A Greasy Lake No More

“Greasy Lake” by T. Boyle is the story of a young man and his companions on their journey to self-realization. The main character, a nineteen year-old boy who also serves as the narrator of the story, tries to live as a dangerous character in a “time when courtesy and winning ways went out of style [and] it was good to be bad” (1). As the narrator and his friends recreate themselves, to play the part of the “purest primal badness,” they begin to push limits, eventually leading them to realize the error of their ways. The narrator and his friends create bad-boy veneers in order to fit the style, but as the story unfolds, they begin to shed their façade in their realization that what is in style is not always necessarily right.

Despite the narrator’s belief that he and his comrades are bad, the narrator’s actions, as well as the actions of his friends, demonstrate their bad boy persona is merely a façade. In the first paragraph, the narrator states that he and his friends were bad because they simply wore “torn-up leather jackets” while slouching around with toothpicks in their mouths and “sniffing glue and ether” (1). Similarly, the narrator even admits that he kept a tire iron—which he used only twice to change his tires—behind his driver’s seat because that is where bad characters keep their tire irons. The boys believe that if they dress and act the part, to fit the style, they will experience “heights of adventure and daring” that come with being a “dangerous character.” Contrary to their veneers, the narrator demonstrates that he is rather learned by his diction. Throughout the story, the narrator makes multiple historical references to figures such as Khe Sanh, a U.S. commander in the Vietnam War; the Sabine women, members of an ancient Italian tribe; and Anne Frank. He evens admits to reading André Gide, a controversial French novelist who writes on the controversy of morality. Likewise, the narrator’s friend Digby attends Cornell, and both Digby and Jeff are supposed to be “experts on social graces,” characteristics not of a low social class.

As the boys begin to hide their natural characteristics to embrace their newly developed manner, they begin to lose their civilities and become animalistic. At the beginning of the story, the narrator wants to go to Greasy Lake to “watch a girl take off her clothes and plunge into the festering murk, drink beer, smoke pot, [and] howl at the stars… [for] this is nature” (2). To live up to their bad boy persona, the narrator characterizes acting like an animal as natural. Once again the groups animalistic characteristics are brought to light when he and his friends begin to try to rape the girl: they became “dirty, bloody, guilty, dissociated from humanity and civilization” (16). Even right before the narrator swings the iron tire at the greasy man, instead of thinking rationally of the repercussions of his actions, the narrator plays out an interrogational scenario, between a cop and a murderer, in his head. Caught in the moment, the narrator becomes far too consumed with acting dangerous to reason.
The final turning point of the story occurs when the narrator comes in contact with the dead body in Greasy Lake. Once coming in contact with the carcass, it is the first time the narrator realizes he had struck down the greasy character; the narrator even rejoices at the sound of the greasy character’s voice moments later. Consumed with guilt and fear from his rash actions, the narrator begins to contemplate suicide when he realizes all that has happened that night. And while thinking of excuses to tell his parents, he realizes that the dead man was probably the “only person on the planet worse off than” he was (31). The carcass made the narrator realize that if he continued down the same path, he could end up dead as well.

The short story “Greasy Lake,” greatly acts as a bildungsroman. The narrator demonstrates he is a changed man for unlike his interpretation of Greasy Lake before, the narrator finally comes to see the beauty of the lake: “there was a smell in the air, raw and sweet,…the smell of the sun firing buds and opening blossoms…this was nature” (32). The narrator’s new interpretation of nature marks his understanding that having the superficiality of a bad character, and pretending to be something they are not, does not make one truly bad, but rather distorts their reason. (787)

Discussion:
Why does the narrator almost start crying at the end of the story?
Significance of animal noises throughout story?
When does the narrrator begin to show he is a changed man?

Cathedral: More Than What It Seems

When looking over “Cathedral” by Raymond Carver, I thought that the significance of the story was a rather cliché wisdom similar to you cannot judge a book by its cover. The nameless narrator’s preconceived notions of blind people keep him from, at first, getting to know Robert, his wife’s visiting blind friend. Yet as the story progresses, the narrator builds a connection with the blind man, Robert, which allows him to relate himself to what he previously did not understand.

