Charles "Smitty" Schmid
Again, this is a five point assignment. Answer on time, or you will lose 10%/day--that's .5 points.
A. Go to the Short Story Links on the right. Click on Casebook: J.C. Oates
Of the "Four Critical Interpretations" which do you agree with the most? Why?
B. Now click on the link called Time:Smitty
How is the teen culture of the article similar to Connie's lifestyle? Do you think Oates is blaming the victim by "killing" Connie in her story? Why or why not?
28 comments:
A. I agree with the third interpretation because his is like satan in a way because he does know what is going on at the barbecue and who her parents and sister are talking to.
B. The life style is extremely similar to Connie's in the way that they go to the burger place and are active sexually. No I don't think she is blaming the victim in The story i think she is letting people know what is going on and how crazy people can be.
a) Of the four critical interpretations, i agree with the one stating that Arnold Friend is the symbolic Satan in this story. I believe this to be true because, like Satan, Arnold is mysterious and disguises himself to accomplish sickly 'deeds'. He knows where everyone of Connie's family are and what they are doing. How he does this is creepy and there are so many similarities that can relate him to satan. Therefore, i agree that Arnold Friend is symbolic to satan in this story.
b) The teen culture of the article is similar to Connie's lifestyle in the way that the teenagers do whatever they want, the parents don't care, and the teenagers hang around restaurants picking up guys. In her story, i think Oates is blaming the victim by 'killing' Connie because it is essentially her own fault for exposing herself to the dangers in this world.
III. Joyce M. Wegs contends that "Arnold is clearly a symbolic Satan
i believe this is the correct interpretation because she give solid examples from the story that clearly state that Arnold is partly supernatural. he is able or acting that he can see what his family is doing and also his boots do not fit him correctly. Also he dress's up in disguise.
A). I personally agree with the 3rd interpretation, which is the one we discussed in class. I firmly believe that Arnold Friend was a representation of the devil dragging the maiden (Connie) from innocence into ‘hell’. The appearance of Friend is symbolic to that of Bob Dylan, one of the inspirations for this story, and although interpretation four makes a believable point with Friend being like Dylan, shown as the ‘messiah’, I would not agree that Friend was anything like an angel. Oates writes off his appearance very negatively, almost hellishly – “shabby black hair that looked crazy as a wig…the jaw and chin and cheeks slightly darkened and the nose long and hawk-like”.
The way Friend acted also convinced me he was more than met the eye. He knew where Connie lived, which is something very sinister and questionable. He knew all the names of her friend and when asked, claimed he was only ‘eighteen’ when it’s made clear to the readers that he is most definitely not. Friend’s quiet and aggressive tone was something that I found very disturbing and intimidating, no doubt what Connie felt at the time. She was paralysed with fear and when implied that she would call the police, he commanded her in a condescending tone to put the phone down. Connie completely lost her own will to do anything and the fiend had complete control of her. Even if she had tried to run away, the two were separated by a screen door which Friend could no doubt easily break into. However, if the representation was in fact towards that of Satan, then Connie would have been extremely safe, since Satan, according to the legend, was not allowed to enter the homes of those that didn’t invite him. As skeptical as I am about this fact, it could have been the only thing to have protected Connie.
B).I do not believe at all that Oates was blaming the victim. First of all there was no indication of whether the victim was tricked into this, I think this ‘Smitty’ might have led her on as a nice and loving boyfriend, either that or she was impressed by his apparent high social status. The girl was never put forward as a slut that Connie appeared to be. The story might have inspired her, but I don’t believe Oates took it literally, and copied the entire story line. She might have borrowed the theme from it, but I don’t see any symbolism to the fact that she wanted to punish the poor girl from the news article.
B
Connies lifestyle is simillar in a way that her parents do not really care what she does. They let her stay out until 11 o'clock at the mall or movies. Just like in "Growing Up in Tucson" the girls go across the road to hang out at a local resturante where poeple chylle by their cars. The girls are on the prawl for the attractive poeple of the opposite sex. hence good looking males. in a way the author is blaming connie because she is to young for most of the guys who can drive and also it was her great idea to go out and try to find different guys to hook up with when she doesn't know them. she had a chance to go and hang out with some people that she did know but she turned them down. it was all her fault.
