I am currently on part five of Darkmans by Nicola Barker, and the plot just keeps thickening, and keeps adding more twists and turns. I would like to make some predictions as to what will happen in the latter half of the book.
For one thing, I think that the John character is the man Dory becomes when he is not himself, which is why he does not recognize anything, even his wife, and why he is crazy. Fleet is aware of this, and Elen is at least aware that he is not himself at these times, because she gets very upset when Fleet calls Dory John. Peta and Ann are somehow in cohorts with John, perhaps having something to do with the mysterious painting. And perhaps the main character being the past is actually refering to John, who is from the past. John is also abusive to Elen. We learn this when Fleet tells Charles, "No. He's not my friend because he hurt my mama." And then, the assurance of the fact, when "Fleet pushed up the sleeve of his mother's jacket, revealing the fading ring of bruises around her wrist." The only thing that confuses me on this topic, is if Elen got those bruises from Dory while he was John, what was she doing hurting herself with the lighter in an earlier scene? And why was she hiding the trian schedule from Dory in the first place?
Since I'm pretty sure that the special thing about Gerry was that she had some STD, that leaves Kane, Gerry, Gaffar, and Kane all as insignificant characters in regards to the past. However, I don't think that they will end up as such, or maybe they will represent the future overcoming the past in a necessary advancement. If so, why is Fleet, certainly, as the more youthful, the more future representative, more involved and aware of the presence of John and the past than any of them? Kane is catching on when he witnesses the dark bird, but he could have been halucinating, or thought he was. We will just have to wait and see what roles these less informed characters have to play as the book comes to its close.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Monday, December 8, 2008
http://sks.sirs.com/cgi-bin/hst-article-display?id=SMN0307H-0-2383&artno=0000014119&type=ART&shfilter=U&key=&title=Rage%20in%20the%20Cage&res=Y&ren=Y&gov=Y&lnk=N&ic=Y
http://sks.sirs.com/cgi-bin/hst-article-display?id=SMN0307H-0-2383&artno=0000282746&type=ART&shfilter=U&key=&title=Solitary%20Confinement%3A%20An%20American%20Invention&res=Y&ren=Y&gov=Y&lnk=N&ic=Y
http://solitaryconfinement.org/resources
http://sks.sirs.com/cgi-bin/hst-article-display?id=SMN0307H-0-2383&artno=0000282746&type=ART&shfilter=U&key=&title=Solitary%20Confinement%3A%20An%20American%20Invention&res=Y&ren=Y&gov=Y&lnk=N&ic=Y
http://solitaryconfinement.org/resources
Sunday, December 7, 2008
ethics sites/cites
DeMartini, Alayna. "Long Terms in Solitary Can Warp Minds, Critics Say." Columbus Dispatch Sept 2007. SIRS Researcher. SIRS Knowledge Source. Edina High School. 7 Dec 2008 http://www.sirs.com.
Alayna DeMartini is a reporter for The Dispatch which is a respected newspaper. In the article, she quotes a director of Human Rights Watch: "For the mentally ill, it can be torture," Fellner said. "You cannot just be locked up with your own mind because it can be very scary and damaging." This suggests the idea that solitary confinement, at least at great length, is neither healthy, nor productive, as, she argues, it can make violent teens even more so. The other end of the arguement is brought up as well, quoting Brian Lane from the Marion County prison, "the confinement teaches youths to change their behavior. They seldom return to the unit." The general ideas the article leaves you with about solitary confinement are that it can be good to calm a person down for a few hours, but at great lengths, it is not good for the prisoner, or society when the person is returned to it, because of the estrangement and isolation and what it does to the human mind, especially when said mind already has emotional issues.
Laughlin, Meg. "Does Seperation Equal Suffereing?" St. Petersburg Times Dec 2006. SIRS Researcher. SIRS Knowledge Source. Edina High School. 7 Dec 2008 http://www.sirs.com.
Meg Laughlin is a reporter for the St. Petersburg Times. She brings up many good arguements towards solitary confinement being cruel, focusing on one prisoner, Ian Manuel, who was 14 when first imprisoned, and even after appologizing to the victim, and her forgiving him and wanting to help him get educated, was not allowed any rehabilitation, because of his solitary confinement. She brings up the fact that "cutting and watching the blood flow is how hundreds of inmates 'relieve the boredom and stress of isolation.' " This quote was from Don Gibs, a psychiatrist for the Department of Corrections, who also states that "It takes from two to six months for inmates in solitary to start exhibiting signs of mental illness, if they are not already mentally ill." So not only is it a cruel experience for the prisoners, the fact that they receive no rehabilitation and have a good chance of becoming mentally ill bodes poorly for society as a whole when they have served their time.
