"If you build it, he will come."

I've said that line and known the storyline behind it since I was... seven? at the oldest? I've seen the movie with my dad countless times, so reading "Shoeless Joe Jackson Comes to Iowa" was a pleasure, let me tell ya. props, W. P. Kinsella.

soherewego:
PLOT

The whole story starts with the narrator (his name is Ray Kinsella in the movie, I found no name in the short story) sitting on his porch "at dusk on a spring evening" when he hears the voice of a ballpark announcer telling him "If you build it, he will come" (511). The obvious question that the reader has with this ambiguous plot beginning is: build what, exactly? and who's going to come? And the story does get to that (what: a baseball diamond. mainly, left field (514), who: "Shoeless" Joe Jackson) but it explains the significance of it (i. e. the whole POINT of the story) in jumpy side-stories. As soon as he finishes his lemonade, he goes into bed, tells his wife what it's going to do, and she says, simply "if it makes you happy you should do it" (512) and then he goes into a story about how wonderful she is for putting up with him - and let's face it, a farmer who is barely breaking even wanting to build a baseball diamond in part of his fields is pretty nuts. He frequently adds anecdotes about his dad as well. these emphasize the importance baseball has to him. He and his dad always bonded over baseball, especially Shoeless Joe Jackson and the "Black Sox Scandal", on which the narrator was raised (514). The last half of the story (516-522) takes place solely in the present, with an interaction between the narrator and Shoeless Joe who has come to play ball in this field. These conversations finalize and conclude the opening statement: "if you build it, he will come." Indeed, in building this "diamond" and taking great care of it (preventing the grass from freezing because of the frost (p.515), asking professionals how to care for it (514)), his dream of encountering this baseball legend happened and because of the anecdotes about his father, we as readers understand just how meaningful this is to the narrator.

POINT OF VIEW

The whole story is told from the narrator's point of view, a first person POV. this is a direct POV too. the narrator is not telling this story as he saw it happen. the story is HIS story. this point of view is incredibly effective in calling attention to the importance that baseball and Shoeless Joe has to this narrator and his father. it makes the relationships between his father and wife more realistic and relateable which further intensifies the ending when Shoeless Joe shows up to play. it's not as if it's being told from an unfeeling, objective point of view. the emotion played on by first-person narrative is imperative for the proper conveyance of the story's meaning.

CHARACTERIZATION

The narrator is characterized almost entirely by his thoughts and actions. in fact, the only physical description given is that he had "ruined his insurance hands" by farming. He likes to make jokes (513), he's very dedicated (he builds a whole diamond, despite dirty looks and possible name calling, 512-13, 516) , and he adores his family (512, 515-16). He even refers to his wife and daughter as his "anyone else" in life (511). The wife is characterized physically: "red hair is short and curly...green eyes of a cat" (516), "a million freckles on her face and arms" (512), "an evil grin...tongue that travels at the speed of light" (516) and also by her actions, as described by the narrator: a series of "It was Annie who got me to"s on 516, her understanding throughout the story. the narrator's father is characterized through the dialogue related to the reader by the narrator. he is passionate about baseball. he has no objection to stating his opinion and was very matter-of-fact in his speech. (514, 516). Lastly, the daughter is also characterized by physical descriptions and her actions as related by the narrator: "an evil grin and bewitching eyes" "a magic about her" "climbs into my lap and watches baseball with me" (516). In essence, those who contribute to the importance of baseball are described more through their words and actions. those who are fundamental to the story but not the central theme are characterized by physical descriptions.

SETTING

The whole story is set in Iowa, the center of the Midwest. being from Indiana (and a family that ADORES baseball), this setting makes perfect sense in terms of the importance baseball had in this family, especially to the men of the family. Annie "understands [her husband] and not always what is happening" (516) in the game, much like the women in families now. this setting makes the story (right down to the love of the Cardinals and hatred of the Yankees, 513) more relateable to modern times. the time frame of this story is at some point after 1951 (the death of Shoeless Joe) (513, 520), likely in the mid- to late-1900s, but not much more detail than that is given. The time period it occurs in does not seem to have much importance to the story itself, beside the fact that it takes place after the death of Shoeless Joe.

