AGENDA:
Morning Reflection: Olivia
Work on short stories and think, pair, share QUESTIONS 1-4 below. Post your responses as comments.
Mudbound
Hillary Jordan, 2008
Algonquin Books
340 pp.
ISBN-13: 9781565126770
Summary
A gripping and exquisitely rendered story of forbidden love, betrayal, and murder, set against the brutality of the Jim Crow South.
When Henry McAllan moves his city-bred wife, Laura, to a cotton farm in the Mississippi Delta in 1946, she finds herself in a place both foreign and frightening. Laura does not share Henry's love of rural life, and she struggles to raise their two young children in an isolated shotgun shack with no indoor plumbing or electricity, all the while under the eye of her hateful, racist father-in-law. When it rains, the waters rise up and swallow the bridge to town, stranding the family in a sea of mud.
As the McAllans are being tested in every way, two celebrated soldiers of World War II return home to help work the farm. Jamie McAllan is everything his older brother Henry is not: charming, handsome, and sensitive to Laura's plight, but also haunted by his memories of combat. Ronsel Jackson, eldest son of the black sharecroppers who live on the McAllan farm, comes home from fighting the Nazis with the shine of a war hero, only to face far more personal—and dangerous—battles against the ingrained bigotry of his own countrymen. It is the unlikely friendship of these two brothers-in-arms, and the passions they arouse in others, that drive this powerful debut novel.Mudbound reveals how everyone becomes a player in a tragedy on the grandest scale, even as they strive for love and honor.
Jordan's indelible portrayal of two families caught up in the blind hatred of a small Southern town earned the prestigious Bellwether Prize for Fiction, awarded biennially to a first literary novel that addresses issues of social injustice.
Author Bio
• Birth—N/A
• Raised—Dallas, Texas, and Muskogee, Oklahoma, USA
• Education—B.A., Wellseley College; M.F.A., Columbia
University
• Awards—Bellwether Award; Alex Award (American Library
Assoc.); Fiction of the Year (New Atlantic Independent Book-
sellers Assoc.)
• Currently—lives in New York State, soon in New York City
Hillary Jordan is the author of two novels: Mudbound, published in March 2008, and When She Woke, published in October 2011, both by Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill. She received a BA from Wellesley College and an MFA from Columbia University. She grew up in Dallas, TX and Muskogee, OK and now lives in Brooklyn, NY.
Mudbound
Mudbound is a story of betrayal, murder and forbidden love set in on a cotton farm in the Mississippi Delta in 1946, during the height of the Jim Crow era. The story is told in alternating first-person narratives by the members of two families: the McAllans, the white family that owns the farm; and the Jacksons, a black family that works for the McAllans as share tenants. When two sons, Jamie McAllan and Ronsel Jackson, return from fighting World War II, the unlikely friendship of these brothers-in-arms sets in motion a harrowing chain of events that test the faith and courage of both families. As they strive for love and honor in a brutal time and place, they become players in a tragedy on the grandest scale and find redemption where they least expect it.
When She Woke
"When she woke, she was red. Not flushed, not sunburned, but the solid, declarative red of a stop sign." Hannah Payne’s life has been devoted to church and family. But after she’s convicted of murder, she awakens in a new body to a nightmarish new life. She finds herself lying on a table in a bare room, covered only by a paper gown, with cameras broadcasting her every move to millions at home, for whom observing new “chromes”—criminals whose skin color has been genetically altered to match the class of their crime—is a sinister form of entertainment. Hannah is a Red; her crime is murder. The victim, says the state of Texas, was her unborn child, and Hannah is determined to protect the identity of the father, a public figure with whom she shared a fierce and forbidden love.
A powerful reimagining of The Scarlet Letter, When She Woke is a timely fable about a stigmatized woman struggling to navigate an America of the not-too-distant future, where the line between church and state has been eradicated and convicted felons are no longer imprisoned and rehabilitated, but “chromed” and released back into the population to survive as best they can. In seeking a path to safety in an alien and hostile world, Hannah unknowingly embarks on a journey of self-discovery that forces her to question the values she once held true and the righteousness of a country that politicizes faith and love.