A. out of the four choices i believe the one in which he is the symbol of satan. because in the story he is described and a person with similar features like satan such as hooves. he also seems to know allot and satan always knows everything.
b. The life style is very similar to hers. they always hangout at burger places and just chill on their cars waiting for somebody to catch their eye. I believe that the author is both blaming connie and also just saying how dangerous life can be.
A. I believe the 3rd exposition; that Arnold Friend is a symbolic Satan. He has an unearthly knowledge of facts about her, which can definitely be found as quite creepy. He disguises himself in weird clothing also, undoubtedly to conceal his real identity.
B. In many senses, the teen life in this article is highly comparable to the life of Connie's. I agree with what was said below, about teens picking up random boys they don't know and hanging out at juke joints, when their parents either don't know or don't care what they do.
A. Of the "Four Critical Interpertations" I agree with the first one as a "feminist allegory." I agree with a "feminist allegory" because the description fits perfectly. Connie is lured into believing that going with him will save her family. She thinks that it is the only way out at that moment. This story is a "cautionary tale, suggesting that young women are "going" exactly, where their mothers and grandmothers have already "been: into sexual bondage at the hands of a male "friend." That friend is actually Arnold in Connie's case. Arnold represents the devil in many ways and trys to be somewhat symbolic towards him.
B. Teen culture of the article is similar to Connie's lifestyle through teenagers in that time running all over the place and their parents not really aware of what was going on at the time. This was a time when America believed everything to be so innocent and safe. I don't think that Oates is blaming the "victim" by killing Connie in her story because Connie is played into going with him. He tricks her with his mind games and theartans her family. I believe that it is not her fault that she dies because she really didn't have another clear choice at the time.
A) Out of the four interpretation about "Where Are You Going, Where Have You Been" I agree with the third one. This interpretation states that Arnold is Satan. I find this to be true, because when Arnold was outside trying to make Connie come with him he was wobbly on his feet. This implies that he had to stuff his shoes because the devils hoof would not fit properly in a boot. Also, Arnold knew everything about Connie, liek where her family was and when they would be back. This shows that he has some sort of supernatural power like Satan.
B)This article is similar to Connie lifestyle in that the teenagers could do whatever they want without their parents taking notice or concern. In Oates story I think she is blaming the victim by "killing" Connie because she put herself out to boys/men she did not know. It was only a matter of time before exposing herself like that would get her into trouble.
A. I agree with the third interpretation because his identity is fake and he hints at being satan. for example, his name and also the hooves on his shoes.
b. I think the article does compare to Connie's lifestyle. the sense of everything being fine to do and having no dangers in whatever it is they're doing is present. For example, even though COnnie says she is going to the movies but actually goes to the burger joint and does not see any harm in it is kindof like the article. I think oates is blaming Connie becuase it is her fault that everything happened. She was living this secret life that her parents did not know of and even though she is young and does not understand that not everyone is good, their should be some sort of common sense to let herself go as far as she did.
A. I agree most with the fourth critical interpretation not only because it is very possible that Arnold Friend was meant to symbolize Bob Dylan, as the story was dedicated to him, but also because the argument that was made for Connie falling into a fantasy about getting away from the captivity of her home. In the story, it was said that Arnold's voice was just like that of the man on the radio. The man on the radio was named Bobby King- a reference to Bob(by) Dylan the "King" of rock and roll. Because Dylan was such a revolutionary, people were beginning to change the way they thought, becoming much more independent in the way they lived- they were becoming less inclined to just blend into the crowd. Because Connie was a teenage girl, one who may have been unhappy at home, and may have had a fantasy about breaking off and living her own life, away from her parents.
B. The lifestyle in the story is very similar to that of the teenagers in the article. The parents aren't overly concerned about where their children are, and the children take advantage by going out nightly and finding someone to get with. I don't think that Oates is exactly blaming the victim, but definitely wants to emphasize that she did have a great deal to do with her abduction, as she went willingly with her captor.
A. I agree with the third interpretation about the comparison to Satin. Many of Friend's characteristics equal the ones of Satin. Friend drives the gold jalopy, which institutes the importance of Friend seizing Connie(the "virgin" as Santo would say) into hell. Friend also has the creepy fast talking voice and the weird fitting boots as Satin.
