subterrania.

What kind of story do you expect lies behind the name Animal Farm? Do you expect a fun, family-friendly adventure about a family and their farm; or do you expect a political satire that takes the form of  anthropomorphic animals trying to rise up against slavery? Made by George Orwell, a writer well-known for his later work 1984, Animal Farm is a novella about a group of talking animals banding together to defeat their human masters, working together to manage, and then falling apart and dividing from the inside.

This novella is set in Manor Farm, located in England, where a bunch of animals being gathered together by Old Major who felt like his death was going to come soon. Not wasting any more time, he foretold that, one day, the animals of the farm will overtake their human masters; make the farm as their own, and have every animal be of equal footing. He then teaches them a hymn of their revolution- called “Beasts of England” - which every animal picks up quickly and sings along with him. This day of revolution came to pass, and the animals were successful, driving the humans away from the farm an claiming the farm as Animal Farm - a farm for animals, by animals. At the beginning, two pigs guided over all the animals – Snowball and Napoleon - with the Squealer appointed as their speaker. The two pigs always debated and had clashing personalities, but even so, together they led the animals of the farm; teaching them how to read and write, as well as cultivate the farm by themselves. They made a set of rules for all animals within the farm, which followed the teaching of Old Major, called ‘The Seven Commandments of Animalism’ which basically focuses on the equality of all animals and separation from humanity. For a while, everything works well in the farm, even after some humans’ attempt of reclaiming the farm by brute force. However, this peace would not last as long as the two pigs leading the farm were arguing. When Snowball pushed for the farms modernization for the better of the animals, Napoleon finally uses his trump card against the other by chasing him out of the farm with his minions; and making himself the only leader of the farm.

Slowly, Napoleon begins to take down the foundations of the established animal farm bit by bit by taking advantage of the animals’ inability to read and write as much as he could; changing the commandments and persuading the rest that it’s always been that way with Squealer’s help. The rules that he breaks, such as: dealing with humans, and stepping foot in the house of the humans are done all the while the other animals are suffering from his leadership; rendering the commandments of Animalism obsolete. Then one day, everything comes full circle; with the pigs being able to stand on their own two feet and converse with the humans eye-to-eye. The pigs, led by Napoleon, then revert the farms name back to Manor Farm, with the blur between the pigs and humans being obscure.

  This book was just a whole experience in and of itself. The title threw me off, making me think as if I was going to have a wholesome read – but it wasn’t. Right from the second chapter, the book sets itself as no ordinary fable; tackling situations by condensing those complex issues in a way that doesn’t patronize the readers nor does it make it seem as if those issues were simple to begin with. It taught me a lot about authoritarianism and deception, and how they go hand-in-hand to favor those in power. This was shown with Napoleon deceiving the animals all throughout his reign, making the animals keep the mindset that the lives they live now were better than when they were under the control of the humans; that they now had the freedom to do what they want, and that them doing these tiresome jobs were for the better of their farm. This couldn’t be farther from the truth, with their current lives comparatively being as worse as it was before, all for Napoleon and his kind’s gain. Furthermore, this book enlightened me about how we tend to turn a blind eye to the grim situations we face – shown with how the animals don’t do anything even when they question Napoleon’s ways, assuming that he’s always in the right (due to Squealer’s influence). Thinking about it now, the book’s situation is almost akin to the political discourse in the Philippines regarding our President’s incompetency in ruling, and some people’s choice to stay silent amidst it all, whether it be consciously or otherwise. It made me realize that my failure to take a stand in the argument shows mine and others’ complacency when put in similar settings; our mindsets being that we are living in a time way better than before, so we mustn’t complain (among other things). I now understand where this complacency will take me, going forward; and I now will consider my actions when confronted to a similar position.

The greatest teachers are your best friends. Mitch Albom, the author of “Five People You Meet in Heaven”, wrote another book that is focused on his real-life experiences of his former professor and best friend, Morrie Schwartz, titled, “Tuesdays With Morrie.” This book tackled a story of a long-lost friendship brought back together, a former student and his professor and life’s greatest lessons.

