Writing for Humans—Logan Willits

Dubliners essay draft 2

In her essay, “A Walk Through the Graveyard: Paralysis in Joyce’s Dubliners,” Megan Burke argues that each character in Joyce’s Dubliners experiences a complete and unalterable paralysis. She contests Florence Walzl’s argument that paralysis in Dubliners is like an infection in the human body, which grows from story to story and has four well-ordered stages. While I agree with Burke’s critic that Walzl’s argument is “an oversimplification of Joyce’s recurring theme of paralysis in Dubliners” I challenge the idea that each Dubliner experiences the same complete paralysis. Burke’s claim is as much of an oversimplification as is Walzl’s. She attempts to create a blanket statement to encompass all the different types and severities of paralysis that is experienced throughout the Dubliners. Rather, through analyzing different stories, such as “Araby” and “Eveline”, it becomes evident that while each character does experience paralysis, some are complete while others are only partial.

P.S. Sorry for the late submission, I just got back from Myrtle Beach and I did not think the car ride would take eight hours.

One question I ask myself every time I am forced to explore a story is whether the author actually put all of this hidden meaning in his/her writing or if I am just over-analyzing. While researching this subject, I happened to come upon the Iceberg Theory, developed by Hemingway, which argues that the deeper meanings is not completely evident but rather hidden underneath the surface. I do believe that great literary authors, such as Hemingway, do have this ability to write in a minimalist manor and create comprehensive messages and themes. However, sometimes people are prone to over-analyzing. In 10^th grade English we had a skype session with Hannah Tinti to discuss her book The Good Thief, and a student asked her if the giant in the story signified something. Tinti responded to this question saying that there is no underlying reason, she just always wanted to have a giant in one of her stories.

So I guess the question I have is how do I know if I am over-analyzing or not?

I think the last paragraph of the story is very interesting. Gabriel describes the snow falling in a numb and emotionless tone. He sees the snow as death slowly falling upon not just him but all of Ireland. The story of Michael Furey caused Gabriel to enter this numb and fatalist mood. He is not sad, rather just understands that his and everybody else’s time is severely limited.

This last passage also shows that the line between the past and the present is hard to delineate. In his speech he talks about how one needs to live their life and not ruminate over the dead. However, in this passage he realizes that it is impossible to forget about the pains of the dead people from the past. Gretta’s story of Michael Furey causes Gabriel to realize that the dead live on within one’s mind.

I chose the passage about Eveline’s ultimate decision to not go to Buenos Aires with Frank (page 41). The ringing of the bell in Eveline’s heart is the moment in which she realizes that she cannot leave her home. This use of words to describe the palpitation of her heart is really interesting. The bell creates this feeling of a loud and sudden rush of emotions that unexpectedly overcame Eveline.

I really like the next sentence as well. The words that Joyce chooses give the impression that Eveline is not registering with her eyes what is going on around her.     She is blind to the outside world, stuck in a whirlwind of emotions that is going on inside of her heart.

The seas that tumble around her heart could refer to the voyage that she is about to embark on. If she goes she realizes that “he would drown her.” However, I don’t think it is that she doesn’t want to escape. Rather, her family bonds and feeling of responsibility are too strong and prevent her from leaving with Frank, the man she loves.

This passage ends with Eveline looking at her fiancée with “no sign of love or farewell or recognition.” She is shocked and paralyzed by the situation and cannot register what is happening.

For the first time in his life he felt himself superior to the people he passed (page 73)

It was impressive that Bai was able to cut so much off without losing anything important. Also, the article did not read like a summary, but rather remained strong and concise. Teachers in my high school taught me that in order to cut down a piece of writing, you need to summarize certain ideas. Bai does not abide by this idea and his article is a lot stronger then just a summary.

I was surprised that aspects of the first chapter can be found in both the beginning and end of the article.   Generally I wouldn’t think that this would work but Bai places the paragraphs precisely where they should be.

I would like to ask Bai about how he thinks we should change so competent people aren’t alienated away from politics?