B. It is similar to Connie's lifestyle because the children go around and do pretty much whatever they want to do. They also go to restaurants and pick up boys. I do not however agree with Oates' reasons to why it would be the girl's fault.
A. I agree with the third interpretation about the comparison to Satin. Many of Friend's characteristics equal the ones of Satin. Friend drives the gold jalopy, which institutes the importance of Friend seizing Connie(the "virgin" as Santo would say) into hell. Friend also has the creepy fast talking voice and the weird fitting boots as Satin.
B. It is similar to Connie's lifestyle because the children go around and do pretty much whatever they want to do. They also go to restaurants and pick up boys. I do not however agree with Oates' reasons to why it would be the girl's fault.
A. I agree most with the third opinion that thinks that Arnold Friend is a symbolic Satan. I agree with this opinion most because of the way he knew everything about what her family was doing that afternoon. This suggested that either he had been stalking her or had otherworldly powers. He also got nervous when she threatened to call the cops, which tells you that he was planning something bad.
B. It is related to Connies lifestyle because in both the teenagers are escaping from most parental control to do what they please without adults supervising or even having knowledge of what they are doing. I do not think that she is blaming the victim by killing Connie in her story, but showing how easily her innocence can be taken.
A. Out of the four critical interpretations, I agree with 4th interpretation. We should be aware of the fact that this novel was dedicated to Bob Dylan, who was a king of a rock and roll at that era. Also, Connie was usually unsatisfied with her family, because her mom was always nice to her sister June. Arnold could be someone such as an omniscient savior or messiah who might take Connie to the totally different world where she had ever experienced before. Also, the similarities of physical description between Bob Dylan and Arnold prove that Arnold is rather a savior.
B. Life in article is extremely similar to that of a Connie’s life, such as parents have no idea of what their children are doing, and where they are. Also, teenagers can do everything whatever they want regardless of parents having concerns. Author is not blaming kids by killing Connie, but they are merely suggesting and implying that one’s innocent can be easily taken away from.
A. I agree with the third interpretation, he is the devil/satan because Arnold seems to be very sneaky and knows almost everything that is going on in Connie's life. He is also puts on an act for Connie pretending to be a nice guy but he really isn't.
B. Teen culture in the article is similar to Connie's life in the sense that the teens both hung around looking to pick up guys I do not think she is blaming the victim by killing Connie but instead promoting awareness about how bad and scary people are.
A. I agree with the second interpretaion which states that Connie has fallen asleep in the sun and has a dream about a composite figure that symbolizes her fear of the adult world. The second interpretaion explains how Connie's will is paralyzed by fear, somewhat like the phenomenon that occurs during a nightmare when you try to run away from danger and your legs don't seem to respond. Larry Rubin makes it easy for the reader to relate to his explanation by using the nightmare/dream as an example.
B. The lifestyles are similar because teenage girls do go out and try to find guys whom they can "hook up" with. I think he is blaming the victim because whatever predicament that the teenage girls get themselves into is completely self enflicted.
A. I agree with the third interpretation the most because it discusses how arnold fiend is like a symbolic satan. He stalked Connie in a devilish way and knew what her parents/ sister were doing at that exact moment. Also, he is shaky in his boots because the "devil's hoof" can not fit well into a cowboy boot.
B. The teen culture of the article is extremely similar to Connie's lifestyle in that they both go to burger joints to pick up guys. I think that Oates is blaming the victim by killing Connie in her story because she is giving her what was coming. The way that Connie behaved and held herself, she was eventually going to have a bad experience with a guy. She is not blaming Connie, only telling what would happen if you take part in that kind of risky business.
A. I agree with the III interpretation of Arnold Friend being satan. You see satan coming in so many different disguises being someone/thing else to trick someone into doing what he wants. In this story he tricks a gullible young confused teenage girl that he wants to be her friend and love her until he finally gets what he wants
B. Yes, the attitude in the article is very similar to the actions of Connie in the story, the fact that she can meet people and have sex without really knowing them, or the fact that she is stupid enough to believe that this older man accually wants to love her. No, I don't think that the writer is blaming Conniw I just think she's making it clear that things like this can happen, and as a teenager you need to be more precautious
The interpretation that fits my opinion the best is the third one by, Joyce Wegs. She says that Arnold is symbolic to Satan. I take her side because like she said , Arnold knew everything about Connie and her family. He even knew about the barbecue they were attending.
