The first time I read this story was the most profound for me. From the first sentence to the last I was completely immersed in the images that Chekhov presented. As I read each sentence I let the images and emotions fill my mind and I found I had a very strong emotional response to them. I allowed myself to experience the setting and the scenes and to become submerged in this world and the character of Iona. This took a long time although the story is very short, it is very complex and a lot of hidden information is subtly conveyed in short sentences that are intensely profound and moving to the reader. This story has many unique aspects about it, and it is very complete in the sense that it is dynamic. There is the harsh landscape and the bleak unforgiving weather, the cold and distant people he meets, and yet also incredible warmth and companionship in the character of the horse. This horse provides a warm and comforting friend that is like a flame in the frozen and sparse setting. This is what I mean that the story is complex, because not only does it convey complex emotions like despair and loneliness, but also the gentle, healing aura that is his horse. This horse is there for him throughout all of his woes, and in the end he takes comfort in its presence and this is an uplifting end to the tale.
This story was a composition of realism due to the fact that it realistically portrays the time period in Russia, and the life that this sleigh-driver would possibly have lived. It also presents Iona's internal struggle as it would naturally occur in a person that was feeling these emotions and dealing with such conditions. It was very true to real life and that is why, to me, this is realism. However, there are many metaphors and images in the story that provide allegorical components. The snow that covers the land and Iona and his horse in an accumulating layer is also representative of Iona's accumulated and encompassing suffering. These metaphorical images are important elements of the story and so Chekhov presents reality or realism, with allegorical metaphors to convey deeper ideas.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Kyle Response III
My initial reading of "Misery" offered me a very remedial understanding of the story. There were a lot of gaps present following my reading. They were mainly surrounding where Iona's true misery lied and the role of some of the components of the story. After reading again I understood more of the story and began to see that Iona's misery was not fully contained within the death of his son, but was caused more by the fact that he had no one to share his sorrow with. After talking to the other group members, this idea was solidified further. We decided as a group that the majority of Iona's lamenting was not with the fact that he lost his son but because of the fact that the only person he could share anything with was his horse.
The horse was another gap for me in reading and discussing this portion aided me a lot. My initial thought was that the horse was supposed to be a shot at humanity, saying that the horse that can't even comprehend, listens better than anyone else that Iona tries to talk to. This idea was altered very much by the discussions we had as a group. We developed the idea that the horse was a representation of two things. One of these things was that the horse have Iona someone to talk to, the only person he had. The other representation was that the horse was humanized and was what I had initially interpreted, but in a different sense. The interpretation differed because in this scenario the horse was not really supposed to symbolize being more sympathetic or listening better than humanity but literally being more "human." Chekhov humanizes the horse to say that it possesses more "humanity" than those that Iona tries to share his woes with.
This whole process of analysis and reading of short stories has taught me a lot. The most significant learning I have had thus far is the "eye" to read with. This means to not get too caught up in the story and relinquish the ability to read critically but also not to stay too distant and not experience the story as it is intended to be. This concept helped me immensely in being able to discuss the story. Also, having different ideas in discussion and reading different reflections really opened my eyes and I find is the most effective way to critically analyze and enjoy a story in order to extract a fuller meaning of the story.
The horse was another gap for me in reading and discussing this portion aided me a lot. My initial thought was that the horse was supposed to be a shot at humanity, saying that the horse that can't even comprehend, listens better than anyone else that Iona tries to talk to. This idea was altered very much by the discussions we had as a group. We developed the idea that the horse was a representation of two things. One of these things was that the horse have Iona someone to talk to, the only person he had. The other representation was that the horse was humanized and was what I had initially interpreted, but in a different sense. The interpretation differed because in this scenario the horse was not really supposed to symbolize being more sympathetic or listening better than humanity but literally being more "human." Chekhov humanizes the horse to say that it possesses more "humanity" than those that Iona tries to share his woes with.
This whole process of analysis and reading of short stories has taught me a lot. The most significant learning I have had thus far is the "eye" to read with. This means to not get too caught up in the story and relinquish the ability to read critically but also not to stay too distant and not experience the story as it is intended to be. This concept helped me immensely in being able to discuss the story. Also, having different ideas in discussion and reading different reflections really opened my eyes and I find is the most effective way to critically analyze and enjoy a story in order to extract a fuller meaning of the story.
Monday, February 15, 2010
Nick Response 2
Perhaps the most significant lesson I have gleaned from this project is the value of rereading. My first reading of "Misery" left me without even a start at what this story might be implying. Obviously, it seemed to me, Iona was suffering. His son had died. Was that it? Would Chekhov go these lengths just to tell a story of how a man could not express the death of his son? But then reading again I saw that it was not only the death which troubled Iona, but the lack of speaking it, or speaking in general. He would brighten with the company of the cruelest deaths. This seemed to me a much more satisfactory answer. Then I read the story again. This time I saw that it was more than loneliness which troubled Iona, but a complete lack of relation to the world. There he is, doubled against the cold, the misery in his heart, enough to drown the world, yet in his heart it remains. On the one hand there is Iona with his sorrow, on the other there is the world, disinterested, unmoved, and not drowning in misery (at least not the misery of Iona). No matter how strong the misery Iona experiences, none of it will be felt by the world, in him is the only place. Thus I went to a questionable first reading to a final understanding that perhaps Chekhov did not intend, but which I nonetheless extracted from multiple readings.
Secondly, I am beginning to understand how there is a more 'objectified reading' than I had initially thought. I was horrified reading Flynn at the beginning of the quarter and seeing her project her understanding of the story (portrayed as the 'right' reading) onto all of her poor students. The act of understanding literature is new to me, and it seemed that there ought to be a better reading than others, but how could that be? So I have begun to sympathize with the concept of better readings, though it still remains a tricky qualifier. This I could see from reading the responses of my group members; all seemed to be striving for some meaning in the text, and all the striving, though they lead to slightly different conclusions, was all in the same direction. Some saw this as a story of sadness because of a lost son, some saw the story as sadness because of loneliness, and some saw the story as representing the objectivity of the world.
Lastly, I was also apprehensive about a group project, but upon reading the responses of the members I recognized the value of considering interpretations of others in literature. For example, one member noted the circularity of the story; it began and ended with Iona and his horse. I took this to mean that the story did not really go anywhere, a clip of life caught with no satisfying conclusion (for me playing further on the title of "Misery"). For others this was a consoling aspect, Iona found refuge in the horse. (This dissonance relates back to the above paragraph.) I also noticed that certain group members viewed this story through differing backgrounds. One member studying psychology understood this story as hinting towards class struggle. Again this relates to the 'meaning' which is embedded in literature, only to be extracted in fragments. Yet through rereading and conversation, something meaningful can result [sic].
Secondly, I am beginning to understand how there is a more 'objectified reading' than I had initially thought. I was horrified reading Flynn at the beginning of the quarter and seeing her project her understanding of the story (portrayed as the 'right' reading) onto all of her poor students. The act of understanding literature is new to me, and it seemed that there ought to be a better reading than others, but how could that be? So I have begun to sympathize with the concept of better readings, though it still remains a tricky qualifier. This I could see from reading the responses of my group members; all seemed to be striving for some meaning in the text, and all the striving, though they lead to slightly different conclusions, was all in the same direction. Some saw this as a story of sadness because of a lost son, some saw the story as sadness because of loneliness, and some saw the story as representing the objectivity of the world.
