AGENDA:
Morning Reflection:
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.)
"Lost Voices" was one of the most empowering pieces of poetry I have heard in a long time. The amount of issues beside the obvious that were addressed required immense skill from the speakers. The messages were gender and race equality and the loss of ability for minorities to speak for themselves.
ReplyDeleteOkay, legit, that was so good like I am seeping with adrenaline and excitement because of so hype I am. I absolutely ADORE button poetry, and the fact that their creativity and the writing itself is so beautifully executed in the video that there are shivers down my spine and goosebumps raising on my skin because they put the thought into words; to recognize that although you may support an issue not truly relative to yourself, you have to be careful not to shut out the voices that wished to be heard and needed to be heard the most.
ReplyDelete"Button Poetry" is one of my favorite things in the entire world. "Lost Voices" was an amazing piece by the two individuals. They spoke well and with passion showing how everyone's voices get lost in the world we live in today. They spoke about two topics, feminism and racism. The two spoke for each other as if to show how we aren't allowed to speak for ourselves, but we have to speak for each other if we do want to be heard.
ReplyDelete"Lost Voices" was an amazing spoken word piece that addresses how those who are oppressed are silenced by their oppressors. The body movement held a big significance in that the white woman was talking about the black man's struggle and the man was speaking on the woman's struggle, emphasizing the "lost Voices" title. This spoken word piece accurately presented why feminism and racial justice is needed because those who don't know your struggle can not accurately speak for it.
ReplyDeleteThe video we watched was about speaking for others when you don't have the same experience. This spoken word piece was hard hitting and told the truth about what is really going on when communities speak up. No one has the same experience, so we can't speak for others.
ReplyDeleteThe spoken word piece "Lost Voices" was very powerful because they said everything I've been thinking about regarding racism, sexism, and feminism. The part where they said that everyone has their own definition about feminism and the most popular is degrading men to make women feel powerful. That people try to say they know how I feel when my scar is in a totally different location than mines. And how I can't even walk to the corner store without feeling uncomfortable because I'm worrying if my outfit is going to get me raped and then blamed for it because "I was dressed like I wanted it." The spoken word was also powerful because they spoke for each other like how many people do in the world. White people always have an opinion on how black should feel and men is always telling how a woman should feel about her body and her mind. I liked this piece very much.
ReplyDeletei like the way the two made that topic. what i didn't really think was that the mimic wasn't on point but it wasn't that much off beat i liked the way when they switched on both perspectives
ReplyDeleteThe "Lost Voices" piece truly displayed how many people claim to believe that they know other people's pain, but unless they truly attempt to walk in their shoes. The way in which they had the person who had no idea what that person's struggle was like was the one actually speaking and feeling the words coming out of their mouth. The overlap of their voices and the power behind them let each of their struggles be heard in a new light. By portraying social issues on this platform, it made the entire message more powerful.
ReplyDeleteThe video discusses the places of minorities in society and how their voices are lost. They present the stories of how they discovered who they are and where they stood in the social hierarchy. They dealt with two separate issues at once and I thought that they way they switched roles to develop the idea of a lost voice was effective.
ReplyDelete"Lost voices" was a very powerful piece of poetry that was able to draw attention from many due to the fact it dealt with two specific issues. the poem dealt with black male issues and feminism , rape and other important situations that are happening in the world. The video shows that no one is the same or have the same experiences , so we cant speak for others besides our selves.
ReplyDeleteThe slam poem “Lost Voices” was eye opening and powerful. The way they mouthed the lines that seemed as though they were meant for the other person shows how in media the voices of oppressed people are heard from someone else. This poem dealt with two issues rape, and being a black male in today’s society.
ReplyDeleteI thought that this piece was really good. I had never seen poetry performed like that, with the opposite voices being spoken for them. I also thought it was really cool when their voices would join, to show that people might have the same sort of issues, but no two are exactly the same and that someone who doesn't face the discrimination cannot know exactly what it was like. Talking for the other person demonstrates how ridiculous saying you know exactly what its like for other people, like when the white woman said "I remember the firs time I realized I was black" or when the man said he knew what it was like to be a woman.