THEME

Baseball is life? Is that an acceptable theme? ;]

but really, there are two themes I found in this story. first, the aforementioned love of family. the narrator adores his wife and daughter. he loves(-ed) his father. they all loved him back. this unconditional love, I think, was the most important theme in the whole piece. without the love and support of his family and the passion instilled by it, the second theme would never have been as effective. (cute segue, huh?) THEME 2: hard work and dedication pay off. even if you are crazy. but really, this guy spent seasons of hard work (three, to be specific, 514) to complete this dream he had. he got weird looks from neighbors, I'm sure, his in-laws though he was crazy, and at the end, he was almost despondent because nothing happened. he "waited, and waited, and waited" (516) for something, and then YAY! Shoeless Joe shows up, plays some ball (complains a bit about the lights), compliments the narrator on his field, and all is well. because of his dedication, he was able to build his...

*gasp!* dare I say it?, no, no I can't. too cliché...





whoops, I did it...
nice segue though, huh?

there's a street super close to me called "Brill"

it's about one hundred meters long. if that.

I always feel so creepy when I people watch. I like Miss Brill's take on it. I'm not so much people watching as I am playing a character who people watches. I mean, after all,

"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players..."

(thanks, Bill)

I really do feel bad for her though. she doesn't even realize that no one around her likes her. she's an English woman in France teaching English. she's naive. and she just doesn't understand what goes on really. I hope I'm not that person..

also, what's up with the comment about not noticing if the guy was dead? that creeps me out a little bit. I'm not going to lie.

I hate stories that start with "Once Upon A Time"

I really do.

I really really love the satire and sarcasm used in this story. I absolutely LOVE the passive-aggressive "I don't think I ought to do anything, too. that's so me...

the author is asked to write a children's story. because she "ought" to. so, she writes a story. it has a child IN it. it begins with "Once upon a time there was a perfect family blahblahblah..." and ends with "...and they all lived happily ever after", so it MUST be a children's story, right? and it has a moral too, right? I mean, the more you try to prevent something, the more likely it is to happen, or something like that.... I want to say it's Murphy's Law, but that's slightly different, I think.

and again we get the infamous word choice making everything oh-so-much-more pleasant. at the end of the story, the boy gets attacked by razor wire. but does he die? let's find out... they carry "it". yup. he's dead alright. just a corpse, a measly "it" now.

there's a little boy at St. Roch named Phoenix

... it's sad to think of crazy people named Phoenix. I love that kid.

again, I don't remember the number of the question, but I believe it was the last one regarding "A Worn Path" in the book. It asked if it mattered if the grandson was dead or not or if the story doesn't matter. I think it's really cool that the author, when asked, responded with "well, Phoenix is alive."

and that's all that really matters, I think.

just because the woman is probably mentally ill - okay, probably definitely mentally ill - does not mean that she can't live out her memory of her grandson. she lives her life just fine. a little bit more strangely than most people do, perhaps, but living nonetheless. she harms no one. she seems happy - save for the occasional threat directed towards the plants - and content with the way she is. any maybe that's because she's too naive to know what's truly going on, but I feel like in times like this it doesn't matter. I'm with the author in that it doesn't really have much bearing on the story whether the grandson is alive or not.

I personally don't think he is, but I think Phoenix would behave in the same (or very similar) manner if he were.

"Eveline" makes me think of Ben Folds

because he has a song "Emaline". completely unrelated. ohwell.

anyway, this is in response to the first(?) question in the book about this story. it asked why the first paragraph was structured the way it was. the word "invades" was used instead of something else. why was everything in passive voice except for the first paragraph?

the "invades" thing I picked up pretty quickly: no one can control night. it just happens and the darkness that it brings seeps into every crack. using the word "invades" rather than a more pleasant word preps the reader in a way for the unpleasantness that is in this story.

until I really looked into why "invades" was used, I couldn't figure out the purpose of using passive voice. (being a yearbook nerd, I find very little use for it in most circumstances. other than laziness, of course). but! I had an epiphany.. as I was explaining to my small group that "invades" is used because it can't be controlled, I realized that the author used passive voice for similar reasons. passive voice suggests that something happens, but not actively. the person doing the action does not choose to do the action, necessarily. there's a lack of DOING replaced by simply BEING... the passive voice foreshadows the lack of control and action that Eveline exercises in the story, a-HA!

