In groups, discuss the following questions and post your group's answers:
5. One of the few things that we know for certain about John
is that he loves Kathy. But what does John mean by love? How do John's
feelings for his wife resemble his hopeless yearning for his father, who
had a similar habit of vanishing? In what circumstances does John say
"I love you"? What vision of love is suggested by his metaphor of two
snakes devouring each other? Why might Kathy have fallen in love with
John?
6. Although it is easy to see Kathy as the victim of John's
deceptions, the author at times suggests that she may be more conscious
(and therefore more complex) than she first appears. We learn, for
example, that Kathy has always known about John's spying and even
referred to him as "Inspector Clouseau," an ironic counterpoint to
John's vision of himself as "Sorcerer." At a critical moment she rebuffs
her husband's attempt at a confession. And in the final section of
"Evidence," we get hints that Kathy may have planned her own
disappearance. Are we meant to see Kathy as John's victim or as his
accomplice, like a beautiful assistant vanishing inside a magician's
cabinet?
7. Why might John have entered politics? Is he merely a
cynical operator with no interest in anything but winning? Or, as Tony
Carbo suggests, might John be trying to atone for his actions in
Vietnam? Why might the author have chosen to leave John's political
convictions a blank?
8. John's response to the horrors of Thuan Yen is to deny
them: "This could not have happened. Therefore it did not." Where else
in the novel does he perform this trick? How does John's way of coping
with the massacre compare to the psychic strategies adopted by William
Calley or Paul Meadlo? Do any of O'Brien's characters seems capable of
acknowledging terrible truths directly? How does In the Lake of the
Woods treat the matter of individual responsibility for evil?
9. Each of this novel's hypotheses about events at the cabin
begins with speculation but gradually comes to resemble certainty. The
narrator suggests that John and Kathy Wade are ultimately unknowable, as
well; that any attempt to "penetrate...those leaden walls that encase
the human spirit" can never be anything but provisional. Seen in this
light, In the Lake of the Woods comes to resemble a magician's
trick, in which every assertion turns out to be only another
speculation. Given the information we receive, does any hypothesis about
what happened at Lake of the Woods seem more plausible than the others?
With what certainties, if any, does this novel leave us?
WORK ON STORIES
5) I question if John really loves Kathy in the conventional sense, or if he merely loves that she loves him. Through the flashbacks with his father, we see that John is emotionally insecure, and always feels the desire to be loved, so I think that John loves Kathy because she returns his affections. In turn, Kathy probably found the total attention that John devoted to her irresistible. It's slightly unhealthy on both ends, because he needs her love, and she can't resist his attention. That's what I think the two snakes eating each other represents: through their intense intimacy, they're eating each other up.
ReplyDelete6) I think Kathy is more of an accomplice to John, rather than a victim. If she knew about the spying and she knew that he was hiding something terrible, then she should have known the score about what was happening. She should have been aware of the place John was in, and she should have helped him. Why she didn't is beyond me. Even more the accomplice, I would say that maybe she's more the magician than John is, because she was in control of her situation, while the emotionally crippled John was not.
7) I do think that John entered politics to do some good to make up for his actions in Vietnam. I think more than that though, he wanted to be popular and adored by the voters, which is why winning meant so much to him. Winning mean that the people loved him, which is what he needed. That seems to be his primary motive throughout much of the book. As a result, the author leaves his political convictions blank because his policies don't matter in the grand scheme of the book. What matters is that he's seeking to do good, and he's seeking the voter's attentions.
8) John denies the terrible things that happened to him both at Thuan Yen as well as when his father died. He denied that these things happened to him because he couldn't accept them, so he goes about trying to remove them from his mind. He pretends his father didn't die, he removes his name from the list of people in Charlie Company. Yet, this is reflective of other characters too. Kathy knows something is wrong with her and John, yet she doesn't really acknowledge it. Pat chooses to be angry with John rather than acknowledge that Kathy is gone. Calley denies that anything wrong was done in Thuan Yen.
9) Personally, I think all hypotheses are possible except the one where he killed Kathy. As messed up as he was, Kathy was his lifeline in a sense, and to me to think that he killed her is to think that he would get rid of the thing he depended on most in world. I think he would sooner commit suicide then kill Kathy, because he would have to be disturbed beyond all point to killer her.