Lastly, I was also apprehensive about a group project, but upon reading the responses of the members I recognized the value of considering interpretations of others in literature. For example, one member noted the circularity of the story; it began and ended with Iona and his horse. I took this to mean that the story did not really go anywhere, a clip of life caught with no satisfying conclusion (for me playing further on the title of "Misery"). For others this was a consoling aspect, Iona found refuge in the horse. (This dissonance relates back to the above paragraph.) I also noticed that certain group members viewed this story through differing backgrounds. One member studying psychology understood this story as hinting towards class struggle. Again this relates to the 'meaning' which is embedded in literature, only to be extracted in fragments. Yet through rereading and conversation, something meaningful can result [sic].
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Lauren Response II
Prior to the project, in class, we read numerous articles conveying the ways in which readers make meaning of the text. In one piece, titled “Gender and Reading” by Elizabeth A. Flynn, I learned I was a submissive reader. She said this was when, “The reader is entangled in the events of the story and is unable to step back, to observe with a critical eye” (Flynn 269). I was overly involved in the story, trying so hard to find its intended meaning that I ended up missing it completely. Yet, it was not until reading “How Readers Make Meaning,” by Robert Crosman, that I gained the most clarity. He wrote, “readers make the meaning of literary texts, and there is no such thing as ‘right reading,’” (Crosman 207). This was truly my turning point. I realized that I needed to stop trying to achieve the “right reading,” and instead, make my own meaning.
During our group project I utilized my newfound knowledge, and allowed my mind to coexist with the text. I read the story once, and then wrote down my thoughts. I truly empathized with Iona, but I was left with a lot of answered questions. So, I read the story again, and more thoroughly examined the text. Since it was such a short story, I read it as though every word was strategically placed in order to convey some sort of meaning. This really helped me to begin to fill in some of the gaps. However, I still needed to read the story again. This time, I extensively examined the parts of the story I paid most attention to, as well as those aspects I ignored. Chekhov’s use of figurative language allowed me to arrive at a satisfying meaning. I was able to fill in the gaps, and supported my claims using text form the story.
I was interested to find out how the rest of the group responded to the story. I found every response exposed me to something new. I was able to meet and discuss the story’s meaning with Ryann and Karen. I enjoyed how Ryann made great use of May, and that Karen referenced Chekov’s style. They were both left wondering the circumstances surrounding the death of Iona’s son, but that was not a question I focused on. My opinion was vastly different from the group, who felt sorry for Iona at the end. Karen felt it was heartbreaking that he had to resort to talking to his mare, but I soon convinced her and Ryann otherwise. I cited examples from the text to convey my meaning that the mare was intended to be Iona’s companion. Rather than being sad for Iona, I was happy. Even though nature was unkind to Iona, he still remained compassionate and was concerned about his mare getting enough to eat. Through their actions, it was evident that they both cared for one another. Even though the best of circumstances did not surround them, at least, they had each other. Through the use of figurative language, I was able to close gaps and make meaning. The same was done by the other group members. That fact that we all arrived at different meanings proved to be more of a learning experience to me, rather than if there was only one "right reading."
During our group project I utilized my newfound knowledge, and allowed my mind to coexist with the text. I read the story once, and then wrote down my thoughts. I truly empathized with Iona, but I was left with a lot of answered questions. So, I read the story again, and more thoroughly examined the text. Since it was such a short story, I read it as though every word was strategically placed in order to convey some sort of meaning. This really helped me to begin to fill in some of the gaps. However, I still needed to read the story again. This time, I extensively examined the parts of the story I paid most attention to, as well as those aspects I ignored. Chekhov’s use of figurative language allowed me to arrive at a satisfying meaning. I was able to fill in the gaps, and supported my claims using text form the story.
I was interested to find out how the rest of the group responded to the story. I found every response exposed me to something new. I was able to meet and discuss the story’s meaning with Ryann and Karen. I enjoyed how Ryann made great use of May, and that Karen referenced Chekov’s style. They were both left wondering the circumstances surrounding the death of Iona’s son, but that was not a question I focused on. My opinion was vastly different from the group, who felt sorry for Iona at the end. Karen felt it was heartbreaking that he had to resort to talking to his mare, but I soon convinced her and Ryann otherwise. I cited examples from the text to convey my meaning that the mare was intended to be Iona’s companion. Rather than being sad for Iona, I was happy. Even though nature was unkind to Iona, he still remained compassionate and was concerned about his mare getting enough to eat. Through their actions, it was evident that they both cared for one another. Even though the best of circumstances did not surround them, at least, they had each other. Through the use of figurative language, I was able to close gaps and make meaning. The same was done by the other group members. That fact that we all arrived at different meanings proved to be more of a learning experience to me, rather than if there was only one "right reading."
Monday, February 8, 2010
Part III: Ryann Walton's Final Response
The initial meaning that I concluded after independently reading “Misery” significantly changed after discussing the story with my group members. Many details were brought to my attention that I was not focusing on. A huge gap that I encountered while reading was that I wanted to know more about the death of Iona’s son. I found that other members of my group were not concerned with this aspect of the story. Instead, they concentrated more on the mare’s relationship with Iona and what she could have possible represented.
I did not focus on the mare as a “human” character within the story. I did not take note of the possible relationship between the mare being a female, the other characters that Iona was trying to connect with being male, and the line, “It would be even better to talk to women” (15). I felt that the mare was present to show the indifference people feel towards others problems and their lack of compassion. All Iona wanted was someone to listen. While all of the characters ignored and even abused Iona, all he wanted was something so simple that even a mare can do it, but those people were unwilling to provide Iona with that relief.
Through this exercise I learned the importance of multiple readings and different perspectives while analyzing a piece of literature for meaning. Everyone approaches a story with different experiences and opinions that determine how they read a story and what details they find significant. Discussing this story brought many details into light that I may have never caught on to after reading “Misery” fifty times. Also because of these different mindsets, there are many “correct” readings of a story. This is one of the first classes I have felt comfortable disagreeing with the students’ and the instructor’s interpretation of the story, because a piece of literature speaks to different people in different ways.
I did not focus on the mare as a “human” character within the story. I did not take note of the possible relationship between the mare being a female, the other characters that Iona was trying to connect with being male, and the line, “It would be even better to talk to women” (15). I felt that the mare was present to show the indifference people feel towards others problems and their lack of compassion. All Iona wanted was someone to listen. While all of the characters ignored and even abused Iona, all he wanted was something so simple that even a mare can do it, but those people were unwilling to provide Iona with that relief.
Through this exercise I learned the importance of multiple readings and different perspectives while analyzing a piece of literature for meaning. Everyone approaches a story with different experiences and opinions that determine how they read a story and what details they find significant. Discussing this story brought many details into light that I may have never caught on to after reading “Misery” fifty times. Also because of these different mindsets, there are many “correct” readings of a story. This is one of the first classes I have felt comfortable disagreeing with the students’ and the instructor’s interpretation of the story, because a piece of literature speaks to different people in different ways.