Mitch Albom, a graduate who wanted to pursue music, ended up becoming a sports writer. During his college life, he enrolled in a class taught by a professor named, Morrie Schwartz, throughout college, he was able to tighten his bond with Morrie. He was a wonderful teacher, and He even considered him his best friend. After graduation, he said his final goodbyes to Morrie, thanked him for everything and promised to keep in touch. However, as he grew up he did not keep in touch. He was invested in nothing but working harder. One night, while scrolling through channels in his Tv. He heard a familiar name, “Who is Morrie Schwartz?” Hearing this, Mitch decided to visit Morrie once more. Upon arriving at Morrie’s house, he was silent. He hasn’t seen Morrie for sixteen years, and he felt guilty for not keeping his promise. However, Morrie did not hold anything against him. Morrie was just happy that he was able to see him again. 

While Mitch was in the outside world working, Morrie contracted a terminal disease called Lou Gehrig’s disease. It attacked his neurological system and with no known cure, it meant sure death. Most people would stop living their life and stay confided in their beds, but Morrie was not most people. He kept on living his life. He continued his daily routines until he was physically not able to do them. He made dying his final project and his final class with Mitch.

It all started when Morrie told Mitch, “I am dying, shall I tell you what’s it like.” Afterward, Mitch was visiting Morrie every Tuesday. Their talks consisted of Life’s greatest takeaways, like regrets, family, emotions, money, aging, marriage, forgiveness, and even good-byes. Morrie spoke of these lessons with his experience and observing other people. However, he spoke not only to rant or to speak, but he spoke with the intent of teaching Mitch in his journey through life. Nonetheless, Morrie was dying. As the days progress, Mitch could see his friend slowly deteriorate. They had limited days to meet until he eventually succumbed to his illness. For Mitch’s final exam, there was none. Instead, he was tasked to write what he has learned throughout the lessons he had with Morrie in a long paper, and that paper ended up into this book.

“Tuesdays with Morrie” was an amazing experience to read. The book had very practical problems discussed and solutions on what to do for them. You learn so much form the life of Morrie. How he lived till his last breath. Likewise, you learn from Mitch, you learn through his growth as a person. After every Tuesday he leaves the house with a new view on life. I felt the same way Mitch felt after reading every class they’ve had together. He did a wonderful job capturing their lessons and portraying the sickness slowly consuming Morrie, yet still seeming cheery and alive. The lessons they talk about branch out from life. They talk about topics like feeling sorry for yourself, regrets, death, family, emotions, fear of aging, money, how love goes on, marriage, culture, forgiveness, the perfect day, and good-byes. These talks seem serious, but throughout the talk, you could see that they were just talking, talking like how anyone does. They make jokes about each other, they vent out their problems to each other, they just related to each other. The feeling I got while reading their conversations were heartwarming. It made me feel like I was talking to a past friend I haven’t talked to for a long time, and yet I learned so much from their talks as well. 

My favorite lesson out of all was when they had the Tuesday about forgiveness. The summary of that lesson was to forgive others and forgive yourself as well. Morrie told Mitch to forgive others, that being prideful and vain does nothing, while he also told Mitch to forgive yourself. Forgive yourself for not doing the things you did and also for the things you didn’t do. This was only one of the practical lessons you can take from their talk together. Death, money, emotions, all these topics get talked about in a very nice and meaningful way. However, even though you may take away a lot of lessons from this book, the real message of this book is the friendship between Morrie and Mitch. A friendship that started in college, was lost but found, and continued till death. The lessons that Mitch got from Morrie is something I’m sure he nor we will ever forget, and as stated by him, “The subject was the meaning of life. It was taught from experience. The teaching goes on.”

After reading the book, I wouldn’t say my life was completely changed by it, but I am sure that it played a part in changing me to who I am now. The book just felt so real and practical. It’s a book that is relevant to anyone, no matter the age and I am sure that you will be able to learn something after reading this book. To be honest, I’m not a big fan of books, I can’t imagine what the words are trying to describe, but this book was different. It wasn’t just words to me, it had real meaning and purpose and that’s what I love about this book.

          The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea is a philosophical fiction written by Yukio Mishima, most known for his works Spring Snow and Confessions of a Mask. It is a disturbing tale of a nihilistic youth with a twisted philosophy in life. The novel follows the perspective of three titular characters— Noboru Kuroda, a fatherless adolescent who rejects adulthood; Fusako Kuroda, Noboru’s mother; and Ryuji Tsukazaki, the second mate of the freighter the Rakuyo. We take a close look into Noboru’s psychology as Ryuji betrays Noboru’s perfect image of him— when he trades his conquest for glory for a domestic life with Fusako.

