deenie. judy blume. (286)

i remember my friend chandra telling me to read deenie once on instagram, i told her i never read it, but i was wrong.  i had read deenie, just forgot what it was called.  i remember a story about a girl having to wear a brace, when i reread blubber, i thought the brace happened in that, but wrong again.  and to be completely honest, all i remember other than the brace was the making out in the laundry room with the brace on (what a pervy kid!)

so deenie was the story of a beautiful girl, deenie, that had scoliosis and had to wear a brace.  and i must say she was a better kid then i because she handled it very well.  there were some breakdowns but for the most part, she just dealt with it.  though that whole undershirt thing was weird.  but a great lesson for kids about having to deal with a handicap and also to be accepting of those with one as well.

i have to add that while deenie was a heat kid, her mother was the worse!  poor thing! i can not imagine having a mother like that.  it was horrible how the mom tried to blame the dad's family for her disease.  also all of the crying by the mom was too much, get a grip, lady! it was also sad how much pride she took in deenie's good looks.  i am glad helen stood up to her at the end, a mom should not live vicariously through their kids, but rather support their talents.  luckily, deenie and helen were more sensible then their mother.

okay, so now to the juicy stuff! so you know how people are always trying to ban books because of the sex stuff in them.  and one argument is that that stuff probably goes over the kid's head, well i am proof of that, because all of the talk about masturbation and sexual intercross went right over my head! as kid, i was turned on by the kissing, and had no idea what else was going on.  i probably assumed her special spot was on her stomach. lol. 

quick digression, at her talk, judy blume discussed how someone once thought her special spot was her elbow!

but yeah, deenie masturbating went over my head in elementary school.  though i have to add what wonderful advice for adolescence about masturbation.  it's normal!  i mean i didn't start until i was in high school, but saw nothing wrong with it and never felt guilty about it.  (i have mentioned this before.)

i will have to say that this is a must read for every girl and kudos to blume and deenie on the positive view of female masturbation! 

the awakening. kate chopin.

i decided to reread kate chopin's the awakening for banned book week.  i came across it while sharing a link to the american library association list of banned/challenged classics.  i have a huge tbr pile right now and decided the awakening would be a fast read, so i decided to squeeze it for banned books week.

i read the awakening in college.  i think it was for a women's studies course.  however, i didn't remember much from it other than the protagonist drowned herself in the sea over a lover.

i hate to say this considering the awakening is an example of early feminist writing, but i did not enjoy the story.  the issue i had with edna, was the same issues that i had with anna karenina.  i just can not sympathize with women that abandon their duties as a mother.  i also can not tolerate women who abandon their duties as wife via infidelity.  in the awakening, edna abandoned her husband and children because she fell in love with another man, robert.  also, robert unleashed all of her inner desires which resulted in her having another affair with a different gentleman.  if edna was single, i would be in full support of her multiple lovers but the fact that she was a mother and a wife caused my dislike of her.

i am normally in support of women not being restricted by gender roles, however, when you decide to become a mother or a wife, there are basic duties that you agree to by assuming these roles.  so for the most part you must meet the most basic duties, care for your children and care for your husband.  there is flexibility within these roles ie women should not be restrict to the realm of the home, but if you can't handle that you shouldn't have assumed the role in the first place.  and i know that i am writing this as a 20th/21st century woman, and it is easy for me to critique because i have the freedom to choose when i want to be a mother or a wife, but i can not sympathize with women who abandon their families, past or present.   it is selfish versus feminist.  

before i go on, so i don't sound completely ignorant, i do realize that at the time chopin was writing, women had only one option in life, marriage.  most women married for financial stability versus actual love and most women did not have a choice when it came to marriage, so many women found themselves in the same situation as edna.  so for that reason i do admire this work for addressing an experience that women encountered but could not discuss.  and to be perfectly honest, if i was in her situation in that time and place, i am not sure what i would have done.  but suicide seems extreme, i mean both edna and anna karenina decided to kill themselves then lead a life without love, which sounds brave but is actually cowardly, especially considering that they had children.  i seen no romance in leaving your children motherless.  i guess chopin wanted to demonstrate how women in these situations have no real options, and rather then life a lie, some women wished for death.