you indecisive twit...

yes, yooooou Bart. you don't even get the rest of your name right now.

can you seriously not make up your mind? or are you just SOO immensely passive aggressive that you make people whip out commands to make you do things? (that image is much more powerful if you think about it in terms of Spanish, just saying)

hey, will you put this away?
--I'd rather not.
well, will you?
--I'd prefer not to.
but are you going to?
--I'd prefer not doing that.
JUST DO IT ALREADY!
--but I'd really rather not.

*facepalm* [sigh of exasperation]

so frustrating. and I think that leaves him with issues in terms of relationships with people (d'obviously). he can't function in the real world [coneofmeaning?!], so he stays where he's comfortable. now, I think that not leaving an office is a bit much. and I think that the first company not calling the police is also ridiculous, but it's a story. whatever, I guess.

he reminds me of myself, as much as it sickens me to say that. but I'm not nearly THAT passive. I hope.

before moving onto the monster

I'm going to talk about the mother in "Everyday Use" for a little bit. (approximately eight to ten more sentences, probably)

it's hard to tell exactly how each of the characters in this story REALLY is due to the fact that the mother (does she ever get a name?) narrates the whole thing. she seems to have a sort of relationship with Dee that reminds me of the relationship that the prodigal son and his father have. she's happy to see Dee, but seems to be hurt that Dee has changed her name. she seems more hurt that Dee doesn't like the explanation her mother gives as to why she was named Dee. and we see that she shifts back and forth from calling her Dee (Wangero) and Wangero (Dee) as if she doesn't really like choosing between the two.
the mother seems offended that Dee wants to take all of the "important" quilts away.
she's very protective of Maggie.
and by the end of the story she kinda loses it. she doesn't do anything crazy, but she just refuses (finally) to put up with the sense of ownership that Dee walks into a household she's abandoned with.

go mom, right?

story quilts

I sorta understand where Dee is coming from in "Everyday Use". I'm one of those people who wants to preserve everything. I don't want anything to get ruined, and I don't want to risk further ruin by trying to fix it myself. but if you really think about it, what would someone be doing with a quilt that would ruin it in five years. that's what Dee seems to think Maggie will do. but really, they mostly just sit on a bed. keeping them hung on the wall won't make a HUUUUGE difference.

also, why did Dee change her name? to try to "reconnect" with her heritage after denying it for all of those years? because of some boy? LAME, I say.

and if she despises the house they live in, why does she make sure that it's in every picture? or did I miss something.

and am I the only one who got the vibe that it's Dee's fault that Maggie is so badly disfigured from the fire? I think not.

"I'm going to the hospital"

are you sure of that, m'love? because it seems to me as if your friends have taken a DIFFERENT turn. not a wrong one necessarily, but a different one.

I don't exactly blame them. I mean, Kenny was a total jerk. he's the bully that every kid hates in highschool. and then he gets out and he's even worse because he's STILL the bully that everyone hates in highschool. still living his "glory days". sure, Tub's a bit on the hefty side, but joking about running him over in a car? not cool.

and Tub, why don't you just eat? I mean, why hide the fact that you have a problem that isn't genetic? people can help you, y'know. and just because Kenny's a jerk doesn't mean everyone is.

also, Frank, grow a backbone. you just sit around and let Kenny make all kinds of awful remarks. and don't do a thing! it's almost as sickening as making the jokes yourself. although, you did encourage Tub to eat his heart out in waffles (pancakes?). that was totally unnecessary though. so graphic. I know he's obese, but I don't need to read about how grotesquely he eats. thanks.

now when

deciding what to make this fourth blog about, my OCD wouldn't really let me arbitrarily pick one to do two over, so I decided to look for common ground.

the one thing I found? subtle, dry-ish, humor. ohyes. I have a knack for finding this sort of thing.

first: in "How I Met My Husband", we see this shy, subservient housemaid be courted by this dashing pilot who HAPPENS to be flying his plane and landing in the field behind her house. (is that what the kids call it these days? [toofar?]}. the two of them create this picture-perfect covert relationship, complete with hiding from a wife and unnecessary drama. of course, he PROMISES to write, so like a good girl, she waits for the mail at the mailbox and meets her real husband. the cynic in me loves this. I love that the perfection is ruined in such a pleasant way. also, if she told her husband the truth, it'd cause problems. which is also the case in...