Before Robert’s arrival, the narrator is already plagued with wild notions of blind people that he learned of from the movies. The narrator admits that “being blind bothered” him because the blind walked slowly and never laughed. Before even meeting Robert, the narrator labels him as the same as all those he has seen in movies. To add to his dislike of blind people, the narrator also develops a jealousy of Robert’s and his wife’s long-term relationship, and the narrator even greatly resents being mentioned in one the correspondence tapes between his wife and Robert. Even after Robert’s arrival, the narrator makes little effort to welcome Robert with conversation for his first thought is to ask Robert how his train ride was. Yet although the narrator’s myopic views of blind people plague the start of the story, as the tale continues, the narrator’s preconceived notions and prejudices of Robert begin to wane.

Soon after Robert’s arrival, the narrator begins to realize that his previous notions of blind people were in fact flawed. At first glance, the narrator is astonished that Robert does not own a cane or wear and dark glasses to cover his eyes, which demonstrates the narrator’s incorrect characterization of the blind. From his new perceptions of Robert and blind people in general, the narrator begins to grow a certain admiration for Robert and how he functions on a daily basis. While eating dinner, the narrator “watched in admiration” as Robert was able to navigate and locate the food on his plate right away. The narrator begins to realize how difficult it must be for Robert, or any blind individual, to find food on their plate, and the narrator realizes that he takes his ability to do everyday chores for granted because for people like Robert, it might not be so easy. Later the narrator also realizes that the blind man is similar to him when Robert stays up and smokes some weed with the narrator. The narrator realizes that blindness is a rather insignificant factor in knowing a person, and the narrator is able to grow more comfortable with Robert. The blind man even goes on to inspire the narrator as they both draw a cathedral. The narrator begins to appreciate the beauty of the cathedral after his eyes are closed, making him embrace “blindness”—what he had feared at the start of the short story.

Despite the qualms the narrator possessed at the start of the story, he realizes that the appearance does not depict one’s true character. The blind mind acted as proof to Robert that you can’t judge what you don’t know. Robert acted as a vessel of inspiration—like when he inspired the narrator’s wife to begin to write poetry—that allowed the narrator to see life in a new perspective. (548)

Only Through Everyday Use

When reading “Everyday Use” by Alice Walker, it is virtually impossible to miss the irony associated with Dee’s supposed assimilation with her heritage. Dee, rather than truly understand her heritage, tries to create an allusion by changing her appearance and by gathering priceless artifacts from her home.

Despite Dee’s efforts to embrace her heritage, it is truly only another phase in what her mother refers to as her “style” (12). At her arrival, Dee insists on being called Wangero Leewanika Kemanjo due to its more authentic appeal. Even though Dee believes her new name allows her to better embrace her roots, her real name, Dee was a name passed down in her family, from generation to generation, a name that truly depicts her heritage. Likewise, Dee tries to continue to create a façade with the outfit she arrives in. When first looked upon by her mother, the dress was “so loud it hurt” her mother’s eyes (20). Dee also demonstrates how she is simply embracing a new style when she decides she wants to take the old quilts that her Grandma had made by hand. Despite wanting the quilts now, Dee’s mother remarked that when she was first offered the quilts before she left for college, Dee pronounced that they were too “old-fashioned and out of style” (66) Irony also appears in the end of the story when Dee puts on her large sunglasses that “hide everything” on her face, indicating her obsession with fashion. Dee’s change of heart and attention with trends keep her from truly embracing her heritage.

Similarly Dee not only tries to recreate herself in order to embrace her heritage, but she also begins to seek materialistic possessions to act as relics of her newly formed self. At dinner, Dee decides to take her Grandma Dee’s butter dish and churn top in order to give the sense that she had had her connection with her ancestors. Yet in taking each object Dee remarks that its purpose will be as a showpiece in her home. Unlike her mother and sister, who actually use the churn top and butter dish, Dee simply sees each object as proof of her connection to her heritage. Likewise, when Dee first arrived, she took out a Polaroid to capture pictures of her mother, sister, a cow, and the house. To Dee, her family and previous lifestyle serve as nothing more than as examples of how their ancestors used to live. Dee also demonstrates irony when she insists that her sister “ought to try and make something of” herself instead of live in her old ways. Despite Dee’s so called embracement of her heritage, she insists on her sister forming a new life.

In spite of her so-called efforts to reconnect with her roots, Dee can never appreciate all that her heritage has to offer. “Everyday Use” depicts how mere materials do not define who one is and where they come from, and that one can only truly appreciate their heritage, like Dee’s mother and sister do, with everyday use. (508)

*Just as a reminder, I was late turning this blog in because I was on the JLP freshmen trip.