it all seems bleak but it is tough being a women, especially due to the expectations that society places on us.  and i guess i should be sympathetic toward edna because she wasn't the mothering type yet became a mother out of society's expectations.  and i can not hate her for that, some people just don't have a mothering instinct.  okay, maybe i was a little two harsh on edna earlier, but in my defense, it's difficult to seperate my modern mind from the historical context, especially considering how women issues are pretty much the same throughout all of history.

for me, personally, it comes down to the fact that i believe women should not be restricted by their gender, we should do what feels natural to us.  yet, at the same time, i am old-fashioned and conservative when it comes to marriage and motherhood.  to me, marriage vows should be upheld, one should keep the promises that they have made.  and i know that people fall out of love, and sometimes the person your married changes, or you change, life happens.  i am fine with divorce, but i think once you start to feel uncertain about your marriage, you should discuss it with your partner versus cheat.  i know edna didn't really have this option but i hope a modern day work like this would have the protagonist going that route.

and though i do not agree with the infidelity, i must praise chopin for writing about female sexuality.  though i wish edna's awakening came before marriage rather than after but it could have never really been the other way.  the sad truth is that women are expected to be the virgin bride, especially back then.  it is also unfortunate that edna's husband did not awaken her.  but this work is important for women to read (then and now), so that they can see that it is fine to be a sexual person, that you are not abnormal for desiring sex. 

i was raised mormon and though i planned on saving myself for marriage as the church instructed, i must admit that i saw nothing wrong with masturbating though i should have according to the church.  i have no idea where i got the notion that masturbation was okay, maybe it was from the novels (the perks of being a wallflower mentioned masturbation) and the teen magazines i read.  one of my friends and i openly discussed masturbation and i remember encouraging other friends to explore, not by in a "let's have a circle jerk" way,  but in a "hey, don't be ashamed to explore your body" way.  sorry, i just got really honest.  but i guess i am demonstrating how i could have been edna in this modern day.  i am not saying that the standards of the church are wrong, teens should not have sex lives, but their sexuality shouldn't be denied.  i mean i didn't grow up to be this sex-crazed slut because i masturbated in high school.  and even if i did, oh well, it is my body.

wow.  this post kind of went all over the place, but there is a lot of layers to the awakening.  it simply as a story was not for me, i did not sympathize with edna.  however, the issues of motherhood, gender roles, and sexuality that arose from it were important for me to contemplate.  i think the later reason is why this book was banned.  it awoken in people the idea that not all women fit into the mold deemed appropriate by society.  for this, and it's feminist significance, the awakening is a must read for every woman . . . and every man too!  

the grapes of wrath. john steinbeck. (144)

 

i follow the penguin truck online and was excited to discover that it was coming to bakersfield!  it would be joining a group of people that will be retracing the route taken by the joad family from john steinbeck's classic, the grapes of wrath.  i am so excited to be able to purchase books from the penguin truck, we know my love of food trucks, now imagine the bookstore equivalent of one!  since the truck would be in bakersfield for an event for the grapes of wrath, i decided i should read it.

as i mentioned in my post for of mice and men, since steinbeck writes about okies, i perceive his book as being lowbrow, in addition to that i figured it might be tedious and boring at times due to its discussion of the dust bowl but how i misjudged.  the grapes of wrath is a beautifully written novel and well deserving of the pulitzer prize.  i was thoroughly surprised how much i enjoyed it but then again steinbeck is an excellent storyteller.

the thing that surprised me was how much truth was in this book.  there were a handful of topics that steinbeck discussed and shed an interesting light on.  i will discuss each topic as they appeared in the book.