Connie is very similar to the girls that get picked up by Smitty. Friday nights they go down to the drive in burger joint and try to pick up guys. The author is not trying to blame what happened to the Fritz girls on the victim but instead giving a reminder on how many weirdos there are on this planet.
A. i personnaly agree with the third interpratation because iabsolutly beleive that arnold friend was the represantation of the devil or an evil spirit.
B. yes i do beleive connie's lifestyle to very simmilar than that of the story in the way that the teenagers are sexually aware.they also wait aournd waiting to be seen. She does not blame the victim in the story but is rather letting poeple know how dangerouse poeple can be!
A. I agree with the third interpretation, stating that Arnold is a symbolic satan. This is because he has a certain mystique and confidence in the way that he speaks and acts that not many other people would have. He also has the uncanny ability to know all about Connie and her family to the point that he uses it to torment her.
B. The teenage life is very similar to Connie's in the sense that most of the kids go to meaninglessly loiter to simply be sexually active. She is not blaming the victim in the story, I think it has a more of a "see what happens" tone of an adult threatening disobediant teenagers.
Out of the four critical interpretations i agree most with number 3 because of the physical details. Like for example the devil has hooves that would have made him hard to walk. Just like Arnold was unsteady in his shoes. Also because he knows so much about her shows that the only person that could know that was if he was a hyigher power or part of her family and friends.
The culture is similar in the way that the parents aren't watchful and uncaring of what they do when they are not there.
I think that she is blaming the victim for being killed because if she had gone to the movies like she said instead of going to the burger place, she wouldn't have met Arnold Friend in the first place.
A. I agree with the second interpretation. I had not thought of it before, but it makes complete sense now. It explains the coincidental music which was playing both in Arnold's car, as she was listening to it at her house. Also, it explains why she said she never could make out what exactly Ellie's face looked like. Ellie was someone she had never seen before and therefore would have no idea what to imagine. Lastly, I agree with Weg's when he states that the quote "You're better than them, because not a one of them would have done this for your", is exactly what she wanted to hear,and therefore imagined somebody saying it.
B. The teen culture was very similar. Their activities were somewhat the same and they basically did whatever they wanted, as they were very detached from their parents. Although what happened to Connie is terrible, I think that Oates was blaming her because she got herself into this situation, not directly, but by exposing herself to the dangers in life.
A. I agree with the 3rd interpretation because Anold "Fiend" his name al ready said it all. Plus he seems to be so powerful (like devil) in pursuating others to do bad things rather than good things.
B.I think that it is pretty similar as they are all tennager which are... eager to have sex.And i don't really think she blame Connie by killing her in the end but she just trying to make a point saying "Hey this is real stuff".
A. Of the four interpretations I agree with the third one saying that Arnold Friend was a 'devil'. In my opinion, it makes a lot of sense due to the fact that he has trouble walking in his boots. If he was in fact the 'devil', this would be true seeing as hooves would not fit evenly into a boot, therefore making it hard for Arnold to walk. Compared to the others as well, this was the easiest one to believe, making it seem that this is was the author wanted to portray.
B. I do not think that Oates was trying to blame the victim. She was showing that teenagers these days and back then were very into 'being cool' and it just so happened that being sexually active was 'cool' to them. I think Oates was trying to show the dark side of trying to fit in with what other kids were doing. Also, the lifestyle is very similar to Connie's. They hang out at burger joints, draw attention to themselves, and try to hook up with random people. Although Connie's goal was to hook up with someone, I do not think that it was necessarily her fault and she should not be blamed for what happened.
A. As boring as it is so just consider the story a dream, I have to go with 2. The entire story just had that lazy, dreamlike, and hauntingly surreal quality. The mixed emotions and connections between things that were happening and being said make me think that Connie was not in a state of being fully conscious.
B. The teenagers described in the murders all had the same restlessness and need for excitement that Connie's life seemed to have. The towns described are very similar in that there was not much to do and no where to go and most of the kids went to the same places repeatedly. The lack of excitement in both places is what made all the kids be open to different things, like talking to a complete stranger like Arnold Friend.
I think Oates is blaming the victim, but not rightly. Teenagers will always be carefree and naive, but that doesn't mean that every girl who wants excitement in an otherwise boring life is asking to get raped.
Post a Comment