panel presentations

I really enjoyed the panel presentations done yesterday by Simeon, Vivian, Claire, and Rodney. I thought they worked well together and helped me go into the mind of Vonnegut. I thought the things about post traumatic stress disorder were very interesting. I really did see the symptoms of PTSD in the writing style of Vonnegut, my Dad suffered with mild PTSD after he was parlayed in a motorcycle accident he says he often had reoccurring dreams about the accident and random flashbacks when he was sick which I found to really seem to be a like lot Billy.

I also found the quote Claire read from an interview of with Vonnegut to be quite striking that he would say he believed his own novel, which was amazingly popular, to be a failure on his part. I think we could easily have a long discussion as to why this novel was a failure for Vonnegut. I think Vonnegut's reasoning could have gone many ways and it is difficult to understand why Vonnegut may have said such a thing, but I am interested in exploring why. Vonnegut may have learned the true number of casualties that occurred at dresden. Maybe people didn't quite interpret his novel as they were meant to, maybe Vonnegut was trying to create an anti-war novel that was also not an anti-war novel. Vonnegut may have been going for a more neutral portrayal of war, given the prospective of the Tralfalmadoreans that we see saying that war and conflict are inevitable and unavoidable, they are merely part of the life cycle. I think this quote was a very interesting one and I would like to hear other opinions on in the future. I would also like to have a little more background on the context of the quote.

Blog post I didn't post because I didn't like it part 2: blaxploitation films

After reading Simeon's very well written post on the similarities of undercover brother and Mumbo Jumbo, I remembered recalled one of my favorite movies Black Dynamite. Black Dynamite is also a satire of blaxploitation films that were made popular with the release of Shaft in 1971. In the movie we see an action packed ride as Black Dynamite, a smooth talking, jive, kung-fu master played by Michael Jai White. The movie follows the typical blaxploitation style plot; the lead finds some plot by the white man to take down the black man and stop them from ever getting out of the ghetto. Our hero Black Dynamite comes to the rescue to kick but and get the orphans off smack. This was some a very good example of a blaxploitation movie as it contained all the similar plot circumstances and circumstances that would be expected in the genre, but it goes out of its way to mock the stereotypes that are magnified by the genre. I'm losing focus, but this is a good very funny satire of blaxploitation films. It shows the played up black stereotypical hero identity that was rose up after Shaft very well. I believe Ishamel Reed was also swept up in this wave of cultural definement and was at the forefront of bringing back this strong sense of black identity along with the black exploitation films may have attempted to do as his book was released in 1972. However, I believe that Ishamel Reed definitely made a much better version of a played up black culture movement then the black exploitation movement did.

Blog post I saved and didn't publish because I didn't like it part 1: Finding a text

I have been thinking about this for a while now and it has bothered me quite a bit. As we have heard numerous times throughout Mumbo Jumbo, Jes Grew is looking for a text, but why does it need a text. To me a writing down of Jes Grew and the spirit of Jes Grew seems impossible as it has been described. To write down Jes Grew seems as if it would limit the evolution of Jes Grew. Could someone actually interpret Jes Grew without limiting it with words? So why is it that Jes Grew needs a text that will define it and restrict the freedom of it that seems to be so important to the movement? What could a text possibly do for it? PaPa LaBas says that "If it could not find its Text, it would be mistaken for entertainment." Maybe a new Text would be a history of the evolution of the black cultural movement instead of a biography of Osiris's life. Maybe the text is something else the old text was described as not so much a text,but a series of dance moves, maybe this is less restrictive and free to interpretation then what a text is more typically thought to be?

Science fiction in Slaughterhouse Five

Recently we have gotten into the debate about the presence of science fiction in Slaughterhouse Five. The focus at the beginning of this debate dealt with whether the science fiction aspects takes away from the seriousness of the novel.
To answer this I believe it is important to evaluate how humor is used in the novel. Throughout the novel there have been humorous bits scattered about, the form of the Trafalmadorians comes to my mind in particular, clearly comparing an alien to a "plumber's helper" is supposed to be taken somewhat lightly, the aliens are the complete opposite of the typical alien image as they are basically one eyed walking hands. So yes this may take away from the seriousness of the novel because of the way humor is added in the science fiction parts of the novel. It could be said that the majority of the humor in he book comes from the science fiction portions of the novel and I think this may have been done on purpose. The science fiction sections of the novel have been the sections that have provided us with the most complex ideas. In order to not weigh down the reader too much I believe Vonnegut gives us these humors bits so that our understanding of these ideas of time, human insignificance, etc don't lead the reader down a path that ends with them jumping to extremely negative conclusions, instead the humor creates some balance that creates a neutral context for the reader when they attempt to make sense of these complex ideas.
 I think yes, the humor may take away some of the seriousness, but it is also essential to our interpretation of concepts in the novel.