first, since tom joad was an ex-con, steinbeck discussed prisons.  growing up in delano and being a frequent rider of the greyhound (they send prisoners home on it), i have very solid opinions on the prison system.  in a nutshell, i think prisoners have too many rights and luxuries.  furthermore, i believe prisons have become a cesspool of corruption and promotes the same immoral lifestyle the prisoners are supposed to be rehabilitated for.  it is often discussed that prisoners become accustomed to prison life and are therefore unable to function in the "real" world.  steinbeck expressed this same idea and i found it interesting that 50 years ago prisons were considered too comfortable for prisoners and that there has been no call for reform.  about 20 pages later, joad explained that he wasn't rehabilitated in prison but would commit the crime just the same if he situation arouse again.  (he killed a man who had started a right with him, the killing was done as self-defense.)

but again a critique of the US prison for not rehabilitating people.  and before you say, but wait tom joad was an honest man but he had that heart the whole time, he didn't gain it in prison.

another character with a heart of gold was pastor casy, he was filled with wisdom and truth.  i valued what he said about sin in a discussion with uncle john.  uncle john wanted to know if it was a sin that he let his wife die.  casy said "well, for anyone else it was mistake but if you think it was a sin--then it's a sin.  a fella builds his own sins right up from the groun'."  this is true, we can not judge our neighbor and label their wrongdoings as sin.  we can only be responsible for ourselves, and we are the only ones who truly know what our sins are and are the only ones that can ask for forgiveness for them.

there was also a great point steinbeck made about bad mouthing parents.  in today's world, there are some many single parents and one thing that happens is the bad mouthing of the other parent.  i have talked with friends about the negative effects of it on kids.  steinbeck wrote that "it ain't good for a baby to grow up with folks a-sayin his pa ain't no good".  if kids do they will internalize what they hear and think themselves to be no-good as well.

another thing that steinbeck wanted to make clear was the fact that when people are in need it's poor people who will help them out.  ma joad told the store owner, 

"i'm learning one good thing.  learning it all the time, ever'day.  if you 're in trouble or hurt or need--got to poor people.  they're the only ones that'll help--the only ones."  

the reason for this is that poor people understand the need.   they have been down and out with no alternatives so when they see others in that situations they try to help.  my mom was homeless for a while because our house went into foreclosure, and she always tries to help others because of that situation.  Steinbeck further demonstrated this by the story of the family and their little boy that died while traveling.  the family did not have enough money to bury him, but the other poor families that were travelling gave what they could to help bury the little boy.  poor people are often seen being needy but in fact they are usually the most charitable. 

in addition to discussing class, steinbeck also discussed gender roles as well.  towards the end of the novel, ma begins to tell pa what needs to happen in order for the family to be safe.  upset by being told what to do, pa said

funny! woman takin' over the fambly.  woman sayin' we'll do this here, an' we'll gothere.  an'i don't even care. 

to which ma responded

'women can change better'n a man . . . woman go all her life in her arms.  man got it all in his head.

later on in their talk she explained, after pa said that life was over and done:

it ain't, pa.  an' that's one more thing a woman knows.  i noticed that.  man, he lives in jerks--baby born an' a man dies, an' that's a jerk--gets a farm an' loses his farm, an' that's a jerk.  woman, it's all one flow, like a stream, little eddies, little waterfalls, but the river, it goes right on.  woman looks at it like that.  we ain't gonna die out.  people is goin' on --changin' a little, maybe, but goin' right on."

maybe i'm must biased because i am woman but we are more flexible than men.  we are more easily adapt to adjust to a new situation than men.  i am not sure why this is and will save that analysis for another day.  and of course our ability to go with the flow, i'm going to say has to do with our period.  if you can endure that once a month, that you have the ability to get on life filled with hope!