Awards
Mudbound won a 2009 Alex Award from the American Library Association as well as the 2006 Bellwether Prize for fiction, founded by author Barbara Kingsolver and awarded biennially to an unpublished work of fiction that addresses issues of social justice. It was the 2008 NAIBA (New Atlantic Independent Booksellers Association) Fiction Book of the Year, was long-listed for the 2010 IMPAC Dublin Literary Award and named one of the Top Ten Debut Novels of the Decade by Paste Magazine. Mudbound was a Barnes & Noble Discover Great New Writers pick, a Borders Original Voices selection, a Book Sense pick, one of twelve New Voices for 2008 chosen by Waterstone's UK, a Richard & Judy New Writers Book Of The Month, and one of Indie Next's top ten reading group suggestions for 2009.
When She Woke was the #1 Indie Next pick for October 2011 and one of Publishers Weekly's Top Ten Literary Fiction picks for the fall. (Adapted from Wikipedia.)
Author Bio
• Birth—N/A
• Raised—Dallas, Texas, and Muskogee, Oklahoma, USA
• Education—B.A., Wellseley College; M.F.A., Columbia
University
• Awards—Bellwether Award; Alex Award (American Library
Assoc.); Fiction of the Year (New Atlantic Independent Book-
sellers Assoc.)
• Currently—lives in New York State, soon in New York City
Hillary Jordan is the author of two novels: Mudbound, published in March 2008, and When She Woke, published in October 2011, both by Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill. She received a BA from Wellesley College and an MFA from Columbia University. She grew up in Dallas, TX and Muskogee, OK and now lives in Brooklyn, NY.
Mudbound
Mudbound is a story of betrayal, murder and forbidden love set in on a cotton farm in the Mississippi Delta in 1946, during the height of the Jim Crow era. The story is told in alternating first-person narratives by the members of two families: the McAllans, the white family that owns the farm; and the Jacksons, a black family that works for the McAllans as share tenants. When two sons, Jamie McAllan and Ronsel Jackson, return from fighting World War II, the unlikely friendship of these brothers-in-arms sets in motion a harrowing chain of events that test the faith and courage of both families. As they strive for love and honor in a brutal time and place, they become players in a tragedy on the grandest scale and find redemption where they least expect it.
When She Woke
"When she woke, she was red. Not flushed, not sunburned, but the solid, declarative red of a stop sign." Hannah Payne’s life has been devoted to church and family. But after she’s convicted of murder, she awakens in a new body to a nightmarish new life. She finds herself lying on a table in a bare room, covered only by a paper gown, with cameras broadcasting her every move to millions at home, for whom observing new “chromes”—criminals whose skin color has been genetically altered to match the class of their crime—is a sinister form of entertainment. Hannah is a Red; her crime is murder. The victim, says the state of Texas, was her unborn child, and Hannah is determined to protect the identity of the father, a public figure with whom she shared a fierce and forbidden love.
A powerful reimagining of The Scarlet Letter, When She Woke is a timely fable about a stigmatized woman struggling to navigate an America of the not-too-distant future, where the line between church and state has been eradicated and convicted felons are no longer imprisoned and rehabilitated, but “chromed” and released back into the population to survive as best they can. In seeking a path to safety in an alien and hostile world, Hannah unknowingly embarks on a journey of self-discovery that forces her to question the values she once held true and the righteousness of a country that politicizes faith and love.
Awards
Mudbound won a 2009 Alex Award from the American Library Association as well as the 2006 Bellwether Prize for fiction, founded by author Barbara Kingsolver and awarded biennially to an unpublished work of fiction that addresses issues of social justice. It was the 2008 NAIBA (New Atlantic Independent Booksellers Association) Fiction Book of the Year, was long-listed for the 2010 IMPAC Dublin Literary Award and named one of the Top Ten Debut Novels of the Decade by Paste Magazine. Mudbound was a Barnes & Noble Discover Great New Writers pick, a Borders Original Voices selection, a Book Sense pick, one of twelve New Voices for 2008 chosen by Waterstone's UK, a Richard & Judy New Writers Book Of The Month, and one of Indie Next's top ten reading group suggestions for 2009.