Part III: Group Interpretation
“Misery” was indisputably defined by its title. While the opening line, “To whom shall I tell my grief?” was added by soviet editors, it does a good job hinting at what the main themes of the story will be; despair and loneliness. Iona is on a quest to find someone who will listen to his “misery” due to the death of his son. Iona’s emotions of grief, sorrow, anguish, and loneliness were conveyed through powerful imagery and metaphors. This makes the emotions that are hidden deep within the character tangible and prominent in the environment. The story’s succinct sentences and vivid scenes cause the reader to feel very deeply for the character.
We get a sense of the despair that the main character, Iona Potapov, is feeling right at the start of the story. Chekhov uses the physical description of Iona, “bent as double as the living body can be bent,” as a metaphor for how bent and twisted Iona feels inside (12). Chekhov continues, “If a regular snowdrift fell on him it seems as though even then he would not think it necessary to shake it off” (12-13). The layer of snow accumulating on everything is a metaphor for the accumulation of his suffering. The snow can also be symbolic of the harshness and hostility of the pain from the absence of his dead son, represented by the harshness of the environment. The frigid winter weather is also a metaphor for death, being a brutally cold time when organisms die.
Charles May points out that the story, "maintains a strictly objective point of view to communicate the latent significance of the protagonist's emotional state" (16). This is part of what defines Chekhov as a realist writer. This story simply describes the setting and action that is used to express the inner feelings of Iona. May enforces this point by saying Chekhov is "creating the illusion of inner reality by focusing on externals only" (53). While we agree with May that Chekhov is a realist writer we also believe that this particular story is laced with allegory. The descriptions of the scenery and characters were indicative of realism while the actions of Iona and the outcome with his horse we more allegorical.
“Misery” also contains a common thread found in many of Chekhov’s stories. The characters in this story are not on the same page. They are physically close to one another but mentally very far apart. Iona is only concerned with his son’s death and the riders are only concerned with getting to their destination quickly. “He hears abuse addressed to him, he sees people, and the feeling of loneliness begins little by little to be less heavy on his heart” (13). Iona was so desperate to alleviate his grief and loneliness, that he even enjoyed the company of the three rude and abusive men in his cab. Chekhov is illustrating the characters’ inability to connect with one another as we also discovered when we previously read his other story, "Gooseberries". We see this same Chekovian style later in the story when Iona tries to talk to another sleigh driver about his son’s death, but that man only has concerns for sleeping and very quickly falls asleep as Iona is trying to engage him. In the end, Iona is only able to make a connection with his mare.
Chekhov humanized Iona’s horse, giving her the ability to think and show emotion. Chekhov wrote, “Anyone who has been torn away from the plough, from the familiar gray landscapes, and case into this slough, full of monstrous light, of unceasing uproar and hurrying people is bound to think” (13). Chekhov foreshadows Iona’s relationship with the mare saying, “And his little mare, as though she knew his thoughts, falls to trotting” (15). The ending of the story brings us full circle back to the opening companions of the mare and the sleigh driver. Failing to achieve any human compassion, Iona began talking to his mare. Chekhov wrote, “The little mare munches, listens, and breathes on her master’s hands. Iona is carried away and tells her all about it” (15). Similarly, Iona and the mare were both overlooked, until now. She was what he was looking to talk too. Finally, Iona finds solace in his horse which is perhaps the least interested creature in the story, yet has been attributed an equal amount of 'humaneness' by the narrator whom we believe to be third person limited omniscient. He relates to the horse, the horse listens, breathes on him, and Iona relieves his loneliness, if only temporarily.
There was some disagreement or misunderstanding as to exactly what Iona's misery was in the story. Some thought it was the loss of his son, some thought it was his loneliness, and some thought it was due to his inability to connect with anyone. The truth is that all these things amounted to Iona's all encompassing misery, and the entire story is about miserable scenes and events. It is miserable to sit in the wet snow in the freezing cold, and it is also miserable to need companionship when there is none. The tale is realistic but metaphors in the story supply an allegorical phenomenon so the metaphors are allegorical components in a realistic story.
We get a sense of the despair that the main character, Iona Potapov, is feeling right at the start of the story. Chekhov uses the physical description of Iona, “bent as double as the living body can be bent,” as a metaphor for how bent and twisted Iona feels inside (12). Chekhov continues, “If a regular snowdrift fell on him it seems as though even then he would not think it necessary to shake it off” (12-13). The layer of snow accumulating on everything is a metaphor for the accumulation of his suffering. The snow can also be symbolic of the harshness and hostility of the pain from the absence of his dead son, represented by the harshness of the environment. The frigid winter weather is also a metaphor for death, being a brutally cold time when organisms die.
Charles May points out that the story, "maintains a strictly objective point of view to communicate the latent significance of the protagonist's emotional state" (16). This is part of what defines Chekhov as a realist writer. This story simply describes the setting and action that is used to express the inner feelings of Iona. May enforces this point by saying Chekhov is "creating the illusion of inner reality by focusing on externals only" (53). While we agree with May that Chekhov is a realist writer we also believe that this particular story is laced with allegory. The descriptions of the scenery and characters were indicative of realism while the actions of Iona and the outcome with his horse we more allegorical.
“Misery” also contains a common thread found in many of Chekhov’s stories. The characters in this story are not on the same page. They are physically close to one another but mentally very far apart. Iona is only concerned with his son’s death and the riders are only concerned with getting to their destination quickly. “He hears abuse addressed to him, he sees people, and the feeling of loneliness begins little by little to be less heavy on his heart” (13). Iona was so desperate to alleviate his grief and loneliness, that he even enjoyed the company of the three rude and abusive men in his cab. Chekhov is illustrating the characters’ inability to connect with one another as we also discovered when we previously read his other story, "Gooseberries". We see this same Chekovian style later in the story when Iona tries to talk to another sleigh driver about his son’s death, but that man only has concerns for sleeping and very quickly falls asleep as Iona is trying to engage him. In the end, Iona is only able to make a connection with his mare.
Chekhov humanized Iona’s horse, giving her the ability to think and show emotion. Chekhov wrote, “Anyone who has been torn away from the plough, from the familiar gray landscapes, and case into this slough, full of monstrous light, of unceasing uproar and hurrying people is bound to think” (13). Chekhov foreshadows Iona’s relationship with the mare saying, “And his little mare, as though she knew his thoughts, falls to trotting” (15). The ending of the story brings us full circle back to the opening companions of the mare and the sleigh driver. Failing to achieve any human compassion, Iona began talking to his mare. Chekhov wrote, “The little mare munches, listens, and breathes on her master’s hands. Iona is carried away and tells her all about it” (15). Similarly, Iona and the mare were both overlooked, until now. She was what he was looking to talk too. Finally, Iona finds solace in his horse which is perhaps the least interested creature in the story, yet has been attributed an equal amount of 'humaneness' by the narrator whom we believe to be third person limited omniscient. He relates to the horse, the horse listens, breathes on him, and Iona relieves his loneliness, if only temporarily.