perhaps the most famous quote of the grapes of wrath, was tom's joad's speech, he gave when he left his family.  he said,

then, i'll be aroun' in the dark.  i'll be ever'where--wherever you look  wherever they's a fight so hungry people can eat, i'll be there.  wherever they's a cop beatin' up a guy.  i'll be there.   if casy knowed, why, i'll be in the way guys yell when they're mad an'--i'll be in the way kids laugh when they're hungry an' they know supper's ready.  an' when folks eat the stuff they raise an' live in the houses they build--while, i'll be there.  see? god i'm talkin' like casy.  comes of thinkin' about him so much.  seems like I see him sometimes.   

in my high school history class, my teacher was so excited when he shared the rage against the machine song, the ghost of tom joad*.  at the time i loved me some rage against the machine, i even had a band shirt with thequote, "who controls the past now, controls the future . . ." (which i learned found out was actually from 1984, god i was such a tool in high school, lol)  but even then i didn't get the hype.  i mean i thought it was cool that rage decided to be literary in their songs but didn't see why mr. myovich was so excited about sharing it to us, to be honest, i don't recall studying the dust bowl, when he presented the song to us.  however, now as an adult and having read the grapes of wrath, i see how interesting it is that a rap rock band from the 90s decided to have such a politically charged message. 

but back to tom joad's speech, that small speech embodies the greatness of steinbeck.  his words are so simple just they speak volumes (i apologize for being so cliché but it is the best way to define his writing!)  his words are so simple but provoke profound thoughts.  if you look back through the quotes i shared, it reads like hicks talking but there is so much more to the words.

this book is truly a masterpiece and truly deserved the pulitzer.  not only is it a beautiful tale of a family and what they endure to survive, but it works on a whole other level politically about how we treat the lower classes.  this work can applied to all farm workers.  as i read, i was reminded of my grandfather and what he had to endure, not only being a farm worker but also one of color.  the migrant farmers from the midwest had to endure so much hatred that i can't imagine what the mexican and filipino farm workers had to endure since they had to deal with addition of racial prejudices.  i also tried to contextualize it for myself right now.  growing up in delano, which is a migrant farmer worker community, i can admit that i do discriminate against migrant farm workers.  not so much for taking my jobs, this may sound horrible but i always say that my grandfather toiled in the fields so that we didn't have to (meaning we should have a better life because that is what he wanted.)  but for abusing the systems that are in place to help those in need.  being in the school systems i see the amount of aid there is now for the poor and there needs to be reform.  when steinbeck wrote the grapes of wrath, there was nothing to help those in need, however, everyone now just gets a free ride from the government.  if he were to rewrite this today, it would be a different story.  yes, the joads utilized a government camp, which we saw, but we also read how they wanted to be able to make it on their own without the help the government.  if the joads were around today, they still hold tight to their morals and use government assistance to help them get on their feet as opposed to making it their lifestyle and means of income.  there is nothing wrong with working in the fields there is something wrong with abusing government assistance.  my grandfather worked kn the fields and both my grandparents worked to help support my mother and her siblings without any government hand-outs.  aide is fine as long as it is helping those that need it.  the grapes of wrath was not a call to take complete care of the lower classes but rather not to discriminate against them and allow them the opportunity to achieve their american dream. now that i think about it if steinbeck were to write this today it would be a tale of the 99 percent against the 1 percent.  

but politics aside, this is a truly wonderful book and if you have not read it, make sure to pick it up!!!

also it's banned book, for god knows why?  maybe the call to stand against a unjust government and unfair economy?  not sure, but it should not be banned but read and studied as a part of american history.  

*i just now, thanks to wikipedia discovered that this song is actually by bruce springsteen

of mice and men. john steinbeck.

i read "of mice and men" in high school but all i really remember was lenny and his rabbits.  and the dopey voice in which i read lenny's dialogue.

but when "grapes of wrath" jumped to the top of my "to-read" list because of the penguin book truck stopping in bakersfield for a retracing of the route from "the grapes of wrath", i decided to reread "of mice of men".  okay more like actually read, i may not have read all of it in high school.  also figured it would be a nice note to end banned books week on.

