Department of Speculation Blog 4

When it comes to The Department of Speculation, I’m not sure that there could possibly be a better word to describe the overall analysis of this work than “speculation”. The author, in this case, has managed to craft such a compelling piece of literature that it not only transcribes multiple genres, but also creates some confusion as to whom this book is written for, and indeed, to whom the protagonist, the wife, is speaking to.

 

The very fact that for the latter half of the book, the narrator describes herself as nothing more than “the wife” as if she were an outsider looking in on her own life, takes the almost journalistic first person POV early on in the book and flips it entirely on its head. Not only that, but it also complicates the matter of what exactly the narrator’s purpose is in telling this story, transcribing it for others to find. Who is the intended audience, if there is one at all? Perhaps this entire text is nothing more than a rambling stream of consciousness, an outlet for a poor, downtrodden wife as she falls further and further into the grips of despair? There are many questions raised by the overall narrative of The Department of Speculation, not the least of which is whether or not there is an explicit intention for this work to be read by others (outside of, of course, the fact that the real-life author of this book wishes to make sales off their work), and I will do my best to address the possibilities of whom the intended addressee is throughout this fourth blog post.

 

As mentioned, throughout the first half of the book, the novel is written in first person, through the POV of a woman who goes unnamed. We learn early on that this woman is an author with great aspirations for a bright future that include taking advantage of all that life has to offer, being both independent and possessing a fairly positive outlook on life. The stream-of-consciousness style in which this book is written still lends a somewhat chaotic vibe that a simple journal entry would lack. In fact, it is almost as if the reader is being plunged headfirst directly into the mind of the narrator, the woman, and experiencing each and every sporadic, spastic thought that crosses her mind.

 

This is perhaps the most intriguing element to this novel, the fact that the addressee would seem to be someone that is allowed to peer directly into her mind as if a window were literally installed in the back of her skull. This is also what makes the book so entertaining and thought-provoking to read, as it prompts the reader to empathize with the woman in the sense that we, as human beings ourselves, can understand and accept that this is in fact how most of us think on a daily basis, from moment to moment; however, seeing such a detailed and thorough outline transcribed onto pages through the written word is something thnat most of us have rarely, if ever, experienced.

 

On the other hand, if one is to view this as a more literal journal entry, just one that happens to be written with a stream-of-consciousness fashion, then there are several possibilities as to whom the possible target audience is. It could be that the author wrote this in the style of a journal like most people keep, one that is to be kept private for therapeutic reasons. Perhaps the journal was meant to be passed on one day to the woman’s husband as a way of detailing how things went so horribly wrong, and using that for alternative therapeutic reasons in something like marriage counseling as a last ditch effort to save their failing marriage. Maybe the journal was meant to be passed on to the wife’s daughter when she grew older, serving as a cautionary tale of sorts, warning against letting go of her dreams and settling down too early and easily for her own good, as the book clearly demonstrates the wife’s slow descent into madness.

 

The final option would rest in the fact that, as we are made aware, the wife is both a teacher and writer by profession. She could, in fact, mirror the author herself, with the target audience consisting of those who would be inclined to pick up and read such a narrative from the local bookstore. The alternative possibility here is that she could be writing this all down for her students, for much the same reasons mentioned as that for her daughter, serving as a more broadened cautionary, yet entertaining tale for the younger generation to consume, take heed, and hopefully find some sort of entertainment from

 

At the very least, the author’s inclusions of jokes and explicit ways to make her transcribed thoughts more entertaining point towards the fact that The Department of Speculation goes far beyond a simple journal entry, meant to be kept secret for the entire life of the wife. Such an example can be found on page 124,

 

“Why couldn’t the Buddhist vacuum in corners? Because she had no attachments.”

 

The inclusion of simple jokes such as these speak volumes as to the exact type of addressee that the author, or the wife herself, would be writing all of this for. The humor is one way of providing entertainment, but the high-brow twist provided by the fact that one must first have knowledge of Buddhist principles to understand the joke speak towards a more scholarly reader, one that is fairly worldly and enjoys thinking critically. Basically, the intended addressee may indeed be the philosopher, much like the one she speaks of throughout the novel.

 

Rather, I believe that the scenario of the wife, a writer herself, directly mimicking the author, or the possibility of her writing this for future generations as a sort of cautionary tale are the more likely scenarios. As such, the intended addressee would be either the widespread audience that would be drawn towards a unique, compelling twist on the standard tale of a housewife that lost her way in the local bookstore, or the wife’s students, including her own daughter.

 

Lastly, I do think that the inclusion of so many high-brow jokes, philosophical diatribes, and internal monologues of quite the philosophical nature mean that this book was meant for those who, above all else, wish to shift their perspective inwards. To better understand the inner workings of their own mind, and maybe even how they got to the situations they are currently in right now, just as the wife did. After all, the wife was not aways the wife. At one point in her life she was a naive child, one that could have very well used a book such as this to guide her along the way, because, “No one young knows the name of anything.” (177)

By Jordan

Dept. of Speculation Blog 3

Speculating Codes

                                                                    by Alex Geffard

In our first blog, we offered our first impressions of Dept. of Speculation, and explained a network of controlling values. In our second blog, we looked at the genres and forms present in the novel. In this blog, we’ll look at a couple of Intertextual Codes.

 

Kaja Silverman, in The Subject of Semiotics, paraphrases Roland Barthes by explaining that “a code represents a sort of bridge between texts. Its presence within one text involves a simultaneous reference to all of the other texts in which it appears, and to the cultural reality which it helps define-i.e. the particular symbolic order.” Think of the code as the connotative meaning of a word or phrase. There are many different codes, each which invoke some kind of other meaning or thought.