There was some disagreement or misunderstanding as to exactly what Iona's misery was in the story. Some thought it was the loss of his son, some thought it was his loneliness, and some thought it was due to his inability to connect with anyone. The truth is that all these things amounted to Iona's all encompassing misery, and the entire story is about miserable scenes and events. It is miserable to sit in the wet snow in the freezing cold, and it is also miserable to need companionship when there is none. The tale is realistic but metaphors in the story supply an allegorical phenomenon so the metaphors are allegorical components in a realistic story.
Karen's Final Response
At the start of this group midterm project I was not looking forward to it. As most often with group projects it is hard to get the group together or on the same page. Soon after we started, however, my view of the group project changed. I feel everyone did an excellent job in their responses and our two discussion sessions were very productive. Personally, I learned a lot from doing this as a group. If it were left up to me I would not have chosen Chekhov because previously I had not had much experience with him and felt like I missed his point in the pieces I had read. I am glad “Misery” was chosen for our group though because I ended up enjoying this story immensely. Doing this as a group discussion helped me as a reader make further meaning out of the story. While a lot of us got the same thing out of the story in many instances (helping my confidence as a reader on my own) there were several things that I had not gotten out of the piece that others did.
Ryann compared and contrasted “Misery” to “The Fly” and also incorporated May’s interpretation in her response, which was not something that I ever thought to do. I feel this was a great way to help us make further meaning out of Chekhov’s story. Jay pointed out a few metaphors that I had not noticed which helped to backup some of the things I had written in my response. One thing that Lauren pointed out was how we should not have felt sorry for Iona in the end because he did have his horse to talk to. Everyone else in the group was sad that he was left with this interaction at the end, but upon hearing Lauren dissect that part, my viewpoint of the ending changed. Kyle and Nick discussed whether the story was allegorical or realist and what the narrator was classified as. Upon reading their discussion of this I realized my biggest short coming of being a good reader is that when I read those two questions never cross my mind. Up to this point I guess their answers did not matter to me. I feel that was the most important thing I learned doing the group project.
Ryann compared and contrasted “Misery” to “The Fly” and also incorporated May’s interpretation in her response, which was not something that I ever thought to do. I feel this was a great way to help us make further meaning out of Chekhov’s story. Jay pointed out a few metaphors that I had not noticed which helped to backup some of the things I had written in my response. One thing that Lauren pointed out was how we should not have felt sorry for Iona in the end because he did have his horse to talk to. Everyone else in the group was sad that he was left with this interaction at the end, but upon hearing Lauren dissect that part, my viewpoint of the ending changed. Kyle and Nick discussed whether the story was allegorical or realist and what the narrator was classified as. Upon reading their discussion of this I realized my biggest short coming of being a good reader is that when I read those two questions never cross my mind. Up to this point I guess their answers did not matter to me. I feel that was the most important thing I learned doing the group project.
Friday, February 5, 2010
Part II: Ryann, Karen, Lauren
Lauren:
When you go through and read everyone’s response, it’s clear that we all agree that the universal theme is misery. Everything in the piece, all of the descriptions, relate back to misery.
Ryann:
One thing that I thought was interesting when I was reading Nick’s response, was the he talked about how he wasn’t sure whether or not Iona was lonely before or after his son’s death.
Karen:
I liked that about Nick’s response too and Kyle talked about that as well. I found myself after thinking about when they brought it up, feeling like it was more that he just wanted someone to talk to, not necessarily that he was sad that his son died.
Ryann:
Like how Kyle said, “I'm not sure if the misery referred to by Chekhov is the misery the man feels over losing his son or the misery of not being able to share it with anyone.” You could argue that it could be more about the misery of him not being able to talk to anyone about his son, because like I mentioned that there’s a gap. Why didn’t they tell you more about how the son died? Maybe it’s just about him grieving and not having anyone to talk to.
Lauren:
I liked Ryann’s quote. I thought that it really showed how Iona felt. “Iona was so desperate to alleviate his grief and loneliness, that he even enjoyed the company of the three rude and abusive men in his cab.” And then as well from your piece, your comparison to “The Fly,” how they are about how both men lost their son and the ways in which they dealt with it and how they grieve.
Karen:
I also enjoyed how you compared those two things and how you related the story back to May’s book.
Ryann:
I liked how Lauren talked about what the snow symbolized because I never thought about the snow as a symbol. It made me look at the story a lot different when you talked about how the snow covers everything and how it even covered Iona.
Karen:
Yeah, I didn’t think about that either.
Lauren:
There’s a lack of life and it’s a time where organisms die. And when you think of snow you just think of cold death.
Ryann:
I talked about how the setting reflected how Iona felt and Jay said that it could be considered aesthetic patterning. It unifies the story through the repeated pattern described in the setting and how Iona feels.
Lauren:
Yeah, Jay said that, “These emotions were conveyed through powerful imagery and metaphors, and descriptions of the scene also added to this effect. This makes the emotions that are hidden deep within the character tangible and prominent in the environment. This story was very thought-provoking due to its succinct sentences and its powerful imagery and vivid scenes also caused me to feel very deeply for the character.”
Karen:
I like how she said that it had lots of imagery, but I think we need to give more examples.
Lauren:
Everything in this piece relates back to misery, all of the descriptions, the setting, and the descriptions of the characters. It’s very profound.
Ryann:
I looked over the story again and realized that just like in “The Fly” all of the characters kept calling Iona old and old names like “old plague” and “old dragon.” Then they talk about the old man and the young man on the next page.
Lauren:
I felt as though it was like that because it was the wrong order of things. Iona was supposed to die and not Iona’s son. It was so tragic because it was the wrong order and it wasn’t supposed to happen that way. He should have been the one to die.
Ryann:
I didn’t know if it was sad or alleviating that he found the mare to talk to. I didn’t know if he was going to feel better after talking to the mare. Is Iona really going to get long-term satisfaction from just talking to the mare who can’t even respond or really even hear or understand what Iona is saying?
Lauren:
I think so. It was weird to me that everyone thought it was tragic. I was sad for the character because he lost his son but I wasn’t sad at the end of the story because I was glad that at the end of the day even though people were mean to him, he had his mare and he had some form of companionship.
Ryann:
All of these people wouldn’t even take a few minutes to listen to him, but it something so simple he needs that even a mare could do it.
Karen:
The whole time they are going from point A to point B, how hard would it be for them to listen?
Ryann:
I thought it made some comment on society and how sometimes people don’t care about anybody else. As long as they are okay and they are going where they want to go, they don’t want to hear about anyone else’s sob story.
Karen:
I thought that was a very Chekovian thing to do. It’s very similar to “Gooseberries.” People are physically close to each other but mentally so far apart.
Lauren:
I don’t think that the people in the story who weren’t listening to Iona were meant to be villains in the story. I thought they were present to illustrate how Iona didn’t deserve the treatment from the people around him and that he didn’t deserve to lose his son. There’s just a lack of human compassion.
I also think I responded very differently to the mare being compared to Iona. On page 13 it says that the mare was lost in thought and I like how it humanizes the mare’s characteristics.
Karen:
They are both lost in their own thoughts and their misery. She’s miserable because she was taken from the country into the city and he’s miserable because he can’t find anyone to talk to about the loss of his son.
Lauren:
And they are both overlooked. He overlooks the mare and he’s overlooked by society and all the while what he was looking for was right there.
Karen:
There was also the line where Iona says it would be better to talk to women.
