no priest attended him

"The Sorrows of Young Werther", Johann Wolfgang Von Goethe, 1774

Werther is a new kind of tragic hero to me: One with a distinct weakness, though said weakness does not cause his downfall at the hands of the State or the Enemy, but at his own hands. "The Sorrows of Young Werther" seems to be highly notable for its controversial views on suicide (especially in the 1700s), and also for its cult following as an overwhelming number of people latched onto this tragic hero like few before him.

On all accounts, this story is a confessional where Werther's plight is discovered via letters to a close friend. As we read, he reveals himself as tender, intelligent, but moreso than intelligent, _passionate_ and sensitive toward nature. This is what draws in the dreamer, as they identify with good Werther. To go further, it is not uncommon for such a dreamer to identify with suicide; I find through all these literary studies as well as life studies that fantasies of death or sabotage of self can overwhelm one who has difficulty reconciling their true identity with the walking dead of most of the self-unrealized humans who surround them. In short, loneliness can eat the dreamer.

Werther's downfall is romantic passion. It is a bit pathetic to me that he'd kill himself over a girl, but his passion for this woman, Lotte, is part of his idealistic allure. Furthermore, that the torture of the one "thing" you want more than anything you've had or could have which is completely unattainable would drive someone to suicide really isn't that far fetched, is something we can empathize with, regardless if it might be pathetic. In a way, what makes us pathetic also puts us beyond that of the mere animal. Werther's passion over Lotte is based on Goethe's own unattainable apple of the eye; however, the downfall of Werther is based on a total other human being, and while these writings are every bit as sensitive and insightful on the human condition of the dreamer or intellectual non-conformist, it's clear that Goethe couldn't all together come to terms with suicide enough to do it himself. While far from promoting such actions, however, he was bold enough to put forth the act of suicide as a human reality and honestly explore how one could commit such an act. He's perhaps much like Kierkgaard in "Fear and Trembling", who cannot all together understand how Moses is able to have such faith in the absurd (by agreeing to sacrifice his son, Isaac, believing he will do this and see his son again in the material world), but can discuss it creatively and fluently. It opens discussion, in the case of "The Sorrows of Younger Werther", into a topic previously considered to be taboo.

Besides its philosophical discussion on suicide, Goethe offers many other insights on humanity through the filter of the sensitive artist. Let's see (looks through the pages), It is as if a curtain had been drawn from before my soul, and this scence of infinite life had been transformed before my eyes in the abyss of the grave, forever open wide. Can you say that anything _is_, when in fact it is all transient? and all passes by as fast as any storm, seldom enduring in the full force of existence, but ah! torn away by the torrent, submereged beneath the waves and dashed against the rocks? It is moments such as this existential bit (which goes on but I do not want to quote the whole paragraph), which make the book even more enriching in philosophy, and paint the whole picture of Werther's beautiful mind. Goethe goes deep into the crevices of this character's consciousness and has him confessing not just his love for Lotte, but his entire being.

I actually think writing about this book gave me a deeper appreciation for it than when I initially finished it. To truly enjoy, you must meditate on its controversy at the time of publish, the poetry of its language, the way it pins-down the dreamer and shows the suicide in all of us who know what we're a part of. I'm not sure if it'll spark more reading into Goethe, but it may. For now, I have this, and I'm sure extra readings will even further bring out the details of good Werther's thinking and feeling.

a quick word on mars

"The Martian Chronicles", Ray Bradbury, 1950

Immediately, this one struck me like my first reading of "Fahrenheit 451", a book I was so enthused about I was determined to teach it to my seventh grade students this past year despite the level of difficulty it posed to them thematically as well as semantically. "The Martian Chronicles" comes at you in waves, describing the first expeditions coming into contact with a species of Martians that have seemingly evolved parallel to the Earthlings. Then we have the Earthlings overcoming the Martians, unwittingly, to eventually colonizing the planet of Mars. Then the great war breaks out, human beings come to the brink of extinction, and return to Mars to, perhaps if they're lucky, start over.