 

The two codes that I want to look at in this post are the Semic and Cultural Codes- which I found to overlap nicely.

 

The Semic Code, as interpreted by Rowan University Professor Andrew Kopp, “Defines characters, objects, and places through repetitively grouping a number of signifiers (“semes”: words and phrases) around a proper name….the semic code sets up relationships of power that often reinforce cultural codes.” The semic code highlights the words or phrases associated with characters, objects, and places, such as the epithet “Alexander the Great”, and hints at their meanings (Alexander was a great conqueror who took over many lands).

 

Naturally, Cultural Codes, as defined by Silverman, “speak the familiar ‘truths’ of the existing cultural order, repeat what has ‘always been already read, seen, done, experienced'”. This has to do with the ideas and thoughts we get after reading certain words or phrases. What appears in our minds is influenced by our culture and society. An example of this as an untrue stereotype is “the blond girl in front of me complained that she didn’t understand the math test.” When we read that the girl is blond, with think about the cultural idea that blonds are generally dumb.

 

In Dept. of Speculation, the Semic and Cultural codes are linked together. The words the author uses as placeholders for the characters are the semic codes, and the stereotypical positions that our culture sees these words are the cultural codes.

 

When the narrator changes POV from first person to third (page 95), she refers to herself as The Wife.  When we see this placeholder, we think literally that she is someone’s wife. She is married to someone. She doesn’t see herself as her own person. She believes that she cannot be referred to without hinting at her connection to her spouse.

Culturally, when with think of a stereotypical wife’s role, we typically picture a 1950s nuclear family, where the wife is a stay at home mom taking care of her child and cleaning and laundry. The breadwinner of the family is the husband, and she is submissive to him. Now the narrator is not the type of woman to be like this, because she works hard for herself and is normally a very independent woman (initially, she didn’t want to be a mother). But once she is married and has a child, she starts to see herself assuming the stereotypical role, having to stay at home and take care of the child. She finds herself emotionally connected to her husband:

• “After you left for work, I would stare at the door as if it might open again.” (page 24)

 

The Husband is the placeholder for someone’s… husband. It implies that the husband is a “he”. He is connected to his wife, a protector and leader for his family. He is his own person, who chooses to be tied to the wife.

 

Culturally, we think of husbands, in the 1950s nuclear family, as the patriarch of the family. The breadwinner. He is honest and strong, confident and kind. Now, in the modern view, our thoughts are less kind. Husbands are thought of as the person in the couple who will generally cheat. Husbands are less trustworthy than wives, and are often thought to be distant from their family. There’s the stereotype that all African American husbands leave their families behind, often to sleep with younger and hotter women. The Wife in the story sees her husband more in the modern sense, sensing him to be distancing himself from her in everything they do, less trustworthy:

• “ Some nights in bed the wife can feel herself floating up towards the ceiling. Help me, she thinks, help me, but he sleeps and sleeps.” (page 108)

 

This novel is rich with Semic and Cultural codes that really elevate it to a more universal level. They make the story almost seem allegorical, like the characters are modern archetypes.

Dept. of Speculation: Changing the way we look at fiction.

I cannot believe that my group is on our final book already. (Where has the time gone?!) For our last group of blogs, we decided to read Dept. of Speculation by Jenny Offill. Although this book falls under the genre of fiction, we see that its form is a bit unconventional; Experimental to say the least. As you can see in the example below, the short chapters are broken up into little paragraphs that has little to no organizational order.

I must admit that it took me awhile to adjust to this new form of writing, but by the third chapter it was all starting to fall into place. What occurred to me, at first as random unrelated thoughts, soon started to form a visible pattern. By stepping back and treating each paragraph as its own entity, I was able to decipher the meaning of the paragraphs individually, as well as altogether.  As I continue reading this book, I keep reminding myself that the narrator is telling this story as a stream of conscious. So it would only be fitting that the chapter would be sporadically composed, because it is realistic to how our minds think throughout the day. We usually do not think in clear, concise patterns, but instead we experience a million random thoughts one after another.

In Dept. of Speculation, we are in the mind of our narrator who is thinking back to all the things that have become her life. In a sense, we are joining her in reflecting on the rollercoaster ride of life. She is an artist, who after marrying her husband and having an unplanned baby, has let go of her dreams for a lack of time. We get a sense that she is overwhelmed and is finding it difficult to balance the scary reality of being a wife and a parent and all that entails. She captures this unease by referring to the following quote:

“What Keats said: No such thing as the world becoming an easy place to save your soul in” (P. 46).

In other words, life is hard and it is something that one must come to grips with in order to succeed.

The form is doing more than just craftily demonstrating her stream of thought, it is also successfully evoking emotions in the reader. Kenneth Burke found that form has five aspects that create an “arousing and fulfillment of desires. A work has form in so far as one part of it leads a reader to anticipate another part, to be gratified by the sequence” (124). Although the text is filled with many instances of all five of these aspects, for my blog I will only be concentrating specifically on the Qualitative Progressive form.

Qualitative Progressive form is responsible for evoking emotions in the reader, thus promoting a natural flow from one emotion to the next. For example, in class Dr. Kopp described to us how without happiness we could never experience sadness. You cannot have one emotion without the other. This example alone is played upon a few times in the text, in the ways that the narrator is describing both happier times and sadder ones. We know in life that good times do not continue forever and we will eventually come to some bumps in the road.

A specific example of the Qualitative Progressive form at play begins in chapter four where she recalls the very first interactions between her now husband and herself. The relationship is described in the little moments that portray how exciting and new this relationship was to them.