Lauren:
And Iona is surrounded by all of these men and the mare is the only female. That was foreshadowing for me. That’s why I wasn’t feeling sad at the end. This is his perfect companion.
Karen:
After you said that it also made me feel better that he had the mare to talk to in the end.
Ryann:
Do you think it’s socially acceptable for Iona to be pushing his misery on people he barely even knows? I don’t think that the people should have been as unsympathetic as they were, but I still don’t know if it was appropriate for Iona to start talking about his son’s death to those people.
Karen:
While it’s cruel of them not to want to listen, could you really blame them for not wanting to listen?
Lauren:
I think those characters were strategically placed in the story to relate back to the title. They were there to show how unfair it was for Iona’s son to die.
When you go through and read everyone’s response, it’s clear that we all agree that the universal theme is misery. Everything in the piece, all of the descriptions, relate back to misery.
Ryann:
One thing that I thought was interesting when I was reading Nick’s response, was the he talked about how he wasn’t sure whether or not Iona was lonely before or after his son’s death.
Karen:
I liked that about Nick’s response too and Kyle talked about that as well. I found myself after thinking about when they brought it up, feeling like it was more that he just wanted someone to talk to, not necessarily that he was sad that his son died.
Ryann:
Like how Kyle said, “I'm not sure if the misery referred to by Chekhov is the misery the man feels over losing his son or the misery of not being able to share it with anyone.” You could argue that it could be more about the misery of him not being able to talk to anyone about his son, because like I mentioned that there’s a gap. Why didn’t they tell you more about how the son died? Maybe it’s just about him grieving and not having anyone to talk to.
Lauren:
I liked Ryann’s quote. I thought that it really showed how Iona felt. “Iona was so desperate to alleviate his grief and loneliness, that he even enjoyed the company of the three rude and abusive men in his cab.” And then as well from your piece, your comparison to “The Fly,” how they are about how both men lost their son and the ways in which they dealt with it and how they grieve.
Karen:
I also enjoyed how you compared those two things and how you related the story back to May’s book.
Ryann:
I liked how Lauren talked about what the snow symbolized because I never thought about the snow as a symbol. It made me look at the story a lot different when you talked about how the snow covers everything and how it even covered Iona.
Karen:
Yeah, I didn’t think about that either.
Lauren:
There’s a lack of life and it’s a time where organisms die. And when you think of snow you just think of cold death.
Ryann:
I talked about how the setting reflected how Iona felt and Jay said that it could be considered aesthetic patterning. It unifies the story through the repeated pattern described in the setting and how Iona feels.
Lauren:
Yeah, Jay said that, “These emotions were conveyed through powerful imagery and metaphors, and descriptions of the scene also added to this effect. This makes the emotions that are hidden deep within the character tangible and prominent in the environment. This story was very thought-provoking due to its succinct sentences and its powerful imagery and vivid scenes also caused me to feel very deeply for the character.”
Karen:
I like how she said that it had lots of imagery, but I think we need to give more examples.
Lauren:
Everything in this piece relates back to misery, all of the descriptions, the setting, and the descriptions of the characters. It’s very profound.
Ryann:
I looked over the story again and realized that just like in “The Fly” all of the characters kept calling Iona old and old names like “old plague” and “old dragon.” Then they talk about the old man and the young man on the next page.
Lauren:
I felt as though it was like that because it was the wrong order of things. Iona was supposed to die and not Iona’s son. It was so tragic because it was the wrong order and it wasn’t supposed to happen that way. He should have been the one to die.
Ryann:
I didn’t know if it was sad or alleviating that he found the mare to talk to. I didn’t know if he was going to feel better after talking to the mare. Is Iona really going to get long-term satisfaction from just talking to the mare who can’t even respond or really even hear or understand what Iona is saying?
Lauren:
I think so. It was weird to me that everyone thought it was tragic. I was sad for the character because he lost his son but I wasn’t sad at the end of the story because I was glad that at the end of the day even though people were mean to him, he had his mare and he had some form of companionship.
Ryann:
All of these people wouldn’t even take a few minutes to listen to him, but it something so simple he needs that even a mare could do it.
Karen:
The whole time they are going from point A to point B, how hard would it be for them to listen?
Ryann:
I thought it made some comment on society and how sometimes people don’t care about anybody else. As long as they are okay and they are going where they want to go, they don’t want to hear about anyone else’s sob story.
Karen:
I thought that was a very Chekovian thing to do. It’s very similar to “Gooseberries.” People are physically close to each other but mentally so far apart.
Lauren:
I don’t think that the people in the story who weren’t listening to Iona were meant to be villains in the story. I thought they were present to illustrate how Iona didn’t deserve the treatment from the people around him and that he didn’t deserve to lose his son. There’s just a lack of human compassion.
I also think I responded very differently to the mare being compared to Iona. On page 13 it says that the mare was lost in thought and I like how it humanizes the mare’s characteristics.
Karen:
They are both lost in their own thoughts and their misery. She’s miserable because she was taken from the country into the city and he’s miserable because he can’t find anyone to talk to about the loss of his son.
Lauren:
And they are both overlooked. He overlooks the mare and he’s overlooked by society and all the while what he was looking for was right there.
Karen:
There was also the line where Iona says it would be better to talk to women.
Lauren:
And Iona is surrounded by all of these men and the mare is the only female. That was foreshadowing for me. That’s why I wasn’t feeling sad at the end. This is his perfect companion.
Karen:
After you said that it also made me feel better that he had the mare to talk to in the end.
Ryann:
Do you think it’s socially acceptable for Iona to be pushing his misery on people he barely even knows? I don’t think that the people should have been as unsympathetic as they were, but I still don’t know if it was appropriate for Iona to start talking about his son’s death to those people.
Karen:
While it’s cruel of them not to want to listen, could you really blame them for not wanting to listen?
Lauren:
I think those characters were strategically placed in the story to relate back to the title. They were there to show how unfair it was for Iona’s son to die.
Part III Prelude
Here is what Kyle and I have devised for pursuing part 3 of the assignment:
Samenesses:
All seemed to be concerned with what the misery was about. Was it about the loss of his son? The impeding loneliness? Or the indifference of the world?
Many of us noted the mysteriousness of the horse (or in other words the 'gap' presented by the horse) whether they listed the horse as gap or not.
Differences:
Some thought the misery to be solely about the son. Others thought it was his loneliness. Others thought it was the dissonance between the world and the individual.
How has reading the responses of others altered your view of the understanding or meaning of the story?
What is the overall theme of the story (the intent)?
Is it the death of his son?
Is it the loneliness Iona experiences?
Is the loneliness a product of an unfeeling ungrateful world?
Is this realist? Allegorical?
Chekhov – is he trying to present a moral, or is he describing the world as it is?
Do we understand this story based on what we know best? Our areas of 'expertise'?
Samenesses:
All seemed to be concerned with what the misery was about. Was it about the loss of his son? The impeding loneliness? Or the indifference of the world?
Many of us noted the mysteriousness of the horse (or in other words the 'gap' presented by the horse) whether they listed the horse as gap or not.
Differences:
Some thought the misery to be solely about the son. Others thought it was his loneliness. Others thought it was the dissonance between the world and the individual.
