zaaaAP Lit Blog 2

A Consensus on Legatt

Through our class discussions, many people have brought up that Leggatt , was not a real person. He was made by the captain in order to get rid of his loneliness on a ship, for which he feels a little out of place. Perhaps both of them being "Conway boys" is just the Captain's way of missing his old friends, who were in a higher class than the first mate he finds so unappealing.

Contradictorily, I believe Leggatt  is real because the story makes the character real. I don't think a captain boarding a ship trying to find him would follow a ghost. Although Leggatt , is real I believe that the Captain's own feelings have made a wrong interpretation of the man. His need for a companion, made him see Leggatt  as not a murder but a man who suffered some quick passion and shot.

I think this happens to every human, when we feel a need to connect to people. Sometimes when we are lonely or sometimes when we are looking for friendship. For example, many people when they are in a relationship say them and the other  person “connect on so many levels”, yet are completely different.  Within this feeling, the Captain is looking for someone who is like him, someone who feels and knows like he does.  It could even be said that he is writing Leggatt’s personality and biography without truly knowing who we was, just in case he was in contrast to his beliefs.  My question then is do you believe people can misinterpret other people, out of loneliness or hope to find common ground? Do you believe that Leggatt is a product of this?

Is Leggatt Real?

In The Secret Sharer, the captain encounters a man floating in the water, who he first describes as a headless corpse. The captain allows him on to the boat and hides the man, whose name is Leggatt, in his cabin. No other member of the crew every sees Leggatt, which causes me to wonder if he truly even exists. While reading, I noticed that the captain considers Leggatt to be exacty like him, which makes me wonder if he is only a figment of the captains imagination. I feel like the captain created Leggatt in his mind in order to fulfill parts of himself which he felt were not complete. My question is, Is Leggatt real, or just a creating by the captain.

No Name

Did anyone notice that the narrator and main character of The Secret Sharer did not have a name, or at least we the audience was not aware of? I have not read many novellas or short stories, but I found this odd and intriguing at the same time. I kept waiting for someone to address him, or for him to introduce himself to Leggatt, but no such luck.

Names give people a sense of identity. It may not be completely conscious, but how would people feel if they did not have a name? Throughout the story, the captain kept referring to Leggatt as his other self. I am wondering if Conrad did this on purpose to make the audience mesh the two characters into one identity. I believe so; you do not just "forget" to give your character a name. In fact, it is probably the first and foremost thing that comes to a writer's mind. Names have to fit the character, or at least the good ones do. So how does this affect the characterization of the captain? Does the audience have a tendency to not give him a more distinctive identity because they do not know his name? Also, what do you think would be the captain's name? Names often have meanings, so I thought it would be interesting what others would think of.

Secrets Aren't THAT Intimate

In class today it was suggested that the Secret Sharer could perhaps be a romantic story between the Captain and Leggatt.  However to me it honestly seems implausible.  There's no reason why two men should instantly be suspected of being gay because they share a room, and have discussions late at night.  Would the same be assumed of two women?  It seems stereotypical to assume that because they are men, sharing the secrets of their lives implies they are romantically involved, for most men keep their thoughts and feelings to themselves.  The Captain is "attracted" to Leggatt, not romantically, but because he has found a person he can empathize with.  Leggatt is a source of comfort to him in an uncomfortable situation where he is attempting to run a ship and crew he does not know.  He sees himself in Leggatt for one reason or another, and it is fascinating to him.  Perhaps he was just desperate for someone to talk to, and once he was able to let go and take control of his ship, he moved on. 

An Exchange of a Whisper

During class today we had a discussion posed on the question, what is the " Secret Sharer" about.? As a class we came up with two options. One being a romantic love story and the other being the category of leadership and danger. There are many viable options for either of the topics to fully answer the question what is the "Secret Sharer" about. For the leadership and danger topic, you could propose that the Captain was fufilling his potential as a leader. Also, that he was a Captain free of all restraints. He still wanted to show leadership, but didn't want to push to hard on the shipmates. Either way the option of Leggatt being real or not fits in with both of these topics. On the contrary, the romantic vibe in the novel is pursued by the fear of discovery. This moves the romance on and keeps it going. There exchange of whispers and loving goodbye puts up a red flag to the reader, suggesting the there is more to their relationship. Which category do you think best answers the question of what is the "Secret Sharer" about?

Crazy, or Crazy in Love??

In The Secret Sharer, the captain is such an odd character.  I really cant decide whether he's insane or if Leggatt truly does exist and the captain is just seeing what he wants to see in him.  The fact that they happen to be wearing the exact same thing and have all of the same mindsets about everything makes it seem so unlikely that the captain would just happen upon Leggatt randomly.  The Captain also mentions seeing himself in Leggatt, as if he were looking at a mirror.  Maybe the captain is lonely so a figment of his imagination is coming more to life, or maybe he is trying to discover something about himself, I'm not sure. 

Skepticism aside, if Leggatt really does exist, I totally agree with an earlier post that claims he and the captain are romantically involved. The first time the captain sees Leggatt (even though he thinks he's dead), the way he describes him seems almost sexual at times.  In fact, a lot of the tone of the novel regarding the relationship and surroundings of the captain and Leggatt seems to be romantic.  I can't reason what the author's intent of this sort of relationship would be though, because there are other ways to interpret their relationship.  Does anybody have any ideas as to what the significance of their relationship is?