“Lying in bed, you’d cradle my skull as if there were a soft spot there that needed to be protected. Stay close to me, you’d say. Why are you way over there?” (P.18).

As the story progresses, we begin to that infatuation fade and a distance start to wedge between them. She writes…

“After you left for work, I would stare at the door as if it might open again” (P.24).

And later still…

“And then there is the night that he misses putting their daughter to bed. He calls to say he is leaving work right when she thinks he will be home, something he has never done before” (P.96).

Because of the way these moments are presented, we can infer that the narrator is feeling overwhelmed and therefore experience it with her. It also sets up the framework for the reader to predict that, if this progression continues, the marriage is in danger of ending. It is also interesting how she decides to flip points of view midway through the book from first person to third. In a sense, this portrays to the reader how the narrator is kind of distancing herself from reality. It is almost as if she is taking a step back and reflecting on her life, pretending that it is all someone else’s truth, and not her own.

In the end, I am lead to believe that, although the relationship between the husband and wife might not be saved, our narrator will at least find balance in her life once again. I am able to make this prediction because the Qualitative Progressive form that is present in the text helps me understand this rollercoaster of emotion that is being portrayed. Just as life cannot be happy all the time, we know that sadness will eventually change back to happiness in a never-ending cycle.

GIFs from GIPHY

Cover Photo

For the Wife and her Speculation on Life

Dept. of Speculation – Blog One

Of the books we have read so far, Dept. of Speculation by Jenny Offill is the most vague, yet painfully specific narrative. The story follows a woman, that calls herself the Wife (95), and the beginning and possible end of her family unit. In the first few chapters we read as she falls in love, gets married, and has her first child.

“What did you do today, you’d say…and I’d try my best to craft an anecdote for you out of nothing” (25).

The Wife tells her story in bursts and jumps sprinkling in seemingly disconnected facts or quotes. The epitaph says “Speculators on the universe…are no better than madmen” which is a quote from Socrates. To open a book called Dept. of Speculation, this quote immediately makes me think that the narrator finds herself to be some kind of madman. Or at least her speculation is driving her somewhat mad.

I found this book extremely easy to read. The short paragraphs and seeming random nature of outside information only kept me reading. I sat down to read just a few pages to get a feel for the story and I found myself halfway through without even trying. I thought then, I was already halfway there. The narrator resonated with me. She has a dual nature, two perfectly opposite desires, one never possible if the other is true. This contradictory nature is something I believe I fight with.

She struggles with what she once wanted from life, and what her life has become. On page eight she says “I was going to be an art monster instead.” In the past she never wanted to get married and have children but by chapter 12 she’s done both of these things. But also, she no longer knows what she wants, or why she isn’t satisfied with what she has.

What do you want?                                                                            I don’t know.

What do you want?                                                                            I don’t know.

What seems to be the problem?                                                      Just leave me alone” (39).

The narrator can not rectify that she is a wife and mother, working a job that the husband would probably call “only vaguely soul-crushing” (34) if the roles were reversed. The narrator also says that someone asks her about her second book (38) which isn’t written yet. Another thing she’s had to give up so far.

“A few days later the baby sees the garden hose come on and we hear her laughing” (32).

I think mostly, the narrator is struggling with herself in these first few chapters. If she was an art monster who didn’t care for mundane things (8), then she would have never known the laughter of her daughter (32), but by giving up that part of her she loses a light that shines within (30). Then again, by giving up being that monster she can be apart of a society that thinks she is doing all the right things, but by being a part of this society she fades, becoming one of the mothers who do not show up early (42).

This progression is the start of the novels network of controlling values. These values can be found throughout the novel, but specifically in the in first 12 chapters. A controlling value for any given person is a cultural narrative their life follows. People will see any event or action through the lense of their own controlling values. This is how people with opposing views will always think their way is right even when given evidence that may prove the opposite. Controlling values are at the base of all judgments and projections. In Dept. of Speculation this is one of the dominant networks of controlling values that I found: 

Controlling Values

Context: Being selfish and concerned only with oneself and the creation of art, one loses out on the biologically and societally driven happiness that having a family and children provide.

Purpose: By forgoing some personal desires and giving oneself fully to the life of family, one will be wholly rewarded in the delights of children and die knowing that they have left something behind to continue to grow and prosper.

Opposite Controlling Values

Context: By giving up agency to focus on having a family and following social norms, one loses the spark of originality and light that made them an artistic creator.

Purpose: Accepting that the creation of art takes sacrifice, one can be a greater asset to society by allowing themselves to break free of social norms and do what they were meant to do, create.

“The Buddhists say there are 121 states of consciousness. Of these, only three involve misery or suffering. Most of us spend our time moving back and forth between these three” (11).

But even this seems to not encapsulate the whole story for the narrator. I wonder if she really gives anything up to continue creating. She has her family, and she has her second book, so to speak. She has gone through hardships and made sacrifices, but in the end it looks as if the only thing she truly loses is the city.

Yet still, she is never truly happy. Even she quotes “The third is an understanding of the unsatisfactory nature of ordinary experience,” while talking about the Buddhist’s three marks one must reach to attain wisdom (47). I think she may have discovered a kind of wisdom, but she feels “There is such a crookedness in my heart. I had thought loving two people so much would straighten it” (44). This is the conflicting nature the Wife lives in, not fully apart of either ideal, for both are perfect opposites to her.

Annihilation Blog #4: An Expedition Into the Narrator and the Addressee

   

   Over the past three blogs about Annihilation by Jeff Vandermeer, my group has come up with a network of controlling values, looked at form and genre, and searched for intertextual codes. In this final blog for the novel, I want to address (pun intended) who the narrator and the addressee are.