How has reading the responses of others altered your view of the understanding or meaning of the story?
What is the overall theme of the story (the intent)?
Is it the death of his son?
Is it the loneliness Iona experiences?
Is the loneliness a product of an unfeeling ungrateful world?
Is this realist? Allegorical?
Chekhov – is he trying to present a moral, or is he describing the world as it is?
Do we understand this story based on what we know best? Our areas of 'expertise'?
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Kyle Sutton - Part I
First off, I found "Misery" quite a sad story. Not so much in the plot of Iona's son having died but the idea that he had no one to talk to. The way that Chekhov sets the mood paralleling the setting of the story, very cold and bleak, with the feelings of Iona. It was as though all he wanted to do was to let his emotions be told and to share his feeling with someone, anyone. The responses from his clients and then his fellow Cabman were not the emotion that he needed to relieve his misery.
The title specifically is interesting. I'm not sure if the misery referred to by Chekhov is the misery the man feels over losing his son or the misery of not being able to share it with anyone. The man is desolate and alone, not being able to cope or feel connected at all. I truly feel for the man when I read this story. His pain at losing his son, but more so his pain at not being connected to anyone in the world other than his mare. He has no one to show that he is sad or that he cares for his son.
This story was very interesting and Chekhov's very descriptive language really makes the reader internalize the misery and pain Iona feels. I don't know what it is yet but there seems to be a connection between Iona being a cabman and his feelings and current state. I'm not sure what it is but there is a question in my mind as to the significance.
One of the other notable things I found while reading this was that there seemed to be a symbolic connotation when Iona starts talking to his mare at the end of the story. It is almost as though the mare listens better or just as well as anyone else he has tried to talk to. I think this correlates and further accentuates the concept that him trying to talk to someone about his son is as though he might as well be talking to a horse. He may be heard but no one really listens to him.
Edit 1:
Another gap that Nick and I discussed was the significance of how much the narrator humanizes the horse. There is a lot of emphasis put on personifying the horse like when Chekhov writes, "She is probably lost in thought," referring to the horse's stillness, it would seem odd that one would assume that a horse would be capable of thought just for the sake of thinking. This is compounded further by the fact that the narrator goes on to postulate why or what the horse might be thinking about saying, "anyone who has been torn away from the plough, from the familiar gray landscapes, and cast into this slough..." This is something I'm still unsure about and will re-visit after another reading and some more reading of comments. Maybe this s Chekhov drawing a parallel between Iona and the horse. Connecting the two of them with a feeling of alienation.
Edit 2:
When Nick and I got together to discuss the story he posed an interesting question. Who is Chekhov writing for? I would argue that Chekhov is writing for the world rather than to tell Iona's story or just for himself. Chekhov, characteristically, writes to
point out some social concept or pose a question about people and their interactions. This story is no different. I believe that Chekhov's intent in writing the story is to show to the world the cruelty of others and how the concepts of grief and misery really work. In the sense of Realist vs. Allegorical Nick and I thought that this story would fall flat in the middle. While the story itself and how the people interact is very realistic, that is only in style the message of the story is what really appears as allegorical or maybe rather socially aware or a critique of the world. Chekhov doesn't have some lesson to teach per say but there is definitely the concept of how people interact and how they deal with misery that he wants the world to be aware of.
From a Psychological standpoint the story itself offers an interesting insight into the way people deal with grief. As is evident by a lot of the responses here and comments, one of the overarching ideas is that Iona is not preoccupied with the loss of his son but rather with the grief itself and not being able to deal with it. The main idea of grief does not lie within the event that has happened which, in this case, is the passing of Iona's son. Grief is something that is separate, it is its own entity that people deal with. Regardless of what has happened grief exists in a vacuum and must be dealt with in a certain way in order to be overcome. Iona needs to talk to people; most humans need to talk to people to be able to cope with grief and misery. Chekhov is pointing out that there is a fundamental flaw in the world, where the grief of some goes completed ignored. There is nothing different about this grief versus others'. This is made evident by the metaphor that many of us pointed out regarding the misery "flooding the world" as Chekhov puts it. If anything Iona's grief is greater than "average" misery and the only way he can cope is by talking to a horse.
The title specifically is interesting. I'm not sure if the misery referred to by Chekhov is the misery the man feels over losing his son or the misery of not being able to share it with anyone. The man is desolate and alone, not being able to cope or feel connected at all. I truly feel for the man when I read this story. His pain at losing his son, but more so his pain at not being connected to anyone in the world other than his mare. He has no one to show that he is sad or that he cares for his son.
This story was very interesting and Chekhov's very descriptive language really makes the reader internalize the misery and pain Iona feels. I don't know what it is yet but there seems to be a connection between Iona being a cabman and his feelings and current state. I'm not sure what it is but there is a question in my mind as to the significance.
One of the other notable things I found while reading this was that there seemed to be a symbolic connotation when Iona starts talking to his mare at the end of the story. It is almost as though the mare listens better or just as well as anyone else he has tried to talk to. I think this correlates and further accentuates the concept that him trying to talk to someone about his son is as though he might as well be talking to a horse. He may be heard but no one really listens to him.
Edit 1:
Another gap that Nick and I discussed was the significance of how much the narrator humanizes the horse. There is a lot of emphasis put on personifying the horse like when Chekhov writes, "She is probably lost in thought," referring to the horse's stillness, it would seem odd that one would assume that a horse would be capable of thought just for the sake of thinking. This is compounded further by the fact that the narrator goes on to postulate why or what the horse might be thinking about saying, "anyone who has been torn away from the plough, from the familiar gray landscapes, and cast into this slough..." This is something I'm still unsure about and will re-visit after another reading and some more reading of comments. Maybe this s Chekhov drawing a parallel between Iona and the horse. Connecting the two of them with a feeling of alienation.
Edit 2:
When Nick and I got together to discuss the story he posed an interesting question. Who is Chekhov writing for? I would argue that Chekhov is writing for the world rather than to tell Iona's story or just for himself. Chekhov, characteristically, writes to
point out some social concept or pose a question about people and their interactions. This story is no different. I believe that Chekhov's intent in writing the story is to show to the world the cruelty of others and how the concepts of grief and misery really work. In the sense of Realist vs. Allegorical Nick and I thought that this story would fall flat in the middle. While the story itself and how the people interact is very realistic, that is only in style the message of the story is what really appears as allegorical or maybe rather socially aware or a critique of the world. Chekhov doesn't have some lesson to teach per say but there is definitely the concept of how people interact and how they deal with misery that he wants the world to be aware of.
From a Psychological standpoint the story itself offers an interesting insight into the way people deal with grief. As is evident by a lot of the responses here and comments, one of the overarching ideas is that Iona is not preoccupied with the loss of his son but rather with the grief itself and not being able to deal with it. The main idea of grief does not lie within the event that has happened which, in this case, is the passing of Iona's son. Grief is something that is separate, it is its own entity that people deal with. Regardless of what has happened grief exists in a vacuum and must be dealt with in a certain way in order to be overcome. Iona needs to talk to people; most humans need to talk to people to be able to cope with grief and misery. Chekhov is pointing out that there is a fundamental flaw in the world, where the grief of some goes completed ignored. There is nothing different about this grief versus others'. This is made evident by the metaphor that many of us pointed out regarding the misery "flooding the world" as Chekhov puts it. If anything Iona's grief is greater than "average" misery and the only way he can cope is by talking to a horse.