"Interpreter of Maladies" (ooooh, did you see that nice segue?!). first for the humor. Mr. Kapasi's ability to interpret is misinterpreted. oh the irony! Clearly, Mrs. Das must know that translating and problem solving are two completely different beasts, but she shares her deep dark secrets anyway. again, a truth that would potentially ruin her marriage if she told her husband.

"A Rose for Emily" is a little different... there is no husband with whom a marriage can be ruined, per se. but telling the truth about the secret lying (literally) in the house of Miss Emily would definitely cause devastation in the community. which is probably why she keeps it on the DL. also, I wish it were that easy to get out of paying taxes... just sayin'.

I'm with everyone else on this one... this is weird.

I personally find it pretty gross that "A Rose For Emily" ends in a rose colored room with a decaying carass. is that really the rose we're supposed to envision? really?

I definitely understand why the book put this short story in POV. It has pretty clear breaks where the people speaking change. the coolest thing about this though is that every change brought a new insight to Miss Emily's life, not necessarily in chronological order, but more like tangents. just like when you're speaking with a group of people and something that one person says gets you to go off onto a similar, related, but not exactly the same topic. rad.

intersting imagery I found in this: she's described using words for death before she's even dead. examples: she is described as having a skeletal frame and that she was so plump she looked like a body long submerged in water, therefore, drowned. yikes? gross? and then she goes and kicks the bucket. after sleeping(?) with a dead man.
so creepy. so gross. yet so intriguing..

I mean, why doesn't she talk about this? why is she hiding a dead body in her house?

the world may never know.

hyperactive love story on some sort of amphetamine...

yeah. I said it.

"Interpreter of Maladies" made me think of a hyperactive love story. on speed. I'm not sure what would ever make someone think that an interpreter is able to solve marital problems... but apparently Mrs. Das thinks that Mr. Kapasi can. the kind of unspoken "thing" they had for one another throughout the story kinda made me sick, too. I mean, really? you will never see this woman again. but you're still trying to get with her? you have a wife, for Christ's sake!

okay, but seriously, think about this in terms of a real relationship, will you? first, there's the infatuation. duh, he keeps checking her out in his rearview. she plays it coy (coneofmeaning?!). next, they start talking. exchange addresses, under the guise of mere picture sharing no less! then, finally, the big boys come to play. the huge bomb drops. the one huge secret that plagues the Das marriage gets dumped on Mr. Kapasi, and he can't deal, so they drift apart because she gets upset. he tries to win her back, she storms off, he saves her from rabid monkeys (okay, maybe they weren't rabid). and maybe that's not exactly "normal", but something similar happens in all failed relationships. then, she loses his address. loses all contact with him. done. all the way through a relationship in a matter of mere paragraphs.

and you thought that I was on crack with the whole "hopped up love story" notion... ha! the plot of this mirrors perfectly how a full relationship works and fails. it's pretty rad, actually.

"I like for people to think what pleases them and makes them happy."

fin.

I personally LOVE the ending of "How I Met My Husband". I find the whole "let's spend five pages talking about this guy that isn't actually her husband" idea quite cool. one of the reflection questions was something about whether or not the end was predictable. I personally sorta saw it coming. I mean, no well-written story ends so perfectly. I KNEW there had to be some twist. now, I didn't expect for the conclusion to happen and be done with quite so quickly... but it made me laugh. for me it was sorta like this: "oh hey, this guy is perfect! he's cute, charming, funny, going places with his life, interested in me, married, he kisses me, promises to write, leaves suddenly on his plane..., andthenImeettheguyI'llactuallymarry. THE END!"

I think that building up all of this backstory that doesn't really matter really sets the stage for some other guy to come in and steal the story. and, even though it's kind of sad, the last line of the story is perfect, just because throughout the story Edie's passive and doesn't want to be the source of conflict, and the same is precisely true at the end.