 

   The narrator is the Biologist. We do not know her name, but her title gives away her profession. We also know that she is headstrong and likes to think for herself. While Area X is very dangerous, we learn that she is interested in exploring it. Unlike her the other women on her expedition, she doesn’t follow the psychologist (of course, inhaling the spores helped her to resist the hypnotism). As a researcher, she is very smart, and as a Biologist, she tries to study her environment.

 

   She is an expert at what she does, so as readers, we automatically believe that what she is saying is the truth (“I believe I qualified because I specialized in transitional environments”-pg. 11). Though, she does indicate that Area X can mess with people’s minds, so maybe not everything she says is as it happens.

 

   From the very first pages, we learn that the narrator is the Biologist (“I was the Biologist.”-pg. 3), and that this book is entries in a journal she is required to write in (“It was expected simply  that we would keep a record, like this one, in a journal, like this one”-pg. 8). As the quote mentions, the members of the expedition were given journals to keep records of their expedition. This could be because unexplainable things happened to the very first expeditions, so each subsequent one was required to keep a record.

   If something else happens to these expeditions, someone may be able to find out what happened to them.  The Biologist becomes that someone when she finds the other journals (including her husband’s) in the lighthouse.

   At the end of the story, the Biologist tells us that she plans to do the same as the people from the previous expeditions, and leave her journal in the lighthouse to be found.

   “I have spent four long days perfecting this account you are reading, for all its faults, and it is supplemented by a second journal that records all of my findings from the various samples taken by myself and other members of our expedition…I have bound these materials together with my husband’s journal and will leave them here, atop the pile beneath the trapdoor.” (P. 193)

   The Biologist chooses to explore on, leaving her records at the very top of a pile of multiple journals  to be found by someone else. That someone else is the addressee.

 

   Just to clarify, the addressee is the audience, the people who are reading or listening to the story. According to Peter Rabinowitz, there are about three types of audience, with the most straightforward one being the actual audience– the characters in the story who are listening to what the narrator has to say.

   I believe that in Annihilation, the character(s) reading the Biologist’s journal are part of the 13th expedition. Like before, a new expedition is sent into Area X to find out what happened to the previous expedition. The 12th expedition (in which the Biologist belonged to) never came back, so the 13th expedition was sent to investigate (this could have happened years later, as the 12th expedition was expected to remain in Area X for a long time, with no means to communicate to the outside world). Eventually, someone from this new group would find their way to the lighthouse and discover the journals. What the someone does with that information is another question.

   I think the Biologist hopes that the person who reads her journal is someone like her- someone who will think for him/herself. If the government group that sends the expedition includes another hypnotist, or just uses individuals who follow directions, whoever discovers the records might not do anything about them. Someone like the Biologist will learn from the journals and try to find out more about Area X.

 

   I mentioned earlier that Peter Rabinowitz has three different types of audience. The second of these is the hypothetical audience– the people the author envisions will read his book. He bases his writing style and artistic choices based off this assumption. At its most simplest level, Jeff Vandermeer seemed to be writing an interesting story for fans of the science fiction/horror genres. But I also think he assumes that we as readers we do not fully trust the government or any Big Brother organization. We live in a world where secrets are kept from us, and we are being monitored almost at all time. Vandermeer hopes that we are like the Biologist, who thinks for herself, and follows what she believes is right (this will make our connection and understanding of the Biologist greater).Like the Biologist, we have learned to question things and investigate on our own.
   We need to become the narrative audience– the readers who who understand what the story is an imitation of  real life. As the best case scenario, we need to assume that we are the addressee that the Biologist hopes will read the journals- the person who knows not to trust the big organization and to think for him/herself. The fictional world is an imitation of real life, and as we see that the Biologist is someone who has a very similar mindset to us in the real world, we are clued in to imitate our ideals as the actual audience in the novel. We have to believe that the character we are in the narrative thinks like us and the Biologist.

By Alex

Annihilation: Area X the new Area 51

My group members and I are about ¾ of our way through the crazy adventure of Annihilation. For those of you just joining our conversation on the book, Annihilation by Jeff Vandermeer is a part science fiction part thriller novel that follows four members who are researching this mysterious area referred to as Area X. This location has been cut off from the rest of the world by a border for reasons that are unknown to the public. Throughout the reading, I have noticed that many of Barthe’s intertextual codes are evident in the text, but the one that stuck out the most to me was the Semic code. Barthe Describes the semic code as a technique used to define a character, object or place.

“The semic code defines characters, objects, and places through repetitively grouping a number of signifiers (“semes”: words and phrases) around a proper name. Because this code defines characters, objects. and places, the semic code sets up relationships of power that often reinforce cultural codes. (Barthe)”

In other words, the Semic code is responsible for creating connotated meaning that delves deeper than the denotative meaning. I believe that a perfect example of this is Area X itself.

In the text, we follow four scientists who are recording and mapping observations of a location referred to as Area X. I could not help but recognize the references, or similarities, to Area 51. In fact the only major differences between the two locations is that one is located in a desert (Area 51) and the other is in a location that is overpopulated with lichen and other plants (Area X). Both places, however, are characterized by being a Government contained area that host mysterious and secretive activities. We see here that on page 94, Area X is described as a result of military research.

“The government’s version of events emphasized a localized environmental catastrophe stemming from experimental military research.” (P.94)

This is interesting considering that Area 51 is also an area characterized by government military research. I believe that Area 51 is included in the text to be used as a metaphor, a semic code implemented to define Area X to the readers, so that they can better relate to the text.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with Area 51, it is an off limits military air force base located in a remote desert area in Nevada. The area is surrounded by a border that is guarded by cameras, a drop gate, and men with guns. Many claim to have seen unidentifiable flying objects (UFOs) and alien life forms wandering around. The government claims to use the base as an area to test air crafts. However, because of its mysterious nature, It has long been an inspiration for many other books, movies, and tv shows.

