Response 2: Sept 8

Type your name in the Subject box, plus any subject heading you want for your response. Type or cut-and-paste your response in the box below that and hit the "Add a Comment" button. Note: you may need to scroll down to post your response if a lot of people have already responded.

comments:

Brieanne Lanham --Michelle, Wed, 07 Sep 2005 13:45:18 -0400 reply
I found the story "Apocalypse" to be very interesting. I thought that Barry Lopez made several points that made me think into them. One thing that Lopez mentioned a few times was that, “success is financial achievement." This could not be anymore correct. This small statement is the way that not only the majority of society thinks but also the government. It seems to me that in the past people didn't have such a get rich quick mind set. Success was based on many other factors as well as financial achievement. Today however, this is engraved into our heads at an early age. I also liked the passage, "To achieve wealth, the letter informed us, is the desire of all peoples everywhere, resistance like ours, a quibbling over methods, actually created poverty." This passage really made me think. In this story the government does not approve of anyone who opposes them or even thinks differently then them. They think that the people who think differently should be punished and isolated from the rest of society. I found this passage to be interesting. The government is attempting to make the characters in this book as well as those who agree with some of their anti- government thoughts think that citizens like them cause the problems with society such as poverty. If these citizens would only go along with the methods that the government set for the society then everyone would be in the same mindset. If the government could convince these outsiders of this then we wouldn’t have problems such as poverty. This statement jumped out at me because it seems like this is how our government thinks most of the time. They tend to blame everything on outside factors. They very rarely have anything to do with any negative problems in the world. The government tends to blame it on other people wither it is terrorists, other governments, or our very own citizens. The government in this story was afraid that the characters were, “terrorizing the imaginations of our fellow citizens.” In other words they didn’t want them to be putting any of their ideas in to others heads. In their society it is obviously not ok to have opposing ideas of the government. This governments mentality is not that different then that of our government. In the U.S we have the freedom to speak our minds but we are not always aloud to act on them. If we do act on them we may be punished or incarcerated. Those people who do speak out against our government and their beliefs however, are sometimes considered a danger to society or a terrorist. These people are punished if the act against the government or do not go along with the methods that they have set in which they believe society should be run. I thought this story had a good message and was fairly easy to read. Many things that the character in the book was talking about I could relate our society too.

James McCeney? --jmcceney50, Wed, 07 Sep 2005 15:40:56 -0400 reply
Lopez’s thematic schema in Resistance seems to be a valid one: reverting to more primitive existence in order to conquer adversity and become reunited with the self. Lopez’s main argument in defending this thematic base is that technology and government play little to no role in individual self-realization; instead, technology and government’s main purpose is to homogenize life as we know it in order to placate the masses. If the individual’s needs are overlooked so that the needs of the masses can be satisfied, then government has indeed done its job. Self-realization, to Lopez, only seems possible with a dissent (and in some cases, complete removal) from the authority of government and media. His characters each reflect his idea of escaping government to find the self in their individual testimonies.

In the stories assigned thus far, every main character has exiled his or herself from the opression of technology and government; each main character has also made an important self-discovery as a result. Architect Lisa Meyer chose to stop building monuments for the corrupt brazilian government, even if it meant losing large amounts of money. Gary Sinclair decided to trek to india and finally became able to love again. Harvey Fleming, in spite of being blinded and maimed at the hands of his own government, finally became able to find a return to innocence. It took Edward Larmirande a spiritual vision quest in the wild of Montana to find himself. Each of these characters chose to reject the principles of Federal government in order to seek the true essence of themselves.

Lopez seems adamant that using eastern (more specifically, Hindu) religious practices e.g. reverting to a more primitive way of humanity and humbling oneself, is the best way to find inner acceptance. Each of the characters endures various trials of will and humiliation, and each character comes out a new and better person in the end. Was it the lack of government interference that caused these epiphanies? While the immediate thought is implausible, one must think that the peace-of-mind which results with the lack of being constantly monitored and checked by the law as well as the absence of modern media constantly lurking over your shoulder would certainly clear one’s mind enough to learn something previously unknown about the self. The setting of rural india or vast montana certainly would provide a quieter, less hostile environment with which to meditate. Harvey Fleming trekked to vietnam, a country ravaged by the tools of American politics and the site of his original loss of innocence, to see if he could reclaim the missing part of his soul that was rightfully his. The pilgrimages taken by the individuals in the novel are vital, in that escaping the droning hum of modern society caused them to finally discover that which lay dormant within their hearts for so long.

The fact that the characters were able to heal themselves merely by soul searching and meditation is indicative, to Lopez, that modern society has lost its way. He seems to want to elicit feelings of guilt in his readers, as if to say “The current way is the wrong way and none of you are doing anything to help the situation.” While he is fairly effective in telling a good story, I don’t think hes as effective at inciting political efficacy in his readers.

Jenna Froess --blondie2825, Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:17:22 -0400 reply
Barry Lopez has put together a book that is full of inspiring stories of overcoming past experiences, conquering fear, and about personal growth. One theme I noticed throughout the stories I’ve read so far is that the people in these stories found peace with themselves in the end once they were out of a government-run, modern society. One story I particularly liked a lot was a Bear in the Road. I like how it was set in rural Montana and that the main character was sort of caught in both the modern world where he was studying law and going to college while he also grew up in Montana near Indian Reservations and experienced the wilderness and simplicity that it offered. I feel that many of us could identify with this main character because the whole time he is searching for this deeper meaning in life and he has a prime example of someone who has found that in Virgil. When Virgil takes him up to the creek he spends 4 days up there trying to figure out what he wants in life and what his purpose is. Instead, he comes back hungry and feeling like he figured out nothing. In our society today, very few people know what their purpose is or even try to think that deep. Sometimes we might touch the surface of topics like that in a class or a discussion, but we go home and enjoy all of our modern technologies and talk about what bar we are going to that night and forget about it. Is this really our fault, though? It is hard to step outside the lines of the only thing you have been taught since you were born. The same is for when we watch a news story on TV. Take Katrina for example. We watch the horrible images on TV, we see what all of these people are going through, we feel bad for a little while and some of us will even donate money to help them out. But how many of us will watch the coverage of it for a few minutes and change the channel to something else and forget that we watched it a few minutes later. This is a big difference between Americans and those who are forced to suffer every day they tragedies that have hit our country a 2 or 3 times in YEARS. One thing interesting about his book in relating it to that point is that a lot of the characters he is writing about are not Americans or at least the story does not take place in America such as the man who fought in Vietnam because of a war involving our country. It had destroyed his whole life and he had been trying for years to come to peace with himself over the things he did to protect his country and the horrible things he saw. We take these things for granted in our society, in our government. Lopez does a good job at looking at society and government and opening our eyes to the negatives that we too often push to the back of our minds.

Bear in the Road --audj, Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:29:44 -0400 reply
When writing this wiki, I wanted to really focus on the story of “The Bear in the Road.” Native American history, though prominently a part of American history as a whole, has never been my forte. I don’t feel a strong connection to it: the religion, the people, and the plight. So, that being said, this story was a lot harder for me to focus on the initial story “Apocalypse” with all its white, upper-middle class people. My favorite quote from the story was: “ Mother said he knew that country, twig and dirt, the way she knew me: what it liked and didn’t like and how all its known parts—the colors of the sky or chinook winds coming east to cross up a hard winter—could never together explain the mystery of what it was.” How do you form a connection so deep with a piece of land? Virgil was born with this connection, and his desperate attempt to make first Edward’s mother and then Edward himself an heir to this connection makes for an excellent story. The first time I had ever heard of a vision quest, it was on an episode of “Family Guy” where Peter and Chris talk to the trees and the Fonz and Peter learns to let Chris pick his own path in life. The Fonz was the guiding spirit. For Edward, this bear is his guiding spirit, and as much as he chooses to ignore it, the bear continues to make his voice heard, whether it be ripping off front doors and just appearing in roads…His presence is known. But what is Edward’s vision? Will a bear-free land make Edward happier? Or will it simply quiet the Christian ranchers who talk too much? I don’t think Edward is on a vision quest per say, but perhaps just a mission. This fierce goal of finding the bear to kill it seems a strange juxtaposition to the idea of the bear being the guiding spirit. If he kills it, that will make him lost to the world. But I believe the Great Burden, at the end of the story, is now the bear’s. Virgil says the bear is carrying something, and that he knows it because of the print being deeper in the front instead of the back. I hate that the story ends so abruptly, even with the resolution of the bear carrying Edward’s burden (which feels like a copout), with the hunt over and Virgil’s life at its end. A note on the book as a whole: I like that all of these stories are different. Each one carries its own reward. I like that the paintings that start each story are all the same basic white face on a dark background. Because everyone’s story (life story) is different, so to is the portrait and background that follow each of the people. I found the most disturbing painting to be the one from “Rio de la Plata.” The face’s mouth is sewn shut, and for a writer, I believe the inability to convey one’s ideas would just be hell. So I find that picture terrifying.