When She Woke was the #1 Indie Next pick for October 2011 and one of Publishers Weekly's Top Ten Literary Fiction picks for the fall. (Adapted from Wikipedia.)
Discussion Questions
1. The setting of the Mississippi Delta is intrinsic to Mudbound. Discuss the ways in which the land functions as a character in the novel and how each of the other characters relates to it.
2. Mudbound is a chorus, told in six different voices. How do the changes in perspective affect your understanding of the story? Are all six voices equally sympathetic? Reliable? Pappy is the only main character who has no narrative voice. Why do you think the author chose not to let him speak?
3. Who gets to speak and who is silent or silenced is a central theme, the silencing of Ronsel being the most literal and brutal example. Discuss the ways in which this theme plays out for the other characters. For instance, how does Laura's silence about her unhappiness on the farm affect her and her marriage? What are the consequences of Jamie's inability to speak to his family about the horrors he experienced in the war? How does speaking or not speaking confer power or take it away?
4. The story is narrated by two farmers, two wives and mothers, and two soldiers. Compare and contrast the ways in which these parallel characters, black and white, view and experience the world.
5. What is the significance of the title? In what ways are each of the characters bound—by the land, by circumstance, by tradition, by the law, by their own limitations? How much of this binding is inescapable and how much is self-imposed? Which characters are most successful in freeing themselves from what binds them?
6. All the characters are products of their time and place, and instances of racism in the book run from Pappy’s outright bigotry to Laura’s more subtle prejudice. Would Laura have thought of herself as racist, and if not, why not? How do the racial views of Laura, Jamie, Henry, and Pappy affect your sympathy for them?
7. The novel deals with many thorny issues: racism, sexual politics, infidelity, war. The characters weigh in on these issues, but what about the author? Does she have a discernable perspective, and if so, how does she convey it?
8. We know very early in the book that something terrible is going to befall Ronsel. How does this sense of inevitability affect the story? Jamie makes Ronsel responsible for his own fate, saying "Maybe that's cowardly of me, making Ronsel's the trigger finger." Is it just cowardice, or is there some truth to what Jamie says? Where would you place the turning point for Ronsel? Who else is complicit in what happens to him, and why?
9. In reflecting on some of the more difficult moral choices made by the characters—Laura's decision to sleep with Jamie, Ronsel's decision to abandon Resl and return to America, Jamie's choice during the lynching scene, Florence's and Jamie's separate decisions to murder Pappy—what would you have done in those same situations? Is it even possible to know? Are there some moral positions that are absolute, or should we take into account things like time and place when making judgments?
10. How is the last chapter of Mudbound different from all the others? Why do you think the author chose to have Ronsel address you, the reader, directly? Do you believe he overcomes the formidable obstacles facing him and finds "something like happiness"? If so, why doesn't the author just say so explicitly? Would a less ambiguous ending have been more or less satisfying?
(Questions from author's website.)
1. The setting of the Mississippi Delta is intrinsic to Mudbound. Discuss the ways in which the land functions as a character in the novel and how each of the other characters relates to it.
2. Mudbound is a chorus, told in six different voices. How do the changes in perspective affect your understanding of the story? Are all six voices equally sympathetic? Reliable? Pappy is the only main character who has no narrative voice. Why do you think the author chose not to let him speak?
3. Who gets to speak and who is silent or silenced is a central theme, the silencing of Ronsel being the most literal and brutal example. Discuss the ways in which this theme plays out for the other characters. For instance, how does Laura's silence about her unhappiness on the farm affect her and her marriage? What are the consequences of Jamie's inability to speak to his family about the horrors he experienced in the war? How does speaking or not speaking confer power or take it away?
4. The story is narrated by two farmers, two wives and mothers, and two soldiers. Compare and contrast the ways in which these parallel characters, black and white, view and experience the world.