ReplyDeleteThe “Lost Voices” piece was very inspiring. It covered topics on growing up being black and growing up being a woman. I liked how the man and woman changed places and spoke for each other. She talked for him about growing up black and about the first few times she “realized she was black”. He talked about how he “answered to everything but his name and that little lady was just a reminder to stay in his place” how growing up a female and black felt almost like a crime. It was powerful how they switched places and spoke to the audience through a completely different person and point of view.
ReplyDeleteThe two writers in the speech spoke very strongly about everyday struggles that aren’t talked about necessarily every day. There was a black male and a white female, and they pulled off struggles of being black and being a woman within society. They switched roles, showing the connection between the actual problem. When one spoke, they were addressing the other person’s problem, making it powerfully intriguing. The white woman spoke of living as a black person, and the black male talked about living as a female in society. Both roles really portrayed what they were strongly suggesting about social roles and how they have finally spoken upon the issue.
ReplyDeleteKarina Le & Tamaron McKnight
ReplyDeleteDiscussion Questions
1. Each character has a specific past tied towards land, that created their personalities and how they live and are like now. For example, with Jamie, he has a certain connection to the land in that he suffers from PTSD after his participation in the Second World War through his fear of water, and how he panicked when he was in a hold filled with mud. Deriving from their socialization and their experiences in life, the land and overall the earth have different connotations in how they overall see life.
2. The changes of perspective help understanding of the story because you’re able to see all viewpoints of the situation and the overall feeling of each individual character and a better understanding of their personalities as you can see what they’re thinking and what others think of them. Not all of them equally sympathetic and reliable due to the fact each person has a different way of thinking and that’s the point. Because you’re able to see how and why people think the way they do and what caused them to be deviant from someone else. Pappy does not have a voice primarily because it’s better to hear about him rather than hear him primarily.
3. It basically represents their role primarily in the story and in life, and how life views their positions. For example, husband does work; men do work while it’s an unequal partnership with the women as she is only working around the house and basically never really seeing each other communicating. Which leads to Laura’s unhappiness to her marriage but she never talks about it because the women aren’t supposed to be sad! Laura is supposed to be happy that she’s has a house, a farm to take care of, a family to take care of, she is supposed to be content, because Henry is giving her what he promised and what men generally promise: a life without hardship and a life with land. With Jamie as well, he is unable to convey his fears and the experiences he had with WWII because it’s viewed as a vulnerability one shouldn’t have, because it’s a simple paranoia and he can take care of it himself because it’s his problem. Speaking and not speaking convey the hold of power versus the lack of power. Laura and Jamie don’t hold any power in the house nor the confidence to grab a piece of it and so it shows how weak and lacking of will they have to even talk about their problems.
Discussion Questions
ReplyDelete1.Each character is connected with the land in some way. The farm grew to become Laura’s life, and Jamie hated water. Laura stuck to the same everyday routines to hide her feelings. Jamie seemed to do the same. He came out of war petrified of the water.
2. The changes in voices helped me understand the story more. I loved reading the different perspectives on life. Not all six voices are equally sympathetic. Ronsel's voice wasn’t as sympathetic as others. Each of the characters has a different perspective on life, and a different way of living it. I think Pappy didn’t have a voice because how scary of a man he was. He was racist and a bigot, he loved to see people that were scared of him.
3. As Jamie holds in his fears they seem to get worse and worse. It’s not only him that doesn’t speak of how he truly feels. Him feeling like he can’t speak to his family about these problems are making him more afraid of everyday situations. Not speaking takes away the characters powers because they aren’t able to voice how they feel. When Henry leaves Laura for a short time in the beginning of their relationship Laura hides how much pain and anger she has. As the book goes on it shows how gender roles are very much there. The woman stays home as a housewife and the husbands go provide for the family.