Alayna DeMartini is a reporter for The Dispatch which is a respected newspaper. In the article, she quotes a director of Human Rights Watch: "For the mentally ill, it can be torture," Fellner said. "You cannot just be locked up with your own mind because it can be very scary and damaging." This suggests the idea that solitary confinement, at least at great length, is neither healthy, nor productive, as, she argues, it can make violent teens even more so. The other end of the arguement is brought up as well, quoting Brian Lane from the Marion County prison, "the confinement teaches youths to change their behavior. They seldom return to the unit." The general ideas the article leaves you with about solitary confinement are that it can be good to calm a person down for a few hours, but at great lengths, it is not good for the prisoner, or society when the person is returned to it, because of the estrangement and isolation and what it does to the human mind, especially when said mind already has emotional issues.
Laughlin, Meg. "Does Seperation Equal Suffereing?" St. Petersburg Times Dec 2006. SIRS Researcher. SIRS Knowledge Source. Edina High School. 7 Dec 2008 http://www.sirs.com.
Meg Laughlin is a reporter for the St. Petersburg Times. She brings up many good arguements towards solitary confinement being cruel, focusing on one prisoner, Ian Manuel, who was 14 when first imprisoned, and even after appologizing to the victim, and her forgiving him and wanting to help him get educated, was not allowed any rehabilitation, because of his solitary confinement. She brings up the fact that "cutting and watching the blood flow is how hundreds of inmates 'relieve the boredom and stress of isolation.' " This quote was from Don Gibs, a psychiatrist for the Department of Corrections, who also states that "It takes from two to six months for inmates in solitary to start exhibiting signs of mental illness, if they are not already mentally ill." So not only is it a cruel experience for the prisoners, the fact that they receive no rehabilitation and have a good chance of becoming mentally ill bodes poorly for society as a whole when they have served their time.
Wednesday, December 3, 2008
more on same book
I'm about halfway through Darkmans by Nicola Barker now. At this point I think it would be interesting to talk about the stylistic factors like methods of foreshadowing. A lot of plot twists are revealed either just to one character, or between a few but kept from the reader, which keeps you curious about how it will turn out in the end, and what the characters know that you don't. There isn't really anything the reader knows that the characters don't, except for the fact that the reader knows things about characters that the others might not.
One of the characters who seems most mysterious is Fleet. He behaves so strangely it makes you wonder if its just how he is, or if he is going to end up playing a bigger role in the overall story.
The summary on the back of the book says the main character is the past itself, and I'm wondering if this is supposed to be true, whether or not it is successfully portrayed. It is certainly alluded to on many occasions, but the present seems just as relevant. I love the comparison of medieval times to the current times, how everything then was symbolistic, just like many things in the consumerism realm of modern day society. While certain objects in paintings represented different religious things back then, now wearing certain clothes makes specific statements. Also, colors then stood for specific things, and they still do for us, even if they are less specific. Red means passion, which could be anger or love, and green jealousy, etc. Reading insightful things like this remind me what clever people authors really are. Everything that the characters in a book know, the author had to know as well. Its interesting to think about, and how the characters intelligence reflects that of the author. Using that theory, I would say Nicola Barker is rather intelligent.
One of the characters who seems most mysterious is Fleet. He behaves so strangely it makes you wonder if its just how he is, or if he is going to end up playing a bigger role in the overall story.
The summary on the back of the book says the main character is the past itself, and I'm wondering if this is supposed to be true, whether or not it is successfully portrayed. It is certainly alluded to on many occasions, but the present seems just as relevant. I love the comparison of medieval times to the current times, how everything then was symbolistic, just like many things in the consumerism realm of modern day society. While certain objects in paintings represented different religious things back then, now wearing certain clothes makes specific statements. Also, colors then stood for specific things, and they still do for us, even if they are less specific. Red means passion, which could be anger or love, and green jealousy, etc. Reading insightful things like this remind me what clever people authors really are. Everything that the characters in a book know, the author had to know as well. Its interesting to think about, and how the characters intelligence reflects that of the author. Using that theory, I would say Nicola Barker is rather intelligent.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)