Today in class we decided collectively that the setence "everyone hungers for human understanding while simultaneously desiring an inviolable privacy'' (1), was most likely the author's thesis in this article. It essentially, as we already said, restated the title and stated what Madden was going to say in the following pages.
As we spoke of paradox we began to discuss this idea that many of the characters go to Singer to talk to - more for their own benefit than Singer's. Madden even says that the Doctor Copeland " was more at peace when he could talk to the uncomprehending deaf-mute, Singer. " (6).
Perhaps it is just me, but it seems like Madden is refuting his own idea. In the beginning Madden said that everyone hungers for human understanding, yet towards the end explains that Copeland prefered it when he talked to someone who didn't understand. Doesn't this evidence seem to contradict his own idea?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree on your guess on the thesis, but it might be deeper than the characters trying to achieve the two opposites of privacy and understanding, but how it is hard to achieve both (and maybe even impossible?). "The need for privacy is no less crucial than the need for understanding, but in the context of society both needs are frustrated, or, in the desperate attempt to satiate one, the other is neglected or deprived..." (1).
ReplyDeleteI think in the beginning Madden's evidence supported the solitude of human beings similarly to what he stated in the end and did not contradict. His first paragraph talks about the strong sense of solitude in people. "...that inexplicable force in each man which makes him, ask why, which compels him to go deeply beneath the surface complex of himself into a more intensive, extensive reality" (1). Madden believes that McCullers' focus is on how her characters struggle with privacy and solitude, but seem to be more comfortable with solitude.
I also agree that line we talked about in class today is the thesis. But, like Molly, I am not so sure that Madden refutes his own argument by saying that humans are more comfortable in solitude. Yes, Doctor Copeland was more at ease when speaking to Singer, however I don't think that this is because Singer was an "uncomprehending deaf-mute". Singer reads lips, and, as the card he carries with him states, he understands what is said to him. So, McCullers must have been implying that Singer did not relate to the characters' problems, or else was unaware of certain aspects of society. I believe that whether or not he actually understood is irrelevant to the characters who take comfort in talking to him. By nodding and smiling Singer appears to understand more than just the words being formed by the characters' lips, and this is what is important to Jake, Mick, Doctor Copeland, and the rest. These characters definitely hunger for human understanding, and they see it (or think they do) in Singer's eyes and his patient nodding. Maybe the reason they go to Singer, rather than someone who will provide verbal reassurance that they understand, is because other people provide feedback and judgement along with the understanding. In other words, the characters long for understanding with no strings attached. Not only does Singer provide understanding without judgement, but he provides a safe place in which to leave their thoughts, since he cannot tell anyone who IS able to verbally judge them (I think Ms. Parrish mentioned therapy when we talked about this in class). To the various characters, talking to Singer is better than therapy because although therapists are bound by confidentiality, they are able to respond and sometimes tell their patients things they don't want to hear.
ReplyDeleteI think this is also the reason why Singer only really talks to Antonapolous- being the only other mute, Antonapolous cannot verbally judge Singer. He can, however, provide the understanding that humans need and try very hard to obtain.
I definitely agree on your idea of the thesis (i had the same one) but I also agree with Molly's comment. I feel like McCullers is trying to demonstrate the struggle that characters experience when going between solitude and being with people. I agree with Molly's last point "her characters struggle with privacy and solitude, but seem to be more comfortable with solitude" especially when you base this on Mick's character. that's mostly what I wrote about in my post, but to repeat that, both author's demonstrate Mick's struggle to discover who she is as a person.
ReplyDeleteI think what Madden is trying to say is, that at the beginning of the novel, the characters view life as personal over public, but it is reversed at the end of the novel. It seems that talking to Singer makes people feel better about themselves and I think Anna said this in class yesterday, but I think that when people "vent" and they don't get a response, life seems clearer to them , and perhaps it's easier to distinguish right from wrong in this way.
I just wanted to say that this is a nice model for what I had in mind for the blog discussions--commenting, modifying, questioning, proposing, etc. ideas about both the articles and the text. And, like Larissa, Libbey and Molly, think that there's something more "complicated" to this paradox--namely, why is this a paradox? What in our nature, in the nature of "privacy" or "understanding" (or both) makes these conditions paradoxical or impossible to coexist? (Or are they?)
ReplyDeleteAlrighty that helped sooo much! Thanks!!!!
ReplyDelete