5. What is the significance of the title? In what ways are each of the characters bound—by the land, by circumstance, by tradition, by the law, by their own limitations? How much of this binding is inescapable and how much is self-imposed? Which characters are most successful in freeing themselves from what binds them?
6. All the characters are products of their time and place, and instances of racism in the book run from Pappy’s outright bigotry to Laura’s more subtle prejudice. Would Laura have thought of herself as racist, and if not, why not? How do the racial views of Laura, Jamie, Henry, and Pappy affect your sympathy for them?
7. The novel deals with many thorny issues: racism, sexual politics, infidelity, war. The characters weigh in on these issues, but what about the author? Does she have a discernable perspective, and if so, how does she convey it?
8. We know very early in the book that something terrible is going to befall Ronsel. How does this sense of inevitability affect the story? Jamie makes Ronsel responsible for his own fate, saying "Maybe that's cowardly of me, making Ronsel's the trigger finger." Is it just cowardice, or is there some truth to what Jamie says? Where would you place the turning point for Ronsel? Who else is complicit in what happens to him, and why?
9. In reflecting on some of the more difficult moral choices made by the characters—Laura's decision to sleep with Jamie, Ronsel's decision to abandon Resl and return to America, Jamie's choice during the lynching scene, Florence's and Jamie's separate decisions to murder Pappy—what would you have done in those same situations? Is it even possible to know? Are there some moral positions that are absolute, or should we take into account things like time and place when making judgments?
10. How is the last chapter of Mudbound different from all the others? Why do you think the author chose to have Ronsel address you, the reader, directly? Do you believe he overcomes the formidable obstacles facing him and finds "something like happiness"? If so, why doesn't the author just say so explicitly? Would a less ambiguous ending have been more or less satisfying?
(Questions from author's website.)
What I found most obviously striking about this morning reflection was how they switched microphones, but then continued to mouth the words the other was saying. As it continues you go on to understand that it doesn't matter who is saying it, these are issues and problems everyone should support, no matter the race or gender. I enjoyed how they talked about inequality and prejudice in small and seemingly unnoticeable situations- it made it more powerful. These were instances that happen today, they happen now, and they persecuted just as much as any other, no matter how small. The entire piece is a giant metaphor, which is revealed at the end, when they say together, that the problem with people speaking for one another is that "everyone is left without a voice." It makes you wonder if what they did was a representation of what they want, or if their message was that no one who is not in your situation can really understand, a black man shouldn't represent women and vice-versa, but it is the other support that is necessary.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteaside from being impressed with the power of their message in this Spoken Word video, I was moved by the role reversal that occurred. This summer we discussed the fact that it is impossible to really speak for how another feel, but silence is not the answer. It is important to try to "walk in another person's shoes." At least the attempt can bring about a greater understanding.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI thought that "Lost Voices" was an extremely powerful spoken word piece. It brought to light something that I don't think is often talked about which goes beyond the struggles that women and African Americans face. It talks about how on one hand, saying that you understand people's problems and struggles when you have never even experienced them is disingenuous at best and ignorant at worst. It also demonstrates that while claiming to know or understand someones struggle is often disrespectful fighting for others success and future can be extremely powerful. By exchanging the stories between the two speakers it helped show that the problems people face are often human problems that everyone should help to fix, but that trying to "join the club" is damaging.
ReplyDelete-Cameron Bennett
The slam poem "Lost Voices" was so engaging. I absolutely loved the delivery of them poem because it was so unique and I have never seen anything like that done before. I felt that by them switching places it represented a universal struggle between the two minorities. Moreover, along with the spotless performance, the poem itself was extremely well written. I loved the analogy of the two wounds sort of signifying life struggles. The authors elaborated that a racist and a black man can both have wounds/struggles but they are two different wounds and having one doesn't justify others meaning that having struggles doesn't justify racism. I felt that the poem had so many great messages in it about feminism and racism that were so eloquent. It was also so interesting to see the two social topics in one poem complementing each other. The poem definitely opens my eyes to society's injustices and discrimination against certain people in a creative way.