         The novel is set in post-World War II Yokohama where Noboru Kuroda finds a small hole that opens up to his mother’s room. That night, he sees that his mother has brought with her a sailor, Ryuji Tsukazuki, and watches them sleep together. Ryuji reveals that he believes that he is destined for glory, to which can only be achieved at sea. Noboru, being part of a psychopathic gang of self-proclaimed geniuses, is enamored by him and his lack of sentimental attachment. As a result, Noboru labels Ryuji as his hero. As Fusako and Ryuji’s relationship progresses, Noboru is faced with the reality that Ryuji may not match the image he has of him. When Ryuji turns out to be sentimental and romantic, the complete opposite of what Noboru would consider the embodiment of his ideals, Noboru does what he believes is saving his hero from his fall from grace.

         Yukio Mishima is well-known for being an Imperial Japan conservative. He believed in bushido— the honor code of samurai which hails self-sacrifice and honorable death. On November 25 1970, Mishima committed suicide by seppuku as an act of political martyrdom. He strongly disagreed with the direction Japan was going in, as the country was in the process of modernization through Western influence. I believe this book to be the physical embodiment of Mishima’s view on the state of Japan during that time.

“There must be a special destiny in store for me; a glittering, special-order kind no ordinary man would be permitted.”

         Ryuji reveals that he believes that he is destined for greatness. He dreams of adventure, glory, and, ultimately, honorable death— a fitting representation of Imperial Japan. Fusako, on the other hand, represents Westernization or Western influence. In the book, she was even an importer of European goods. Her role in the book was the ‘push’ that compelled Ryuji to give up on his ambitions of glory— a parallel to how Western influence itself is what led Japan to reject its past convictions. As Japan entered the age of modernization in the Meiji Restoration of 1868, bushido and its values were abandoned in the same fashion as Ryuji to his dreams of greatness.

“There’s a huge seal called ‘impossibility’ pasted all over this world. And don’t forget that we’re the only ones who can tear it off once and for all.”

         Noboru himself would represent Mishima’s own thoughts. Mishima truly believed in Imperial Japan and bushido. Noboru believed that death was the only concept that truly mattered after birth. With knowledge that Ryuji believed in glory in death, Noboru revered Ryuji, in the same way Mishima did to his country.

“Can this man be saying things like that? This splendid hero who once shone so brightly?”

         Noboru believed that Ryuji’s emotions were a sign of weakness and vulnerability. He saw this as Ryuji’s act of betrayal— his hero’s fall from grace. The ‘Ryuji’ he long admired had been corrupted by sentimental attachment. Ryuji’s renouncement of his ambitions for a life of domesticity with Fusako represented Japan’s conformity to Westerm influence. Like Noboru’s act of ‘absolute dispassion’ to make Ryuji a hero once more, Mishima committed seppuku as an act of patriotism to the Japan he knew and an act of defiance to what Japan had become. Likewise, as Ryuji had died in Noboru’s attempt to regain his glory, Mishima’s ideal Japan died along with him.

         The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea felt like a collection of Mishima’s grievances against Japan masked in a published book. At face value, The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea seemed like an ordinary book. However, with context and knowledge of Mishima’s views and beliefs, the purpose of this book is clear as day. Knowing the author’s background helped me understand why Noboru acted the way he did. I could understand why Noboru looked at Ryuji scornfully, as Mishima looked at what Japan had become in the same light.

         Being only 181 pages long, the book did not provide much room to fully flesh-out characters. Despite the fact that Noboru had a psychology I could never hope to understand, I was able to accept him. I looked forward to seeing his perspective, though he felt detached— like I couldn’t relate to him like how I should any other protagonist. However, Fusako had no personality as a character in any way, shape, or form. It felt like she was a character just for the sake of ‘being there.’ Ryuji, on the other hand, was someone I could sympathize with. The book ended with me feeling bad for Ryuji, and with me wishing he had never decided to marry Fusako in the first place. If the book had a political agenda, it would be safe to say that it succeeded. That is, if wanting Ryuji to be a sailor once more equated to discouraging the modernization of Japan.

“Glory, as anyone knows, is bitter stuff.”

