Journal 1 - Chaucer, Johnny, and Teddy Bears

 

6/23/2000

               Geoffrey Chaucer of England by Marchette Chute

               [Note brought in Denmark near Round Tower]

 


               Discussing football (soccer) matches between school and trade boys. Was banned before Chaucer’s birth “because too much excitement had been generated” (20).  Football hooligans in Chaucer’s day.

               Chute actually gives a reason why Chaucer never mentioned Bocchico.  Any student of Chaucer knows his sources as Chute points out Chaucer mentions them himself.  Chute points out that Bocchio wanted his vernacular works kept secret, nice to read a critic that points out that to the reader.

               Chute deals very well with the historical information and some her analysis of the tales lacks depth.  She makes a mistake and calls Emily Theseus’s sister instead of sister-in-law, but she does succeed in making Chaucer come alive.  Books does at times show an amount of depth and understanding.  Nice to read someone who doesn’t presume that Chaucer’s marriage was a bad one.  She is especially right about Chaucer’s mocking tone, and everyone knows he mocks an yet most critics presume the tone tells about his marriage in a serious way.  Nice to read a different view point.  But it raises the question, why do people want Chaucer’s and Shakespeare’s marriages to be unhappy?  Would a happy marriage detract from them in some way.  In Chaucer, there is no proof that the marriage was bad.  We presume too much and base theories on the tiniest of facts.  The closet I ever truly seen to the objective view is a critic’s comment that the marriage was good and Donne loved his wife but spent much time at his club because his wife did not have much time for his intellect also the crowded house.  Does having a bad marriage show reason for their genius, is that the reasoning behind the idea?  Do people except writers to suffer or is it better to suffer then to have a normal life?  Chaucer’s life does seem to be refreshing “normal” no big, major foamily tragedies or sudden deaths (yet, some of his children must have).  Do critics sprout off the bad marriage idea to compensate for this?  If so, what does that say about society?

 

6/26/2000

Johnny and the Dead by Terry Pratchett

[Note:  Brought in Denmark]



LOL

               Take serious topic and makes it funny.  He is teaching the reader about life and death, and how one person doing an seemingly insignificant thing can change things.  Death in life.  Even Mr. Grimm who seemed pained to be a villain is given understanding and the reader feels pity for him.

               As funny as the Discworld novels but also deals with a more serious theme [Note: I hadn’t read Small Gods at this point].  This books obvious is designed to do m ore than tell a good story.  Pratchett is funny because everything is so true, happens in the real world.

               Focus on this book is about death and withdrawing from life and not living.  Everyone in the book learns how to live (at least the major characters0 except for Mr. Grimm.  But from the way Mr. Grimm talks it is obvious that he chooses what he is doing, the haunting as it were.  The choice is the reason why we feel pity for him.  The Loneliness as well.  Point seems to be to find a balance between seriously and life.

 

6/26/2000

Only You Can Save Mankind by Terry Pratchett



               So, I am never ever going to play Space Invaders again.

               One of the points is the same as in Johnny and the Dead.  Always asking the question of what is reality and how reality is different for each person.  Though if weird stuff like that keeps happening to Johnny perhaps he would be safer in a mental home.

               Description of home life is well drawn, everyone can identify with it because everyone has experienced it or something similar.  Johnny, in essence, is the 12 year old everyman

               But why if the game didn’t work right for so long did people keep playing it?  This is never answered fully.  Wouldn’t normal children move to a different game?

 

6/27/2000

Hokas Pokas by Paul Anderson and Graham Richardson

[Note: brought in Denmark]



“Full Pack”

               Prologue is extremely good.  Something immensely funny about a bunch of teddy bears pretending to be the characters from The Jungle Book,  one does feel sorry for Fanni Jones. Hokas are not anything like Fuzzys.

“The Napoleon Crime”

               Quote that Alex Sr Says to Brob , in context of discussing problems in Planetary Congress: “It’s either believe that, or else believe we’re only characters in a series of stories being written by a couple of hacks who need the money” (49)

               Shows that while humans have influenced the Hokas in the book so they have influenced the humans as well.  Alex’s reaction at the end of the story.  Everything influences in some way, shape or form.

               The story is good because of the detail.  You can see the Hokas acting as Frenchmen and the writers keep them enough in character yet do not lose the actor to the part.

 

“Star Prince Charlie”

               Didn’t like this one as much as the others.  Undoubtedly the reason is due to the fact [Note: OMG I sounded like my students!] that the Hokas are supporting characters.  Isn’t as charming and funny unless there is more than one Hoka.  It is however a good story about moving from stage of life to another.  But is more serious in tone than the other two stories.  Slightly more political and societal but and while the Hoka fits the charm is not there.  It is not the best of the three.  I think that it would have to be the first one, just slightly edging out “The Napoleon Crime”.  Part of the problem was that when Betra took up the role of the Scottish Patriot (became Hector) it seemed to be cardboardish.  When the Hokas in the other stories took up characters or acted a part, the illustration  was well done i.e. The Jungle Book Crew.  But in “Star Prince Charlie” Hector feels like a cardboard caricature of a Scot almost.  In the process the character of Bertram becomes “lost”.  The characters in the other two stories, esp. the members of the Jones household changed the characters they were being but yet were still themselves.  Bertram/Hector does not feel this way.  Perhaps it is due to the fact that you do not get to know him or see him in a totally official capacity.

               The Hokas are better on their planet and acting as a small or large group.

Comments