(Area 51 video)

Often times throughout the text, Area X is described as a mysterious, eerie, and oddly beautiful location that is surrounded by a border and full of life forms, some alien or unknown, that have adapted. This border is continually expanding and the government sent the group in to attempt to figure out why. Past expeditions have ended in death and the members of the twelve expedition must avoid becoming contaminated.

So why would Jeff Vandermeer decide to reference this in the text? I think this intertextual play reinforces the network of controlling values that my group identified in blog 1.

By comparing Area X to Area 51, the reader begins to understand how mysterious and unknown this location is. You begin to realize how the members of the group could blindly be lead into danger. For example, our narrator, the biologist, is faced with the choice of either following the leader blindly, knowing that the leader may know something that she does not, or questioning what she is told. We see this is evident on pages 38-39 when the biologist realizes that the psychologist maybe withholding information from the group.

“We had a choice now. We could accept the psychologist’s explanation for the anthropologist’s disappearance or reject it. If we rejected it, then we were saying the psychologist had lied to us, and therefore also rejecting her authority at a critical time”. (P.39)

It is at this moment in the text that the weight of how serious and dangerous this situation could be hits the biologist. We get a sense that the government may be lying to our characters and leading them unwillingly into danger. It is almost as if the members of this expedition are lab rats or guinea pigs, sent in to see what is going on in this area to the benefit of the government. To prove how indispensable the members are they are not referred to as their real names but their job titles. Again the semic code is evident in this piece of text. “There were four of us: a biologist, an anthropologist, a surveyor, and a psychologist.” (P.3) This demonstrates how they were treated as test dummies rather than living breathing humans with families and outside lives. This reinforces the cultural code of it is a “dog eat dog world.” We hear the statement all the time but what does it mean? According to the Cambridge English dictionary, the phrase “dog eat dog” is used to “describe a situation in which people will do anything to be successful, even if what they do harms others.”  Kind of like, how these government officials are inviting these members in knowing they most likely will not survive.

As my group members and I finish up this book, I am curious to see if the cultural and semic codes that I have identified still ring true. Also note, that this is an example of only one way to look at the text. There are many other possibilities of values and controlling ideas that are evident in the text.

GIFs from Giphy

Cover Photo

YouTube video

Genre and Form: Annihilation​ Blog 2

 

“When you see beauty in desolation it changes something inside of you” (6).

Annihilation is part science fiction, horror fiction, and fantasy fiction; three genres that create something more for readers to experience. Science fiction, many times, is a futuristic tale, or story that is technologically advanced, or even a story dealing with some kind of extraterrestrial. While horror fiction has elements that leave a reader scared, or uneasy. Then fantasy fiction deals with magic or the supernatural and many times isn’t set in the “real world.”

So far Annihilation is mostly a science/horror fiction novel. From the beginning, an air of uneasy mystery is brought to life. The Biologist says of Area X that “All of this part of the country has been abandoned for decades, for reasons that are not easy to relate” (3), which makes me wonder. Why is it not easy to relate? I feel that if something happens in an entire part of the country, as she says, that people would know what happened, or at least something easy to relate. On the same page the Biologist then says, “I do not believe that any of us could yet see the threat” (3).

The book continues in this way, making everything about Area X uneasy. This type of tension fits into the category of horror fiction, while the findings in the Tower lend itself to science fiction. The writing on the walls comprises of organisms that the Biologist can not fully identify. She says about the organisms in the letters, “most of these creatures were translucent and shaped like tiny hands embedded by the base of the palm” (24-25).

 

“Desolation tries to colonize you” (6).

These elements create a mysterious, ominous feeling. This mystery and slight fear of what’s to come keeps people engaged and ready. In the first fifty pages only about a day and a half pass in the book but it reads quickly. Many things are being set up (what’s so important about the lighthouse?), and many things are happening (goodbye Linguist) but the pace doesn’t feel rushed. It’s almost like the untouched wilderness is growing around the reader without them realizing they’re being trapped.

This situation, a world that was never what it seemed, requires there to be something more. I think that to most people the world is just as it seems with the simplest explanation being the right explanation. People want to step into a world like the one Annihilation is creating, a world where the calm is not calm, and a tunnel is not a tunnel, but a tower.

The form of the text also adds to the expectations created by the genre, it also circumvents those expectations. The qualitative progressive form evokes a mood from inferred qualities and allows the reader to move into a certain headspace, and progress with the text’s mood (Kopp).

 

“Where lies the strangling fruit that came from the hand of the sinner” (23).

So far we have read that the Biologist in not just like her colleagues, she prefers solitude to people, and she not only fully accepts the dangers of the exhibition, she wants to be there. She wants to be there so much, even after three of her colleagues “leave” the exhibition she is still prepared to press on. Everyone else’s mood fits perfectly with the unease that surrounds Area X. The ominous nature of the uninhabited wilderness seeps into the others but not the Biologist.

 

I would argue that a qualitative progressive form surrounds the Biologist and her contamination. She says that her senses become heightened and that she is elated in the midst of the terrible things happening. On page 92 and 93 she worries herself out of this elevated mood with all of the questions about the Tower and the thing she names the Crawler, but finds that she slips back into it. She says that;

“The brightness in my chest, continued to sculpt me as I walked, and by the time I reached the deserted village that told me that I was halfway to the lighthouse, I believed I could have run a marathon” (93).