     The Boy at the Top of the Mountain is a book by John Boyne, who had previously written the bestseller, The Boy in the Striped Pajamas. Much like the previous book, this book takes place during World War II, after the Holocaust. You enter the perspective of a 7 year-old German boy known as Pierrot Fischer, whose father is a Nazi and mother is a French housewife. Living directly below them are a family of Jews known as the Bronstein(s). Anshel, the son of the Bronsteins, is Pierrot’s best friend who writes stories despite being deaf. While the book takes time to build up its setting and characters, most of the story takes place in Hitler’s retreat on top of a mountain. You’ll slowly see that Pierrot’s innocence is corrupted by Hitler, which in turn makes him turn into an irritable, prideful, insensitive teenager bent on impressing Hitler and looking down on other people. 

     The story begins in France, where the main characters are introduced. Pierrot and Anshel are together in a small room where Pierrot reads Anshel’s stories and offers criticism. The main problem in the beginning is Pierrot’s father, Wilhelm; a Nazi who had taken part in the Holocaust which haunts him in night terrors. This leads to conflicts in Pierrot’s home, where his mother, Emilie contemplates leaving. Ultimately, the terrors prove to be too much for Wilhelm, so he commits suicide by jumping in front of a train. A few years after Wilhelm passes, Emilie catches tuberculosis and also passes. Now alone, Pierrot is sent to an orphanage where he meets the Durand sisters, Simone and Adele. He progressively makes friends with them but is shortly taken away by his aunt, Beatrix. She brings Pierrot away to a mountain retreat, where a certain German leader resides. Little does Pierrot know, that this German leader was no other than Hitler himself, and that his values and character would be forever changed under Hitler’s influence.

     The years go by and Pierrot (now known as Peter for Hitler’s sake) grows up to be a hateful and unruly teenager. The kind boy from the beginning of the story was now a Jew-hating, power-tripping, megalomaniac bent on impressing Hitler.  This takes a turn for the worse when Peter uses his influence to ruin a family business and force himself onto the daughter of a shopkeeper. Later, history plays itself out, and Hitler is soon found to be dead. With no motivation left and no reason to keep going, Peter keeps to himself for many more years. Time passes by, and he is wracked with guilt for his actions: getting his aunt killed, forcing himself on the girl, and many more undesirables. He meets the girl again, only to have been grown up. Due to his guilt, he can’t even look her in the eye. He makes his way to a library where he meets his old friend: Anshel. He had become an esteemed writer in the time that Peter was away. The two interact like how they used to as children, and head inside a library where they talk. Peter says he has a story to tell Anshel, and the book ends with Anshel saying: “Let’s begin.”

         One thing I’ve noticed while I was reading the book is that Pierrot simply sought affection from parental figures. This is made apparent when he loses both of his parents and tries to get along with the sisters from the orphanage. Eventually, however, he becomes jaded towards people he used to love. This brings me to the point that when someone is wracked with grief, they are more prone to show (or hide) more emotion and even act a completely different way to compensate for their loss. In Pierrot’s case, he craved a father figure because he had lost his at such a young age. Now, the problem with this is that Pierrot’s dad, Wilhelm, was a very… passionate Nazi. Under that kind of influence, meeting Hitler (who was the epitome of Wilhelm’s ideals) had simply compelled him to try and prove himself to him. When I first made this realization, I only felt empathy towards Peter. He had lost two of his parents at an age where he had needed them most, and with no one else to turn to, he had clung to the one thing that reminded him of them.  

     This led me to some realizations that involved the ability to empathize and sympathize with people. People suffer through grief everyday, and the smallest things could affect them in big ways. It led me to believe that the act of understanding someone’s situation goes a long way, which I wish people would be more inclined to do so instead of being self-centered. The book goes a long way to justify everyone’s actions, showing their perspectives and their pasts in order to fully understand why they act that way. While we can’t look at people’s lives like a book can, we CAN put ourselves in the perspective of others. By simply asking yourself what it would be like to be in the situation they are in, it becomes easier to forgive people for things that they do. 