Jessica Bradley --jbradley, Wed, 07 Sep 2005 17:10:22 -0400 reply
From the moment I started to read the first short story in Resistance I could not put the book down. The stories I have read up to this point have intrigued me and I have become completely engaged with each of them. As I read I could not help myself from connecting to each of the situations. I found that I was linking them to my worldly knowledge and personal life experiences. This easily led me to form thoughts and opinions on the particular situations. Of the stories I have read so far, I found that two of them seem to have similarities, so I decided to compare “Rio de la Plata” and “Mortise and Tenon.” Both of the story’s main character is an only child raised in a situation where they were not consumed by material possessions, but content with the way their life was. They are both about the same age with lives beginning to peak during the ‘70s and ‘80s, a time of cultural change and a society of fading morality. In “Rio de la Plata” I can see how our society has evolved, where cultural values have begun to change and then develop into the lifestyles that exist today. On pages 22-23 I notice that Lisa, at a young age, can understand her father’s affair and how the effect of wealth and material possessions distinguish the behavior of people. I like how she appreciates what she has and the simple things that bring meaning to her life, especially her mother. During this time it seems separation of parents is low and independence of a single working woman is just beginning. I think her mother is a strong woman after the b.s. affair, still maintaining her own restaurant and constantly working. I can see how the affair made an impact on both of them by the way they stay by each other’s side, believe in themselves and the distrust Lisa has with men. I noticed that while her mother is suffering from her illness, Lisa is also suffering from the frustrations she has with her job and the materialistic society. This shows that they both never gave up and that they could not resist the surrounding world that forced them to move on. I find that “Mortise and Tenon” is comparable with “Rio de la Plata” because like Lisa, Gary is content with his life because he too does not surrounded himself in material wealth, but simply enjoys his personal confidence and gratification that he has gained from overcoming his past. On page 41 Gary speaks about trying to understand love and to be loved. I think this is similar to Lisa and her mother’s situation with men and Lisa’s search for her father’s love. Also, both Lisa and Gary are hard workers, consumed with their jobs and appreciate small opportunities that some people may take for granite. Although, on page 49 beginning with “He speculated…” to the end of the paragraph, can be compared to the affair and behavior of Lisa’s father. I think that these stories show the importance of parents/family and that they/it has an affect on the way people are raised and determins personal satisfactions in life.

Lauren Gilkeson --lgilkeso, Wed, 07 Sep 2005 17:28:20 -0400 reply
The book, Resistance, is a compilation of short stories that are seemingly unrelated except for one underlying principle, that of a person attempting to escape restraint. The first story, Apocalypse is my favorite. In my opinion this story brings to the forefront a very touchy subject: the government’s involvement with personal lives. The issue in this story elicits a mixed response out of me. On one side I understand exactly where the narrator, Owen Daniels, is coming from. Our country was founded by people that were going against the “mainstream” in their homeland countries. People sought refuge on this soil in an attempt to gain the right to do things there own way such as worship based on their own personal beliefs. The First Amendment of the Constitution states that the citizens of this nation have five specific rights of freedom, included in these are the freedom of the press, speech, the right to assemble peacefully, etc. Why, then, does the government that is elected or appointed to uphold the United States Constitution feel that they have the right to break their own rules? Why is it okay for the government to monitor every move these people make, invade their privacy, uproot their lives, and cause these people to live on the run? Then again there is the conflict that this invasion is for our protection. Many people feel that if the government had been more proactive the events of September 11, 2001 would never have happened. The problem is everyone wants the government to interfere with everyone else’s lives, not theirs. The general public feels that the government should just magically know who is “suspicious” and who is “normal”. How is the government supposed to know this without being “Big Brother” and watching everyone’s every move? The restraint that these people felt was seemingly unfair. The imposition on their lives would never have been tolerated in this nation before September 11, 2001. The government feeds off of the general public’s fear that another terrorist attack could potentially take place. While most of the public is thankful for the heightened security and for the government being proactive, the portion of the public whose lives are turned upside down as a result of these security measures absolutely resent the government. During World War II Japanese-Americans were placed in condensed camps in order for the government to keep a closer eye on these citizens who may have been a threat to the country. After the war, America realized its mistake and began paying restitutions for this mistake. Due to the fact that September 11, 2001 is still so fresh on everyone’s mind, the government will continue to invade the privacy of its citizens until such time that they realize that it is not constitutional, and then the government will be forced to face the consequences of their actions. The rest of the stories in this story don’t elicit quite the same response from me. Apocalypse touches a very sensitive subject in this post-World Trade Centre world. The others are not nearly as political and are more about personal restraint that most be overcome by the individual, but this one is a restraint that must be overcome by the entire nation collectively, along with the world.

Melissa Malone ~ Overcoming Trauma --mmalone2, Wed, 07 Sep 2005 18:23:15 -0400 reply
In the book Resistance, I find that Barry Lopez has compiled many different narratives but all with one purpose. The purpose being how people overcome different events that happened in their lives. The two that I would like to focus on are Mortise and Tenon and Traveling with Bo Ling. I found that these two narratives, which discussed different events in two men’s lives, were very different yet somehow tied together. In Traveling with Bo Ling, Harvey Fleming discusses the loss of innocence and the loss of ignorance. He talks about loss and compares it to many different things you can lose and how you would feel. “Or consider a loss of sexual innocence, whether by force or by choice. Remembered as a loss, it can contribute to a life of grief, a life of anger or numbness. What comes of the choice to no longer be innocent is different for every pilgrim; but to choose is to risk a region of the soul.” His narrative is dealing with a man who fought in the Vietnam War and was left blind which has made his life a tragedy. In the narrative he married a woman named Bo Ling, who is also blind, and together they overcome their hostility and their fear. Through traveling to far away countries and back to Vietnam, her home country, they learn to appreciate each other and the life that they had left. Bo Ling tells Harvey that in order for him to overcome his trauma he must love. “The wages of trauma, as I have written it out in my life, is anger. The resolution of that anger, say the therapists, breaks the grip of the traumatic event. But to resolve the anger-and this I got on my own-it’s necessary to love. It’s not enough just to arrive at a place where no one, not even yourself, is to blame. You have to go further.” So in the end he talks about adopting a child and learning to fully love another human being, one who is innocent and needs that love. I find that the above narrative ties to Mortise and Tenon because it deals with the same issue. A man claiming to be a doctor raped this young man, Gary Sinclair, at the age of five. When Gary finally got up enough nerve to tell someone what had happened to him, that this man had taken away his innocence, they told him to be silent. “When I could finally bring myself to speak about it, her new husband told me that I would have to get over it, that the doctor had run a hospital, that he had done many good things. I needed to get past it, to get on with my life.” For someone to tell him this is just awful because how was he ever supposed to deal with the trauma that these events had inflicted on him. The narrative goes on to talk about how he made the best of his life but he was never fully whole. Then it talks about how he traveled never really making a home for himself but meeting many people along the way. He was never able to attach himself to anyone after what he had been through. He experienced a loss of self worth from being raped where Harvey experienced anger because of the war and that fact that it left him blind. They both had to learn to overcome these things in order to be whole in some sense. They had to learn to love. Harvey had to learn to love someone else with his whole heart, and Gary had to learn to love himself. I think that this deals with everyday life because many people experience pain and trauma and have to figure out how to love afterwards to overcome the pain.

