I just want to say I am thoroughly thrilled that this was the last peice of work we had to view in this class. It was so funny that it made me cry, even the serious and touching parts, for instance when he had to shoot his own mother in the head. But I will say one thing, David was not someone I would ever want to be friends with. The humor in this film was so simplistic that besides being funny, it makes you realize how complicated society has made things, or how high tech everyone thinks they need to be because of consumerism. When an audience thinks its funny when the main character tells everyone to stay here I’ll go scope out the area, and then climbs up a three foot kiddie slide, besides making you split your sides it really makes you realize.
So now that the Apex has been ripped off and thrown away, meaning the story is over, everything finished its full circle and has come to a rest. This story has so much in it, that in the end had changed the narrator and how he looks at how things are named, and basically how he looks at life as well. His toe was the most disturbing part of the novel, and the maid along with Muttonchops was probably the most humorous parts. The ending of the story was probably the most disappointing. Even though the process of getting to the end was intriguing.
In an earlier post I compared this novel as a new age mystery, with its fragmented postmodern information, and seemingly pointless details that in the end add up and let loose the real meaning. One conclusion is that nomenclature is not just a simple job that everyone should want to have, but it is the idea of where someone fits into society, it shows confliction. Or, that an apex may cover up something damaged, but it does not make it physically go away, or cure anything. Which in a way this story was an apex over the way the narrator saw and believed things ran, it was taken off in the end and he saw things in a new light, unlike his poor toe that had to get cut off. The realization that even though the narrator mentioned early on that a name is power, but then he settles with naming the town “Struggle” shows the narrators growth and realization.
Even though the story ended with a dud name, the way you get all the information about how there was a conflict with field, and there is still a mystery as to why Goode decided to join Winthrop’s side in the vote, was what made me really enjoy the book despite the “struggle” to understand the reasoning of the flow and pace of the book. 🙂
part II November 17, 2007
I liked the second part of the reading more so than the first because, now that I understand the drift of this novel, it was more intriguing to keep reading. The second part is revealing some answers to the questions that orignated, and its kind of like this book is a mystery in itself, it starts off being mysterious and not understanding where it’s going to go next, and now its letting us in, showing us the problems, and why things are the way they are. For example, the toe has been brought back up. We know know a possible solution to why he is missing his shy, back of the room, B average student toe, because he stubs it and puts an Apex on it but he continually stubs it? So is this why he gets it amputated? the second part gives possible solutions but no definitive end to what we are reading yet, which is like a mystery novel, and I enjoy mystery novels, so this is novel is like a postmodern spin-off on what old mystery stories are like. This book isn’t about who killed who and how, or how something got where and why, the story itself is a mystery, like the town of Winthrope and like the unnamed narrator limps, and despite being a “namer” has no name himself.
Apex November 14, 2007
I actually like this book. It has the slower pace, and even though it seems like in the first fifty pages you learn nothing, in class when we were talking about it all there’s a lot more that you do learn then you think. The most different thing about this book is the humor, and the whole renaming a place. I do feel as if the humor is out of the movie Fargo. It’s dry and you have to realy be paying attention to what you are reading to catch on to that one funny sentence amist a paragraph of horrifying realizations, like the housewife that cuts herself paragraph, but her husband definitly went to a liberal arts college. A lot of the things that I feel are funny aren’t right away and they continue to make me feel like the book is not funny at all until class time where we point all the little humorous comments and then it dawns on me that oh yeah thats funny. I guess this would put this novel into the postmodern genre. The unpredictability and straying from the general rules of what makes something funny is what happens in Apex Hides the Hurt.
Also I kind of get why some of the citizens of Winthrop want to change the name, but then again I don’t. Don’t some places really pride themselves on being a place for over so and so number of years? Wouldn’t that only be possibly if they kept the same name? Doesn’t every place want to keep the same name so they can be considered a historical landsite which in turn can help them earn more tourists and help raise up their town’s revenue? Also, barbed wire…who would want that? Oh Apex…
Paper Topic November 9, 2007
As said in class I wanted to do my paper on something that had to do with masculinity which was a theme that was brought up in almost all of the texts we read. The way masculinity changed and had different meetings in every text is what sparked and kept my interest. So then, my topic is really, what is postmodern masculinity?
I decided to narrow down the text reference to the film Fight Club, in it masculinity is changing, has several different definitions, along with various reasoning for what is and why certain things were made masculine or not. Doing the film instead of the book I thought would be better, because when talking about masculinity it is easier to find that characteristics to me, when watching images rather then reading a text where the images are left up to our own imagination which can tend to make things more masculine when they shouldn’t be just based on how we interpret the words in the passages.
