Name the title and setting of the lecture. Describe the experience and what it was like for you. What did it make you think about? (minimum 250 words) (Skip a line between paragraphs.)
The lecture I attended was titled J.D Salinger’s Family Dramas. This was part of a series of local lectures called 1st Wednesday that are spread throughout Vermont. This particular one was held in the Norwich Congregational Church. Inside the church, the second level booth overhead gave it a feeling as though the presentation was much larger and commanding, even though the balcony was completely empty. Amy Hungerford, Yale Professor of English and Dean of Humanities, delivered a well thought out and very thought provoking presentation about some of Salinger’s literary tendencies. One particular aspect however was really the theme of her presentation, and that was how Salinger used the human voice in his novels. For the most part she really stuck to one of his novels entitled Franny and Zooey, just to keep the characters and storyline consistent. She went on to mention how Salinger’s writing in his books resembled how humans talk and interact with each other instead of the description and side explanation of other novels. She said that in the book Franny and Zooey, Salinger demonstrated multiple different ways of human conversation. She started by pulling people out from the crowd to read a scene that sounded very natural and normal. Just by reading an excerpt from his book, it seemed like it should be acted out as a play. Aside from the typo prespiration instead of perspiration (which was made abundantly clear from the elderly woman reading the script) the excerpt flowed very well seeming as though the actors had rehearsed the scene. She then followed that up by pulling two different people from the crowd to read a scene that she said Salinger modeled after a television drama. As soon as they started the excerpt, you could immediately feel that something was off. It just sounded too artificial with people going off on these long and dramatic speech marathons. The contrast between the two was startling and she made a point to emphasize the significance of the two. That the first makes the novel more comfortable and relatable for the reader. It draws them into the story even if the actual plotline isn’t too overwhelmingly good. Although there were many interesting points made by Hungerford, the one that really made me stop and think about was a comment she made about an open book and the human voice. She said that in her hand was an open page, with hundreds of words on it. But, she added when you open a book it doesn’t talk to you; it doesn’t explain the complicated themes and lessons recorded in its pages. It takes a human voice to read, and project those words. It takes a voice to unlock the lessons and project them out for the world to learn from. It takes human voice to make a difference in the world good or bad for whatever your cause; it doesn’t matter. Human voice makes thoughts and ideas and dreams come to fruition. It was that message that I found very intriguing and one that induced a lot of thinking from me, to a point that I used my voice to write this blog comment, converting thoughts into text and how I wrapped my head around this humbling concept.
The lecture that I attended was on JD Salinger’s Family Dramas by Yale Professor of English and Dean of Humanities Amy Hungerford,. This lecture was held at the Norwich Congregational Church as a part of a series called First Wednesdays. I found this lecture to be very interesting and thought provoking. It focused on a book by Salinger called Franny and Zooey, which I have not read, but it never the less opened my eyes to several things that I had not previously noticed about Salinger's works. One of them was that his books tend to focus on well-to-do people, people without many visible problems going through breakdowns of some kind. Kind of “the plight of the upper crust,” so to speak. This gives his books a relatable aspect of some kind, but also reminds us as readers that life is never perfect. That brings me to a quote from the book Franny and Zooey, explaining how the book is “a love story, pure and complicated.” Within this quote, Salinger is referring to life being pure in its impurities and the world's complexities. From this lecture, I began to realize the symbolism within The Catcher in the Rye that I had not noticed before. Another thing brought to my attention from this lecture was how the majority of Salinger’s novels are set up almost perfectly for drama, as in theater. Most scenes contain two characters performing easy movements with flowing conversational tones that you can picture in your head with ease. And it is not just one type of drama that his novels enact, but three. The first of these is snarky, fast paced dialogue between quick-witted characters, carrying on in an almost poetic manner, parrying, snide remark with innuendo filled banter. The second is the cliche drama; typical sitcom style scenes, easily played out in the mind's eye. The third is the one sided conversation that goes over the complementing character's head as well as yours. This non reciprocal conversation is deep, intellectual, unnecessary. Each of these dramatic styles are written with detailed descriptions of the scene, as well as the characters emotions. Despite this, Salinger never allowed his books to be performed as plays. This lecture opened my eyes to some very complex yet fascinating symbolism. Hungerford delved into the actual silence within the pages of books, and how we as readers find the voice of the book within that silence, we seek the words transmitted through the negative space. This space is, as Hungerford said, “empty, beautiful, waiting.” Perhaps this is why Salinger never let his novels be performed as plays-- so that the readers could find the voice of the books themselves. As I read books in the future, or even just in life, I will apply this knowledge that Hungerford shared with us-- search for the voice in the silence. One's true voice is not found by the words that they say, but rather by what is left unspoken.