This statement comes after she has found a body, seen mysterious lights in a place no one should be and discovered some kind of creature. This circumvents the normal genre expectations. Under normal circumstances, I would expect the Biologist to be losing it, or making some crazy plan, or escaping. It’s unexpected to be that she’s feeling so good. But while I’m in this mood, or headspace, I am immediately thrust back into the ominous unease of the area. She continues to say that “I did not trust that feeling. I felt, in so many ways, that I was being lied to” (93).

Am I being lied to?

 

Me entering Area X.

 

This change in mood makes me wonder where the story is going next. The genre would have me predict that either the Biologist is destroyed by Area X, or she somehow destroys Area X’s mystery or an entity inside of it. I’ll have to wait and see.

Annihilation Blog 1L Beginning of The En d

When I was first introduced to this novel, one which I have honestly never heard of before, I immediately found myself in the comfortable position of having a surrounding background of knowledge that should be able to guide me through, utilizing certain tropes and conventions. While I may have never intentionally gone out of my way to read a work of fiction in this genre, thriller or science fiction, I have consumed massive amounts of media that have familiarized me enough with the expectations and values of the genre such that I feel well prepared to tackle the undoubtedly thick layers of Annihilation.  I am well  aware that the covers of different print books will differ greatly, but the basic premise combined with the artwork depicting a beautiful yet menacing plant on the forefront is what really drew me in. In such a manner, knowing that the genre is science fiction, and can be seen as a sort of thriller, I sought comfort in my childhood memories of Little Shop of Horrors. Much like the carnivorous plant from Little Shop of Horrors, perhaps the “great evil” did not start off as such a horrendous creature, but was through our nurturing as a species that the monster came to be. The everlasting theme of the survival of the fittest finally shone through. Perhaps it would be a tale that begins with man’s best intentions, looking to further our own well-being while making advancements that could very well benefit the world at large with agricultural industrialization, but my fore-knowledge of the genre made me much more prepared to read for subtle allegories, cautionary tales, and the like.

 

The book begins with four scientists, all of whom remain unnamed, crossing the border to a mysterious and condemned area known only as “Area X”. The name alone sounds intimidating enough, but the fact that every single other expedition team before the current one has gone missing is the real kicker here. How and why did these previous search teams vanish? Who knows, but it’s questions like this, and being in an element of the deep, dark, unknown of a world we still barely understand, that give this novel an element of thriller and, perhaps, even vibes of horror. After all, the reader may not feel incredibly connected to any of the protagonists in particular at this point in the story, but we are still able to connect with them as human beings and as cogs in the machine in which we are all expected to play our specific roles in. If nothing else, we are able to empathize with the protagonists by the specific role, or function, that they have been given in the machine before the events of the novel even took place. Specifically, we are dealing with the surveyor, anthropologist, biologist, and a psychologist. The psychologist is perhaps the most interesting wrench thrown into the story here. We come to learn as readers that it is specifically her job to subdue the rest of the crew via hypnosis whenever deemed necessary. Adding a crack further to this dynamic is that the biologist soon discovers that unknown spores she may have ingested could make her immune to this hypnosis, leading for an explosion of drama and excitement that honestly makes me not want to put this book down. That’s all we get, so far because, due to the unique way in which this particular novel was written, the paperback novel is actually meant to be a sort of collection of field journals.

Overall, it is my belief that the two most dominating controlling values for Annihilation is the never ending struggle between two opposing ideologies: should human beings use every means at their disposal to better their own lives, even at the risk of permanently changing the environment, or should we be satisfied enough in the state of technology and advancement we have now as to not risk permanent negative effects with onward pushes? The environment of Area X seems to exemplify the struggle between these values. The biologist notes a strange sound that is heard every night coming from a distance:

“All you heard was the low moaning. The effect of this cannot be understood without being there. The beauty of it cannot be understood, either, and when you see the beauty in desolation it changes something inside of you. Desolation tries to colonize you.” (Pg. 5-6)

This example illustrates the point perfectly.  For one of the sets of controlling values within the confines of this narrative, the innate desire of man to innovate. That is to say, if is it perhaps better for human beings to accept their blessings as they are to an extent, living themselves happily and comfortably in the world that they have come to know, or if the risk of pushing the boundaries for something new, and potentially far greater, would be worth the inherent risk.

Does our meddling, for all of the technological wonders and boons that it brings, ultimately lead to our downfall. The howling almost seems to call out as if nature is giving the humans a warning. This has been a longstanding fear of the human race since the day that our species was first successfully able to ignite flame. Does the flame itself harm? Possibly, yes indeed it can, but so long as it is handled correctly, the capacity to be able to wield fire brings a near-endless supply of benefits to human society. In such a case, using technology to harness the power of nature for our own benefit can and should definitely be seen as a positive thing, and as such, an example of its corresponding controlling value winning out, at least temporarily. In addition, the idea of “desolation tries to colonize you” implies nature is fighting back. That in our downfall, nature will be the one to control us, not us controlling nature.

On the other hand, what if the future depicted in Annihilation is anything but the dystopian future with possibilities of dangerous outliers that we, the readers, were first meant to believe? Early on in the book, It is clear from the very first few pages of the novel that the narrator has several misgivings about trusting the government in general, let alone the people whom she is to lead this expedition with. For example, when they first cross the border into Area X, they are informed that the psychologist must put them under a sort of hypnosis to protect them, and prevent their minds from tricking them, because “apparently hallucinations were common. At least, this is what they told us. I no longer can be sure it was the truth.” Furthermore, the exact role of the psychologist in such a limited pool of available scientists for the expeditions, combined with her description of “An imperceptible smile on her lips as she watched us struggle to adjust” (10) is evidence of far more than simple foreshadowing.

