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? ~John loved Kathy but he needed her more. His yearning for his father’s affection is similar with Kathy because she pushes him away as well. The metaphor of the two snakes is that they need each other in order to survive and one cannot survive without the other. Kathy might have fallen in love with John because he was interesting, charming and ultimately taken by his persistence and strong will.
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? ~Kathy has to be conscious of John in order to keep herself safe from John. She is ultimately a victim because she is at risk. Though she knows John is dangerous she still loves him and wants attention which causes her affair in order to get him to spy on her. Kathy is not an accomplice if anything she is a victim.
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? ~The author may have chosen to leave John’s political convictions a blank because he wanted the reader to have their own hypothesis of what happened just like the death of Kathy. John might have entered politics in order to atone for some of his previous actions in Vietnam but ultimately it was about power and control.
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? ~None of O’Brien’s characters tell the truth directly they all speak in puzzles and subliminal messages. However this is what keeps the reader engaged and has them dissecting each sentence in order to find out the true meaning of this novel and to find out what happened to Kathy.
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? ~If any hypothesis is most plausible it is that he killed her. Though he most likely does not remember. He is prone to blackouts and has severe PTSD, which may have honestly caused him to forget his crime but does not make him innocent. The novel does not leave us with a clear concept of the conclusion but more puzzled if anything.
Mitchell Duncan, Austin Hammond, Jacob Gilbert-Mahoney
5. John feels very protective of Kathy. He says that he loves her because he doesn't want her to disappear, like other important people in his life such as his father. John tells her that he loves her when he is afraid she will leave and he'll lose another person in his life.
6. Kathy seems more like a victim than an accomplice. She had no idea she would disappear, and even if she did, she would have escaped. Kathy is a complex character by the end of the book, but she is still realistic.
7. John most likely entered politics to have some authority and control over others and his own life. He is also trying to atone for his weaknesses. The author might have left John's convictions blank because John doesn't know his own convictions. It would have taken away some of the mystery of the character and events in the novel to have given a definite answer.
8. John also denies the death of his wife when asked by anyone since it cannot be proven. This is John's way to convince himself that it didn't happen and this is his way to cope with the lose of his wife.
9.The most likely correct hypothesis is that John Wade killed his wife, Kathy. He doesn't want to admit even to himself that he could have killed her, since he legitimately loved her.
5. I think John loves Kathy the way that he thinks people should be loved. The way he was loved when he was younger by his family. He wants to make sure she never vanishes like his dad did, so he always watches and stalks her. He says it when he thinks she might leave him. An infinite love. She fell in love with the attention that he gave her. 6. I think we are meant to see her as a naïve girl who then surprises everyone when we find out that she knew about everything the whole time. 7. I think he entered politics because he wanted to have control over things and be able to trick people. I think he is trying to atone for his actions. I think it is to show that John can be like any other politician trying to hide their dirt. 8. He doesn’t want to believe that his dad is dead or that Kathy is missing. They start to believe him. No. It shows that people don’t want to face the truth. 9. No, because it is all a part of the big magic trick. It leaves us with the idea that nothing is as it seems.
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?
ReplyDelete~John loved Kathy but he needed her more. His yearning for his father’s affection is similar with Kathy because she pushes him away as well. The metaphor of the two snakes is that they need each other in order to survive and one cannot survive without the other. Kathy might have fallen in love with John because he was interesting, charming and ultimately taken by his persistence and strong will.
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?
~Kathy has to be conscious of John in order to keep herself safe from John. She is ultimately a victim because she is at risk. Though she knows John is dangerous she still loves him and wants attention which causes her affair in order to get him to spy on her. Kathy is not an accomplice if anything she is a victim.
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?
~The author may have chosen to leave John’s political convictions a blank because he wanted the reader to have their own hypothesis of what happened just like the death of Kathy. John might have entered politics in order to atone for some of his previous actions in Vietnam but ultimately it was about power and control.
ReplyDelete8. 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?
~None of O’Brien’s characters tell the truth directly they all speak in puzzles and subliminal messages. However this is what keeps the reader engaged and has them dissecting each sentence in order to find out the true meaning of this novel and to find out what happened to Kathy.
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?
~If any hypothesis is most plausible it is that he killed her. Though he most likely does not remember. He is prone to blackouts and has severe PTSD, which may have honestly caused him to forget his crime but does not make him innocent. The novel does not leave us with a clear concept of the conclusion but more puzzled if anything.
Mitchell Duncan, Austin Hammond, Jacob Gilbert-Mahoney
ReplyDelete5. John feels very protective of Kathy. He says that he loves her because he doesn't want her to disappear, like other important people in his life such as his father. John tells her that he loves her when he is afraid she will leave and he'll lose another person in his life.
6. Kathy seems more like a victim than an accomplice. She had no idea she would disappear, and even if she did, she would have escaped. Kathy is a complex character by the end of the book, but she is still realistic.
7. John most likely entered politics to have some authority and control over others and his own life. He is also trying to atone for his weaknesses. The author might have left John's convictions blank because John doesn't know his own convictions. It would have taken away some of the mystery of the character and events in the novel to have given a definite answer.
8. John also denies the death of his wife when asked by anyone since it cannot be proven. This is John's way to convince himself that it didn't happen and this is his way to cope with the lose of his wife.
9.The most likely correct hypothesis is that John Wade killed his wife, Kathy. He doesn't want to admit even to himself that he could have killed her, since he legitimately loved her.
5. I think John loves Kathy the way that he thinks people should be loved. The way he was loved when he was younger by his family. He wants to make sure she never vanishes like his dad did, so he always watches and stalks her. He says it when he thinks she might leave him. An infinite love. She fell in love with the attention that he gave her.
ReplyDelete6. I think we are meant to see her as a naïve girl who then surprises everyone when we find out that she knew about everything the whole time.
7. I think he entered politics because he wanted to have control over things and be able to trick people. I think he is trying to atone for his actions. I think it is to show that John can be like any other politician trying to hide their dirt.
8. He doesn’t want to believe that his dad is dead or that Kathy is missing. They start to believe him. No. It shows that people don’t want to face the truth.
9. No, because it is all a part of the big magic trick. It leaves us with the idea that nothing is as it seems.