Ap Lang

Researching the Work part 5 *dramatic sigh of relief* I'm done!! Honestly one of the happiest moments of my life just being done with this. I feel so freeeeeeeeeeeeeee. Writing this whole project was also really beneficial as much of a pain in the butt as it was. Hopefully, my writing improved from it, I think it did.

Status update: all I have left to do is the introduction the annotations, the general intro, and two more background resources. This sounds like more than I've mentally conceptualized but I do have a page and a half of my general intro started as well as a strong idea of where I want it to go so that's a pretty good chunk out of there. Yea writing all my annotations in one day did not work out, they took wayyy longer than I imagined; I could only really crank out one a day. But that's also because I thought they had to be 2-3 pages when really that was just the intro to the annotations. That honestly cost me more time than you would imagine. Hopefully it'll add a little positive weight to my project, though. Writing the intro to the annotations actually scares me more than the general introduction because I'm worried about just repeating stuff from my individual annotations. ((If anyone has a finished and approved copy of their that I can't take a quick peak at then I would be soooo grateful.))

I finished all of the criticisms section!!! That means I did my abstracts, citations and all, and scanned, printed, and hole punched the criticisms. Hand scanning and printing all those pages took forever, it was such a pain. Also, admittedly, my abstracts don't have check marks from Kreinbring but that's uh a minor detail so not trying to think about that right now. I also picked out my annotation passages and acquired online text of them which took longer than I thought it would 'cause there were no .pdf versions of my book. But I found a way to cheat and use the Google Books copy without paying for it so that worked out. Now if I can just mark those up and write aaallll of my annotation papers tomorrow then I'll have three days for my general introduction and also finding some background sources and I should be good I can do this😅

As part of my research, I watched the movie adaptation of Wise Blood. I had heard a lot of good things about it, and it has a lot of hype online, but I wasn’t thrilled by it. Having read the book, I felt like it was missing some key parts. However, having read some criticisms is what really threw me off for the movie I think. Because of the criticisms, I felt the characters in the movie were lacking in development, as everyone in the movie is supposed to be without moral, yet there were a few city folks who appeared to be kind. Also, Enoch’s ending was changed to give it a new meaning, which I wasn’t totally unhappy with, but that’s just another observation. A lot of the scenes in the movie were spot on with the book, and then there were some that weren’t or weren’t even there. Watching the movie did help me to pick out some important scenes I could use for my annotations, though.

Also I imagine Mr. Darcy at prom, who hates dancing, and how funny it would be to get him to do the Cupid Shuffle or some ridiculous dance like that. Also I would want Westley to wear his Dread Pirate Roberts outfit.

Reading my criticisms is so fascinating. I am not well versed in religion, having been raised in a very nondenominational church my whole life, so I learning so much from my criticisms. I find I have to look up a lot of terms in order to fully understand the religious concepts but I don’t mind doing that as it’s just enhancing my experience. It’s also really interesting seeing how the authors of these criticisms approach such a heavily religious book written by a devout Catholic in a non-bias way, seeing as this is what I will be doing a majority of the time in my research paper. Being nonreligious myself, I enjoy reading text that is so religious as it presents me with a whole new perspective that I can take in without compromising my own beliefs. Overall, I’m really happy I picked this book because it is such a controversial novel that the criticism are really enjoyable to read.

(Tumblr is so annoying!!! Why is this picture so large??? i tried resizing it 5 times now I give up) Anyways, my trip to the library was a bit difficult. First of all I went alone and couldn’t find the place so I had to call up Megan who is AMAZING at directions, thanks girl. Once I got there it took me like 30 minutes to gather up the courage to talk to the librarian. Once I got the information I needed, it took me quite a bit of time to find my books, but I got it done eventually. BUT THEN when I tried to check out my books I couldn’t ‘cause the Troy Library isn’t cool like that. So then I was freaking out ‘cause there was no way I was leaving that place without my books. So I called up Andrew who agreed to come check out my books for me BLESS HIS SOUL. I picked him up, he checked out my books for me, SAVED MY LIFE, and all was well.

So much happens in the end of this book it’s soooo good. I love books that have a killer ending, and this book has exactly that. Not only that, but the ending is filled with so much symbolism. Everyone in the book gets their own ending and significance with it. Emory’s ending is my favorite obviously. Like he just escapes into the woods in an Ape suit.... so bizarre I love it. But even better is reading some of my criticisms to add meaning to all these endings. Its makes the whole story so much more interesting to know more of what O’Connor intended with her book. I was a little confused with Haze’s ending, but now that I’m starting to understand it all more, it makes me want to reread the work with this new perspective. Really happy with this book overall, one of my faves.

