Showing posts with label Dillard. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dillard. Show all posts

Sunday, November 10, 2013

Response to: Annie Dillard: “The Chase”

Dillard begins her essay by explaining her relationship with boys as a child. She speaks of her cunning tactics in football and baseball. Talk of these sports, and their inability to be played throughout the winter, lead into a detailed anecdote of Dillard and her friends in the winter. One day, while continuing their routine of throwing snow balls at cars, Dillard and the boys she hung out with throw a snowball at the windshield of a black Buick. In contrast to an adults "normal" reaction to this childhood prank; "the car, pulled over and stopped." A man, dressed in "city-clothes: a suit and tie, street shoes", got out of the car and began a very extensive chase after the six children. Upon catching up to the kids, the young man proceeded to "perfunctorily" lecture the "stupid kids" on the error of their ways. Regarding the maze Dillard and friends caused the businessman to run, Dillard remarks, "I don't know how he found his way back to his car."
        Growing up with two older brothers has a very large impact on your childhood. When I was a young girl, I was the biggest tom-boy to ever live. I spent my days aspiring to be like my older brothers, playing in the mud and catching tadpoles. Every year, for my birthday, my aunt would give me a Barbie doll, and every year, I would ask my mom "Why?" "Why does Aunt Mary give me these when I never play with them?" It wasn't until I started school that I understood that young girls were expected to WANT to play with dolls. Although, this discovery did not change the way I acted nor the way my mother encouraged me in my playtime habits. At school, I would always befriend the boys playing basketball on the playground, and actively ignore the young girls practicing their older sisters' cheer-leading moves. My mom will tell the story of how she once waited months for me to get on to the waiting list of a highly regarded dance school, only to have me throw a fit about not wanting to go and insist upon joining a soccer team instead. All these anecdotes are highly ironic to the fact that I grew to love music and dance as a teen and soon regretted my six-year-old decision to forego the dance training. Although, I have no honest story of being chased by a man in a business suit, I can connect to Anne Dillard in this other way. From her extensive descriptions of beating her male friends at what is assumed to be tackle football and baseball, I can see a small bit of my young self in her writing. This was the part of the essay that stood out so strongly to me. I feel as though Anne performed the act of throwing the snowball as a form of impressing her daring male peers. As a child, I always felt as though I needed to act like and compete with the boys I befriended as a way to state my value to the group. This may also stem from a bit of sibling rivalry and being the baby of the family, who knows?

        I am most interested to know how this passage connects to Anne Dillard's life as an adult. In contrast to E.B. White's essays, Dillard gives primarily the facts and ceases to explain the event's later impacts on her life. I would like to ask her why she felt the need to write this little piece of her history down and share it with others. I am also curious to know what she now, as an adult, thinks of her actions as a child. In all honesty, I would like to have more details about the businessman. Did he go to the children's parents about their prank and what all did his lecture to the children entail?

Response to: Annie Dillard: “Total Eclipse”

Beginning with a simile comparing the events to "dying", Dillard introduces one of the overlying themes of “Total Eclipse”. She goes on to describe in great detail a terrifying painting on the wall of her hotel room. It is of a "smiling clown's head, made out of vegetables". Dillard then directs her attention back to her experience with the eclipse. She discusses the long drive "inland from the Washington coast". The focus of the essay then returns to the hotel, where Dillard describes the events of a small lobby as she and her husband wait to be assigned to a room. They remain at the hotel for one night, and awake the following morning at six to begin their trip up the hills. They perch, along with hundreds of others, on a "five hundred feet high" hill to watch the eclipse. Dillard goes on to discuss a "partial eclipse" she witnessed in 1970. She explains how a partial eclipse "bears almost no relation to a total eclipse". Dillard tells the reader that during the total eclipse the sky's blue deepens to an indigo. Dillard directs her attention to the land around her. She compares all vegetation to various metals and then begins seeing the world as a "nine-tenth century tinted photograph". Dillard yearns to be back in her "own century, the people [she] knew! And the real light of day". As the eclipse takes place, Dillard hears screams erupt from the hillside as every is plunged into total darkness. The author, in part three, discusses the existential properties of a total eclipse. Following the eclipse, it takes the author hearing a college student compare the ring of sunlight visible to a "life-saver" to snap herself back into reality. In conclusion, Dillard remarks on the highway during the eclipse; how individuals on their way to work are stopped by the sudden darkness. She also explains her behavior following the total eclipse; how she and her husband immediately left, not even staying long enough to watch the sun fully emerge.
Although, I have never experienced an eclipse I still found a strange amount of connection to Dillard's writing in this instance. There are moments where I think about the vastness of the universe and feel incredibly small. One feels entirely insignificant when one thinks about the size of the world around them. I remember once, at bible camp, we watched a seminar on the universe. The preacher first held up a golf ball, and then a large projection of the sun was lit up on the wall behind him. The point of the speech was to tell us kids how much God had created and how much bigger he was then everything in the universe, but that isn't what I got out of it. I mean, it was, but not the only thing. All it made me feel was small, not inspired, and not trusting. It was terrifying, it took me until I was home with my family to snap back to reality, much like it took Annie until hearing the college student to come back to the real world. Knowing that I meant something and was so important to my parents and siblings brought me back, they made me feel big again. They made me feel significant in a humongous world.

