Tracking Mythology, Identity and Family.

Part of our assignment for my Senior Seminar class (the class for which I have read the past four books) was to familiarize ourselves with Chippewa myth and also to come to class able to talk about several critical approaches to this text. Google searches did not turn up very reliable sources on Chippewa myth, so I ended up looking at several books in Ames (Illinois Wesleyan's library) on Ojibwa religion and mythology. A few books had some really good information about the creation myth which is centered around Nanabozho who is also known as Nanapush. These myths obviously have relevance since Nanapush is also the name of one of the narrators of the novel. The Water Monster, Mishebeshu, is also a major figure in Chippewa myth and appears in the novel as the Lake Man who Fleur is purportedly in league with. Water and wind also figure heavily in the mythology. Wind is personified by four brothers who are controlled at various times by Nanapush through his tricks. All these motifs play heavy roles in the narrative and are worth brushing up on if you were previously unaware of their significance.

There are a lot of parallels between Tracks and Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon. Both novels feature non-white protagonists attempting to find their identity and happiness in a society dominated by whites. Tracks differs from Song of Solomon because the characters in Tracks are trying to keep alive their own society and are in touch with their traditional culture. The characters in Song of Solomon try to get back in touch with a culture they never knew and are trying to subsist within white society rather than creating their own. Ultimately, African-Americans are Americans since they were bereft of their own heritage for so long. Native Americans on the other hand were left their culture but not their land. Yet that does not mean that the characters in Tracks are in any less of a search for their identity, especially the young. Characters like Pauline, Fleur, Eli and Nector Kashpaw watch their culture fail to survive in the face of western oppression and greed. They struggle to reconcile what they are being told by their elders, what they believe about their heritage and the realities they face every day. Much like Milkman and Guitar try to orient their history and their family's history within their current experiences, the youth in Tracks do the same with a much more concrete reminder of what was.

The narrative also illuminates the damage done to the traditional family/clan structure which was very important in Native culture. None of the main characters have a nuclear family intact. In particular, there is a distinct absence of biological fathers in the text. Even Eli's status as Lulu's biological father is put into question. The families have been destroyed by disease, alcohol and hardship. As a result there is no hierarchy of authority or an established process for decision making. There is no natural check to improper behavior or built in defense against the encroaching lumber company. In-fighting features heavily in the novel as the Native community comes under constant attack from both internal and external pressures. I believe those threats are only made possible by the disintegration of the family and the loss of authority that results. Before that disintegration, there is no possible way the Lazarre and Morrisey boy assault Margaret Kashpaw like they do. Nor is Nector allowed to betray Fleur in the way he does. The break down of the family robs the community of its ability to protect itself. Nanapush, Fleur, and the Kashpaws do what they can to form a substitute family, but it can only do so much and the bonds are not as strong as blood.

I am writing a longer paper on this book that will touch upon the ideas I have sketched out in here. I am going to compare Pauline from Tracks's and Macon Dead from Song of Solomon's attempt to find their identity and how that attempt impacts their status within the community. I'll probably post a few updates from the paper at various points, but I also hope to continue to read and make posts about other books. Right now, my agenda is to post about W.P. Kinsella's Shoeless Joe and Love Medicine.

Past as Present: Toni Morrison's Song of Solomon

The chronology of this novel can be difficult to follow at times. It begins with the day the protagonist is born. The opening scene is a man preparing to jump to his death from the local hostpital, Mercy. Passing by is Ruth Foster Dead and her two daughters First Corinthians and Magdalene call Lena. A crowd gathers and as the man throws himself to his death, Ruth Foster Dead goes into labor basically on the steps of Mercy Hospital. Her circumstances lead to her son, Macon Dead, being the first black baby born in the hospital. Also during this opening scene, we are given some history of the town and Ruth Foster Dead. She is the daughter of Dr. Foster, the first black doctor in town which lead to the street he lived on being called Doctor street by the black residents. The white residents were not overly fond of this phemenon, so the city posted many signs declaring that the street name was Mains Avenue and not doctor street which conveniently gave the black population justification to start calling it Not Doctor Street. Already, the major themes of the novel emerge. We are exposed to the current racial culture of the town, we are given some of the history of the family of the protagonist, the issue of nomenclature is raised and we are also introduced to the protagonist's best friend and his aunt although we are unaware of it at the time.

It takes some time to sort out the details of the family and their situation as the boy grows up, so the reader is never quite sure what to believe. Macon Dead's father, also called Macon Dead is probably the wealthiest black man in town. His business is rental properties and he owns a good portion of the poor black section of town. His ambition is what drew him to Ruth Foster. He came to town and worked his way up until he felt secure enough to approach Dr. Foster about his daughter. Their relationship was based on status rather than love. Ruth herself is a very bizarre character and her unusual practice of breast feeding her son until he was much older than was necessary lead to the younger Macon Dead acquiring the nickname Milkman. From that foundation, the story is fleshed out both into the future as we follow Milkman into his late thirties as well as the past as we learn the more immediate history of the family but also where the family originated from. The past is a major theme in this novel. Knowing where you came from and who your people are is central to your all around development.

