Difficulty Paper

    The difficulty I found in understanding John Steinbeck’s novel, In Dubious Battle, is how Marxist/Communist ideals played a big part in America.  My understanding of the “red-scare” is very limited. It was difficult for me to understand how Marxist ideology was present in America and perhaps still is. I questioned my familiarization of farm workers. How little I know of the history of America. Researching vocabulary words from the book and researching on Marxist views and of labor in the 1930’s has given me a broader understanding of Marxism and Communism in America. As I add to my vocabulary and research on questionable subjects for my analysis, I gain so much more of an understanding of the novel and the world we live in.

Late Journal Entry- Marxist Theory Perspective

MARXIST THEORY

Jim Nolan is the product of a society of the haves and have not’s. In Steinbeck’s book, In Dubious Battle, Jim was fighting for “…-hunger mostly “(Steinbeck 19). Jim grows up feeling hopeless; fighting perhaps a rebellion against the power or people that have money. He experiences this feeling while fighting against “the establishment”, which he calls “bosses” or the authority. The people where Jim directs his anger is at the “bosses’ who Jim believes control  him and his father and who dictate their lives. Whether it is true or not, to Jim that is his reality. While incarcerated he experiences an epiphany of sorts, of people who are similarly in the same situation, that have anger but are viewed as without feeling hopelessness. It is in this setting of collective thinking or the conviction of this diverse group (while incarcerated with them), that eventually things will change in their favor.  Jim’s views change at this point. They are angry but not at an individual but “… the whole system of bosses…” (20). Steinbeck uses the proletarian and the radical groups to formulate the writing of In Dubious Battle.

Works Cited

Steinbeck, John, and Warren G. French. In Dubious Battle. New York: Penguin, 2006. Print.

Untited Farm Workers



Who is the voice for the children? What do they want to be when they grow up? America:Land of Opportunity!!There are high school students who work the fields so they can go to college. Do they have to pay the high tuition to have a better life? These children sometimes die in less then desirable conditions. I am one voice for the children. I pray for these children to have everything that I have and more!! God Bless them! God Bless America!!!!

I read about children, as young as twelve years old that drive tractors and work in the fields. Payment is made to parents of the children. The UFW has tackled these problems by the use of protesting, marches and of the vote. Growers and agribusiness also use the vote to hold on to their way of life which exploit children. Labor organizations for both sides goes way beyond the vote. We do not know about these situations of abuse until there is a march or pickets which has hundreds of people involved. Then it becomes news worthy. To be honest, I myself learned the situation from my English 1A class this past spring. My research took me to the UFW website. I became a member. Active in reading only. I learned of high school students working the fields to save money for college. We are so blessed to have vegetables and fruits all year round. We complain of the prices but, at what cost do the children, who provide  our needs, deal with? There is the story of Maria Jimenez. A seventeen year old, pregnant, who died of heat exhaustion, to provide grapes for us.The struggle continues on both sides: Growers and workers. Big agribusiness and the Labor movement.

  Thirty four years ago, when I was sixteen, I was told I could work only in the fields and not the cannery. How dare they think I was one of them! I was furious. Not because I was not able to work in the cannery but, for them to suggest that I work the fields. I thought I was better than that. My grandmother then lectured me on her life. Growing up in the Great Depression and what she and her family did to survive. I apologized for being unreasonable and eventually found a good job with her help. I worked in the city's  street department. A "mans" job for a sixteen year old. My reaction to the whole farm and working in the fields situation was my non-identity to the workers. I was sheltered from all this by my mother, "God Bless her heart". School in the late 60's and 70's never had lectures on Mexican-Americans. It was not until I became enrolled in college, took a course in English 1A, that I began to have identity. It is knowing where I came from, people who struggled and are still struggling to get ahead. To know that time is always moving. Years go by fast and life goes on and on. Time to stop and think. We can make a difference to all people, if we just stand still and listen to them. Then we can have a choice to go on with our life oblivious to everything around us except in our own world, or sphere of influence or actually do something to change lives. I will vote. That is one way of helping. I have a cause to believe in. I can identify now.





Final Draft- Formal Analysis Paper 1

                                                                                                                                             Pollack 1

Charles Pollack

Professor Knapp

Eng1B

11/03/2011

Faith is the Substance of Hope

            While growing up in a violent revolution of Iran, Marjane Satrapi’s faith is shattered, due to real life situations she witnessed as a child. Satrapi’s graphic novel contains both irony and paradoxical situations. She writes about the cost of war; loss of loved ones, religion, Islamic fanaticism and social injustices she must endure on a daily basis. I will list a few examples of paradoxes, ironies and ambiguity statements in the New Criticism analysis. In a time of chaos in Iran, Marjane Satrapi’s young life is indelibly changed. Satrapi’s faith and beliefs are shown to be tested in horrible and in sometimes comical ways.  The reality of living and seeing the  consequences of social distinctions, a fundamentalist revolution and a war, the ten year old Satrapi gives in to the conflicts and loses faith altogether.  