Charlotte Harris --charris3, Wed, 07 Sep 2005 19:08:50 -0400 reply
In the book Resistance by Barry Lopez, it is a lot of short stories compiled into one big book. He has done a good job so far trying to keep the same type of stories with the same meanings together. In the end of each story the main character comes to an inner peace. In Mortise and Tenon. The main character of the book talks about how he wants to love but somehow cant because he was raped at a young age. The narrator said, “ When I was five I was raped by a man who told me he was a doctor, that this was a treatment I needed.”(39). Even when they moved so far away it took the narrator lots of places to live and a long time the narrator finally came to an inner peace at the end when the narrator decided to go and stay with a close friend from their home town. In Rio de la Plata the narrator deals with the sick mother for such a long time, gives up their live to help take care of her. They move apartments and the main character ends up watching the mother die after suffering all that time. It took the child a while to get over but in the end he deiced to take on some projects and then he was going to look for a studio and then go in search for his father. In Traveling with Bo Ling the main character was reflecting on his time in the Navy in the Vietnam War. He has very well in depth memories that he tells about from the war. He then had hard times trying to readjust to live back in America and in the end of the story he and his wife went back Vietnam to visit the places. In the Bear in the Road there was a bear that kept coming to their house and ripping of the door and staying there. His friend Virgil takes him back to the place where he took them all those years ago. While camping out there he came to being back at inner peace because that is what Virgil pretty much said that the bears would stop coming once you explain to them. These stories all have the same type of meaning in them they first all started off in some type of distress at different parts in their life. But they came to inner peace at the end of the book and went back to where they were when their problems started. They all seemed to want to go back after saying that they didn’t at times. They all seemed to find inner peace after the main characters had gone back to the areas that they were when the distress started in their lives.

Casey Tominack--Rio de la Plata --ctominac, Wed, 07 Sep 2005 20:10:04 -0400 reply
The nation is currently mourning for those lost in the ruins of Hurricane Katrina. Now more than ever, we should appreciate the meaning of the saying never take anything for granted. And, in my opinion, Rio de la Plata is one of the best examples of the fast-paced society that we are living in today--a society where people are somewhat disillusioned with the materialism and ambitious dreams that have characterized it. As the author states, there are times when we are “so caught up with the social spectacle” we don’t “perceive the transparency of life.” It takes something as powerful and destructive as Hurricane Katrina to make us realize that emptiness that can accompany of this type of life. There are certainly times in my own life when I can relate to this. For example, I wake up in the morning and do not stop until late at night. Whether it is completing a homework assignment, reading, going to the Rec Center, working, or studying for the LSATS that I will take in October, there will always be an uncompleted list of things to do. If, by some chance, my list is lacking things to do, I begin to feel guilty--as if I am wasting time and energy by not doing anything. And, then, before I realize it, I have a whole new list of tasks to complete and goals to achieve. The author mentions that she was 24 when she got her architecture license in Argentina. At 28 she was running her own firm, and by 30, landed her first American commission; however, despite all of her success, she was living a life that she could not fully believe in. She wrote her bitter and angry thoughts down in a journal, yet appeared as a confident and successful woman in the office. She did well hiding from the fact that she was 35 and had lost contact with her close friends, did not have a family of her own, no religion to turn to, and no revitalization or effort to do the things she once loved (such as reading the newspaper). And, even more traumatizing, her mother had been diagnosed with Parkinson’s Disease. It was her mother, however, that ultimately saved her life by giving her a copy of Victor Frankl’s “Man’s Search for Life.” I read a quote from Frankl’s book that states, "Logotherapy...considers man as a being whose main concern consists in fulfilling a meaning and in actualizing values, rather than in the mere gratification and satisfaction of drives and instincts." This summarizes the way in which Lisa Meyers lived her life as if it were a “triumph of determination,” rather than something that she actually enjoyed doing--something she found meaning in. As I mentioned before, there are times when I catch myself doing everything imaginable to achieve a goal I have set for myself. Of course, I believe that working hard and achieving goals is important; however, if and when the goal interferes with those things that are most important (such as family and friends), then it is time to take a step back and determine what it is that you really want, and analyze just how much you are willing to sacrifice in order to achieve it. Frankl also said, "What matters, therefore, is not the meaning of life in general, but rather the specific meaning of a person's life at a given moment." This especially relates back to the beginning when I mentioned Hurricane Katrina. For some, it takes a disastrous event such as Katrina to make us re-evaluate our priorities. I am sure that the victims are not worrying about whether or not they will get that promotion at work or whether or not they will be admitted to an Ivy League school. But, whether or not we are a victim of such a traumatizing event or not, it still causes us to look at our own lives and be grateful for what we have, take nothing for granted, and live the life that we know we were meant to live.

Response to Resistance --kamos, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 07:07:50 -0400 reply
In reading other student responses to Barry Lopez’s Resistance, it was clear to see that so many people liked reading Apocalypse, whereas for me, the word itself sends chills up my spine. After I read that first short story I was hoping that the rest of the stories would not weigh so heavily on me, as I am a person who has to be in a certain “mood” in order to feel comfortable reading something so full of information. After I finished the readings for class, I found myself thinking more and more about something I read in Mortise and Tenon. In this story, the main character is trying to find peace within himself, and come to terms with all of the things he has been through in his life. When he is visiting a friend, he is attacked by young boys who are obviously troubled themselves. Following this attack, the narrator’s friend makes a comment about one of the boys, stating, “Families today, he said, are no longer to keep such a person in check. Too many of them burst in the street now, a pomegranate thrown in a fire.”(49)

While many people choose to focus on bigger issues, I feel that if we would first shed light on smaller ones, the bigger ones would just fall in line behind them. It is also my opinion that such a statement as that on page 49 is more important today than it has ever been because of the falling apart of so many American families. First of all, my mother, uncle, cousin, and two aunts are all teachers who are encountering more and more problems in the school systems. Also, more often than not, parents are quick to blame their children or the school systems themselves rather than take any responsibility for the influence they have over their children. Many families and individuals today are loosing touch with what values and behaviors are truly the important ones, and I feel that on some level, Lopez is pointing that out.

I also think that the quote from page 49 represents what can happen to people who deal with lifelong pain and grudges. The narrator of the story is going through so many things in his daily life, that he is constantly moving from city to city trying to escape his past. I feel that Lopez is trying to say that eventually we all must come to terms with and accept who we really are and what we’ve been through, and not let others’ ideas change our opinions.

Overall, the short stories I have read so far in Resistance have been very informative as well as inspirational. Such a book is almost a crucial read for a college student trying to stamp out exactly who they are and what they believe in. Resistance is unlike anything I have ever read, in that it takes the lives of very different people – a Vietnam veteran, a woman from Argentina, an American, and a Native person – and shows how everyone is searching for the same things.