ReplyDeleteI don't know how to feel about it. But what I found interesting about it was when they switched microphones and I felt like they were trying to speak for each other and how it feels like to be another person. I like how at the end they both say "everyone is left without a voice" I think they were trying to say that everyone needs to speak for themselves
ReplyDeleteI liked the morning reflection Olivia picked out today. It was really different from all the rest in terms of how the speaker(s) got the message across. I loved the message because as a black girl the only real struggles I consider are of blacks or anyone else of different color that are discriminated against or categorized. With this video it showed not only the black man but also of what a white woman might go through in society. The way they did it with talking at the same time and still moving their lips was really great. It sent an even bigger message on top that the two struggles are similar in a way. Them switching microphones gave them the opportunity to speak for each other and sense what the other felt like and though that never actually happens it sent a powerful message.
ReplyDeleteI think it is mind blowing that someone can dislike someone simple based on their on their race. Just because I'm black and your white or Asian or whatever your ethnicity is it wouldn't change the way I think of you. We all are humans we all have the same orgasm we all are made from the same things so how can I judge you because of your skin color? It isn't right to just judge someone based on their race. We need to speak up for ourselves because no one can understand what you go through because no one is in your shoes no one goes through exactly what you go through and if you don't speak up for yourself and well being.
ReplyDeleteI thought that the video was very inspiring toward people because now people feel that races sometimes have a greater advantage toward rights or things than other races. So when people talk either race or gender you cant assume you have the same problems or feelings. so when they changed microphones they were going into other persons perspective so that we can all relate.
ReplyDeleteIt was a very powerful and moving speech. They wanted to tell the society that we are all people and we all have a voice. Its hard to try to see things from a different point of view. It was very interesting and overwhelming but I really think it was so they could make sure they have gotten their point across. You cannot discriminate against people and you cannot assume peoples life story.
ReplyDeleteIt was a very powerful and moving speech. They wanted to tell the society that we are all people and we all have a voice. Its hard to try to see things from a different point of view. It was very interesting and overwhelming but I really think it was so they could make sure they have gotten their point across. You cannot discriminate against people and you cannot assume peoples life story.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was interesting with the message and role reversal that occurred. I don't think that a person assume that one understand how one race or gender know how they feel actually truly understand so with the two speakers switch microphones make them understand what the other has gone through and can relate in some degree.
ReplyDeleteThis morning reflection shows how it feels to be in another persons shoes. The male was speaking in place of woman and vise versa. Women are in relationships and get abused by their boyfriends, there should be others to speak up not for only another but themselves. African Americans still are discriminated against low-key like where she was saying "in the gas station, the cashier floated from isle to isle" referring to how blacks even at the store are watched and speculated of wrongdoing and people say that they could empathize with them and how bad it was for them before but yet, they couldn't possibly understand their pain and past because they weren't there.
ReplyDelete"Lost Voices" was very engaging and straight to the point when it comes to society. I loved how they switched perspectives; the girl speaking for the man and the man speaking for the girl. One thing that really stood out to me was the line "we have two different wounds and looking at yours does nothing to heal mines". Even though we all go through pain, we can't compare whose is worse with one another. You can't repair something when you're broken yourself.
ReplyDeleteI definitely understood the concept of this mornings reflection. Being a colored boy in a world so controlled and confused no one really would understand the problems that they face. Its as if there concerns are numb to others. Everyone has a voice that needs to be heard but to speak for another and not being in their own skin is somewhat disrespectful. It shouldn't take another color of skin to be able to express the concerns of another's problems than themselves.
ReplyDeleteOlivia and Cameron
ReplyDelete1. The setting contributes very much to the conflict in the story. Laura hates the land on which they live, while her husband never wants to leave. They also live in a racially segregated area, which makes the relationship with Florence, Hap and Ronsel. It is influential to Henry in that he loves the land, it affects Laura because she hates it there and that causes tension within their marriage. Ronsel wants to break out of his prejudice, his parents want to remain under the radar and Jaime needs the presence of good people and family to help him, which he will receive by being in Mississippi.
