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.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Connections
I'm now on part three of Darkmans by Nicola Barker and I think it would be interesting to make some connections to the text.
For one thing, the fact that Kane is a prescription drug dealer connects to our society today, in the way that lots of people do prescription drugs instead of nonprescription drugs because they are more easily accessed and can give similar effects. I think it also says something about Kane, in the way that yes, he is a drug dealer, which would seem pretty hard core, except for that they're prescription drugs, which somehow makes him seem more pathetic. Either way it is a modern twist on your average drug dealer character, showing us how really anyone can be involved in the business.
A text to text or other media connection is Fleet. The troubled or special child seems to be a common theme in film and literature today. Many of the books I have read in the past year feature children similar to Fleet in this way, like Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by Jonathan Safran Foer, and The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime by Mark Haddon. In horror films it is used as a creepy factor, a child who is smarter than they should be, or knows things they shouldn't. It seems to be a combination of these two in Darkmans, because Fleet is both troubled and strangely knowledgeable.
For one thing, the fact that Kane is a prescription drug dealer connects to our society today, in the way that lots of people do prescription drugs instead of nonprescription drugs because they are more easily accessed and can give similar effects. I think it also says something about Kane, in the way that yes, he is a drug dealer, which would seem pretty hard core, except for that they're prescription drugs, which somehow makes him seem more pathetic. Either way it is a modern twist on your average drug dealer character, showing us how really anyone can be involved in the business.
A text to text or other media connection is Fleet. The troubled or special child seems to be a common theme in film and literature today. Many of the books I have read in the past year feature children similar to Fleet in this way, like Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by Jonathan Safran Foer, and The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime by Mark Haddon. In horror films it is used as a creepy factor, a child who is smarter than they should be, or knows things they shouldn't. It seems to be a combination of these two in Darkmans, because Fleet is both troubled and strangely knowledgeable.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Darkmans part two
I finished chapters one through eight, which was part one of Darkmans by Nicola Barker. I think it would be good to sum up the characters that were introduced in this first section so as not to get confused, now that more characters are being introduced in part two, even though the style of writing makes it easy to get to know the characters. Just for future reference:
Beede is a mature adult who has an obsession with history and order and pride. He likes to manipulate words and sometimes people, but is, at least in Kane's mind, simple and not worth investigating for the most part.
Kane is Beede's son, a prescription drug dealer, who is not into emotions, and who enjoys living life in the shallow waters. He smokes cigarettes and marijuana and lives in the same building as his father, who always keeps his door unlocked as a fatherly act, even though, until now, Kane has never taken advantage of that.
Kelly is Kane's ex girlfriend who seems to still be involved somehow with Beede. Kelly's family is very well known for various things, like being rich and mischievous. She breaks her leg and Beede visits her in the hospital. Their relationship is something to watch.
Gaffar is a Turkish man who helps Kelly when she breaks her leg and gets in a fight with Kane, who thought he was harassing Kelly. He understands english but doesn't speak it very well, so fills in everything else with Turkish, so no one but Beede understands him.
Elen and Fleet. Elen is Fleet's mother, and Beede's chiropodist, which is some sort of foot doctor. They have a way more intense relationship than the average doctor/patient sort, which seems to be the case with Beede and whoever he encounters.
Isidore is Elen's husband and Fleet's father, and has some mental issues with periods of time where he forgets many things, like who he is, and does things he normally wouldn't. Beede acts as his caretaker sometimes, and Fleet seems to have learned or inherited some of these eccentricities from him, much to his parents displeasure.
So those were the main characters from part one. I'm pretty sure all of them are still going to be in the rest of the book, I just want to remember their specifics so when new ones are added it doesn't get confusing.
Beede is a mature adult who has an obsession with history and order and pride. He likes to manipulate words and sometimes people, but is, at least in Kane's mind, simple and not worth investigating for the most part.
Kane is Beede's son, a prescription drug dealer, who is not into emotions, and who enjoys living life in the shallow waters. He smokes cigarettes and marijuana and lives in the same building as his father, who always keeps his door unlocked as a fatherly act, even though, until now, Kane has never taken advantage of that.
Kelly is Kane's ex girlfriend who seems to still be involved somehow with Beede. Kelly's family is very well known for various things, like being rich and mischievous. She breaks her leg and Beede visits her in the hospital. Their relationship is something to watch.
Gaffar is a Turkish man who helps Kelly when she breaks her leg and gets in a fight with Kane, who thought he was harassing Kelly. He understands english but doesn't speak it very well, so fills in everything else with Turkish, so no one but Beede understands him.
Elen and Fleet. Elen is Fleet's mother, and Beede's chiropodist, which is some sort of foot doctor. They have a way more intense relationship than the average doctor/patient sort, which seems to be the case with Beede and whoever he encounters.