Rio de la Plata - Craig Joseph --cjoseph1, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 07:38:41 -0400 reply
I find Lisa's story "Rio do le Plata" to be fascinating. In a world where all too many are caught up in things that just dont matter, seeing Lisa's story unfold makes you realize you have to appreciate what you have. What Lisa seems to be describing comes across as more or less of a mid-life crisis and her overcoming of that obstacle: she is lost in her own disillusionment, stuck between an adultror father and a mother struggling with parkinsons. This seems to be a common occurence once people reach the middle of their lives; in this case, Lisa feels more trapped than enthralled at the architecture she has dedicated her life to. "This was the life I lived--energetic, creative, financially successful, professionally admired--but it was not a life I could fully believe in" (26). This contemplation about the life one lives often evades many, and some do not even have the mental capacity at that stage in their life to even care. They will go on doing the same monotonous tasks they have done for years, for the same check they have received for years, without any satisfaction. And they will do so only because its what they know. They are trapped in familiarity. Simply, life is not exciting. It takes a stronger, more willing type of person to delve through the circles of BS running wildly through ones brain tocome to a conclusion on how to better oneself internally than to wallow externally. I think Lisa realizes this after she reads Frankl's book Man's Search for Meaning, that her mother gave her before passing. After reading it, she moves on from the "lost distinction between what was true and what was false in my life" and grabs life by teh balls and realizes that her life is a product of the "choices that I might make now" (34). ; she decides that she eventually wants to discuss love with her father, to go back to work as an architect with a renewed sense of purpose. She has moved beyond the independent clusters of confusion in her mind and has unified her thoughts into a purpose that she recognizes and grasps. For Lisa, this realization that her uncontemplative, routine of a life was making her unhappy caused her to turn 180 and examine her reasons for doing what she does. More power to her, and to anyone who has the desire to do so. And this carries on with our course goal for the semester; the analyzation of trauma and how it affects people. In the wake of trauma (father's adultory, mother's parkinsons, lack of love, lack of purpose in her job), allbeit at 40 years old, Lisa realizes that she needs to move beyond the negative aspects of life and focus on having a stronger, more meaningful purpose. But all too often you see people who can't move on from such traumas, or even more minute trauma. They take life for granted, unappreciative of what they have or what they could have. While it is a shame that trauma is so often a catalyst for reasoning, I suppose it is a better catalyst than none at all. We take for granted what we have during the good times, getting lost in it. and while misery may be a negative thing when trauma happens, as the minutes and hours pass and the calendar flips, we are able to contemplate that misery in a less emotional/more rational way that will perpetuate our drive for happiness; the true purpose of life.

Traveling with Bo Ling- Will Good --wgood, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 13:19:43 -0400 reply
I liked the story "Traveling with Bo Ling" because it dealt with the topic of the reprocutions of war. The writer was in Vietnam and it affected his life greatly. The Vietnam war is an important part of history to consider today. I believe it is similiar to the situation we are in with Iraq. Half the nation wants war, the other half does not. As described in this story, war changes lives in many ways. The writer's father describes how his son has lost his ignorance of the wolrd. In paranthesis after the world ignorance is the word innocence. He talks of things he sees during war that change his view on mankind, like a girl being raped or his fellow soldiers dying.On the point of the girl being raped he said it could change the witnesses view on harming another individual completely. I think that the idea of war changing a man is something to think about. This day and age with the war in Iraq I feel if I werent in college i would be over seas. Im sure soldiers over there my age are seeing things i will never see and for that they will be intirely different people. The writer comes back blinded and eventually marries a north vietnamese women who is also blinded. Both blinded as a result of the war, the women was brought back by an American who later blinded here for looking at another man. These two could have been married as a indirect result of the war. If they didnt both have the similarity of being blind they might not be married. In the end of the story Bo Ling, the writers wife, says to let go of the anger and love again. The point being regain some type of inocence. After the thinking id say the main point of this is at one point innocence is lost. It could be good or bad. When he talks of losing virginity he claims it could be good or bad, but one way or the other innocence is lost. Same with life. One way or another we all lose innocence or ignorance that the world can be a tough place. Going to college,getting a white collar job, and getting married might be the pleasant raod to finding that out. On the other hand, War would be the school of hard knocks where learning that lesson might not be a pleasant expirense. All and all i would say this story makes a good point about life and how certain choices can affect you for life. It is an important thing to consider especially with how the war is going today.

Jennings (Jay) Lyons --jlyons5, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 13:26:08 -0400 reply
One of the stories from Resistance by Barry Lopez that interested me was Mortise and Tenon. The first thing this story does is opens with an atypical “attention getter”. The first line is “When I was five I was raped by a man who told me he was a doctor, that this was a treatment I needed,” (39). You could only imagine that the narrator would be traumatized from that point and through most of her life. As you read on to see how the story unfolds, you learn that the narrator was affected through her adult years. The narrator was so traumatized her being rapped as a young girl, her mind often had visual flashbacks to the harrowing event when she sees “terrors like destitute fathers on their knees in the roads, begging for of other men, who ignored them, children pawing in refuse for food and things to sell, beaten senseless by police, indentured prostitutes standing catatonic in their doorways, and elephant men on the region on display for a small charge,” (40). The narrator explains on page 40-41, that she grew up with “no desire for revenge that I was aware of; but neither had I any true companion, nor any experience of live as I imagined it could be in a home—support given without judgment, food prepared as an act of love, the guardian silence, the kiss good-night.” Not everything the Narrator encountered was ridged was her loneliness was. The narrator does reveal about her self that she is a successful carpenter and woodworker. The uniqueness about the narrator is that she often didn’t work for money, but just for food and a chance to see the world. This eventually would lead her to come in peace with her past. And with this found peacefulness, she would find a friend in Gileathal and his family. Also upon her being more in peace she would receive the desired kiss good-night by Belinda, one of Gileathal’s daughters. This was the beginning of the narrator growing toward the kindness she was shown. “I was able to reduce the height of the protective wall I always have kept around my self. I can only understand it the way: a fear of never fitting in, which I carried all my life but which I had not been aware of, began to dry up,” (50). The narrator’s experience at Gileathal’s made her nearly complete but still with the desire to learn, meets new people, and experience new cultures. So she left on a long trip to Abashiri, Japan. The difference is in this trip she had a lot more working for her, in fact that she could open herself up and let other in to her emotions and love.

Amanda Drake --adrake, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 13:34:40 -0400 reply
Barry Lopez's Resistance offers a unique look into the inner minds of some very different people, all with very similiar goals and values in mind. I want to focus mainly on Apocalypse because these characters passion and concern are easily related to by anyone with an acceptable understanding of American history. Throughout history people have always wanted what is best for their country. They want their country to thrive and basically win, believing that this can be accomplished through unity, and that the truth will bring said unity. Seeing this struggle from another countries point of view, and hearing the character's in Apocalypse drop comments about our country from their outsider standing was a refreshing experience. As American's we shield ourselves from other opinions and wrap ourselves into the bubble that is totally focused on us: our country, our freedom, our rights. The narrorator seems to understand human behavior and tries to explain it, as if he is making excuses for the human race as a wholes behavior. But maybe that is what needs to be done. It is highlighting the idea that most of us go from day to day unaware or uncaring of what is going on in our country around us, and even when we are blatently presented with information that should provoke some emotion or reaction we just wrap that bubble around us tighter and assume someone else will do something about it. On a deeper and even more interesting level, this short story allows us to see what everyday life has become for this average couple since the terrorist attacks on September 11. We see their personal struggles and how, because of the attack on our nation, they are suddenly under a microscope. It is hard to imagine going from innocent everyday citizen going on about your own business to a suspect, every move you make being judged, being watched. Suddenly there is no such thing as a personal email between friends. It is now a possible piece of evidence. Everything you say must be watched closely, in case you accidently incriminate yourself for a crime you had nothing to do with in the first place. "Apocalypse" sets the stage for the whole novel, the feelings of role confusion and of floating in the world and not belonging anywhere. Even as an AMERICAN curator just living in France he was not saved the scrunity. After receiving an ominous official letter from "Inland Security," expressing "widespread irritation with our work, and the government's desire to speak with us" he immediatly contacts others like him through coded e-mails. He is then able to determine that all over the world, friends similarly engaged in "chip away like coolies at the omnipotent and righteous façade" have received the same missive. They agree to vanish, leaving behind a record of their political and spiritual awakenings. But why should they have to? This short story leaves me wanting more, wondering why, and feeling frusterated toward a country handing out meaningless orders and punishments just so at the end of the day they can feel they have accomplished something. I will be comforted with the thought that it was not a silencing, it was just a relocation.