Ben,
DeleteExcellent, insightful responses. Accomplice rather than victim. You support your claims with strong evidence.
5. What John means by love is a strong connection, and even a needing of her. John loves his wife, as he loved his father, and he sometimes clings to and even stalks his wife to make sure she never leaves him. John most often says "I love you" in trying or difficult times, but during good times he rarely says it. The metaphor of two snakes devouring each other suggests a vision of love that is circular, and dependent. The reason Kathy fell in love with John is probably because he is charming and magical, "...he'd do some fortune-telling, offering prophecies of things to come. 'Wicked vibes,' he'd say..." (O'Brien 38).
ReplyDelete6. It seems like the author wants us to see Kathy as a victim at times, like when she is being stalked, "It was full dark when Kathy stepped outside. She passed directly behind him, so close he could smell the perfumed soap on her skin" (44). But at some parts of the book, to create more questions it seems like he suggests that it is possible that Kathy may have been a sort of accomplice to John just to give the reader another choice to ponder.
7. John probably entered politics because he likes to have an enormous amount of control over everything. It appears that John is somewheres between only wanting to win, but at the same time he certainly wants to atone for the things he did and witnessed in Vietnam, "'You want to win?' Tony Carbo said. 'Obviously.'" (149). John's political convictions were probably left a blank because it inserts even more questions into the already question-filled plot.
8. He also denies Kathy's disappearance for a long time throughout the novel. His method is similar to the other two's, he turned to alcohol and politics to numb the pain, while Calley and Meadlo turned mainly to alcohol alone. It seems like none of O'Brien's characters have the capability to accept awful truths directly. In the Lake of the Woods treats the matter of individual responsibility for evil as something that is non-existant for everyone in the novel.
9. There is one hypothesis that stands out, the possibility of John having a melt down and doing away with her, because throughout the novel there are instances that display how capable he is of violence and how angry he can sometimes get. The only certainty this novel leaves us with is what we believe from it.
Nathan and Ethan,
DeleteVery thoughtful responses! Good use of textual evidence...I'm impressed by the way you answered the last question. Postmodernism!
Jahni Rattray & Imani McLamore & Shayozinique & Imani Gunner
ReplyDelete5) While he was in Vietnam the reporter states, "He told her how lonely he was and how he was lost without her. He said she was his compass." John's feelings for his father resemble his hopeless yeaming for his father, who had a similar habit of vanishing, because somehow he wants Kathy to fill that void that his father left within him. Whenever Kathy would "vanish" for hours at a time, he thought that when she would vanish she would somehow up and leave him forever like his dad did weather its purposely or accidentally. His love for her was so strong that every time he wrote her a letter he would write an analogy about two snakes, "like we're swallowing each other up, except in a good way." Kathy might have fallen in love with John because he's the "sorcerer" and the trick was to make her love him and never stop.
6) I think the author want's us to see her more as the victim than his accomplice, she was blindly in love with John. Even though she knew about his issues in Vietnam and he's father's death she still put herself in a situation as a victim.
7) John might have entered politics because a magician and politician are similar in a way. Also, the fact that a magician plays tricks they have to make people trust them as well as a politician does. He doesn't seem interested in just winning , he seems to get the a type of thrill out of it like playing a magic trick. He may not be trying to "atone" for his actions in Vietnam because he might have repressed those memories. The author might have chosen to leave John's political convictions a blank because the fact that his past about Vietnam was coming up and affecting his political career.
8) In the novel he uses this trick again when he imagines that his father is in the bed talking to him, but when he is really in actuality dead. O'Brien's characters like to beat around the bush and not own up to anything. In the lake of the woods treats the matter of individual responsibility for evil because inside of each of the characters theres some kind of hatred or "void" that causes them to become evil or make them do something immoral.
9) Not one hypothesis seems more pluasible than the others. Most of them were "red herrings." This novel leaves us still wondering what actually happened to Kathy, weather John could have killed her, or could she have run off somewhere, weather she's dead or alive.
Great responses! What ending did the members of your group seem to favor?
