Journal 10/20

On a few occasions in the book, Spiegelman writes about his concern about representing his father as a Jewish stereotype. What characteristics does his father have that seem to match up with these stereotypes, and what events in his life might have caused him to behave in this way?

Art's concern about his father Vladek's representation in the book is completely validated. Vladek perpetrates a number of commonly known Jewish stereotypes, and some of them aren't really his fault . He is very stingy with his money and food, which are respectively shown on two separate occasions. He only gives Mala, his wife, $50 a month to spend how she wants (pg. 133), even though he has more than a hundred thousand dollars in savings. He doesn't even use this money on himself, and lives life much like a pauper would. When it comes to food, at one point he argues with Art about going to get compensation from the grocery store for a half- finished box of cereal. Frugality is acceptable when someone isn't well-off, because they need money and simply can't pay for some items because of that. Vladek, on the other hand, has plenty of money to live well off of, and could easily buy the things he needs. But why is he so stingy? I think it might have something to do with the way he lived during the holocaust. I'm not simply talking about the awful conditions and lack of nutrition, but also about what Vladek himself did to survive. He bartered with guards, traded with others to get the things he needed, and generally found ways to bypass things that would otherwise bring about hardship- but he never steals from other Jews or does bad things to make it by. I think these things have parallels to the way he lives now, in that he finds the easiest ways to make it by without sacrificing too much. He also sees the potential value in things, such as with the cereal box. He tries to consider everything as a means by which to live, even though he doesn't need to do that anymore. He probably just hasn't gotten out of the habit.  

Journal 10/13

What do you think some of the challenges might be in drawing another person's story? What might be some of the advantages? Why?

For Ms. Harrison: You told me to remind you that this post isn't late, so here is the reminder. 

Well, the first thing about drawing someone's story is that the artist must make sure that what he is drawing retains resemblance to what he is told. One can't ask a soldier to recount his experience in Iraq and draw war movie scenarios instead of real combat scenarios, because they wouldn't be capturing the essence of his story. I mean, they can dramatize/ make things up, but I feel that staying faithful to the true story is important for that kind of work to be valuable. Anyways, moving on. Since everything is being drawn, the reader forms his idea about the story through the pictures being shown, making the need for them to be accurate very important. When writing a novel, the author has an ideal way that he wants his readers to picture the book in their heads, but it can (obviously) only be done through words. Maybe there's a picture here or there, but my point stays. Much of the book, including simple things like the characters' exact looks, are left to the reader's imagination. This all changes when it comes to graphic novels. If it is done correctly, that extra level of description- heavy use of visual imagery- can lend a hand to telling a story. The artist could capture, with more accuracy in the reader's eyes, the story being told to him. 

Journal 10/6

We have finished reading The Alchemist. For your blog post, you may write about anything that interests you. Though this is a free post, make sure that what you write is appropriate for a school audience.

I decided to discuss Bullritos in my free blog post- I was inspired to write about it after what has occurred over the four days we've had off. This weekend, we (John, Rains, Alex and I) ate there twice. Once after the football game, then again in the afternoon the next day. After scarfing down my burrito on the second trip there, I started to wonder: why do we like this place so much? What makes it different and so much more appealing to us than, say, Freebirds or Chipotle? Well, I broke it down into two categories:

1- Convenience

Not based only on its location, but on how quick and easy it is to get a burrito there. McDonalds is slower than the burrito masters behind those counters. I honestly think that there is some magic involved. Not only that, but they've got this genius food selection idea: you put your food specifications on a bag with all of the options next to oval spaces and check off the ones that you want. They then use this bag, which is folded flat when you pick it up, to hold your burrito (which is, of course, held in insulated paper). These bags, along with markers used to check off what you want, are on a shelf in the waiting line area of the restaurant. This really streamlines things and avoids long lines created by indecisive people who can't choose what they want when it's their turn to place an order.

2- Quality

Going back to the McDonalds reference point, you know how you can taste "fakeness"? How you can tell whether or not there is something wrong with the food you're eating? Well, that stops at Bullritos' front door. Everything in those burritos is so fresh- when you get them, you can tell that the main ingredients weren't prepared hours earlier. I've also never found any large pieces of fat, bone or other unwanted items in my grilled chicken burritos. I don't know how they do it.  The one exception to these claims is that I can't vouch entirely for the quality of their food, as I am only judging it through taste.

Anyways, I've spent way too much time writing about food. Go eat Bullritos.

Journal 9/29

For your final blog post for The Alchemist, you may write about anything that you want regarding the book. You should write at least one well-developed paragraph and use textual references to support your point(s). You should choose any element of the book that was interesting to you and that you have not yet had a chance to write about. 