For the paper I want to start off with describing some vividly masculine scenes in Fight Club, maybe two or three. Then go into further detail with why these scenes are masculine, their importance, and what masculinity means in that reference. Then to bring it back to what’s going on today I want to first bring up what others are saying about the masculinity in Fight Club, and about what postmodernism is to them, and then to bring it even further back to base, use some current images that show and over use of masculinity. One example of this would be a magazine ad for Tag Body Spray. I will go into further explanation of the masculinity visible in the ad and then talk about what others have said about masculinity in today’s advertising and photographs. I feel by doing these four general goals, I can talk about what postmodern masculinity is, demonstrate it with the film Fight Club, and then talk about what masculinity is today, and use some ads and photographs to demonstrate it.
The only problem I having with writing this paper is that it is difficult to find sources that are specific enough to pertain to my topic and other goals. I have found one journal that talks about the impact of visuals over reading, and a couple scholarly websites that talk about masculinity in Fight Club the movie. I can’t really find any one who talks about what generally postmodern masculinity is, or about anyone mentioning what masculinity is today. Most sources I do find are about politics and I can not find that information useful for this paper so if anyone has gotten any sources I could use that would be greatly appreciated. 😀
Here are the sources I did find:
http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/postmodern_culture/v013/13.3friday.html ~Talks about the masculine scenes in Fight Club, novel and film.
http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=H0QKJrprQCDShTtMXWCvSprVXJ5RJ4FL4rCnCX4qTj9JqpBJQsLw!-1280909210?docId=5006370732 ~ Talks about the masculinity in Fight Club and relates it to the world we live in and how the film is just showing us the society we have become.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/j7n7v3212064h237/ ~Talks about the crisis of masculinity and how Fight Club is alienated men using updated pranks to demonstrate this crisis.
http://www.umpi.maine.edu/~ricer/research/masculinity.htm ~ Talks about masculinity using Fight Club and other movie references.
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~ma02/freed/fightclub/mv.html ~ Says violence is the reclamation of masculinity in the postmodern moment.
http://www.jstor.org/view/00028762/di981910/98p2596i/0 ~This is a book review on Martin Jay’s novel: Downcast Eyes: The Denigration of Vision in the Twentieth Century French Thought.
http://blog.lib.umn.edu/raim0007/gwss1001/axe.jpg ~ This is an Axe Body Spray ad that I will probably include in my paper.
Third chunck of Galatea October 30, 2007
First off I really liked Donna Haraway and her theory. She is really different and talked about things I never would have thought about with technology and humans. Also, how power is thought of both physically and theoretically. The way she relates to Galatea really interested me as well. It was well explained that one of the boundries is that technology is a man’s way of thinking which links to Galatea because what is the purpose of Helen? Lentz wanted to make this machine to help him figure out how the brain works in reference to his wife. What was really fascinating is the relationship between Helen and Lentz’s wife.
They work inversily towards each other. Audrey has the data base but there is no meaning left. Meanwhile Powers is trying to expand Helen by giving her more data, and from there get her to get meaning. Another relation is that Audrey at one point was a capable human being of being independant and providing for herself and Lentz was her lover, but since her stroke Lentz is now like a father figure, trying to get her to remember paths such as a spoon to the bowl and then spoon to the mouth. Helen is the opposite with Powers. At first he was a father figure to her, spoon feeding Helen information. Now it seems as if Powers has surpassed that emotional stage and is kind of falling in love with her instead. The role reversal is opposite that of Audrey and Lentz. This can also bring it back to Donna Haraway where it shows the seperation of humans and machines. You can’t have a machine feed an insulate, a human with feelings and emotions would be the only appropriate thing to perform such a task.
On an ending note, since Power’s only writes when he has love pushing him, or else there is no meaning, does this justify that this book is about Helen and his new love for her, or is this supposed to show that as a human Power’s himself has expanded and can write now with out being in a romance?
part 2 of 2.2 October 23, 2007
When I first started reading the book, I got a false sense of actually liking it. This should have been a sign from the beginning because all of the other books we have read I hated at first and then started to like it. Since I liked this book at first it should have been a clear obvious sign that I am not going to like it. This is going to be one of my worst posts because I do not like this book at all. The only thing keeping me going is just me trying to get to the conclusion of the relationship with C. and not the Imp C. either since Powers just loves to repeat uses for abbreviations so the reader really has no idea what is going on, which annoys me, how is the reader supposed to interpret and get a greater meaning out of this book if the readers need to take notes on what every letter of the alphabet stands for.