Ah yes more of Emory in this section :):):))) Also, Flannery O'Connor definitely chooses her names purposefully. Hawks, Sabbath, Enoch, and now Onnie Jay Holy. Lots of biblical references in this book, which makes perfect sense. Would be a pretty crappy book craftsmen-wise if it was lacking in biblical references considering the author and it's purpose. Also, the irony of the relationship between Haze and Sabbath is particularly acute in this chapter. Here Haze is thinking he's corrupting the sweet young Sabbath when really she thinks he's the innocent one of whom she is targeting. This is the second person who views Haze as innocent, as well, which connects to Haze's incessant need to proclaim that "he is clean!" Lots of connections and themes here that I am trying to figure out how to work in to my paper.

So I'm going to stop pretending as if I'm posting these right after having read this section of the book. I finished the book long ago and I have just procrastinated writing these. There you go, the honest truth. Now anyways, it is in this section of the book that the eye motif is very prevalent. This is when the reader learns that Hawks (eye motif in that name alone) is not actually blind like he lets everyone on to believe. This was actually a pretty big plot twist for me, as I remember reading it. I knew that everyone in this book was crazy but when this new information was revealed I was surprised at the actual level of absurdity the characters in the book could reach. And obviously I was thrilled. Another example of the eye motif in this section, "'I like his eye,' she observed. 'They don't look like they see what he's looking at but they keep on looking.'" (Pg 56). This line is pretty important from what I can tell, I've seen it mentioned in two of my resources so far.

Enoch Emery is one of my favorite characters ever. His character is so out there that it's hilarious. The way he ~listens to his blood~ is such a creative literary quirk that Flannery attributed to him; I really love her as a writer. This chunk of the book has basically been all about him, which I really enjoyed reading, because Haze's nihilism and obsessive preaching can get a little uninteresting after a while. Emery provides a nice comical relief, in my opinion, but I'm wondering if his character will contribute more than that as the book goes on. Also, I remember when we were searching for funny ap lit books last year to read over the summer, and if I had read this book I would have totally suggested it 'cause I find this book hilarious.

I really like this book. When I read it, everything flows in a constant image and narrative inside my head, and I am submerged in the book. I don’t even notice I’m reading. It’s been a long time since that’s happened to me with a book I have to admit. This is because I absolutely love her writing. One thing that I value maybe more than anything else about a writing is the figurative language. There are some writers where the imagery and metaphors they use feel forced. Then there is Zora Neal Hurston, who writes every single metaphor in the most perfect and creative way that I scream internally because she hits whatever she is describing so on the mark. That has been the one thing I’ve enjoyed the most so far with this book, and so I thought I’d include a couple of my favorite examples: “Oh to be a pear tree - any tree in bloom! She was sixteen. She had glossy leaves and bursting buds and she wanted to struggle with life but it seemed to elude her. Where were the singing need for her?” “She knew God tore down the old world every evening and built a new one by sun-up. It was wonder to see it take form with the sun and emerge from the gray dust of it’s making.” Also an example would be that whole scene with the birds eating the carcass of the mule. Which, by the way, I’m surprised we haven’t talked about this scene at all cause it seems almost out of place in this book. It’s this random fantasy-esque scene within a realist fiction novel, which I love, but I’m also wondering why it was placed there.

I love the way the characters are being revealed in this book!! All their weird attributes and motives and true characters. And there is not a single normal behaving character in this whole book. Everyone is sooo weird - I cannot stress how much I like that about this book. It makes me wonder what a conversation with Flannery O'Connor would be like. She seems like she was cool a person. I can not for the life of me understand why a devout catholic like herself would write a book with such twisted religious ideas and characters. It's very fascinating, I'm actually excited what the criticism I am going to find has to say about this book.

Hazel Motes is definitely weird, so this book is off to a good start. He's returned from war and he's acting weird so of course I as the reader question if PTSD is going to be a plot element in this book, but so far it has not been mentioned at all. Very little about his time in war has been mentioned, which I find refreshing, because I've read one too many stories about war and PTSD. But as this character is struggling with his faith, I wonder if the reader is supposed to factor in the detail that he is returned from war and draw their own connections from that. Is he so strange cause of PTSD? Or did something happen in his childhood? Both his parents are dead so there's something else to consider. I don't know really, everything is sort of exposition-y still so the plot hasn't really begun too much yet.