Nick Schwieterman - Part I
Why does Iona have misery? At first it seemed to me that his misery came from his son, or loss of. But a closer reading has left me in some doubt. Is it the loss of his son, or is it the loneliness that surrounds him? Is it the care that Iona has for his son or lack of care that the world has for Iona that perpetuates this incredible misery? I sense that it is in the latter questioned sense that Iona is suffering. For instance, the first fare that he receives puts him in a generally good mood, and he is willing to accept it no matter what the price. And regardless of their abusiveness, the loneliness begins to evaporate. Investigating further, it seems as though there is some dissonance between the thoughts of Iona and what he speaks of. At the top half of 14 he is concerned about his son throughout conversation, but at the bottom half the misery returns, though this time through the narrator and without mention of his son, but instead his loneliness: “...can he not find among those thousands someone who will listen to him?” When Iona returns to the stable, it is the same, a non-interested world represented by the cabman and the limited omniscient narrator revealing the loneliness and misery of the protagonist. Finally, Iona finds solace in his horse which is perhaps the least interested creature in the story, yet has been attributed an equal amount of 'humaneness' by the narrator. He relates to the horse, the horse listens, breathes on him, and Iona relieves his loneliness, if only temporarily.
Edit1:
I am still not satisfied yet with this interpretation. I think that there are further implications which i hinted at, though did not fully commit to. In particular, there seems to be a rift between the inner world of Iona, full of sorrow and loneliness and misery, and the outer world; non-caring and non-interested. Maybe this is represented by the horse? - not too sure what the significance of the horse is yet, though it seems to me that there is one.
Edit2:
Thinking about it further i see the target passage - the bottom half of page 14. Here he feels as if the misery in his heart could fill the world, but it is trapped with his 'insignificant shell' so that 'one would not have found it with a candle by daylight.' <-metaphor BAM Hence i want to change my thesis from 'miserable being loneliness' to 'miserable being the indifference of the world.' Now i need to write a whole new response.
Edit3:
I will merge my edits into an all-encompassing response when i get a chance.
Edit1:
I am still not satisfied yet with this interpretation. I think that there are further implications which i hinted at, though did not fully commit to. In particular, there seems to be a rift between the inner world of Iona, full of sorrow and loneliness and misery, and the outer world; non-caring and non-interested. Maybe this is represented by the horse? - not too sure what the significance of the horse is yet, though it seems to me that there is one.
Edit2:
Thinking about it further i see the target passage - the bottom half of page 14. Here he feels as if the misery in his heart could fill the world, but it is trapped with his 'insignificant shell' so that 'one would not have found it with a candle by daylight.' <-metaphor BAM Hence i want to change my thesis from 'miserable being loneliness' to 'miserable being the indifference of the world.' Now i need to write a whole new response.
Edit3:
I will merge my edits into an all-encompassing response when i get a chance.
Lauren Wasserstrom - Part I
The literary work, “Misery” by Anton Chekhov, was indisputably defined by its title. The story took place in St. Petersberg, Russia, during a time of twilight and snowfall (12). The ambiance was dark, cold, and lonesome, where snow symbolized death. The protagonist, Iona Potapov, was a sleigh-driver described as, ‘all white like a ghost’ (12). Chekhov wrote, “He sits on the box without stirring, bent as double as the living body can be bent. If a regular snowdrift fell on him it seems as though even then he would not think it necessary to shake it off” (12-13). His mule was motionless as well, because she was lost in thought. Chekhov wrote, “Anyone who has been torn away from the plough, from the familiar gray landscapes, and case into this slough, full of monstrous light, of unceasing uproar and hurrying people is bound to think” (13). All occurrences lead back to the story’s theme of misery. As the tale progressed, Chekhov revealed Iona’s son died a week ago. He cannot bear of immense grief that consumes him while being alone. Iona desperately wanted someone to listen while he talked about his son’s death. However, no one expressed human compassion, especially three young men Iona drove in his sleigh. One of the men verbally, and once physically, abused Iona. The men were unsympathetic, but not intended to be villains. Iona did not deserve both the unkind treatment from the man, and nature for taking his son. Failing to achieve human interaction, Iona began talking to his mare. Chekhov wrote, “The little mare munches, listens, and breathes on her master’s hands. Iona is carried away and tells her all about it” (15). Similarly, Iona and the mare were both overlooked, until now.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Karen Thacker - Part I
The first thing that jumps out to me in “Misery” by Chekhov was the line right under the title. “To whom shall I tell my grief?” While it was the soviet editors that added this line to Chekhov’s story it does a good job hinting at what the main themes of the story will be; despair and loneliness. We get a sense of the despair that the main character, Iona Potapov, is feeling right at the start of the story. Chekhov uses the physical description of Iona’s actions, “bent as double as the living body can be bent,” as a metaphor for how bent and twisted Iona feels inside. It struck me as fascinating that while Iona was full of despair and loneliness, Chekhov decided to humanize his horse as if to create someone for Iona to converse with. He humanizes the mare by giving her the ability to think and show emotion at being pulled away from the country she loved to the busy city she does not love. It is as if Chekhov made sure that he gave Iona some sort of companion who can share his “Misery”.
Iona Popatov perks up a little when he finally acquires some riders. They are not the nicest people, however, this apparently does not phase the sleigh driver. “He hears abuse addressed to him, he sees people, and the feeling of loneliness begins little by little to be less heavy on his heart.” He must have been extremely lonely if something as bad as verbal and eventually physical abuse brings him comfort just because it is from another human being. At last we find out why Iona is so depressed although the way he brings it up is very weird. He stumbles through saying that his son has died and rather than be sorry for him his riders brush it off saying, “we shall all die.” This is not a very compassionate way to address the loss that Iona has suffered. As Iona tries to elaborate on his son’s death one rider completely ignores his tale and thanks God out loud that they are at their destination. To me this is another classic example of the characters in Chekhov’s stories not being on the same page. While they are physically close to one another the characters are most often mentally very far apart and have different things that bore them or excite them. For these characters, Iona is only concerned with his son’s death and the riders are only concerned with getting to their destination quickly. We see this same Chekovian style later in the story when Iona tries to talk to another sleigh driver about his son’s death, but that man only has concerns for sleeping and very quickly does fall asleep as Iona is trying to engage him.
The ending of the story brings us full circle back to the opening companions of the mare and the sleigh driver. After Iona fails to get humans to listen to him he goes out to the stable to talk to his horse. Again Chekhov wanted Iona to be able to vent somehow so he has provided him with the horse. “The little mare munches, listens, and breathes on her master’s hands. Iona is carried away and tells her all about it (son’s death).” Finally, Iona has found his only companion that will never rudely interrupt him or completely ignore him. I find it very heartbreaking that he is reduced to this interaction. Reading this story reaffirmed my feelings that all too often people are caught up in their own lives to care about the lives or heartaches of others. The saying “fend for youself” comes to mind.