Resistance --mbender1, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 13:43:03 -0400 reply
Contemporary culture has gone beyond what was the original “American dream” and morphed somewhat into a distortion of that dream. America was founded on ideas such as freedom of the individual and boundless opportunity, which is all well and good. However, problems of today’s society could, quite possibly, be a result of this boundless opportunity. One could claim that it has created a green eyed monster out of what was once, and still is by many, considered the greatest nation in the world. From day to day we bury ourselves in our notebooks, Palm Pilots, and PCs? completely immersed in our own little world while losing sight of the bigger picture. Our drive to succeed is actually closing our eyes as well as our minds. In light of recent events, I have experienced somewhat of an epiphany, as I’m sure many Americans of my age have. The first time my eyes were opened to the “real world” was when the two towers and the pentagon were attacked. “Ok,” I said to myself, “maybe everyone doesn’t love America as much as we do.” The second incident to fracture the snow globe that was my world was when I experienced the death of a close friend. My third and most recent revelation came about due to the devastation of New Orleans. My point is that the world we live in is brutal and the lives we lead somewhat shelter us from this brutality: when it hits us, it hits us hard. So what is the solution to this? Should we devolution until we can find who we truly are and what we truly want to do with our time on earth? Should we throw our computers out the window and trash our cell phones just to get to know ourselves? I don’t believe this is the answer. The problem comes about when we begin to identify and define ourselves through income and material things. Just as Lopez’s characters had to break free from what was concealing their true selves, overcome great obstacles, and find something in life with actual substance, we too must examine our lives and figure out what is truly important to us. I tend to be fairly idealistic when it comes to life, so I’m not convinced that all of America is consumed by materialism and greed and I believe that people are truly good at heart. Yes, sometimes it does take a shock to the system to open up our eyes so we can see our world from a new perspective. Tragedy in life is practically inevitable: bad things happen to good people; it is something in life we must deal with. I feel that Lopez is trying to say that, due to recent events, Americans are beginning to see the world for what it really is, just as his characters do. After all, we as Americans are only human just like his characters.

Autumn Means --ameans, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 13:52:46 -0400 reply
In Apocalypse, the character Owen Daniels describes the beliefs held by the members of his group of friends which prompted each of them, in his or her own way, to resist their society. These people are actually attempting to resist globalization through personal, creative methods. Tuesday, class discussion focused, partially, on the affect of globalization; is it a good thing or a bad thing? During discussion, several binaries were introduced as topics: generality versus specificity, homogeneity versus individuality, etc. From my understanding of globalization, influenced by reading The Lexus and the Olive Tree by Thomas Friedman, an explanation of globalization and its affects on the world, the two major opposing forces in today’s society are globalization and tradition. Apocalypse obviously places Owen Daniels and his group in favor of tradition, heritage, and nature. On page 17, the character states “We regard ourselves as servants of memory. We will not be servants of your progress”. Also, on page 13, the character says, “We were attempting to resurrect the past and have it stand equal with the present. We profoundly misunderstood, our accusers argued, the promise of the future”. My interpretation of Apocalypse led me to believe that Owen and his group were trying desperately to preserve the past, history, and tradition through modes of art, literature, theater, and sculpture/architecture. While doing so, they completely overlooked and dismissed the advantages of globalization and the idea of capitalism and free-market trade and global commerce. At one point in the story (pg. 18), Owen even asserts that he and his group advocate for air and water without contamination, even if the contamination can be called harmless or its to be placed there for their own good. In this sense, this group would consider any man-made structure a contamination. This would mean they would consider even homes and temples contamination of the earth; by doing so, wouldn’t they have to relinquish their self-given title of servants of memory and of the past? I believe so; the past, history, and memory consist greatly (if not completely) of human involvement in changing and impacting the world around them. While I don’t totally agree with this radical opinion on globalization, I also don’t completely disagree with it. After having read Friedman’s book on understanding globalization, I realize that society needs to strive for a balance of globalization and tradition – to accept and benefit from the growing ability to see more, do more, and buy more things available all around the world; but at the same time, to be willing and active in preserving individual, specific, local cultures and traditions. In The Lexus and the Olive Tree, Friedman tells a story about a young Japanese girl who comes to America and exclaims, “Look! They have McDonald?’s here, too!” He goes on to explain that, while he enjoys being able to take his young daughter to the sushi bar down the street, the goal is to teach her to appreciate that that is something from a different culture, filled with different traditions. Ultimately, the goal is to hold on to personal cultural pride and memory, but to achieve a balance by also utilizing assets provided by globalization and the emergence of cultures into one another.

Christopher Glover: Traveling With Bo Ling --cglover, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 14:22:18 -0400 reply
Barry Lopez’s book Resistance is a set of short stories in which individuals are faced with traumatic events, or even just feelings of regret and spite in a world where individualism is almost non-existent, and they find peace through realizing their inner self and how the world seems to work. One short story I found to be very interesting was the Traveling with Bo Ling. I thoroughly enjoyed the writer’s colorful expression of the world of innocence and ignorance through his vivid descriptions of war and the ways war affected himself. In a short passage, he makes statements such as: “We are destined to remain innocent of experience” and, “The loss of innocence becomes an appetite to experience the loss again.” He is sure to delineate the difference between ignorance and innocence, because innocence is much more natural than ignorance. We can choose to be ignorant to a situation, but innocence only comes with a “lack of opportunity.” I found in this story that the writer was bitter and angry towards war because it took away the innocence he had once known and never expected to lose. The innocence of killing a man, the innocence of seeing someone raped, and even the innocence of planning someone’s torture. He came home from Vietnam with the utter realization that these experiences and this war had stripped him of an innocence that he would never be able to attain again.

I enjoyed reading this story because it depicted how more than just lives are lost in war. Wars started by individuals who will never take part in them. This relates to the opening story Apocalypse because it identifies government’s role in affecting peoples’ lives through their ignorance of the greater good. Governments turn their back on mass genocide as long as it stays within one country, and the economic gain to ignore the situation is positive. Yet, when they want to flex their economic or political muscle, it is the ordinary people of this country who are forced to lose themselves in someone else’s war. They lose their lives, their minds, and even their souls; and usually with no real justification for why it was all done. Yet there is a greater point to this story than just the loss of his and many other’s innocence. It is the fact that innocence can be regained. Harboring anger and resentment throughout your life for the loss of your innocence will only take you farther away from the place you need to be to regain that innocence. The author describes his anger as “the wages of trauma.” Yet, as the author describes in the final passage, the only way “to resolve this anger is with love. It’s not enough just to arrive at a place where no one is to blame. You have to go further.” He points out his realization that in order to reengage your innocence, you have to fall in love with anything, a peach, a sunset, a lover, anything. I think that this is only backing up the fact that your mental state is always going to reflect what you dwell on. If you dwell on the bad things that have happened to you throughout your life, you are going to find yourself feeling alone and against all odds. It is when you look to the things that truly matter such as relationships and friendships and personal passions that you will realize that you are not the only one lost and suffering in this world. You stop taking for granted all the simple pleasures in life like a soft breeze against your skin or the feel of fresh grass underneath you. So in conclusion, I think John Lennon had it right, “All You Need is Love.” It’s awfully corny, but undeniably true.