i was surprised that "of mice and men" was so well written.  since steinbeck's characters are okies, i always imagine him as one.  silly, i know especially since i just learned via wikipedia that he went to stanford.  also, i am not saying okies aren't educated or intelligent people, but a stereotypical okie is a hick and i always imaged steinbeck as coming from that culture.

one thing that struck me on this rereading, was the foreshadowing of lenny's fate by old candy's dog.  as soon as the reader meets lenny, one knows he is marked for doom, kind of like piggy from "lord of the flies."  you just know they are going to die in the end.  this doom then becomes cemented with story of old candy's dog.  old candy has a dog that according to the others is worthless and a nuisance, but old candy loves him and his companionship. however, the other men decide that the dog must go and another man goes out and shoots him.

the shooting of old candy's dog frames george shooting lenny in the end.  taken out of context, it sounds horrible, man shoots best friend, however, it was not that simple.  george had to be the one that shot lenny because he loved him the most.  it was a mercy kill and could only be one if performed by george.  if curly shot him, it would not have been the same, as demonstrated with old candy's dog  it was a bittersweet ending for lenny, but better he died at the hands of a friend than an enemy. it was a difficult act but was assuaged by george's telling of their dream farm, at least lenny passed on with peaceful thoughts and images in his mind.

i don't recall the moral that we learned from "of mice of men" while in high school.  as i mentioned before all i remember was lenny and his rabbits and his inability to pet things gently.

i watch and love a youtube called "thug notes" in which a thug breaks down beloved classics into thug terms.  (if you haven't seen or heard of it, go watch an episode) and they have a great analysis of the novel.  "of mice of men" is a demonstration of how there really is no "american dream" and though motivational, it ultimately sets individuals up for failure.   for as thug notes explained that in a culture of exploitation, in which individuals lose their basic rights, dreams are unachievable.  

furthermore, these dreams result in  abuse and discrimination among the lower classes due to disenfranchisement.  in a college course, i remember discussing this in terms of the dust bowl. disenfranchized farmers, who had lost their farms to the banks, as a means to exert their power, became racist and sexist towards blacks and women.  this is demonstrated with curley's wife.  though it appears at first that curley's wife is a bit of a floozy but after hearing her backstory it is demonstrated that she is part of this cycle of abuse.  (for you "how i met your mother" fans, kind of like the cycle of yelling).  curley, who had a napolean complex in addition to being powerless by the farming system, exerts his power and his abusive towards his wife.  curley's wife, who is jaded by dreams of being pictures and thinks she deserved better in life, takes the abusive from curley but then exerts her power over crooks.   crooks though intelligent and a hardworker suffers because during that time, blacks were the lowest rung in society.  it's sad because here is a group of people that should have worked together to better their life situation but instead abused each other in order to feel powerful.  (sorry i might sound like a communist but i didn't say ban together to overthrow the government but ban together to ensure their basic rights.)

i must add that i also agree with the judeochristian undetones "of mice and men" that thug notes discussed.  though i disagree with their analysis about it being a theme of man's reason (geroge) conquering (shooting) animal instinct (lenny). i saw the shooting more as an demonstration of innocence and selfless needing to be destroyed in order to succed in a capitalistic economy.  greed is the driving force of capitalism (see: monopoly), and lenny did not have this, so he would have never achieved his dream.  furthermore, lenny was the ideal worker, he worked hard and didn't question anything, just did his work, and yet he was still crushed by the world, demonstrating that the labor force though key to the economy will ultimately be destroyed.  (wow, okay, i might be a communists).

but politics aside, at its very core, "of mice and men" is beautiful tale of friendship.  though at times george was a bit harsh with lenny, in the end, he loved him and vice versa.  it was beautiful to see to which lengths a friend will go to protect their friend.  

this book really has so many layers and it is quite short, which is prove how great of a writer steinbeck is.  this book is also a banned book.  based on my googling, it was banned for his profanity, use of the n-word, lack of traditional values, and i am going to assume the whorehouses.  but lets be honest, it is probably due to is critique of the american dream and capitalism, and of course probably having communist undertones. 