             Satrapi claims at the age of six, “I was born with religion” (Satrapi 6). Yet at no point does she write about what religion she follows. The beginning of the book begins with the Islamic Revolution and the wearing of the veil. Satrapi states, “… [I]really did not like to wear the veil, especially since we didn’t understand why we had to” (3). This proves she was not following Islam religion. Satrapi goes on to explain that she is very religious and describes her

                                                                                                                                             Pollack 2

family as modern and avant-garde, a statement of ambiguity.  This contradiction is stated when she describes the time her parents had given such books with Communist and Marxist writings to enlighten her. In the beginning of Satrapi’s story, she believes in the existence of God then her values and personal system of belief disappears so that she rejects religion and faith altogether.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

           Another interesting paradox is the two types of prophet used in the novel. She states, “At the age of six, “… I was the last prophet” (6). The illustration in the novel shows four people kneeling down worshipping a young Satrapi who has a crown of light around her head like a halo. This particular meaning of prophet indicates Satrapi’s claim to interpret or transmit the commands of a deity [God]. I believe she thought that this kind of prophet was someone who has the power to heal and change situations. It is in the next use of prophet, which is the paradox.

            Utilized in another context prophet has a different meaning. Satrapi states several times about the negative situations in her family’s life. She wanted to change the segregation of classes. The maid is an example of social class distinction because she ate in another room apart from the family. Another example is her grandmothers aching knees. As a prophet, Satrapi wanted to heal the pain. However, she quotes Zarathustra, “…behave well, speak well, [and] act well” (7). It is in this use of the word prophet the meaning changes, “… as some who advocates a cause or idea” (Microsoft Encarta Dictionary). There is ambiguity in both meanings of prophet. It is difficult to determine whether she using the religious aspect of prophet or the advocacy of a just cause either way it is another use of paradox.

           A situation that is clear ambiguity is in her defeatist tendency. When asked, in her classroom, what she will be when she grows up she states, “I’ll be a prophet” (8). After the

                                                                                                                                            

                                                                                                                                             Pollack 3

teacher informs her parents, she acquiesces to her father’s questioning and tells him, “I will be a doctor” (9).  Later that night she talks to God in her room and writes, “I felt guilty towards God” and states aloud to God, “… I will be a prophet but they mustn’t know” (9). She flip-flops in-between what she sees and what she imagines. She is beginning to see the world as it really is, consequentially she starts to lose faith. The proof is when she states, “My faith was not unshakable” (10). This is  the beginning of her defeatist attitude and the loss of her belief system.                                                                                                                                          The final paradox and irony comes when she compares God to Marx and tells God to get out of her life. Ten-year-old Satrapi read books by Karl Marx, his theory on dialectic materialism, for her enlightenment during the Iranian Revolution. Satrapi’s faith or belief in a particular religion is never stated. She has read a book about Marxism, but no references of God other than what she imagines. Satrapi illustrates images of God and Marx and writes how they resemble each other. She talks to God and tells Him when to change topics when she gets upset. Satrapi wants something more concrete than just a belief or the imaginations she conjures up. Her world and her beliefs are chaotic at best, but she continues to search for stability in her young life.

            Overall, this graphic novel, Persepolis, is about faith shattered beyond repair, losing loved ones like her Uncle Anoosh, and the loss of religion. Islamic fanaticism and the injustices that she endured daily caused the loss of her faith. In the tragedy of sorrow and heartache, she blames God and banishes Him from her life. God was her comfort and the only thing that she really believed in. She states, “And so I was lost, without any bearings…” (11) it is at this point where she is becoming secular. The irony that Satrapi’s only concession seems to be about

                                                                                                                                             Pollack 5

seeking freedom from war and Iran. Eventually she leaves Iran to find her identity elsewhere in a chaotic world.

                                                                                                                                                                          Pollack 5

Works Cited

Satrapi, Marjane, Persepolis. New York: Pantheon Books, 2004. Print.

           Soukhanov, Anne H. Microsoft Encarta Dictionary. New York, NY: St. Martin's Paperbacks, 2002. Print.