2. The voices contribute to the racial theme of the story. It also leads the reader to be more sympathetic toward some characters than others. Pappy not having a voice makes him more of an antagonist because you only hear and read the voices that find him annoying. The author chose to not give Pappy a voice because she didn’t want the reader to sympathize with him or understand his perspective.
3. Laura, Ronsel and Ronsel’s parents are the most commonly silenced. Laura’s silence about her unhappiness in her marriage affects the negativity that creeps slowly through the novel. Ronsel being silenced in the store was a rude awakening to how black men and women were really treated in Mississippi. When Jaime fails to speak about the war, it is him closing himself off to his family, the people he should be able to trust to help him hear and care for him. One of the main themes of the novel is that not speaking about things can be more powerful than actual words and conversation themselves, but in a very negative way.
4. It is evident that the farmers experience many of the same things, with the exception that Henry has more power in business and conscious. Henry is more selfish, whereas Hap is kinder. Jamie and Ronsel are similar in that they both experienced the same thing, don’t want to talk about them and are gradually getting more and more closed off to their families. Ronsel, however, had to return home to two struggles: leaving war and returning to racial persecution. The mothers are similar in that they care incredibly deeply for their children, but Laura has influence over Florence in a business way, whereas Florence has influence over Laura in an educational and philosophical way. Florence is happier than Laura in her marriage.
ReplyDelete1. The land in the Mississippi Delta was a crucial part of Mudbound. It served as connection between the characters but more so, it helped to build each character substantially. The land, and how each character felt about it played a large role in every character and helped to make the plot. For example, Laura and Henry had two very different perspectives about the farm. Laura wasn’t the biggest fan whereas Henry was very hopeful for the possibilities. These contradicting opinions served to enhance the plot. Hap and Florence both lived off of the land and relied on it. As a result, the reader sees two different marriages and how the land affects them both dramatically.
2The various perspectives enhance the story. It allows the reader to see why a character reacted the way they did and help to build characters even stronger than a third person perspective would. I especially enjoyed Laura’s sections because I felt she was a complex character and the fact that she hid her unhappiness was interesting and engaging to read. I believe Pappy is the only character who has a no narrative voice because if he had a voice, his character wouldn’t be as interesting. The fact that no one knows exactly why he is the way he is, adds suspense to the story. His character is more dynamic and has more depth because he’s mysterious and misunderstood.
3The ability to speak or to be silent plays a major role in certain characters plot. For Laura and Henry this is a major theme. Laura is extremely unhappy living in Mississippi on the farm and she hides this from her husband, Henry. She does so because she knows how invested he is in the farm and how hopeful he is for its future. She spares her happiness for him and as a result, her marriage suffers. She is hiding her feelings and although she never tells Henry, he does have an idea. This puts a strain on their marriage and distances them as a couple. On the other hand, Jamie is silent because he never shares the horrors he experienced in the war. As a result, he has a lot of internal conflict. Mudbound shows how not speaking gives you no power, only internal struggle and unhappiness.
4.All of the characters have very different life experiences because of their race. Given the time period, race plays a substantial part in the quality of one’s life and the book illustrates this perfectly. The two wives, Laura and Florence, experience two very different perspectives in their marriages and lives in general. Florence is a hardworking black mother who although struggles, finds happiness in her marriage. Laura on the other hand, is a white women who is deeply unhappy due to the fact that she is in a situation she has no control over. Her marriage is falling apart and she struggles with internal conflict and relies heavily on Florence for guidance and company. Henry and Hap are both farmers, one black and one white. Henry seems like he is just trying to make his farm successful not regarding any of his ten dents needs. For example, he makes Hap use his mule which will put Hap in debt to him. Hap on the other hand is a struggling, hardworking father who, since his accident, feels incompetent and blames himself for allowing his wife and daughter to work to make ends meet. The fact that Henry has power just further implements the racist ideas from this time. I noticed that Laura and Henry respect Florence and hap however, they feel they cannot show it due to the time period and because it wouldn’t be acceptable.