The entire Dead family, including Milkman's two sisters as well as Macon's sister, Pilate, and her family, suffer because of their lack of history. Macon and Pilate grew up in Danville. Their father was a slave in the South and came North after being freed. He was given his name when he registered as a freeman. The "yankee" who registered him was drunk and filled out the information in the wrong spots. The original Macon Dead was illerate and did not catch the mistakes until it was too late. He worked his way from nothing to having "the best farm in the county" becoming an inspiration to all the other blacks in the area. Par for the course in the early 1900s, late 1800s, a local wealthy white family decided they wanted Macon Dead's land and killed him for it with out suffering any judicial repercussions. The younger Macon and Pilate were forced to flee for their lives and eventually split up over an incident that caused bad blood between them for the rest of the novel. The original Macon's emphasis on things and his singular goal of becoming a land owner inspired in his son an obsession with ownership. Possession and ownership is equated with power in the younger Macon's eyes and he becomes single minded in his pursuit of it. At one point Milkman's best friend, Guitar, says that "he has the heart of a white man." It is another major theme of the novel. Ownership becomes a family value for the Dead men at the expense of relationships and their own happiness. Morrison clearly looks down upon middle class values of security and the pursuit of wealth in favor of what is characterized as lower class values of family and community.

There is an incredible amount going on in this novel and every single scene is important and plays a role in shaping the culture and course of the action. No word is wasted in crafting a superb narrative. Even the more ancillary characters have a lot of depth and development. Relationships between men and women and races are explored in great detail. Ultimately the ending may be somewhat unsatisfying but how can Morrison suggest a resolution of some of her themes when they are far from resolved in our society today.

Magical Realism

I am going to have to put Dickens on hold for awhile as I start my final semester of college. I do intend to continue the blog and use it as a place to log thoughts about the books I am reading for my senior seminar, which is the only literature course I have this semester. The senior seminar is titled American Magical Realism and we are reading books by Updike, Tim O'Brien, Louise Erdrich, Toni Morrison and W.P. Kinsella. We have already read the Witches of Eastwick by Updike and now will be moving on to Going After Cacciato by Tim O'Brien. Before I get into the novels though, I want to briefly talk about what Magical Realism is as a point of reference.

Magical Realism's roots begin in German and Eastern European literature in the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th century. It is characterized by the presence of something(s) amazing or magical in an otherwise ordinary situation and the fantastic element is usually treated as a matter of course by the characters and narrator. That is about as simple of a definition as I can give but since there is not a truly agreed upon definition, it does not encompass everything. It is important to note that if the Magical elements mount up to the point that the book clearly does not take place in this world or becomes fantasy (ie. Lord of the Rings) then it is not Magical Realism. From my own experiences, a good indicator is if an event takes place in an otherwise realistic novel that has you questioning whether or not that actually happened or was a figment of a characters imagination or symbolic language for another event, then it could be Magical Realism. The key is that in Magical Realism, the fantastic event actually took place and while it may be symbolic, it is a part of the reality of the novel. My popular culture analogy was the TV show, Family Guy, in particular Stewie's ability to talk. In the first few seasons everyone was confused as to whether or not the family could hear what he was saying or it was just an internal monologue that was made external for our benefit. Of course my professor did not exactly get or appreciate the reference, but I think it is a fairly decent example.

From its roots in Germany, Magical Realism was then claimed and developed as a distinctly Latin American literary form. Its development in Latin America added an element of faith to the Magical Real. In a culture that is more religious and more accepting of events the Western World labels impossible, Magical Realism was a perfect fit and became tied to an emerging cultural identity in Literature. It is no coincidence that the growth of Magical Realism took place during a time period in which Latin America was struggling to find their own identity and voice in the global community. We read several short stories in the beginning of the class to give us an ideal of what is and is not Magical realism. My favorite was the Handsomest Drowned Man in the World by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, it is short and worth a read if you are interested in an example. (Click on the title to get to the story online).

That cultural investment makes it a difficult form to break into if you are an outsider and yet there is enough American literature which can be classified as Magical Realism I am taking a class on it. From my brief introduction to Latin American Magical Realism in the short stories I mentioned earlier and North American Magical Realism in Updike, there is a marked difference in style. At least in Updike, the tone is much more cynical and irreverent than the more mystical and religious tone of the Latin American work. Of course, Updike is more irreverent and cynical than most, but I believe the lack of true mysticism in American culture makes it impossible to believably replicate the Latin American treatment of magical events. It will be interesting when we get to Erdrich and Morrison since the Native American and African American traditions feature mysticism much more prominently and are far more conducive to this sort of style.

I'll keep this post focused on Magical Realism in general and in the next post I'll give a brief synopsis of the Witches of Eastwick as well as some thoughts and reactions to the novel. It is going to be a great semester and the class has been really exciting so far. I would definitely recommend the novel if you enjoy Updike. If you are easily offended by salacious Literature, I would avoid it because sex is a central theme in the novel. If you can get beyond that though, it is worth it because there is an incredible amount of depth and very interesting thoughts and insights on a variety of subjects.