beeeep.

"So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past." p. 115

anyone else bummed that Nick and Jordan never get together? I am. I sorta wanted them - ANYONE - to be happy at the end. I mean, Tom has no one. Gatsby's dead. Daisy's with Tom, but not really. Jordan's got a man, but with the way relationships go in this book, I don't see that lasting long. good thing the book ends before anything bad happens.

ANYWAY.

If this quote isn't the quote referenced in the opening line of the book, I'd rather like to think that it is anyway. please don't correct me unless it's vital to my understanding of the work as a whole. also, it fits quite nicely into the whole "I'm on a path trying to figure stuff out" theme I established in my first blog. I think it's a beautifully haunting quote. nice imagery, too.

I haven't decided if I like this novel yet or not, but I've gotta give props to Fitzgerald: it's very well written.

I'm anxiously awaiting the start of House

blogs are a good filler, right?

so now, to analyze protagonists, antagonists, foils, ect. yay!

I'm thinking that Willy and Biff are definitely foils. I mean, they bicker all the time. no wait, they're cool and Willy is supporti- oh, wait, nope. they're arguing again. I can't really tell who THE protagonist is... I mean, it's about Willy. and Biff plays a big role in Willy's actions, but Linda is ALWAYS there... if I had to pick one, it'd be Willy. Biff is definitely an antagonist, but whatever mental issue Willy has serves as an antagonist of its own. Happy kinda mellows things out (imagine that!). The rest of the characters just kinda float in and out (literally for some, I think [Ben?]). I think Linda and Happy serve as foils for Willy and Biff, respectively. like I said, I'm still pretty confused by the whole thing.

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.