DeleteKayli, Carly, and Grace
ReplyDelete5. It seems to us that John loves Kathy in an obsessive way. His way of loving isn't what other people think of as love. He stalks Kathy and must always know what she's doing. The more Kathy pulls away from John, the more he wants to be with her. Her constant leaving resembles his childhood which makes him want her even more. By love John means honesty because towards the end of the novel he questions how many lies are told in a day and he thinks Kathy is an honest person which is what he wants. John says "I love you" when Kathy is about to leave in an attempt to make her stay with him. The two snakes eating each other is a representation of John wanting all of Kathy and needing to have all of her. We think Kathy fell in love with John because of his manipulation. She probably found his secrecy and attachment attractive and intriguing.
6. We think its supposed to make the reader decide but the reader is more for Kathy. It depends how the reader depicts John and the way he acts. Kathy knowing about his stalking ways makes her seem like she knew what was to come. If she stayed with him after everything she knew then if he really did murder her then I guess it was her fault in a way. Her knowing about John's stalking shows that she is actually really independent and its her decision, not Johns, to be apart of the relationship.
7. We think John entered politics because he got the audience he always wanted but never had as a child. He was also able to mentally murder people like in the war. For John, it isn't all about winning, it's about defeating. O'Brien probably left the political convictions a blank because he wanted that part of his life to be open for the readers interpretation.
8. The entire novel seems to be based on what happened in the war. It opens with whats going on in the war however the readers never actually know what happened. It seems like the people who were in the war with John know what actually happened but John is in denial so they wont say anything. In the Lake of the Woods tells people that it is their own individual responsibility over evil.
9. All possibilities in the novel seem equally likely. We don't know what happened to Kathy and it leaves us with questions that will never be answered. However, the possibility of John having murdered his wife seems more likely due to the fact that he seems a bit mentally unstable.
Kayli, Carly, and Grace,
DeleteYou've caught the spirit of the novel. All possibilities are presented and each reader must decide which ending seems most plausible.
5. John's undeniable love for Kathy is a constant throughout the novel. The nature of this love, however, is difficult to define. He loves Kathy passionately. He tells Kathy that he feels like two snakes eating one another: "That's how our love feels...like we're swallowing each other up, except in a good way" (61). However his love for Kathy is also comparable to the proprietary love one might have for an object. For example, he had a habit of following around Kathy, stalking her. "On Saturday mornings he'd follow her over to the dry cleaners of Okabena Avenue, then to the drugstore and post office" (71). The interesting thing is that Kathy knew about John's sying, and yet she stayed with him, and rarely did she confront him. Kathy and John's love was characterized by desperation. They desperately loved one another and desperately craved each other's love, so that they overlook one another's eccentricities.
ReplyDelete6. If Kathy is a victim then she is a victim in cahoots with the perpetrator and is that really a victim at all? She knows that John follows her but she doesn't do anything about it, indicating that she probably gets some thrill out of being followed. I don't think she is his beautiful assistant because I think that she disappeared without John's knowledge or help.
7. John's reasons for his political ambitions are ambiguous. He is trying to make up for what he did in the war, but he is also searching for love. He wants to be elected and reelected to disprove the feeling that his father never loved him. It is the same reason he so desperately needs Kathy's love. He needs someone or something to prove to himself that he has worth. John reflects that "In certain private moments, without ever pondering it too deeply, he was struck by the dim notion of politics as a medium of apology, a way of salvaging something in himself and in the world" (152).
8. While John denies that the atrocities ever happened, Meadlo maintains that the women and children were Viet Cong sympathizers. Meadlo says in his Court Martial Testimony, "They was all VC and VC sympathizers and I still believe they was all Viet Cong and Viet Cong sympathizers" (260). John, in contrast, tries to forget that it ever happened. He used this "trick" also with trying to forget that he killed his friend PFC Weatherby. He also tried to deny that Kathy was missing when she was first gone, spending the day paying the bills instead of searching for her.
9. The most plausible hypothesis is that Kathy and John both went missing and eventually died. I don't think John killed Kathy because although he had trouble controlling his emotions I don't think he would hurt her. I don't think they escaped together in some elaborate plan because that doesn't make sense. Why need the plan? Why not just escape? I think the one constant in the novel is that no matter what, John and Kathy really did love each other. Their love may have been corrupt, or desperate, or what have you, but it was undeniable.
Gina,
DeleteYour responses are very well-written and supported. Your interpretation of the novel has made me rethink my own.