“Subterrania” is a short fiction poem written by a Filipino named Luis Joaquin M. Katigbak. The story follows the point of view of a male character. He has a female friend named Kaye, who likes to stay in her room all the time. Most of the story is about his view on Kaye and the interactions they have together. The story starts with Kaye introducing her room as her “subterrania” to the male lead. Silence fills the room as Kaye sits, watching her TV as the narrator watches her. After a while, Kaye pays attention to the guy and they have a small friendly interaction, and he takes his leave. Before Kaye became reclusive, she and the narrator used to always hang out together. She was once a lively and outgoing girl until she decided to find her subterrania. In his next visit, he tries his best to persuade Kaye to leave her room; nonetheless, Kaye decides to stay in her room. During the conversation, Kaye explains how she doesn’t need to go outside anymore; how she has everything she needs in her room. After leaving the room, the narrator worries for Kaye. He worries if she will ever go back to her past self. He visits Kaye time and time again. In each visit, the narrator tries his best to bring Kaye outside; however, each attempt ends in failure, with Kaye expounding her love for staying in her subterrania. Months pass, and the guy has visited Kaye so much he slowly gets confused with the worlds they both live in. Before entering the room again, suddenly a thought was placed in his head, he continuously imagined how their story may end. He enters the room once more, and discovers that he has become accustomed to the darkness - the subterrania.

“Subterrania” is defined in the story as an area with insufficient light or air. This coincides with the story’s themes of isolation and influence, shown in the perspective of the protagonist. The story is centered around his friend, Kaye. Kaye is a social recluse who refuses any outside interaction, save for the protagonist. In the story, she is shown to isolate herself from the outside world, relying only on the resources in her room and the occasional visits from the protagonist. Her behavior is that of a hikikomori, which is someone who abnormally denies any social interaction. The protagonist, on the other hand, is unnamed. His role in the story is to simply narrate the events from his perspective. He is shown to constantly visit Kaye and create scenarios regarding their relationship in his head. By the end of the story, he visits Kaye a final time, only to succumb to her state of living. Both Kaye and the protagonist represent opposing ideals, with Kaye preferring the comfort of isolation and the protagonist preferring the growth involving reality. Kaye is shown to dislike uncertainty, stating that she prefers to know the underlying reasons for why everything is what it is while the protagonist is shown to lament her behavior, constantly trying to bring her out of her shell and let her grow. This contrast in behavior makes the ending much more impactful, where the main character’s ideals change into that of Kaye’s, which is implied when he says that nothing could be seen in the darkness of her room, despite clearly seeing her outline. This, will be further expounded on in the analysis of the themes.

Throughout the story, the theme of isolation is always presented with Kaye who would have been the quintessential embodiment of isolation, had she not cared enough to interact with the narrator every time he visits. One should note that isolation itself is not much of a bad thing. Isolation, done right, allows one to evaluate and reassess their decisions, their lifestyle choices, as well as their position in life. It gives one the freedom to think for themselves, and to be able to understand themselves better. However, the kind of isolation presented within the story is the type that causes one to become a recluse to society, hidden from the face of it in favor of their own company, and no one else’s. In the story, Kaye argues that the reason as to why she doesn’t feel the need to go out anymore is because she already had everything she deems was important to her, and that her little room was better than the real world; her room, she argues, is certain. The world outside, is not. This shows Kaye’s discomfort with being unsure with life, making her immediate affinity of her subterrania much more comprehensible. Essentially, she favors her small dark room more than the outside world because she doesn’t have to deal with the surprises that come with life, which is the reason why some people decide to become social recluses.

Another theme that “Subterrania” tackles would be the power of exposure or influence. To elaborate: near the end of the Katigbak short story, the narrator mentions that, as he huddles together with Kaye in her subterrania, he can see the outlines of her face - everything from the lines of her cheekbones, to her eyes. It is there that he realizes - he isn’t supposed to see anything at all, in that darkness. From this, we can make assumptions that the narrator has gotten accustomed and has adapted to the obscurity that surrounds every surface of Kaye’s room. The question remains: How did this happen? Why has the narrator, someone who was adamant on getting Kaye to get outside her little safe bubble and back to the somber bitterness of reality, become complacent with the cloistered nature of Kaye’s subterrania? By perusing the story, we find out that this part of his ark has been long overdue. In the course of the events of the composition, we can see that the narrator is slowly, yet steadily, understanding and appreciating the comfort which the dark room gives through the interpretations which Kaye provides every time he inquires. As the story comes to a close, and with the narrator becoming more open with the idea of the hermit-like lifestyle that she exhibits, its no surprise that he can see — the narrator has now accepted her subterrania as his own, and has been successfully influenced by Kaye, whether she meant to, or not.