Resistance: Post 2 Steve Sinning --ssinning, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 14:27:52 -0400 reply
When I was a little kid, I was close to all of my uncles. By close I mean that I would talk to all of them on the phone about once every week. My uncle bill lived in Seattle, my uncle dick in Utah and my uncle Rob in Maine. I would see them roughly three times a year. Usually they would come in for Thanksgiving, Christmas and for the Forth of July. Back when I was 9 or 10, Pittsburgh had just recently opened up its new airport. I loved planes, and I loved this airport. I could hope on the train that would take you to the terminal and I could sit in front of the large windows that led to the runways. Every time my uncle bill came home I would go to the airport with my grandparents. He used to save me the snack on the plane and toss it to me as soon has he came through the hallway. Looking back, I guess it was an insignificant part of my childhood; however, it is one that I look back on with much joy. Besides telling a short childhood tale, what does this have to do with English 273 and more specially Resistance? After September 11, that air industry changed forever. No one with out a ticket could enter the terminal. This meant no more rides on the electric mono rail and no more guiding the plane in off the runway for me. At first after September 11th, everyone thought of the hundreds of people who lost their lives. Even a couple weeks later, I don’t think anyone realized that the hijacking of four planes could change the lives of so many people who weren’t even in New York or Washington D.C.. In “Apocalypse” Barry Lopez writes about a group of artists. Before September, no one paid any attention to the group. Afterwards, they were declared anti Americans. I believe that the point that Lopez is making involves the changing world after September 11. Today, Americans are annoyed based on precautions. While precautions are obviously necessary is some cases, the government has gone over board in some instances. In cases where terrorists cells have been realized, the government breaks them up and arrests anyone who could possibly be involved. While I’m obviously against terrorism, the government has broken one of its fundamental rights: the rights to a fair trial. The main character in “Apocalypse,” knows that even though he is innocent, he has very little chance of living a normal life after talking to the government. I believe Lopez is trying to point out the changes post September 11th, in a positive view that doesn’t necessarily come out against his own government in a harsh manner.

Sam Cole --scole, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 16:25:45 -0400 reply
After reading the fisdt five stories in Resistance by Berry Lopez I was trying to find a common moral in the stories something that linked them toghter that made him put them all in the same book. I wanted to what he was trying to convaye to the reader. One of the first things I noticed was that at the end of everyone of the stories he says the persons name and where he or she is leaving from, so all of the stories have to do with people leaving places but not for the same reasons.

In Apocalypse Owen and Mary are fleeing from the American Goverment because they want to put a stop there writting. Rather that cooperate they leave in order to spread therre ideals through other countries. They do not run because of fear they run because what they think they are doing is right.In Rio de la Plata Lisa does not so much as flee but by getting her passion back for life she leaves that place she was as a result. Then in Nortise and Tenon you see a man constantly on the run, but no one is chasing him. Gary is running from his past after being sodomised as a child by a person that lived in his home I dont think he ever became comfortable with the idea of a home and whenever he found himself becoming to at home in one place he had to leave. In Traveling with Bo Ling it says at the end of the story "on leaving Tangiers" I did not get the impression so as to that with what he was leaving. I dont think Harvey was leaving a place I think he was leaving a state of mind. He went from being an angry bitter blind to a happy married blind man a with becoming a parent in question. The final story I read up to was A Beat in the Road agian it said at the end he was leaving Winnipeg, Manitoba but I couldnt really find what he was leaving, he had found what the bear had wanted to communicate to him he had gotten married had kids.

sarah --shaas1, Thu, 08 Sep 2005 23:51:36 -0400 reply
The stories so far in Resistance have to do with freedom of speech. In Apocalypse, Inland Security is threatening the character’s rights. In the next story, the character looses her chance to communicate what she feels. I think a huge issue in this book is the issue of national security versus civil liberties, like freedom of speech. The question of national security versus civil liberties is one that has two main sides, but many different extremes to those sides. Most people have an opinion on one being greater than the other, but the main question at hand is how far certain aspects should be taken. For example, there might be two people that both agree that protecting civil liberties is the most important. They also might both agree that a person’s home can be searched with probable cause. The difference is what they both consider ‘probable cause’. One person might have much higher criteria than the other. It is hard to talk about taking sides with an argument that has so many fine lines. One thing for certain is that people are much more involved with this issue after September 11th. Ten years ago people would have been more apt to take light of the issue and not contemplate their side. Today, the issue is everywhere in the world with the war on terrorism, especially in the United States. While most human instinct is to strive for protection and security, it is hard to overlook the fact that all people want their liberties and freedoms to be things that are not messed with under any circumstances. I would have to say that I side more with the national security side. I feel that the safety of others and myself is my number one priority. However, I feel that by saying national security is more important; I am putting a lot of trust in those who are dealing with civil liberties. They need to handle their job in a responsible way and not abuse their privileges. They cannot threaten people just because they feel a slight sense that something is wrong. Of course, they should investigate the situation, but not go as far as to send threatening letters. I think that in the case of the first story, the Inland Security had no right to threaten just because the writings of the people didn’t agree with their values. I think the problem has to be a little deeper for that action to be taken.

Jamie Green --jamieallison, Mon, 12 Sep 2005 22:09:13 -0400 reply
After reading through the first stories in Barry Lopez’s, Resistance, I noticed a recurring theme. All the stories seem to give hope. Though each story is very different, when I finished reading each one I felt closer to the main characters. I liked the way this book is written because I feel like I am close to the main characters and can truly understand what they are going through. Despite the fact that I have never experienced what any of these characters have, like everyone else I have had to overcome obstacles in my life. It seems as if it is easy to relate to these characters, opposed to many other characters in other books. I liked the story, Traveling with Bo Ling, the best because it made me think a lot about the way people see things in life, as well as it was a very eye opening story. The main character in the story continuously discusses a loss of innocence. Not a loss of innocence in one way, but how with everything we do, there is a loss of innocence. It is not necessarily a bad thing nor is it a good one. The main character in the story says, “The loss of innocence becomes an appetite to experience the loss again.” I believe when he says this, he means nothing is ever enough. People always want more, but never stop to appreciate these things once they have them. It also could mean that people are always eager to experience new things and get sick of the old very quickly. The main character, who is a veteran from the Vietnam War, discusses all the innocence lost at war, that both he and his fellow soldiers faced and can never get back. One way they lost their innocence was by killing another. He says, “Many who lost their innocence in Vietnam didn’t want to. They thought they did, until they got up close.” He goes on to talk about all the horrible things that went on during the war overseas. This is another thing which he talks about in this story, the Vietnam War and war experiences. He discussed everything from rape to killing people and watching people get killed. Although this was disturbing I found it very interesting to read about. Another way the main character suggests one can lose their innocence is through sex. He believes that once innocence is lost in something, you can never have it back. He goes on to say, “What comes of the choice to no longer be innocent is different for every pilgrim; but to choose to risk a region of the soul.” This means that the outcomes of the choices made are different for everyone, but with every loss of innocence, something is lost, and it is a choice one makes. Throughout the whole story the main character seems weary of many things and taking chances, but Bo Ling opens up the world to him in a different and more positive way.

Brieanne Lanham --sbaldwin, Tue, 13 Sep 2005 00:18:37 -0400 reply
Yes, good point about "success is financial achievement." Clearly Lopez does not agree. How do you think he measures success, or how do the characters in these stories measure success? Notice how the second passage you identify deals with the same question. The idea that wealth is the desire of all peoples everywhere may not be true - what else might people want? Peace? Freedom? There's the suggestion that imagination - story telling - may lead people to think of these alternative views.

James McCeney? --sbaldwin, Tue, 13 Sep 2005 00:32:15 -0400 reply
I think you've done a great job summarizing Lopez's general argument. (Although I'm not sure I see his arguments/religious claims as Hindu. Why so? They could fit many other religious views, including ascetic versions of Christianity; though Hinduism would be sympathetic with this view, I suppose.) What do you think of Lopez's argument? It seems you agree - how about the argument as political strategy? I mean, is withdrawing, dropping out, an answer or simply capitulation. How, precisely does Lopez/his characters claim their dropping out will address cultural and political problems? Or, another way of asking this: Is it reasonable to set individual enlightenment against national injustice? Can the claims of these stories really balance or change the problems of the world? I see this question in your final sentence... Would you say this is a failing of Lopez or an indicator of what kind of action is possible in such a world?