the bridge to terabithia. katherine paterson.

i never read "bridge to terabithia" as a kid but i always saw it at the library.  i avoided it as a kid because it seemed too fantasy for me (which it turned out not to be).  however, now i regret judging a book by its title because i missed out on a great book as a kid.  

about a year ago, i came across the movie, it was on ktla, one of those sunday afternoon movies.  i watched it, primarily because zooey deschanel is in it, and it left me in tears.  i cried my heart out and realized that i needed to read the book.  i bought it at the goodwill but it sat on my bookshelf for a while.  while researching banned books for banned books week i noticed it on the list so decided to finally read it.

and before i go, zooey deschanel was the perfect person to play miss edmunds the music teacher.  miss edmunds was described as:

her long swishy black hair and blue blue eyes.  she could play the guitar like a regular recording star and she had this soft floaty voice that made jess squish inside.  lord, she was gorgeous.

totally, zooey right?

also, i loved annasophia robb as leslie but i wished they had made her hair a boyish cut and dressed her poor (even though she was rich), which is how it was in the book.  but other than that a great adaption.

if you haven't read "bridge to terabithia" please stop by right now and go read it.  there are spoilers ahead.

"bridge to terabithia" is the story of two fifth graders, jesse and leslie and their unlikely friendship.  leslie is a new kid at school and unconventional.  her parents are considered "hippies" by jesse's parents, they are both successful writers but they moved to the country to live off of the land.  at first, jesse was jealous of leslie because she beat him in a race.  he was also hesitant because she was a little different from the rest of the kids.  she didn't watch tv and was intelligent (sad how smart makes you different versus the norm) but he soon saw that she needed a friend and helped her out at school.  i should add, jesse is a little different from the other kids at school.  he is sensitive, well-mannered boy who secretly likes to draw and loves music class.  jesse saved leslie from the school bully, janice avery, and after that they became friends and started hanging out everyday afterschool (they are neighbors).

there is a woods near their home, and one day they crossed over the creek with a rope swing and created their own mythical land, terabithia.  leslie, who is well-read, likened their mythical place to nardia, and started sharing books with jesse.  leslie came up with all of these mythical creatures and areas and jesse felt less creative in contrast, but they still have fun.

they had typical kid adventures.  they get revenge on the school bully for stealing jesse's kid sister's twinkie, but then leslie befriended her and discovered that she was a bully due to abuse at home.  as a reader, you are happy for jesse and leslie and their friendship.

and then you are hit with a curveball.  i was prepared for it because of the film, but when i watched the film, it had me in tears.  jesse went to the museum for the day with miss edmunds (which in itself is creepy but i guess it was a different time?) and when he came back, he finds out that leslie is dead.  yes, dead!  it was raining and she had an accident swinging on the rope.  it was devasting reading about jesse dealing with her death.  he was uncertain about his feelings and how to mourn and what to do.  in the end, he does get closure, he created a bridge to terabithia and shared the kingdom with his little sister.

"bridge to terabithia" is a wonderful book but sadly, it is on the banned books list.  the reasons its listing are death and atheism (leslie doesn't believe in god or go to church).  two things that i think children should not be shielded from, i don't have kids but i was a kid and like i have seen in maurice sendak's books and his documentary, it's better to be honest.  

i first want to discuss the "atheism", which i actually read as being in support of spirituality.  leslie is an atheist and doesn't go to church.  but one day she joins jesse and his family.  jesse and his sister who go to church every week are bored at the service, jesse spends his worship time counting things.  while leslie, the atheist, finds the story of jesus beautiful even likens it to lincolm and socrates.  furthermore, more when leslie talks about the crufixtion of christ with jesse and may belle they focused on the gory details while she understood the higher meaning in it.  she even tells them, "you believe in it, but you hate it.  i don't have to believe in it and i think it's beautiful".  a pretty deep thought for a kid, but a demonstration of the importance of following rules of a church and being considered religious but lacking any spiritual (and i think more important) connection to god.  leslie's "atheism" then demonstrated the importance of finding the beautiful within god instead of going through the motions.