When it is revealed that the government sets up these expeditions in part to serve as a sort of distraction for the people, steering their attention away from the real issues plaguing their society. This is not stated outright, at least not so far in the novel, but the author herself makes mention of the fact that for her part, “it hardly mattered what lies I told myself because my existence back in the world had become at least as empty as Area X. With nothing left to anchor me, I needed to be here” (12) The fact that this narrator, intelligent and successful as she should be by modern standards, would feel the need to embark on such a journey along with so many others on his expedition speaks volumes about what the Southern Reach, the clandestine government agency, has set up for the world surrounding them. These explorers embark on this journey not only for a sense of freedom from that desolation they are already accustomed to, but also the possibility of freedom from a clandestine government that, as has been suggested through the text and inclusion of hypnotic psychologists, is just another illusion of freedom to keep the populace satiated.

It is here where the defining lines between the two dominating controlling values becomes clear: Following strict order and sacrificing freedom, perhaps even individuality and freedom in the sake of forward progress, or reverting back to our more instinctual bonds and values, becoming one with nature once again, even if it means that we must sacrifice some of those progressions and innovations?

However, this is not always the case and fears of what the other end of the spectrum, those who believe we should leave nature as intended, have been saying such for years. From films such as The Terminator, to simple documentaries such as An Inconvenient Truth, examples abound and prove why such a genre needs to exist in order to tackle such prominent, relevant issues. The fact that the current expedition of the novel is the 12th unsuccessful venture speaks to some of our former controlling values discussed in Cat’s Cradle (hyperlink).  In Cat’s Cradle seeking out the truth in the first place in inherently risky, because the the search of exactly how and why things went so very wrong at area X in the first place puts not only the char

acters of the story, but slso the reader, at area X puts the individuals at risk due to the potential uncomfortable truth lying beneath the surface. From the premise alone, it seems as though Annihilation, much like Cat’s Cradle, serves as a sort of cautionary tale to warn us against some sort of dire future at the cost of or repeating mistakes in our own lives, playing off both the elements of science fiction and satire.As discussed with the elements and necessity of satire and science fiction, both of these genres have a need to exist that is driven by the way in which human beings react to our civilization, and the world at large.

Much like most recurring issues that serve to spawn the works of science fiction and satire alike, our early look at this novel could perhaps point towards very relevant environmental issues concerning the way in which we treat our environment. Also, how our continued technological impacts could serve to further impact that increasingly fragile relationship. There is not only an ever increasing need for innovation and control, but also the need for control over other human beings. The first example, demonstrating a failing control over the environment itself, can be seen in the overgrown nature of Area X itself, while the latter could be evidently seen in the prominent use of hypnosis as a means to directly control the thoughts and actions of the people. In this way, with the controlling values were to be established as sort of a “back to nature/let people do as they choose” vs “controlling the people in the name of the greater good.” Then the scene where the team uncovers the writing on the wall, “Where lies the strangling fruit,” followed by the action of swallowing spores that would seemingly make one  immune to hypnosis, demonstrates a slight victory, or at least a push towards the first direction of nature. In the coming chapters from the biologist, we will have to see which side wins out.

1. The characters themselves representing different segments of this dystopian society. (Entire story told through the perspective of the biologist, so possible bias there)
2. Numerous hints that the psychologists has some sort of ulterior motives and is there for the purpose of control. The expedition is given as an illusion of freedom, but the psychologist is there to keep things in check.
3. This could introduce yet another controlling value of whether or not true freedom is even possible in such an organized and advanced society, particularly in a post-apocalyptic setting. Even “the expendables”, those sent on these trips with a 100% death record must be closely monitored by the clandestine government.
4. The fact that the author, along with her comrades, seem fully cognizant of these facts shows just how little hope that there is left in the world, and leads to a question which could pose ass another controlling value. Is it better to take the risk, to leave one’s entire life behind for the sake of just a glimmer at some sort of higher truth, or to suffer in the monotony of a future that had already, presumably, been predetermined for them back home?
5. Connected to this, it becomes evident very early on that, at least the narrator, has little to no actual faith in the government or expedition in general, as can be seen in the observation that they had been told to “return to wait ‘extraction’…no one ever explained what the form of extraction might take 11) After all… what did happen to the other expeditions? Were they truly missing, killed off some unfortunate series of events, or was it their own employers that simply decided they learned just a bit too much more about the outside world than they should have?  by some unfortunate series of incidents, or, rather, could it be because the government itself was the one willing to silence those who eventually learned “too much”. One of the first quotes in this novel is another example of the psychologist (arguably the assistant most closely related to the government for purposes of control) who asks, “Does anyone yet have even an inking of a sensation of wanting to leave?” Now, considering her abilities, via hypnosis, the message within this statement is extremely clear
6. As a last example of this distrust towards the clandestine government, and another argument either for or against some form of higher control.

                                  

Cat’s Cradle: Living by the foma.

As a reader of Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut we are interpellated, or asked to play a certain readerly role before the story even begins. The prologue craftily welcomes us with the statement, “Nothing in this book is true.” This challenges its readers to decide whether they will in fact leave their beliefs behind and submit to the text, living by the foma, or “harmless untruths” of Bokononism (prologue).

On page 1, we are introduced to the narrator who invites his readers to call him Jonah although his birth name is John. My belief is that he is referred to as Jonah modeled after the Prophet  who is sent by God to prophesy the destruction of Nineveh. In a way, Jonah is beckoning his audience to heed his warning in questioning their beliefs before it is too late. If the reader chooses to believe him, they will survive and have life through him.