Iona Popatov perks up a little when he finally acquires some riders. They are not the nicest people, however, this apparently does not phase the sleigh driver. “He hears abuse addressed to him, he sees people, and the feeling of loneliness begins little by little to be less heavy on his heart.” He must have been extremely lonely if something as bad as verbal and eventually physical abuse brings him comfort just because it is from another human being. At last we find out why Iona is so depressed although the way he brings it up is very weird. He stumbles through saying that his son has died and rather than be sorry for him his riders brush it off saying, “we shall all die.” This is not a very compassionate way to address the loss that Iona has suffered. As Iona tries to elaborate on his son’s death one rider completely ignores his tale and thanks God out loud that they are at their destination. To me this is another classic example of the characters in Chekhov’s stories not being on the same page. While they are physically close to one another the characters are most often mentally very far apart and have different things that bore them or excite them. For these characters, Iona is only concerned with his son’s death and the riders are only concerned with getting to their destination quickly. We see this same Chekovian style later in the story when Iona tries to talk to another sleigh driver about his son’s death, but that man only has concerns for sleeping and very quickly does fall asleep as Iona is trying to engage him.
The ending of the story brings us full circle back to the opening companions of the mare and the sleigh driver. After Iona fails to get humans to listen to him he goes out to the stable to talk to his horse. Again Chekhov wanted Iona to be able to vent somehow so he has provided him with the horse. “The little mare munches, listens, and breathes on her master’s hands. Iona is carried away and tells her all about it (son’s death).” Finally, Iona has found his only companion that will never rudely interrupt him or completely ignore him. I find it very heartbreaking that he is reduced to this interaction. Reading this story reaffirmed my feelings that all too often people are caught up in their own lives to care about the lives or heartaches of others. The saying “fend for youself” comes to mind.
Jay Venegas - Part I
What stuck out most to me in this story was a strong impression of grief, sorrow, anguish, and loneliness. These emotions were conveyed through powerful imagery and metaphors, and descriptions of the scene also added to this effect. This makes the emotions that are hidden deep within the character tangible and prominent in the environment. This story was very thought-provoking due to its succinct sentences and its powerful imagery and vivid scenes also caused me to feel very deeply for the character. It is a profound story about a profound loss and a profound suffering and it is an element of the story that so much is said by so little.
I found myself profoundly empathizing with this character as I knew and became aware of his anguished solitude and harrowing sorrow. Once I knew the depth of this character's suffering, which is expressed by precise sentences and images and metaphors each with deep meaning, conveying these profound feelings with masterful craftsmanship. The emotional state of Iona, though hidden on the exterior, once revealed gives the opening scene so much metaphorical meaning that the details presented are all chosen to convey or symbolize metaphorical reflections of Iona's immobility represented by the stillness of the subjects of the scene (despite the snow) and the layer of snow accumulating on everything is also a metaphor for the accumulation of his suffering. The snow can also be symbolic of the harshness and hostility of the pain from the absence of his dead son, represented by the harshness of the environment.
The metaphor of flowing misery is meant to to show that his misery engulfs him like it would engulf the world. (pg.14) Then, in the next metaphor he says he is so invisible and insubstantial that not even an excess of illumination could make him visible.(pg.14) This metaphor gives a strong impression of being lost in a feeling of a diminished state of non-existence, and the insignificant shell he refers to himself as is a symbolic expression of his grieving state. He is saying that he is empty and this emptiness is also another agony to him, because it does not alleviate his suffering, and causes him to suffer more. This metaphor means both that without his son he is nothing, and that he has also been reduced to nothing from suffering.
Iona is overcome with grief and utterly fallen and broken from this loss and he tries to seek comfort from anyone that exists he is so alone in his anguish. His dismissal by the house-porter is a painful rejection to him and this sends him into an abyss of hopelessness as he finds nothing to help him while he suffers deeply and isolated. His alienation is due to his untouchable grief which makes him feel so distant. He finds comfort in his horse, his only companion, which proves to be the best because it comforts him with its proximity, as it breathes on his hand and gives him that contact which he has been needing. The horse does not silence him or walk away, and its presence helps him on a very deep level.
I found myself profoundly empathizing with this character as I knew and became aware of his anguished solitude and harrowing sorrow. Once I knew the depth of this character's suffering, which is expressed by precise sentences and images and metaphors each with deep meaning, conveying these profound feelings with masterful craftsmanship. The emotional state of Iona, though hidden on the exterior, once revealed gives the opening scene so much metaphorical meaning that the details presented are all chosen to convey or symbolize metaphorical reflections of Iona's immobility represented by the stillness of the subjects of the scene (despite the snow) and the layer of snow accumulating on everything is also a metaphor for the accumulation of his suffering. The snow can also be symbolic of the harshness and hostility of the pain from the absence of his dead son, represented by the harshness of the environment.
The metaphor of flowing misery is meant to to show that his misery engulfs him like it would engulf the world. (pg.14) Then, in the next metaphor he says he is so invisible and insubstantial that not even an excess of illumination could make him visible.(pg.14) This metaphor gives a strong impression of being lost in a feeling of a diminished state of non-existence, and the insignificant shell he refers to himself as is a symbolic expression of his grieving state. He is saying that he is empty and this emptiness is also another agony to him, because it does not alleviate his suffering, and causes him to suffer more. This metaphor means both that without his son he is nothing, and that he has also been reduced to nothing from suffering.
Iona is overcome with grief and utterly fallen and broken from this loss and he tries to seek comfort from anyone that exists he is so alone in his anguish. His dismissal by the house-porter is a painful rejection to him and this sends him into an abyss of hopelessness as he finds nothing to help him while he suffers deeply and isolated. His alienation is due to his untouchable grief which makes him feel so distant. He finds comfort in his horse, his only companion, which proves to be the best because it comforts him with its proximity, as it breathes on his hand and gives him that contact which he has been needing. The horse does not silence him or walk away, and its presence helps him on a very deep level.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Ryann Walton - Part I
To me, "Misery" was about the grief Iona was attempting to deal with after the death of his son. The setting of the story was in the dead of winter. Iona's description as old and doubled-over alongside the blankets of snow and white mare reflected a feeling of cold death. Iona was so desperate to alleviate his grief and loneliness, that he even enjoyed the company of the three rude and abusive men in his cab. Eventually, he has to resort to confiding in his mare, who cannot even respond to him, let alone listen and understand the story Iona is telling.
I related this story to "The Fly" by Katherine Mansfield. Both of these stories revolve around grief and both the boss and Iona are dealing with the grief of the death of their sons. Both Mansfield and Chekhov illustrate the emotional state of these characters through a narrative without much insight into the characters minds. Both stories also have a simple act that define their emotions as well. The boss kills the fly and Iona tells his mare about his son's death.
Charles May points out that the story, "maintains a strictly objective point of view to communicate the latent significance of the protagonist's emotional state" (16). This is part of what defines Chekhov as a realist writer. This story simply describes the setting and action that is used to express the inner feelings of Iona. May enforces this point by saying Chekhov is "creating the illusion of inner reality by focusing on externals only" (53).
One gap I encountered while I read was wanting to know more about Iona's death. I am not sure if it was Chekhov's intent to stir this kind of interest in the reader, but I thought it was significant that while I wanted to hear Iona's story, none of the other characters would give him a chance to tell it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