Jenna Froess --sbaldwin, Tue, 13 Sep 2005 00:38:47 -0400 reply
Jenna: What do you make of Virgil's explanation to Edward of what the bear is saying, "You need to stop hearing your own name, Edward, when someone speaks." And what does Edward have to do to finally hear this, to "step through the door" (in the final sentence). You see, quite clearly, that Edward represents someone who is at a distance from the world and events. What is needed to get closer? I mean, he wants to be closer to the world, wants to see the bear, but he doesn't - why?

Bear in the Road --sbaldwin, Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:12:21 -0400 reply
I like the question, a good and honest one, of how we achieve that kind of connection with the land. Interesting to think Virgil is born with it - does that make it something natural and almost mystic? Or rather, is it a cultural connection, so he's born with it by being born into his culture? Now, what do you make of how Virgil chacterizes the bear's question? What is Edward's problem, exactly, that prevents him from hearing the bear? And shifting to the bear: is it carrying Edward's burden? I'm not sure I agree, but let's say he is... what is this burden, according to the story? It seems to be very specific, very cultural, not individual at all. And then what would it mean if the bear were carrying it? About the paintings: yes, they are appropriate, perfectly in tune with the stories, but often disturbing - often the stories are. Each story is a portrait, isn't it, a written portrait.

Jessica Bradley --sbaldwin, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:26:30 -0400 reply
Jessica: I agree with you about the similarities between "Mortise and Tenon" and "Rio de la Plata." I hadn't noticed it before, but the characters are similar. Both think of themselves as self-sufficient, but part of the story is coming to see their need to be open to others, coming to recognize or be willing to have weakness as well as strength define their self. So, neither story is focused on money or possessions, but rather a different kind of change and giving up. I think family is quite different in each though. Her mother and father are important - even her father, after the affair, where the point seems to be some kind of recognition/acceptance despite the affiar (but because of the concentration camps) - whereas he has more or less given up on his family, though perhaps he's adopted another one.

Lauren Gilkeson --sbaldwin, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:32:13 -0400 reply
Lauren: OK, nicely put about how "Apocalypse" sums up some of our concerns post-9/11. I wonder if you could push your thinking and find similar concerns in the other stories - I know you say you don't see it, but how far do these other stories engage with the political concerns of the first story? Certainly, the other stories deal with variations of cultural and political intolerance and the discovery of means of resistance. Could the case be made that we as Americans need to pay closer attention to these other stories? Another aspect of this question is how to articulate individual experience, perhaps the focus of these stories, with the broad cultural experience/resistnace suggested by Apocalypse.

Melissa Malone ~ Overcoming Trauma --sbaldwin, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:38:57 -0400 reply
Melissa: Good response. Looking at the main characters in the two stories you focus on - what is it that allows them to deal with their trauma? Some of it is being able to speak about the experience. But there's other things, right? There's a need to feel vulnerable, as if their reaction to the trauma was (understandably) to build walls and to hide, but the suggestion is that innocence comes with opening out to others. It's clear that this involves risk. For both, it involves risk that relates to or touches on the sources of their trauma. More generally, doesn't this give a sense of the kind of notion of the self and other that Lopez is addressing?

Charlotte Harris --sbaldwin, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:42:58 -0400 reply
Charlotte: Good response, but focus on a particular passage rather than summarizing the story. Try to discuss things in the passage. Then you might be able to address how the character found inner peace- yes by returning to the places of their past, but what would that achieve?

Casey Tominack--Rio de la Plata --sbaldwin, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 00:49:35 -0400 reply
Casey: Nice job explaining that sense of chance and incompleteness the main character expresses in Rio de la Plata. The story certainly has a sense of looking back on one's life in terms of the moments and the goals of those moments. It seems that there's a kind of balance or give and take between having goals and priorities, on the one hand, and realizing that we're constantly inventing, coping, surviving moment to moment, on the other hand. The Frankl book is a really good reference. Of course, Lopez' whole book resonates with that sort of careful and introspective philosophy, as well as the kind of writing that came out of the holocaust (the basis for Frankl's memoir), the event that continues to mark our sense of the limits of goals and priorities.

Response to Resistance --sbaldwin, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 09:13:09 -0400 reply
Katie: I think you're right that the stories can be heavy, even if they're important to read. So, I think you're smart to focus on the smaller things - surely this is in accord with Lopez's goals, since these stories arise out of the small and minor. Or, perhaps not the small, but the everyday, the common, as opposed to the global and abstract. Family: what could be more everyday? Notice that his critique is of family under conditions of globalization, not specifically American family, though we might be exemplary of the crisis! He offers a contrast: families in still traditional societies, where there are more tightly knit roles and relations. I don't know that he's arguing that these familier were perfect, but more that they did form a social institution that is not as clear today.

Rio de la Plata - Craig Joseph --sbaldwin, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 09:38:26 -0400 reply
Craig: "Trapped in familiarity" is a good formulation. So, there's a sense that success in terms of job, money, position, is not enough, or not adequate for what life gives us. This seems to be Lopez's critique of much contemporary society. It's not simply American society, though it's tied to globalization in the name of America, as it were. I agree that for Lisa, this change involves coming to terms with herself and her family history. I wonder, though, how much this involves a change of focus too. For example, how does her attitude to her father change when she hears the story of how her parents met? There seems to me the suggestion that the interpersonal relations and anger, the B.S. as you put it, which was focused on individuals and their experiences, fades into the background some - she sees her father, and her mother, as part of history, as part of the movement of the century, sees how their actions are caught up in this, and starts to see herself in this way. So, I guess I'm wondering how far the story is about balancing what we take for granted, as you say - and no doubt it is about that - and how far it's about re-evaluating our emphasis on ourselves and our lives versus an emphasis (understanding?) based on larger units of family, history, culture, and so on.

The Cage Analogy --ryrivard, Wed, 14 Sep 2005 16:35:18 -0400 reply
The idea of the caged animal in “Resistance” reminds of me of Hobbes’ “Leviathan,” which I never read because the name has more to do with the size than the actual contents of the book. But Hobbes found life in a world without laws to be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.”

There are two elements to the analogy that I find, two separate ways to perceive the caged leviathan in Lopez’s story. First, as being of nature wild, irreparably savage. In which case, what choice is there but to cage such a thing? Second, the animal being naturally domicile but rebellious upon being caged. In that case, what for the cage?

Hobbes, so far as Cliff’s Notes honest and accuracy endures, seems to have thought the first, that men naturally “warred” and needed a government. (But of whom? By the very people that are themselves savage – or are there people apart, as Plato thought?) If this is what Lopez meant, then he means that we have to have some sort of a government and, as it was discussed in class, that government is sometimes in the form of self-governance, by one’s own mind instead of the rule and laws of other people’s. If he means this, he is accepting a sort of defeat, in that the system and persecution which he is fleeing is an inevitability.

In the second, we see the general attitude of the Founding Fathers, of Albert Camus, and of that scene in “Fight Club” where nobody wants to pick a fight until they are forced to. The Declaration of Independence said men would suffer as is sufferable, Camus said essentially the same thing in “The Rebel”, and in “Fight Club” we saw it took some persistence to get into a good fight. If this is what Lopez means, he means that the government is getting too controlling and they ought to step off, that people are naturally peaceful, and that the cage is an artifice that is not to control savages but is controlled by them instead.

Generally, though, both things are on-and-off true, people are not naturally anything, nor are governments automatically anything either. Maybe this is why Lopez chooses such an unrevealing metaphor, he has no idea himself. For all his talk about leaving for more peaceful and old ways he forgets that the old ways were never more or less peaceful than they are now, that conditions wavered between war & peace but never really become fully either. The Greeks killed babies but created science, the Romans crucified men and burnt them alive but spread law throughout Europe, and it appears from some studies than non-western societies (like the American Indians) had higher rates of violence and death and more frequent wars than their European counterparts amongst themselves, and yet were more environmental.

