance that 'good' and 'evil' would have clear defined roles. It just seems unrealistic.


Sahil

What is the nature of evil?

For lack of a simpler statement, I think 'evil' can be anything that the audience/public/society does not like. However, the idea of 'not liking something' is very broad, and encompasses several opinions of what 'evil' really is.

In everyday life, on the streets of Toronto, 'evil' is usually associated with a crime - something that can be punished by law (such as theft/assault/murder etc.) However, these are just physical actions that someone can identify as being 'evil'.

On the other side, people's values and ethics also come into the picture, and this leads to 'evil' through judgment rather than just an 'act'. The book I have chosen (The Book of Lost Things), has an 'evil' character - and he is known to be a trickster. If his actions had a physical outlook, he would be referred to as a thief or a robber, but he plays with the mind more than anything else, and as a result, he is known as a trickster. Such actions as well are considered to be 'evil'.

Some can be a mixture of both, it can have a lasting physical impact as well as a psychological impact. The events of September 11, 2001 are recognized to be 'evil', and can definitely be broken down into an event that had a physical and a psychological impact. The physical part was the crashing of the planes into the towers, and the subsequent collapse. The mind, however, was affected even more because of the countless conspiracy theories that surfaced as a result. Many blamed the faction of Al-Qaeda for the attacks; many blamed the American government; and many specifically blamed President Bush. People around the world are divided on the question "'who was behind it?".


Sahil

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

What is the nature of good?

I think the nature of something 'good' depends on the audience or society. Although there will be discussions and debates over such a topic, there are a few qualities that most societies would attach to the nature of being 'good'. A couple of examples include respect and friendliness while interacting with other people. The nature of 'good' can also include thumping the daylights out of the 'bad'. Many societies would agree that the police force of a city/region/country are 'good' because they work to prevent the 'bad' in the city/region/country.

Many people also think that something is 'good' if it does not harm them or concern them. This is found in groups of all ages and in both genders. A lot of people also depend on a "higher authority" to provide them with boundaries for 'good'. To them, something is 'good' if it accepted in the religion.


Sahil

Is it subjective or a universal truth about what constitutes “good” and “evil”?

I think it is decided individually regarding what constitutes "good" and "evil". The idea can be brought up as a country, as a country's financial / political stability can affect the country's opinion of good and evil. A national crisis such as a war can also alter the country's opinion on what is good and what is not.

The idea can also be brought up as a city, or region. The population of that particular region can decide on one thing being good, while another region decides that it is evil. It can become more specific, all the way down to an individual, and this is where the greatest differences occur. As a country, many people have the same opinion of what constitutes good and evil. However, as the number of people become less, and it becomes more specific, there are more disagreements on what constitutes good and evil. The neighbor can think of something being 'evil', while you think it is fairly 'good'. Your employee may have another opinion. Your best fried, for that matter, may have a different take on what is good and what is evil.

However, there do exist a few 'universal' truths about what is bad and what is not. Almost the whole world has experienced crime and/or war, and as a result, the world's society has deemed those actions as being evil. But, according to some, these atrocities are good, and they deliver justice. This is going back to the role religion plays on people's opinion on 'good' and 'evil'.


Sahil

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Adolescents and the Media - Informal Tone + Structure

I like this piece. It's nice to see a change from the mundane paragraph after paragraph approach. Sometimes, bullets can work just as well. Since the editorial was meant to be informal in its tone and structure, I find it safe to let the criticizing fly out the window and read the piece mainly for its content.

The writer covered many debatable topics that have found a home in the media. They are present day after day, delivered to the audience show after show - not to mention the intervening advertisements every ten minutes. The writer (Victor) also uses statistics to give his opinion some backbone. The writer categorized the content into what people know and do not know, breaking it down for people to have an easier time browsing through the information.

There is one thing I would like to comment on. Victor (the author) said:

"Parents may also buy into the Hollywood myth that television and movies are merely fantasy entertainment."

I feel that many groups of people, institutions and research centers in today's society are wasting their time pointing fingers at an acceptable scapegoat whenever possible. For example, many have accused Hollywood of polluting virgin minds at home. In turn, Hollywood may cast the blame towards parents for being unable to control what their children watch. The parents, then, may look towards the media (TV primarily), blaming them for running inappropriate content. And the cycle can go on and on .. and on. And on.

Of the four pieces examined, Henry Jenkins and his essay on Virginia Tech and media violence grabs first place, while second place goes to the "informal tone and structure editorial". Third place goes to the article about Tom and Jerry (I forget its author and name - sorry), and number four would go to the first piece examined. This is my preference, however. I'm sure there is someone who disagrees with my order.


Sahil

Debunking Media Violennce - Formal Tone

For one thing, this editorial did not sound formal from start to finish. There were numerous inclusions of the audience (by saying We, I, and our).

This editorial was completely different from the piece written by Jenkins (regarding Virginia Tech). I found a few errors about grammar and structure throughout the piece, and felt that this piece should not be used as an example of a good editorial. Jenkins's article would be a better choice.

I also found that the editorial was not organized as well as it could have been. The topics jumped back and forth, talking about Tom and Jerry -> Entertainment -> Video Games -> Cartoons -> V-Chip -> Entertainment again. I also found unnecessary repetition used by the author, mainly the word "So". One paragraph ended with "So our government and our society have been down this path before. " and the next one began with "So what should be done about violence in the media?" There were also a few lines that were not needed, and the editorial would have looked a lot more professional had those lines been cut off. An example of this would be "So our government and our society have been down this path before. " Lastly, I felt that the writer could have requested someone to edit their piece using a fine comb. There were many examples that suggested that this piece was, in fact, informal. An example would be "So another solution to solving the violence in the media problem is to use the V-chips. Sounds simple, and it could help stop a lot of the violence that children see on television." ... Sounds simple? ... Again with the use of "SO" ...

The only upside to this piece was the fact that this editorial did contain a good portion of facts and statistics. They enhanced the writer's opinion regarding media violence.


Sahil