Feed Back

The peer comments and feed back, on my rough draft, showed a weak conclusion. I will need to rewrite it with more analysis and a summing up of points at the end. A stronger conclusion to leave something with the reader to think about. And no Jim, this is not about a feel good or say something positive analysis paper however, I appreciate your comments.

Rough Draft

Charles Pollack

Professor Knapp

Eng1B

10/20/2011

                       

                        Marjane Satrapi’s life in Iran, at a time of chaos, indelibly marked her way of thinking and her beliefs. Her faith was shattered because of the real life situations she witnessed. The loss of loved ones, the cost of war and the Islamic fanaticism in the story contain both irony and paradoxical situations. I will list a few paradoxes, ironies and ambiguity statements in my New Criticism analysis.

                        For instance, she claims at the age of six years old she was “…born with religion” (Satrapi 6). Yet at no point, she writes about what religion she follows. The beginning of the book begins with the Islamic Revolution and the wearing of the Veil. She then states, “…really did not like to wear the veil, especially...we didn’t understand why” (3). Obviously, she was not following Islam. Satrapi goes on to explain that she is very religious, but her family is modern and avant-garde. I believe she uses another paradox here because Satrapi’s parents had given her books with Communist themes and Marxist writings to enlighten her. In essence, what is her religion in this story?  Who or what does she worship? At one point, she believes in the existence of God but then her values and personal system of beliefs disappear so that she rejects religion altogether.

                        Another interesting paradox is her claim to be a prophet. She claims, “At the age of six… I was the last prophet” (6). The text also shows four people kneeling down and

                                                                                                                                             Pollack2

worshipping her with a crown of light around her head. This particular use of the word, prophet, indicates Satrapi claims to interpret or transmit the commands of a deity.

                        I believe she thought that this kind of prophet, as someone with power, the power to heal and the power to change situations. Satrapi states several times about the negative situations in her family’s life. She wanted to change the segregation of classes. The maid is an example of social class distinction; she ate in another room, separated.        Another example is her grandmothers aching knees. Satrapi wanted to heal the pain. However, she quotes a prophet, Zarathustra, “…behave well, speak well, [and] act well” (7). In this use of the word prophet, the definition takes on a different meaning, “… as some who advocates a cause or idea” (Encarta Dictionary). There is ambiguity in these meanings. Is she using the religious aspect of prophet or the advocacy of a just cause? Either way it is a paradox.

                        A situation that is clear ambiguity is her defeatist tendency. She tells her teacher and classmates, about what she will be when she grows up, “I’ll be a prophet” (8). She then acquiesces, to her Father’s questioning, “I will be a doctor” (9). Then she goes on to say she is, “…guilty towards God” and states aloud she “… I will be a prophet” (9). She flip-flops in-between what she sees and what she imagines. She is beginning to see the world as it really is therefore she is losing her faith. She states this in saying, “My faith was not unshakable” (10). Clearly, a defeatist attitude is stated.

                        The final paradox and irony comes when she compares God to Marx and when she tells God to get out of her life. She has books about dialectic materialism, a comic book, by Karl Marx.

                                                                                                                                             Pollack3

Where does the comparison come from? Her faith, or her belief in a religion, is attributed to what source?  She has a book about Marx, but no book or pictures of God other than what she believes are a resemblance to Marx. She has dialogs with God and telling God to change topics. Satrapi wants something more concrete then a belief or an imagination. Her world needs stability in a chaotic time.

                        Finally, her faith is shattered beyond repair with the death of her Uncle Anoosh. In the tragedy of sorrow and heartache, she blames God. The only comforting thing she has known and the only thing that was her faith, she lets go of God. She states, “And so I was lost, without any bearings…” (11). It is at this point, where she becomes secular. The rest of the book is without faith or a belief system. That is a paradox.

Works Cited

Satrapi, Marjane, Persepolis. New York: Pantheon Books, 2004. Print.

           Soukhanov, Anne H. Microsoft Encarta Dictionary. New York, NY: St. Martin's Paperbacks, 2002. Print.

Idea Post

Charles Pollack

10/9/2011

Eng 1B

Week Five- Prompt #1

      As I read my blog posts for an idea post, I started to come up with a theme based on religion. I believe I will be exploring the New Criticism theory in my analysis.

      Supporting my argument would be the Islamic Revolution versus western ideals. How Marjane uses both of these ideals using irony and as a paradox throughout the novel. Words spelled the same, but Marjane uses the words to mean different ideas. I would write about how she uses them and the different meanings. Satrapi’s writes about similarities, God and Marx, and her faith in each of them. Then later she has no faith in either or in the fundamentalist regime.