since leslie doesn't believe in god, may belle is frightened that she will go to hell for not believing when she died.  i thought this was an interesting topic because the reader knows that leslie was a good person and would not end up in hell.  again i think it reinforces the idea of its more important to have good works here on earth versus having blind faith in god.

this discussion on spirtuality may go unnoticed by a child, but the topic of death is a main focus and probably the main reason, this book is banned.  as a kid, i was frightened of death.  i used to pray at night for god to keep my grandparents alive.  i was also petrified of mankind's demise.  it must have been due to a science lesson but at night, i would imagine that the sun no longer existed and how mankind would eventually die out like the dinosaurs due to lack of food.  i never shared this with anyone but i would think about this all the time, as a 5th/6th grader.  furthermore, since adults treat death as a taboo with kids, instead of protecting them from death, it just makes death more frightening.  kids need to understand that death is a fact of life, there is no way to avoid it so we should not be frightened of it.  and if you scared of death, its okay because others are too.  

i learned online that paterson was inspired to write "bridge to terabithia" after her son's best friend was strucked by lightning and died.  this book was meant to help children deal with death.  it is supposed to explain to them something that even baffles adults.  it demonstrates that there is no one way to mourn and that you will experience maby different feelings.  it also shows that adults have a difficult time dealing with death as well.  i can admit that even with my thirty years of life, i never know what to say when someone loses a loved one and am still scared of those around me dying.  however the only difference is that now as an adult i understand i am not the only one who has these worries.  

i am glad i read this as an adult but really wish i read it as a kid.  i also hope that kids do read this book.  by reading "bridge to terabithia", the reader learns an important life lesson and if read as child, it will last them their lifetime.

ps food for thought:  many children's books are banned because of death as a topic.  however, every disney movie has a dead parent especially in the recent years.  in "lion king", we see mufasa's death.  "finding nemo", scene with nemo's mom was intense for me and i was an adult when i saw it.  however there is never a ban on them and parents normally buy movie merchandise and take them to disneyland to ride rides based on the movie. 

the bluest eye. toni morrison. (143)

in honor of banned books week, i decided to read "the bluest eye" by toni morrison.  it has been in the news recently because an alabama senator wanted it banned from schools because of its content, rape and incest.  some

claim the ban is a protest against common core, the new system schools are adapting to standardized education in the US.  regardless of the reason, i decided to read "the bluest eye" and see for myself.

and yes, there is rape and incest in the book.  there is also sex.  but if that is all one takes from the novel, then s/he completely missed the message and point of "the bluest eye".  in fact, by focusing only upon the rape and incest of pecola, s/he commits the same transgression that all the characters of "the bluest eye" are guilty of, making pecola a scapegoat by projecting their insecurities and self-hate upon her.

there was the physical act of pecola being raped by her father in the novel but to label it pornographic as school districts do (which i think says a lot more about administrations then students if they are aroused by it) is wrong.  the rape, and i am by no means justifying pecola's father's actions, was not one of lust but rather an extreme example of how individuals disenfranchised based on race often abuse their own race to feel empowered.  pecola's father, cholly, was "raped" by white men as a young man.  during his first time having sex, cholly and his partner were discovered by two men who had him finish while they watched. his raping of pecola was revenge for what those men did to him versus wanting to be with his daughter.  again, i am not trying to pardon on cholly, just giving the context for which the incestual rape occurred.  i want to illustrated that if the rape is contextualized for students, which it should be since it is a school lesson, then students would not see it as pornography.  furthermore, it is allows a honest discussion about sex for young adults, sex is not just an act of love or lust, it can also be abused as an exertion of control and power.  and to not go completely off based but high school kids are at the age of having sex, so reading this should not come as a complete shock to them.  they also see worse in movies or hear worse in hip hop and pop songs.  as i mentioned in my persepolis post, the topic of sex for education purposes should be find, the real issue is the topic of sex as entertainment, that is what the senator should be concerned with.