It's been a week since I've read it, considering how I've been behind on releasing my random ponderings here, I don't intend to say too much. So here's two bits and I'm gone:

1) The majesty of the Martians mirrors our own majesty, but considering we did not know them long enough to examine their faults, their abrupt end was indeed melancholy. The invasion of Earthling germs was nothing they could come back from, and it left me wishing to know more about them, but was also a witty and scientifically possible end to them. And considering the reaction of the Earthlings when it came to the abrupt downfall of the native species -- the collective unconcern -- the greed and tyrannical qualities of homo sapien were fully exposed. Thus the majesty of homo sapien is ripped through, especially as the book develops and their technology and greed drive them near their own extinction.

2) It is easy to make connections from "The Martian Chronicles" to the soon-to-be-published "Fahrenheit 451". For one, both have their main plot severely effected by looming nuclear war. Another: the "Usher II" episode, which shows a brand of Thought Police being exported to Mars, explicitly follows the function of the firemen in "Fahrenheit 451", as these "police" come to burn the house dedicated to literature and imagination. Further, Bradbury believes heavily in the positive traits in humanity, but worries they will be overtaken by the greed or ignorance (or a combination) of the majority. In "451", Faber and Montag represent the virtues of intellect and curiosity in the face of a world on the brink of nuclear disaster; in "Chronicles", compassion for loved ones and family are exposed in the face of not only the conquest of another planet, but yes, nuclear disaster.

I loved this book, and I love Ray Bradbury. He rocks!

what kind of idea are YOU?

"The Satanic Verses", Salman Rushdie, 1988

I have been toiling over this book over and over in my poor journal that wasn't meant for such toiling over books books books. But I've been moving, haven't had internet, so this blog -- which is essentially a dumping station for my literary impressions knowing the best ideas come into my head and rarely in type -- wasn't available. Now that it is, I have already started my plans to do a second reading with running commentary, which will undoubtedly take the form of more questions than answers, and through these questions I find the truth of the book, or at least personal truths, if not a few universal. Questions like:

-Is Gibreel's situation similar to Mahounds, in that Mahound was going through the same schizophrenia in believing he was talking to an angel as Gibreel was in believing he was a holy entity talking to angels and the undead and even God? Then the secondary question: is this a commentary in believing in one's own "hype"?

-Who is Ayesha in this story? Is Gibreel Ayesha, are their deaths parallel? Knowing there was nowhere else to go, that the road ended at the Arabian Sea, did Ayesah commit suicide and take all others with her? If that's the case, how is this similar to Gibreel outside of his own suicide? What does he take with him? Anything?

You know, basic questions, easy to answer (hardy har har).

To break down my basic interpretation it goes in these parts:

1) This book is not about religion, it's about man the highest, and the transformation of two men in opposite directions in an incredibly poetic and symbolic way. Instead of Bible, it is grand Fiction that reveals subtle and hard to define truths, but truths nonetheless.

2) This book is about the non-distinction of good and evil as inherent in man, and that neither exists explicitly but are non-interpretive and complex pieces of what a human is. Shaitan and Allah live in us all, and reveal their parts in mysterious ways.

3) This book is about the migrant and his struggles to navigate between two distinct and opposing ways.

4) This book transcends the migrant in exhibiting how one -- anyone anywhere anysituation -- must navigate the big BE, IT, ALL, the WORLD; it is about ambiguities, contradictions, as our hero is the one to transform into Shaitan and our tragic piss the archangel Gabriel! How can this be?! Go back to number two, see that the Shaitan is only thus because the context has brought out the scum in him, and conversely the angel in the actor. It is about the hopeless absurdity of life, and the hope in that.

And it's about none of those things and many other things. I'm sure it's about religion, too, breaking it down to its flaws and manmade ways. But I'm going to do running commentary on my second reading so I'll talk about much more later. All I can say now is that "The Satanic Verses" captured me in all its post-modern openness and liberation-ary prose as one that is automatically going into my favorites.