I attended a lecture entitled J.D. Salinger's Family Dramas, which took place at the Norwich Congregational church, and is part of a lecture series called First Wednesdays. This lecture was done by Amy Hungerford, a Yale professor of English and Dean of Humanities. The lecture was mostly focused on Salinger's novel, Franny and Zooey, which I haven't read, though The Catcher in the Rye was mentioned briefly a few times. However, I gathered that Salinger's writing style was the same for both books, and was able to make interesting connections to the Salinger novel that I have read as I listened to Amy Hungerford speak about his other works. Much of what was discussed was the unique language that Salinger used to write his stories. Not only does he write as people think—messy, all over the place, and even incomplete—but he depicts real life situations that readers can relate to with ease, allowing for a more complex understanding of both his characters and the fictional world he has created. Something else that I hadn't known, is that people have wanted to adapt Salinger's works to fit the stage for years, though he has never allowed them to be performed as such. He was able to so accurately capture the dramas of family and everyday life in his works, and many think that they would be a fantastic addition to the theatre. The way that he places his characters in certain spaces—the way that he writes them to occupy that space—can create so much emotion, and can show you exactly how characters are feeling simply by the way they inhabit a room. Something else that is important to note, is the dialogue aspect of Salinger's works. His dialogue flows, and though his characters' speech is thickly laced with drama at times, Salinger writes their voices to speak like you or I would (if, of course, we had lived in the 40s and 50s). Many are off-put by the way he writes—the dialogue can be snarky, and the internal dialogue of certain characters can be hard to follow at times, but what human being thinks in clean, connected sentences all the time? It is really incredible that he was able to perfectly capture imperfect human speech and thought. This lecture was really interesting, even though it focused on a book that I had never read. I admit that it was a little abstract, and that there were times where I definitely found myself thinking that Amy Hungerford was reading a little too much into Salinger's words, but overall it was a great learning experience. The knowledge that I gathered from this lecture can be applied to Salinger's other books in my future reading career, and can allow me the ability to make further connections and observations regarding the book that I have already read: The Catcher in the Rye. Salinger's stories were so complex and many-layered, allowing us a three-dimensional view into his wonderful, yet realistic world of fiction. Salinger was a truly amazing writer, and his incredibly powerful novels will live on as timeless classics.
This Is My Response To A Walk Through Presentation At Baker Library At Dartmouth...
The presentation was put on by group called Dimensions of Open and was about having free information for everyone. Dartmouth College is at the forefront of this movement, but only has ten percent of it's publications open to the public. They are trying to make it possible for everyone to be able to access all information that has been published, calling it a human right for people to be able to have all the knowledge available. They also talk about subscriptions to magazines and how it costs money for information, when it should be free to the public. They are working on making magazines that are free and cost very little to make. They also had information on what percent of works are published and available to the public in certain sections of the world: North America: 37% South America: 10% Europe: 34% Africa: 1% Middle East: 2% Asia Pacific: 16% That means that only about 17% of all the works in the world are published and available to the public. That means 83% of all works are hidden from the public eye. The goal of this is to make that seventeen percent into a one hundred percent. Places like Africa and the Middle east are going to be the hardest, but there goal is for all information to be available and free to all of their citizens.