Image Credit

According to James Seitz, we must “attend to the relationships that readers create between themselves and the emerging possibilities which they anticipate in the text” (148). In other words, in order to understand the rhetorical dimensions of the text we must predict the ways in which an addressee may react to the text. By examining the rhetorical dimension, we see that Jonah as the narrator is specifically addressing someone. Who could this addressee be? By presenting the book as lies, we know that the addressee is encouraged to question everything that is presented. Which heavily aligns with our network of controlling values that we created in Blog 1 (Link). Numerous times throughout the text we are introduced to characters who go about life without questioning things. For instance, on Page 25 Jonah, the bartender, and a young woman named Sandra are discussing how Dr. Hoenikker was the guest speaker at her commencement.

    He said science was going to discover the basic secret of life someday,” the bartender put in. He scratched his head and frowned. The conversation continues with the bartender stating that he read in the paper that scientists had finally worked out the answer.

“I missed that,” I murmured.

“I saw that,” said Sandra. “About two days ago.”

“That’s right,” said the bartender.

“What is the secret of life?” I asked.

“I forget,” said Sandra.

“Protein,” the bartender declared. “They found out something about protein.”

“Yeah.” said Sandra, “That’s it.”

The bartender and Sandra do not seem to question this answer even though it seems very odd. What about protein could make it the basic secret of life? If it is the great truth, then what does it mean? This reaction is making a statement about how many times we are told things in life, especially from those who hold the position of power, and we just accept them as the truth.

In conclusion the addressee that Jonah is addressing is the reader who believes everything they are told to be the truth. The narrator is almost reminding the addressee to live life for the chase of the answer and not finding the answer itself. If the answer to the great truth was truly revealed, then the search for the answer would end. Just as my group leader Laura points out that “the ruler of San Lorenzo can never get Bokonon because that would end the hunt for Bokonon.”

As a reader being introduced to this new type of religion that is based on lies, our typical way of thinking gets disturbed. It forces us to question everything that we are told and not just accept it as the truth. Also by witnessing the interaction between the narrator and addressee unfolding in front of you, you realize how believing a harmless lie could be more beneficial than facing the hard truth.

 

Cover photo image link

GIFs from Giphy.com

 

 

Religion: Truth and Lies

I took Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut to be an exaggerated tale about religion and the culture that surrounds it. Told through the lense of a born again Bokononist, the story follows a convoluted spiral to the end of days, so to speak. The book left me scratching my head thinking why.

“[T]he son of a bitch had a piece of ice-nine with him – in a thermos jug” (83).

Barthes argues that there are five codes that describe the intertextuality of a writerly text. The codes help the reader to understand the interruptions they may have missed upon a mimetic, linear reading. By stopping and revisiting Cat’s Cradle in segments, the writerly text, and the use of the codes, allows readers to find connections to the cultural frame the text exists in.

“No damn cat, and no damn cradle” (166).

The island of San Lorenzo acts as a contained Symbolic Code that reinforces the dominant cultural codes of the time. One of the main ones being the fight between science and religion, or some form of truth and lies. There are poor islanders, cruel and rich rulers, and an oppositional religion that everyone believes in (but openly denounces). These many cultural dynamics are as old as people, and are as important today as they were when the book was written. The beauty of Cat’s Cradle is that it is self-conscious and draws attention to its Symbolic Codes. Even the cruel leader “Papa” is a devout Bokononist, demanding on his deathbed to be given last rites; “I am a member of the Bokononist faith,” “Papa” wheezed. “Get out, you stinking Christian” (218).

This comes right after “Papa” demands that Jonah kill Bokonon saying, “He teaches the people lies and lies and lies” (218). Having read Philip Castle’s book on San Lorenzo, Jonah knows that the Bokonon religion is built on lies and opposition between the city and the jungle. Yet still Jonah says, “I was not eager to kill anyone” (218). This symbolic code between the oppressive government and something to believe in is what kept the San Lorenzo people going. Their secret belief in Bokononism made life on the terrible island tolerable. Bokonon continually preached; “‘Live by the foma that makes you brave and kind and healthy and happy.’ The Books of Bokonon. I: 5” (epigraph).

Yet in the end these foma (harmless untruths) lead the survivors on San Lorenzo to commit suicide. How can the foma then be harmless? How can commiting sucide make “you brave and kind and healthy and happy”? I feel that the lies of Bokononism had become dangerous by this point. They no longer served their purpose in creating a utopia as I thought Johnson and McCabe had desired.

“Maturity,” Bokonon tells us, “is bitter disappointment for which no remedy exists, unless laughter can be said to remedy anything” (198).

The use of religion to create happiness in this text bothers me. Instead of actually increasing the standard of living on San Lorenzo, Bokonon created a religion to relieve the people of their suffering. Yet they still suffered, and in a negative turn of events some even died on the hook for their beliefs. Vonnegut laid bare centuries of turmoil due to poor living conditions and mixed religious teachings in such a way that it was comical, and outrageous. He wrote the symbolic code as if he was explaining it to the reader, rather than only existing within it. He called attention to the frame his narrative lived in, creating an interruption to the mimetic experience of the readerly text, yet somehow still creating a mimetic experience. By creating a false religion that was aware of its lies, the reader is forced to look at their own religion (which is taught as truth) and question how truthful it really is.

“I took my hands from the wheel for an instant to show him how empty of symbols they were” (285).

I think, like Campbell’s argument in Impacts of Science on Myth, the literal interpretation of Bokononism gets in the way of the spiritual impact it can have on people. In the end the dominant cultural code prevails. People have died for both science and religion and will continue to do so until ice-nine destroys the world, and in most cases even after that too. In the end religion killed the people and science killed the world. What is left for us to believe in?