back to the novel, the bluest eye was a truly sad story.  i felt bad for pecola because all she wanted was to be love and yet the world just caused her suffering.  but as toni morrison wrote in the afterward, she did not want to "lead readers into the comfort of pitying her [but] rather than into an interrogation of themselves for the smashing."  as readers, of course we will sympathize with pecola, but morrison wanted us to stop being the forces that destroyed pecola.  as i mentioned before, pecola, being poor, black, and a female, inferior in terms of class, race and sex, she was labelled "ugly" and became a scapegoat for the characters.  instead of dealing with their own insecurities, the characters projected everything they hated about themselves upon this little girl.  but where does this self hate come from?  in the afterward, morrison explained that this was the reason for her writing the bluest eye.

its difficult because it is so ingrained into american culture but the standard of beauty is based on whiteness.  to be white is to be beautiful.  i would considered myself an intelligent and self confident woman, proud of my ethnicity but i still am ruled by this standard of white beauty because it was installed before i was so self-aware.  growing up i played with white barbies and white dolls, i watched white characters on tv and read about what characters in books, as a kid you don't really thing much of it but subconciously it has its effects.  i mean those we know me, know i hate getting too dark of a tan, it happens to me every summer, and goes away every winter, but i still try to prevent myself from becoming too dark.  i know its silly but am ruled by this need to stay light.

i think the best example of this subconscious need to be white is that as a person of mixed race often forget that i am not white.  for example, when i am out with my friends, i am always extremely critical of asian hipsters, especially foodie asian hipsters, and guess what . . . if you asked the average person to described me, s/he would say a foodie asian hipsters.  i mean my friends would too but never to my face. (hipster in my opinion is a misnomer.)   where does this hate for foodie asian hipsters come from?  i think it had to do with my thinking i am a unique individual and then having to be confronted with the fact that i actually am a stereotype, i do fit into the box that society wants to label me.  but i do take pictures of what i eat, and shop at urban outfitters and hold up peace signs in pictures.  it horrible to realize that you are stereotypical but better to accept yourself then trying to avoid a label.  

this denial of nature to avoid labeling was best exemplified by geraldine, the mother of the demonic little boy who blamed pecola for killing the cat.  in the section about geraldine, there is a discussion about colored folks versus n****** (prior to reading this always thought chris rock was clever for his blacks versus n*****, but looks like morrison beat him to the punch(line)). geraldine is so determined to not be labelled a n*****, that she denied the essence that makes her black, she denies who she is.  her denial and self-loathing, is then exploded upon pecola, someone she wrongly viewed by her eyes as a n*****.  if geraldine accepted herself and not tried to live up to society's standards, she would not have wasted so negative energy on hating her own race.

another example of this race on race hate  stemmed by a white standard of beauty was the children making fun of pecola for being black.  the irony is that all of the kids were black and yet they singled her out as being the "blackest".  as morrison explained that it was the worse insult because one does not have control over their skin color.  she went on to explain, "it was their own contempt for their blackness that gave the first insult its teeth."  to be told you are worthless or ugly because of your skin color, something you have no control over, fills a person with self-hate.  since you have no control over the matter and you are denial about yourself loathing, you focus on someone like you and project your feelings on them.  unfortunately, it results in you hating your own race/ethnicity.

i wish i could say that we have professed in terms of accepting all races and ethnicities as beauty however we haven't.  we see beautiful people of all ethnicities and races in our media today but they are still treated as an exception versus the rule.  i wish i could say that hopefully times will change but i am pretty sure it won't.  i mean i am aware of the unacceptance of racial beauty yet i still promote it.  it is going to take alot to change the definition of beauty.  so it's important that we don't banned books like the the bluest eye to based on its mislabeling as pornographic and connection to unpopular educational systems.