The lecture I attended was titled J.D Salinger’s Family Dramas. This was part of a series of local lectures called 1st Wednesday that are spread throughout Vermont. This particular one was held in the Norwich Congregational Church. Inside the church, the second level booth overhead gave it a feeling as though the presentation was much larger and commanding, even though the balcony was completely empty.
ReplyDeleteAmy Hungerford, Yale Professor of English and Dean of Humanities, delivered a well thought out and very thought provoking presentation about some of Salinger’s literary tendencies. One particular aspect however was really the theme of her presentation, and that was how Salinger used the human voice in his novels. For the most part she really stuck to one of his novels entitled Franny and Zooey, just to keep the characters and storyline consistent. She went on to mention how Salinger’s writing in his books resembled how humans talk and interact with each other instead of the description and side explanation of other novels. She said that in the book Franny and Zooey, Salinger demonstrated multiple different ways of human conversation. She started by pulling people out from the crowd to read a scene that sounded very natural and normal. Just by reading an excerpt from his book, it seemed like it should be acted out as a play. Aside from the typo prespiration instead of perspiration (which was made abundantly clear from the elderly woman reading the script) the excerpt flowed very well seeming as though the actors had rehearsed the scene. She then followed that up by pulling two different people from the crowd to read a scene that she said Salinger modeled after a television drama. As soon as they started the excerpt, you could immediately feel that something was off. It just sounded too artificial with people going off on these long and dramatic speech marathons. The contrast between the two was startling and she made a point to emphasize the significance of the two. That the first makes the novel more comfortable and relatable for the reader. It draws them into the story even if the actual plotline isn’t too overwhelmingly good.
Although there were many interesting points made by Hungerford, the one that really made me stop and think about was a comment she made about an open book and the human voice. She said that in her hand was an open page, with hundreds of words on it. But, she added when you open a book it doesn’t talk to you; it doesn’t explain the complicated themes and lessons recorded in its pages. It takes a human voice to read, and project those words. It takes a voice to unlock the lessons and project them out for the world to learn from. It takes human voice to make a difference in the world good or bad for whatever your cause; it doesn’t matter. Human voice makes thoughts and ideas and dreams come to fruition. It was that message that I found very intriguing and one that induced a lot of thinking from me, to a point that I used my voice to write this blog comment, converting thoughts into text and how I wrapped my head around this humbling concept.
The lecture that I attended was on JD Salinger’s Family Dramas by Yale Professor of English and Dean of Humanities Amy Hungerford,. This lecture was held at the Norwich Congregational Church as a part of a series called First Wednesdays. I found this lecture to be very interesting and thought provoking. It focused on a book by Salinger called Franny and Zooey, which I have not read, but it never the less opened my eyes to several things that I had not previously noticed about Salinger's works. One of them was that his books tend to focus on well-to-do people, people without many visible problems going through breakdowns of some kind. Kind of “the plight of the upper crust,” so to speak. This gives his books a relatable aspect of some kind, but also reminds us as readers that life is never perfect. That brings me to a quote from the book Franny and Zooey, explaining how the book is “a love story, pure and complicated.” Within this quote, Salinger is referring to life being pure in its impurities and the world's complexities. From this lecture, I began to realize the symbolism within The Catcher in the Rye that I had not noticed before.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing brought to my attention from this lecture was how the majority of Salinger’s novels are set up almost perfectly for drama, as in theater. Most scenes contain two characters performing easy movements with flowing conversational tones that you can picture in your head with ease. And it is not just one type of drama that his novels enact, but three.
The first of these is snarky, fast paced dialogue between quick-witted characters, carrying on in an almost poetic manner, parrying, snide remark with innuendo filled banter. The second is the cliche drama; typical sitcom style scenes, easily played out in the mind's eye. The third is the one sided conversation that goes over the complementing character's head as well as yours. This non reciprocal conversation is deep, intellectual, unnecessary. Each of these dramatic styles are written with detailed descriptions of the scene, as well as the characters emotions. Despite this, Salinger never allowed his books to be performed as plays.