The biggest question I must ask about this passage is in regards to the clown painting. I am always curious as to why authors choose to include certain anecdotes in their writing. In my opinion, I was unable to find the significance of the clown in this particular essay. Why did Dillard include it? I would also like to acknowledge the timeline of this essay. Why did the author jump back and forth so often? What time of emotion was she trying to emote based on this? I would also like to ask why she felt as though the vegetation was like metals. I had a hard time picturing this, and therefore, question where this metaphor came from.

Response to: Annie Dillard: “Weasel is Wild”

Annie Dillard takes a much more vivid and violent approach to essay writing in "Living Weasel is Wild". In this passage, Dillard describes a small confrontation between herself and this rodent, referring to them as "two lovers, or enemies". To begin her account, Dillard describes the preying of a weasel; how he "stalks" and kills "more bodies than he can eat warm". Although, the author contradicts this strong interpretation of a weasel by proceeding to an anecdote about Ernest Thompson Seton. Seton says that a man "shot an eagle out of the sky" and "found the dry skull of a weasel fixed by the jaws to his throat". By choosing to share this with the reader, Dillard explores the idea of the weasel as a victim. Dillard then states that these ponderings featuring weasels were inspired when she "saw one last week" "near [her] house in Virginia" by Hollis Pond. She goes on to produce a detailed description of the pond and her meeting with the "arrowhead"-like rodent. Dillard felt as though this experience were as if she had "been in that weasel's brain for sixty seconds". This experience causes the author to examine life through the eyes and mind of a rodent. She realizes the value of "mindlessness" and the "purity of living". Dillard then toys with the idea of fully embodying the creature and "live for two days in the den" and living where "the mind is single". In her final thoughts, Dillard leaves the reader to ponder the idea of "living at every moment to the perfect freedom of single necessity".
        I truly can never say I wanted to step into the mind of an animal. (I read Anamorphs as a kid, and I think they may have ruined that whole super power for me.) Although, I can say I have always felt a strong connection to animals, mostly my pet dogs. I was bullied throughout elementary school, and therefore, I did not feel as though I had many friends. This may sound sad, but that is where my dog came in: Jake. Jake was a black Labrador retriever who my parents had had since before I was born. He was my pet, my companion, and my best friend. I could talk to him about anything (no judgment); cuddle all over him, and play; all things and struggling nine-year-old needs. If I could have jumped within Jake's brain all I could hope to find was the same amount of love for my family and me as we had for him. We loved Jake as a member of our family, when I was twelve, he passed away. I can honestly say, that is the most emotional I have ever been. Losing Jake was like losing my best friend, but I knew, from the way Jake had always been, that he would have wept the same way over losing one of us, as we did over losing him.

        Once again, I find myself questioning Dillard's purpose in writing this passage. How did this experience affect her life in the future? And why did Annie feel it was so significant she felt the need to reflect back on her feelings after time had gone by? I am also curious about her use of such violent and, frankly, gross language. How was she hoping this language usage would affect the readers? Although, I personally enjoy a darker take on description, use of words and phrases such as “carcasses” and “splitting the jugular vein” could have easily turned off the more innocent reader. This change in writing style from “The Chase”, was welcomed in my mind, but could be considered shocking in others. I can hope that as we continue to read Annie Dillard’s essays, she does not sugarcoat her descriptions, although, I must ask, if these artistic choices were ever second-guessed by the author.