The slam poem "Lost Voices" was so engaging. I absolutely loved the delivery of them poem because it was so unique and I have never seen anything like that done before. I felt that by them switching places it represented a universal struggle between the two minorities. Moreover, along with the spotless performance, the poem itself was extremely well written. I loved the analogy of the two wounds sort of signifying life struggles. The authors elaborated that a racist and a black man can both have wounds/struggles but they are two different wounds and having one doesn't justify others meaning that having struggles doesn't justify racism. I felt that the poem had so many great messages in it about feminism and racism that were so eloquent. It was also so interesting to see the two social topics in one poem complementing each other. The poem definitely opens my eyes to society's injustices and discrimination against certain people in a creative way.
ReplyDelete1. The land functions as a character in the novel because it affects each of the other characters. For example, Laura sees it as a burden while Henry sees it as an opportunity. Little by little they grow with the land and it really takes a toll on the characters differently.
ReplyDelete2. Changing the perspective gives a new outlook on the voices. All of them are different but they all have one thing in common- family. The author probably chose not to let Pappy speak because nobody wants to hear is side of the story. He doesn't contribute to the plot in any positive way.
3. Silence is a big theme because each character doesn't speak freely about certain subjects. When they do- Ronsel- bad things happen. It doesn't do any good for them. It would change the story if they didn't stay silent with some things. Even if it's not the right choice, it's a safe one for the characters.
4. Both Henry and Hap try their best on the land and with their families, but because they are different races one has an advantage over the other in society. Same with the wives/mothers, but Laura starts to build a friendship with Florence. As for the soldiers, Ronsel and Jamie have seen that after the war nothing has changed race-wise. They both went through a lot, but in different ways. These characters in the novel are very similar yet different mainly because of skin color, being in Jim Crow South.
1. The setting of the Mississippi Delta is intrinsic to Mudbound. Discuss the ways in which the land functions as a character in the novel and how each of the other characters relates to it
ReplyDeleteThe Mississippi Delta functions as a character within Mudbound because it has an effect on the mindset of the character. Living in the Mississippi during this time period made the characters feel a certain way towards African Americans and the type of jobs that they actually felt that they wanted such as farming. It had a great effect on their interests and types of goals that they set for themselves such as with Henry always wanting to own his own land so he can farm.
2. Mudbound is a chorus, told in six different voices. How do the changes in perspective affect your understanding of the story? Are all six voices equally sympathetic? Reliable? Pappy is the only main character who has no narrative voice. Why do you think the author chose not to let him speak?
Having six different perspectives I believe gives me a lot more inside on all the different characters feeling towards the other characters and the things that they are experiencing throughout the story. I think Laura has the most sympathetic perspective because she cares for Ronsel, she go grabs a doctor for him instead of going to buy clothes like she was supposed to. She has a different view of from everyone else within the story. The author didn’t give Pappy a voice because not seeing things from his perspective and not knowing what he is really thinking in a way allows the audience to gain a more negative relationship with him. Adding his perspective could change the way we think of him, it could make us understand him more causing us to like him as a person but I the author probably attended for us not to like him too much.
3. Who gets to speak and who is silent or silenced is a central theme, the silencing of Ronsel being the most literal and brutal example. Discuss the ways in which this theme plays out for the other characters. For instance, how does Laura's silence about her unhappiness on the farm affect her and her marriage? What are the consequences of Jamie's inability to speak to his family about the horrors he experienced in the war? How does speaking or not speaking confer power or take it away?
Laura not speaking about her unhappiness shows that she has little power over her marriage. This leads to her, not wanting to be there she doesn’t want to be alone. She started to really enjoy Florence being at her house helping her cook, clean, etc. Pappy spoke on any and everything that he felt he needed to because she had the most power over everyone. In a way he controlled things that happened, he almost made Henry throw away Laura’s piano so he can have somewhere to sleep. The aspect of speaking up and saying what you want shows how much control you have over the other characters within the story.
4. The story is narrated by two farmers, two wives and mothers, and two soldiers. Compare and contrast the ways in which these parallel characters, black and white, view and experience the world.