This lecture opened my eyes to some very complex yet fascinating symbolism. Hungerford delved into the actual silence within the pages of books, and how we as readers find the voice of the book within that silence, we seek the words transmitted through the negative space. This space is, as Hungerford said, “empty, beautiful, waiting.” Perhaps this is why Salinger never let his novels be performed as plays-- so that the readers could find the voice of the books themselves. As I read books in the future, or even just in life, I will apply this knowledge that Hungerford shared with us-- search for the voice in the silence. One's true voice is not found by the words that they say, but rather by what is left unspoken.
I attended a lecture entitled J.D. Salinger's Family Dramas, which took place at the Norwich Congregational church, and is part of a lecture series called First Wednesdays. This lecture was done by Amy Hungerford, a Yale professor of English and Dean of Humanities. The lecture was mostly focused on Salinger's novel, Franny and Zooey, which I haven't read, though The Catcher in the Rye was mentioned briefly a few times. However, I gathered that Salinger's writing style was the same for both books, and was able to make interesting connections to the Salinger novel that I have read as I listened to Amy Hungerford speak about his other works.
ReplyDeleteMuch of what was discussed was the unique language that Salinger used to write his stories. Not only does he write as people think—messy, all over the place, and even incomplete—but he depicts real life situations that readers can relate to with ease, allowing for a more complex understanding of both his characters and the fictional world he has created.
Something else that I hadn't known, is that people have wanted to adapt Salinger's works to fit the stage for years, though he has never allowed them to be performed as such. He was able to so accurately capture the dramas of family and everyday life in his works, and many think that they would be a fantastic addition to the theatre. The way that he places his characters in certain spaces—the way that he writes them to occupy that space—can create so much emotion, and can show you exactly how characters are feeling simply by the way they inhabit a room.
Something else that is important to note, is the dialogue aspect of Salinger's works. His dialogue flows, and though his characters' speech is thickly laced with drama at times, Salinger writes their voices to speak like you or I would (if, of course, we had lived in the 40s and 50s). Many are off-put by the way he writes—the dialogue can be snarky, and the internal dialogue of certain characters can be hard to follow at times, but what human being thinks in clean, connected sentences all the time? It is really incredible that he was able to perfectly capture imperfect human speech and thought.
This lecture was really interesting, even though it focused on a book that I had never read. I admit that it was a little abstract, and that there were times where I definitely found myself thinking that Amy Hungerford was reading a little too much into Salinger's words, but overall it was a great learning experience. The knowledge that I gathered from this lecture can be applied to Salinger's other books in my future reading career, and can allow me the ability to make further connections and observations regarding the book that I have already read: The Catcher in the Rye. Salinger's stories were so complex and many-layered, allowing us a three-dimensional view into his wonderful, yet realistic world of fiction. Salinger was a truly amazing writer, and his incredibly powerful novels will live on as timeless classics.
This Is My Response To A Walk Through Presentation At Baker Library At Dartmouth...
ReplyDeleteThe presentation was put on by group called Dimensions of Open and was about having free information for everyone. Dartmouth College is at the forefront of this movement, but only has ten percent of it's publications open to the public. They are trying to make it possible for everyone to be able to access all information that has been published, calling it a human right for people to be able to have all the knowledge available. They also talk about subscriptions to magazines and how it costs money for information, when it should be free to the public. They are working on making magazines that are free and cost very little to make. They also had information on what percent of works are published and available to the public in certain sections of the world:
North America: 37%
South America: 10%
Europe: 34%
Africa: 1%
Middle East: 2%
Asia Pacific: 16%
That means that only about 17% of all the works in the world are published and available to the public. That means 83% of all works are hidden from the public eye. The goal of this is to make that seventeen percent into a one hundred percent. Places like Africa and the Middle east are going to be the hardest, but there goal is for all information to be available and free to all of their citizens.