4. Ronsel is a black male in the army. He talks about how his frustration with how people treat him is growing and making him more and more angry with people. He hates how he is treated in the army. He basically becomes almost emotionless toward death. Jamie goes into the army and comes out with a growing overwhelming fear of water. He hides his pain and suffering quite well from what I have read so far. Laura at first was lonely with Henry leaving often but then when she has Amanda Leigh she becomes happier.
1. The mud relates to each of the characters by the mud relating change of life to Laura’s life. Before she married Henry her life was routine and nothing different, but now she is living on a farm. The mud relates to Ronsel as a reminder of the life he had as a war veteran, and to Jamie as a fear factor regarding his fear of water.
ReplyDelete2. The changes of perspective of the story affect my understanding of the story by giving multiple views of the same situation in one story. The perspectives are reliable to me because the story is still developing, but I feel I can trust their views. I think the author chose to not let Pappy speak to enforce his presence without giving his voice, and to let his views be seen and inferred not spoken.
1. The land functions as a character because each character’s own struggles and hardships always, in some way, tie back to the land. The setting, in any novel really, is one of the main precipitants of the action especially when some sort of natural disaster is central to the plot. For specific examples, Laura often mentions her connection to the farm and based on the environment of the novel, the crops most likely aren’t doing well which causes stress on her part. Jamie also has a history with being tied to the land because of his fear of water during the war and that is why he was considered brave. He was forced to go straight through gunfire, which had a lasting impact on his personality and following life.
ReplyDelete2. The changes in perspective create a story that is much more well-rounded because each person is going to have a different view-point. The story is easier to analyze and comprehend because of the unique perspectives, but it still maintains the personal and direct manner of first person point of view. Each voice’s reliability is debatable, but because of the way the book is structured, there would be no reason to deceive anyone. Each opinion is valid and each person is dealing with their own personal problems, putting them in a different situation. I think the author chose not to let Pappy speak because his perspective did not enhance the storyline in a beneficial way. The voices she chose to include each had a specific reason to speak while Pappy did not have this same necessity.
3. Laura’s silence about her unhappiness on the farm must have built up inside her and makes her have less energy to actually do things for the farm or focus on her husband. Silence only makes Laura’s feelings less valid in her heart which could really be detrimental to herself and her family members. The consequences of Jamie’s silence are that he does not have a community, his family, to help him deal with the horrors that come with war. These events scarred him and he cannot rehabilitate without sharing these experiences. Not speaking takes away so much power because someone who is silent keeps all of their thoughts and feelings inside, making them seem irrelevant to others. Some people have no choice and are forced into a life like this. Having the opportunity to be heard is all of the freedom someone needs to make a change in their lives or in others.
1. The setting is always a large part of the development of any story. So much that it maintains the same essential qualities that a main character possesses. The beginning storyline of Mudbound, specifically, depends heavily on natural disaster and the land to keep the plot rolling.
ReplyDelete2. The changes of perspective broaden the reader’s perception of the story and the way the events unfold. Each character has a very different point of view and it creates a more balanced and less biased story. Their reliability is questionable, but each opinion that is offered still carries validity. The author most likely chose to not allow Pappy to speak because his opinion had nothing to offer to the story.
3. Laura’s silence has caused her to become tired. She pays less attention to the farm and to her husband. Jamie’s silence has a similar effect on his spirit. He is allowing his experiences and unhappiness to build up and eat away at his energy.
1) setting in this novel is more significant than most given in the beginning of the book geographical features are a big part of the overall plot.
ReplyDelete2)Changes in perspectives are vast because almost nobody has the same view on the life there leading, there view points on life always differ from the last and give us more background and information than the last character did.
3)Silence is a component as where silence takes over the persons psyche and throws them into a spiral of silent emotions that haven't been found how to be dealt with.