Isidore is Elen's husband and Fleet's father, and has some mental issues with periods of time where he forgets many things, like who he is, and does things he normally wouldn't. Beede acts as his caretaker sometimes, and Fleet seems to have learned or inherited some of these eccentricities from him, much to his parents displeasure.
So those were the main characters from part one. I'm pretty sure all of them are still going to be in the rest of the book, I just want to remember their specifics so when new ones are added it doesn't get confusing.
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Chapter One
The book I am reading right now is Darkmans by Nicola Barker. I've just finished chapter one. I would like to examine a quote to learn more about Kane and a certain situation with a two men on one horse.
"Outside the horse was still vaguely audible as it moved around in the car park. While Beede continued to search through his bag, Kane strolled over to the window, pulled the curtain back and peered out. The horse was still visible, but way off to his left. It had come to a halt in the children's play area, where it stood, breathing heavily and defecating. The man was now struggling to climb off its back. But it was an entirely different man.
Kane blinked.
Entirely different. Tall. Nordic. Smartly dressed in some kind of uniform --
Imposter " (27).
It's strange enough that there was a random man bareback on a horse outside the restaurant window in the first place, but now the man has mysteriously disappeared and been replaced by a new, different, man. The first clue that the man was not the same was that he was struggling to get off the horse's back. The original had ridden the horse with grace and confidence, this one seems less comfortable on the creature's back. Next Kane realizes his obvious appearance is different as well and for some reason this greatly shocks and disturbs him. Why is he seeing this man on the horse in the first place, when no one else notices it and only the little boy seems to entertain the idea, or even listen to what he's saying about it? The little boy certainly does seem to know more than an average five year old would. Almost as if he is a part of this realm where the men on the horse are an every day sight, and Kane is just becoming able to experience it. Sort of like in Harry Potter when Harry can suddenly see the dragon horses that pull the chariots to Hogwarts, because he saw Cedric die. Which doesn't even make sense because he saw Sirius die, and if that doesn't count then Sirius isn't really dead. But the series is over. But this isn't the point. Back to Darkmans. I wonder if there is some mysterious aspects of life that Kane is suddenly becoming aware of. He says he feels differently, and he doesn't seem to be enjoying this change.
I think his comment of 'Imposter' is interesting. Imposter has connotative associations such as liar, fake, a bad thing, a cruel trick, being deceived, betrayed by something or someone you trusted. He feels so strongly about this horse and these men that this is the word that comes to mind when the second man is on the horse, the first absent. Would the second even be the imposter? Maybe the first was the imposter, and he doesn't realize it. Or maybe, like the boy suggests, there really were two horses, so neither is an imposter. Either way the whole scenario is rather curious and I hope more light is shed upon this, both for my sake, as well as Kane's.
"Outside the horse was still vaguely audible as it moved around in the car park. While Beede continued to search through his bag, Kane strolled over to the window, pulled the curtain back and peered out. The horse was still visible, but way off to his left. It had come to a halt in the children's play area, where it stood, breathing heavily and defecating. The man was now struggling to climb off its back. But it was an entirely different man.
Kane blinked.
Entirely different. Tall. Nordic. Smartly dressed in some kind of uniform --
Imposter " (27).
It's strange enough that there was a random man bareback on a horse outside the restaurant window in the first place, but now the man has mysteriously disappeared and been replaced by a new, different, man. The first clue that the man was not the same was that he was struggling to get off the horse's back. The original had ridden the horse with grace and confidence, this one seems less comfortable on the creature's back. Next Kane realizes his obvious appearance is different as well and for some reason this greatly shocks and disturbs him. Why is he seeing this man on the horse in the first place, when no one else notices it and only the little boy seems to entertain the idea, or even listen to what he's saying about it? The little boy certainly does seem to know more than an average five year old would. Almost as if he is a part of this realm where the men on the horse are an every day sight, and Kane is just becoming able to experience it. Sort of like in Harry Potter when Harry can suddenly see the dragon horses that pull the chariots to Hogwarts, because he saw Cedric die. Which doesn't even make sense because he saw Sirius die, and if that doesn't count then Sirius isn't really dead. But the series is over. But this isn't the point. Back to Darkmans. I wonder if there is some mysterious aspects of life that Kane is suddenly becoming aware of. He says he feels differently, and he doesn't seem to be enjoying this change.
I think his comment of 'Imposter' is interesting. Imposter has connotative associations such as liar, fake, a bad thing, a cruel trick, being deceived, betrayed by something or someone you trusted. He feels so strongly about this horse and these men that this is the word that comes to mind when the second man is on the horse, the first absent. Would the second even be the imposter? Maybe the first was the imposter, and he doesn't realize it. Or maybe, like the boy suggests, there really were two horses, so neither is an imposter. Either way the whole scenario is rather curious and I hope more light is shed upon this, both for my sake, as well as Kane's.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)