Lopez knows something’s wrong and needs fixed, that things are going too far in one direction, but he would rather flee the situation than raise questions and for all the hints he makes at his characters’ having some rebellious spirit they don’t rebel, they just run.

Traveling with Bo Ling- Will Good --sbaldwin, Fri, 16 Sep 2005 16:59:54 -0400 reply
Will: The relation between ignorance and innocence is interesting. The boy's father says he (the boy) has lost his ignorance, meaning innocence, but are they the same? The one is about what you know and the other about how you know things. Can we be knowledgable and still innocent? It seems to me that the story is in part about the main character trying to answer that question, trying to see if he can regain innocence despite what he's seen. I think the blindness goes along with that: on the one hand, both the narrator and Bo Ling are blinded by violence, by outcomes of the war, so their blindness relates to the world, to loss of innocence and loss of ignorance; on the other hand, the blindness produces a kind of not-knowing (they're blind, they can't see the world) and a kind of innocence (they have to re-experience and learn things over; they're led around like children). I take the goals of the story to be about returning to a state of innocence despite knowledge. It seems like this return is not guaranteed...

Jennings (Jay) Lyons --sbaldwin, Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:18:14 -0400 reply
Jay: (You should not that the narrator of the story is male not female.) Yes, we have an image of childhood trauma filtering and shadowing all subsequent experience. The trauma produces a permanent kind of distance and fragility in her dealings with others. He works for a chance to see the world, as you note, and yet remains at a distance from others. So there's a trauma, a blank, a wall. Note that the narrator's experience seems far removed from the political "resistance" of the first stories - some of the others are more personal like this one, others more political. Is this simply a sign of unevenenss? Or rather, can we see how what happens to the narrator in Mortise and Tenon is related to the kind of stories of political resistance Lopez describes in Apocalypse? I'm wondering whether the resolution of the story, the act of love and act of acceptance - even to the attacker - is a kind of message about how we need to be open to even our enemies.

Amanda Drake --sbaldwin, Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:25:09 -0400 reply
So, one aspect of this is America as isolationist, as shielding itself from the world, both through political action and at the level of the individual, who sees him/herself as American rather than a citizen of the world. If we see our personal lives as political, i.e. the personal and political intertwined, there's the question of what kind of political being we are. It's interesting that he suggests the power of art, and story/narrative in particular, as a way to challenge this monolithic view of self and nation. Stories suggest shared concerns, shared histories, and stories have to be told - they need other people.

Resistance --sbaldwin, Fri, 16 Sep 2005 17:30:01 -0400 reply
Matt: OK, nice job discussing Lopez in relation to your experience. Be sure next time to root your response in something specific about the text! Certainly, Lopez's character represent Americans more open to the world, trying to move past the exclusioniary/isolationist viewpoint. They also tending to drop out, to work on minor and local issues. This might be their success or we might ask why they can't tackle larger issues. I guess I'm wondering if Lopez's focus on the local and on the small is a problem or not...

Autumn Means --sbaldwin, Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:09:23 -0400 reply
Autumn: Globalization vs. tradition makes sense as an analytical binary. Owen and group are trying to preserve tradition. What are some of the specific of what they're preserving? They see in tradition alternative forms of government and of social grouping, and alternative ways of thinking of oneself - at a distance from the money-driven view of Americans. So, it's not tradition in and of itself but also a set of values associated with it. Notice how they argue that the recounting of tradition, the performance of these stories will alter the tendency towards globalization; so there is a force of tradition, but perhaps it also touches something already in globalization, since the global must have some relation, some structure that is local. So, there's a claim here not simply for maintaining tradition but for its functioning in the present. I think you're right to see some paradoxes in extreme resistance to globalization, but perhaps theses need to be seen as two tendencies in constant struggle?

Christopher Glover: Traveling With Bo Ling --sbaldwin, Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:17:50 -0400 reply
Christopher: I agree that the story moves towards innocence regained. I suppose this isn't possible with ignorance - we can't unlearn things, but we can cleanse ourselves, as it were. What does this suggest about the difference between innocence and ignorance? Now, the formula for regaining innocence, falling in love with anything, being open to falling in love with a peach, etc., suggests to me a giving up of evaluations and expectations of the world, and a willingness to let the world be. I agree that the message is a bit corny, though perhaps this is a sign of how far we've all accepted loss of innocence. Dare to be corny?

Resistance: Post 2 Steve Sinning --sbaldwin, Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:29:08 -0400 reply
Steve: I see the comparison between the changed security post-9/11 and the changed attitudes towards the artists described in Resistance. I do want you to be more precise in your reply -- more focused on something directly out of the text. I wonder, also about your story of traveling and your uncles, how this is about family and place, about the waning of our relations to family and place through globalization? You see less of them, to some degree, because of distance and because of the new dispensation of space and security.

Sam Cole --sbaldwin, Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:45:27 -0400 reply
Sam: First off, the notes at the end of each story are a good thing to focus on. But do write more - this is nowhere near 500 words. You might consider why, overall, Lopez makes them be leaving, moving on. What's the point? What does it say about storytelling, for example? What does it say about the role of place/location in these stories? Also, look at other information in those notes. Why make all of these people authors/artists? What types of things are they authors/artists of, and why is this significant?

sarah --sbaldwin, Mon, 19 Sep 2005 14:55:13 -0400 reply
Sarah: You do a good job setting out the tension between civil liberties and national security. I'd like to see you work on this in relation to a few passages in the stories. Stay close to the text. Choose one story and talk about how the tension is made clear there. Then: what is Lopez's position? Is he totally for individual liberty?

Jamie Green --sbaldwin, Mon, 19 Sep 2005 15:00:36 -0400 reply
Jamie: I like the way you've put it - the stories are about hope, but also they "give hope" to the reader. I too feel hopeful, consoled even, on reading these. I think that's quite an accomplishment on Lopez's part. I would say that this is the kind of effect (or performance) that Owen, in "Apocalypse," claims fiction can have and claims is its effect on culture. So, there's a kind of change in the characters from the beginning of each story to the end, but also in us - hard to pin down what it is, but certainly it seems to relate to empathy.

Mekhala Sofsky msofsky --msofsky, Thu, 22 Sep 2005 07:07:46 -0400 reply
I really thought this was a great book. I think it is a hard thing to write something with the intension of sending a message of compassion without sounding too preachy or self-righteous. We spoke in class about the theme found in the first story of kind of growing out of adolescence. It seemed to me like that theme actually ran thoughout the entire book. In Apocolypse Lopez wrote a segment where he says something along the lines of-> In the beginning they thought love was pointless but as they got older and learned more about the world and themselves Love began to seem essential. I think that is a coming of age idea itself. In each story after that, it seemed that each character began the sotry feeling defeated in one way or another. Throughout each story the characters found themselves arriving at some sort of awakening. Some realization where the character begins to understand life and take control of thier own. The one character that got molested as a child spent most of his life using it as some sort of handicap. He didnt reall live. He used it as an excuse to be (I felt) afraid of living, of finding happiness. It was the same with the woman whose father left them. She didnt really have a life. She spent her life focusing on this one negative part of her life as a crutch. The book (for me) was almost like a, not so much a self-help book, but kind of an inspiration. Lopez came off like he was pushing his readers, or encouraging them, to open us to compassion...to stop focusing inwards and take a look around.

Mekala Sofsky agian --msofsky, Thu, 22 Sep 2005 07:26:59 -0400 reply
I think it is really obvious that there is a problem with the way we live and the things that we let happen around us. Lopez also said that it is not that people believe there is no problem but that they don't know how to go about fixing it, or they don't know how to speak out agianst it. I think he was effective in getting his message across also, because he wasn't really like arguing or forceful about how he wrote his stories. He tied all of the characters in together by making them all people who