Since I've already done enough complaining and nitpicking about Santiago's choices and the various story-driving elements of The Alchemist, I had to search the book to find a good question prompt to write about. The question I decided to go with is one that hasn't really been brought to any seminars (at least to my knowledge) and that I haven't really heard from anyone at all- why do Santiago's relationships oppose his goals? We've seen that this book somewhat adheres to the Hero's Journey monomyth, and in that respect some of the book's romantic elements are still applicable. He meets Fatima, quickly professes his love to her (pg. 98), and then leaves to go to the pyramids/ finish his quest. Once he had completed his quest, the book ends with her kiss- thus completing a very basic relationship structure. Nothing's wrong with that, but there was one thing that stuck out as being different from the Hero's Journey format: that the ladies Santiago wants to get with actually prevent him from completing his goal instead of being part his agenda themselves. First it was with the merchant's daughter, then with Fatima. In both situations, he is told by his mentor that pursuing them would be a distraction from his Personal Legend. In most works similar in structure to the Hero's Journey, love is presented as an additional goal to the main quest rather than as an obstacle. I found this small change to be very odd. There is also very limited dialogue and general relationship development between Santiago and his romantic interests, making the ending (and to be honest, he and Fatima's relationship as a whole) seem very phoned-in and contrived. But hey, maybe Mr. Coelho did all of this on purpose. Maybe he wanted to focus on other aspects of the story, or just didn't want to have an interwoven romantic subplot like many other books and movies whose stories resemble the structure of the Hero's Journey do. I'm not really sure. What do you guys think?

Journal 9/22

3. What is the purpose of omens in The Alchemist? Use examples from the text as evidence for your claims.

The purpose of omens in The Alchemist is to guide Santiago and other characters in the book towards their goals. Santiago basically picks what events he should consider good omens, such as when he meets the king. Omens come in the form of situations he is thrust into, whether a result of his own or others' choices. There aren't really rules governing what makes something an omen, and rather it is up to Santiago to decide. The Alchemist illustrates this when he says "And you'll get better and better at understanding omens, because the desert is the best teacher there is" (pg. 123). I'm not sure why this is a talent of any degree- wouldn't it be wise to assume that any action or situation you take part in that is morally right and lawfully acceptable be considered a good omen? Oh, wait... this is The Alchemist. Having a world with cryptic, confusing and ungoverned rules is kinda its thing. Complaints aside, omens are a way for Santiago to take meaning out of random events and use them to help achieve his Personal Legend. 

Journal 9/15

WOn page 24, the king of Salem tells Santiago, "When you want something, all the universe conspires to help you achieve it." Do you believe that this is true? Why or why not?

Somewhat. I say somewhat because the rules of this book's world make no sense at all. The king is a magical dispenser of justice pertaining to one's personal legend. When he thinks someone deserves something and it's following their personal legend, he gives it to them- or so we've seen so far. Take, for example, the story about the emeralds. We're presented with a miner who has had no luck with finding emeralds, who is about to give up and pursue something else. He really wanted to be successful, and had worked for five years sacrificing everything to try to get these minerals. He's about to give up when, lo and behold, the king swoops in and rewards the man with a huge emerald that he turned himself into. Not only can the king do that, but he also comes in the form of good ideas and solutions. But what if what someone wants very badly conflicts with following their personal legends? Those two aren't the same, as Santiago really wanted to settle down with the merchant's daughter near the start of the book but this was ruled out as straying from the correct path. The king is basically contradicting himself in saying his little spiel about the universe, and at the same time the entire personal legend concept is proven to not be the only way to go. The universe did not conspire to get Santiago hitched to that girl, even though he wanted to. Oh, but Santiago losing all his money and having to work for an entire year to get it back when he could've just gone straight to Egypt with no hassle? Pshh, that's part of his personal legend and is totally valid (sarcasm). The book makes silly excuses like that and its rules aren't grounded at all- good things and bad things blur the line between following/straying from one's personal legend, which makes no sense and just bothers me. What the king said about the universe is only sometimes true, and can apparently be overridden by the personal legend's priorities.

Journal 9/8

3. What is a Personal Legend, and why do you think this will be important in the rest of the book?

A Personal Legend is one's path that they need to follow in order to have a satisfactory life. Everyone knows at a young age what their Personal Legend is, but as they get older it is overshadowed by more likable or "realistic" expectations set upon them by others. For example, when Santiago is talking to the king he says, "Bakers have homes, while shepherds sleep out in the open. Parents would rather see their children marry bakers than shepherds" (pg. 24). The king also asks why he tends sheep instead of seeking less mobile jobs and settling down. Santiago responds that he is a shepherd because he likes to travel, prompting the king to point at the baker standing in a shop and say: "When he was a child, that man wanted to travel, too. But he decided first to buy his bakery and put some money aside. When he's an old man, he's going to spend a month in Africa. He never realized that people are capable, at any time in their lives, of doing what they dream of" (also pg. 24). Santiago seems to be facing a two-way path at this point in the book- he could either try his hand at winning the merchant's daughter or follow the gypsy's advice to go to Egypt and adhere to his Personal Legend. I seriously doubt that he'll do the former because that wouldn't provide for very good reading material, but it'll be interesting to see how he interprets the advice he's been given. The Personal Legend is very important in this book, and Santiago's choices thus far seem to effect how he follows it. This makes me more conscious of every important decision he makes for the rest of the book, for each one could be either straying from the path of his Personal Legend or following it.