The view of the white family which is Laura and Henry, Henry view the world as a cold place I would say. He is mainly focused on making money to support him and his family. He isn’t as racist I would say as his father Pappy, but he still he a different view on the black family that is living within his land. I think if Ronsel couldn’t read the book that states how much he supposed to be paid, I honestly think with everything that started to go on later in the story I think he would have been the average white landowner and cheated the them out of some of their money just to support his. Not caring about whether Ronsel and Florence can support their family. Ronsel and Florence perspective is more caring. They actually want to help whoever they can but they are focused on making enough money to support their family at home the same as Henry and Laura.
Avana and Nandi
ReplyDelete1. The setting of the Mississippi Delta is intrinsic to Mudbound. Discuss the ways in which the land functions as a character in the novel and how each of the other characters relates to it.
- In the Mississippi delta the people are really racist and the land is muddy and wet. Jamie and Laura are not fond of the land down there because Jamie has been away for so long and Laura isn’t used to that kind of life. Pappy likes it because he’s also racist and been there his whole life. Ronsel hates it because he’s a black soldier coming to a place where everyone is racist and in Europe he was treated with respect.
2. Mudbound is a chorus, told in six different voices. How do the changes in perspective affect your understanding of the story? Are all six voices equally sympathetic? Reliable? Pappy is the only main character who has no narrative voice. Why do you think the author chose not to let him speak?
-It’s told from people who like to be in the Mississippi delta and people who don’t. It’s also told from a white perspective and a black perspective which is really significant is a racist town. No, were not sympathetic towards henry because he seems like he doesn’t care about a lot of things like Laura’s feelings and he might be a little racist too because he envy’s his father. We think the author chooses not to make pappy a voice because they wanted the readers to feel a way about pappy without hearing his thoughts because they don’t want you to sympathize with him.
3. Who gets to speak and who is silent or silenced is a central theme, the silencing of Ronsel being the most literal and brutal example. Discuss the ways in which this theme plays out for the other characters. For instance, how does Laura's silence about her unhappiness on the farm affect her and her marriage? What are the consequences of Jamie's inability to speak to his family about the horrors he experienced in the war? How does speaking or not speaking confer power or take it away?
-Both Laura and Jamie don’t speak on their feeling about things. It affects them negatively because Jamie still has the nightmares but lets the family think that he’s perfectly fine and so does Laura. Laura is distant from henry more and more each day. She becomes sad. We think it takes away their power because it’s only affecting them negatively.
4. The story is narrated by two farmers, two wives and mothers, and two soldiers. Compare and contrast the ways in which these parallel characters, black and white, view and experience the world.
-There is two different families, black and white. The families contrast because living in Mississippi is worse for a black family because it’s dangerously racist. A white family in Mississippi is a regular thing. They compare because they both struggle and both Jamie and Ronsel are voices that were in the war and have family issues.
https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQr2v33fYbVrE0Ep8a_KNFeeuApus4pim1OiD5pSuId_GDyyXTFTA
ReplyDeleteReyenne & Amanda
ReplyDelete1. The land in Mississippi is a part of the conflict in the story. Laura’s husband said he never wants to leave the land while Laura said she hates it so much. Where they live starts to grow on each of the characters a little bit.
2. The different voices of the story helps the reader see how a character thinks about the current situation and it allows the reader to develop a favorite character. For example, Pappy doesn’t have a voice so therefore the reader may not like him at all because the reader only hears about pappy through the other voices.
3. Silence is a huge theme because the characters don’t talk about certain subjects in the story. Laura doesn’t speak on how she doesn’t like living on the farm and doesn’t tell anyone at all because Henry, her husband, puts his all into the farm. This situation starts to have them become distant from each other. Jamie is quiet because he went to war and never told anyone about the scary experiences.
4. Due to the fact that the characters are a different ethnicity they go through different things. The time period plays a huge part in it because that is the time period where everything was racially segregated. Florence is a mother who is black and even though she struggles a lot she keeps her head up and puts faith in her marriage. Laura is a white woman who is very unhappy because she is in a certain type of situation where she can’t do anything at all. They are semi-similar but very different because of their skin color and what they have to go through because of that.