The Second Mate Who Waits Too Late

After reading Part 1 of The Secret Sharer, I became suspicious of the character who is referred to as the second mate of the ship.  This suspicion arose after an incident that occurred on the ship.  Over dinner the crew, especially the chief mate, were trying to figure out why a ship nearby had decided to set down their anchor.  When dinner concluded, the chief mate came up with a theory and pronounced it to the rest of the crew.  At this time the second mate reveals that he knew all along why the ship had pulled over near them.  To me this is strange because if he knew why the ship had decided to stop near them, why would did he wait to tell everyone right when dinner ended and after the chief mate announced his theory, as opposed to when the question was first asked?  This I believe is very unusual, almost as if he is a secretive person.  What do you think?  Was he just curious to why others thought the ship was pulled over or was he trying to hide it?

Conrad: relationships amongst men

    As I was reading The Heart of Darkness, I began to notice many similarities that it had with The Secret Sharer.
    In both books the protagonist has an obsession with a man. In The Secret Sharer the attraction seemed blatantly homosexual, in The Heart of Darkness Marlow seems to idolize Kurtz.This is shown when he says: "I was seduced into something like admiration--like envy"(82).  Marlow puts Kurtz on a throne so high that I cannot even understand why Marlow is so drawn to Kurtz. The Russian also has this admiration for Marlow, this connection is shown when Conrad repeatedly refers to the Russian as "The Admirer of Mr. Kurtz..."(87).
     It is also interesting in how vague Conrad describes the relationships. He infers a connection between two characters but we never understand the nature of their relationship.

Joseph Conrad-Man of Mystery

I'll admit that when I first began reading the Secret Sharer and Heart of Darkness, I did not like them.  I found it incredibly hard to understand what was happening and what the characters were doing.  Yet, after a few class discussions, I realized that I had been missing so much and that I was going about reading the book entirely wrong.

Joseph Conrad is fun to read because it is so unclear what he is saying.  During class, there were many different interpretations of the same event/story and it was interesting to see what each individual person got out of his or her reading.  Now, reading the book is like an adventure.  I look for symbols and hidden meanings on every page and connect what I have read with the ideas presented in class.  I feel that Joseph Conrad's ambiguous style is so unique because I am used to having an idea presented to me.  The feeling of hunting for meaning within his writing is simply exhilarating.  Does anyone else like this style or do you all find it just frustrating?

Legatt? More Like Le-gay

You know what, I'm diggin' all the gay vibes in The Secret Sharer. I believe that Conrad is being very brave and bold in writing a beautifully elequent (and intimate) piece of literature stuffed with homosexual inferences.

I do believe I could go as far as saying that its almost sexy.

Forbidden love is always a beautiful tragedy to behold...I always say.

It can be quite easily interpreted that the captian is completely smitten with Legatt. He's is constantly checking him out through the entire story.

"Anybody would have taken him for me...I was fascinated by it myself. Every moment I had to glance over my sholder I was looking at him." (28)

The captain repetitively claims that the only reason why he's so entranced by Legatt is because of the fact that he looks kinda like himself.

Oh please.

No one writes about someone's physical features as delicately and sensually as Conrad does unless they are being romantically admired.

It simply comes down to the fact that the Captain is infatuated with another man and he cannot take his eyes (or his mind) off of him. It's just as simple (and sexy) as that.

Conrad is a bold man for writting what he did, when he did.

So I say, give the man some props.

Captain's 'Dark' Side Unmasked!!

First off I loved the Secret Sharer, it's subtle yet intriguing story is what kept me interested the entire time. Even before our class decided that Leggatt was indeed a breathing human and not some ghost, I always interpreted Leggatt as the Captain's hidden side, his secrets, his thoughts that were only thoughts and never actually acted on. After finding Leggatt, he instantly has a mysterious connection with him; it was "as though he had been faced by his own reflection in the depths of a somber and immense mirror" (130). The Captain constantly refers to Leggatt as his "double" and his "reflection", as though Leggatt was another side of him. Furthermore, when Leggatt briefly retells the story of the murder the Captain doesn't need to hear it for "he needed no more. He saw it all going on as though Leggatt was himself inside that other sleeping suit" (131). To me it seems that the Captain doesn't question Leggatt because if he were in that situation he would have killed a man as well, yet would never go through with it for he knew it was wrong. In this sense Leggatt seems to be the Captain's dark side. Even with the whole homosexuality hints throughout the ending of novel, the captain finally has to let Leggatt go because he can not handle the possibility that he could live like Leggatt, that he could actually go through with it. However, since it is looked down by society, the Captain toughs it out and eventually becomes stronger in the end because he has overcome those thoughts or "temptations". One last significant point in viewly Leggatt as his other side, is that in the beginning of the story the Captain continually refers to himself as the "stranger of his own ship....and somewhat a stranger to himself" (123). The Captain doesn't even seem to really know himself in the beginning but by meeting Leggatt who brings out another side of him the Captain is more sure of his own identity in the end.

The Paradox

I know the statement that I wrote on my poster board today during class was a little confusing, but I find it hard to believe that no one understood the general meaning of it other than my group! Am I right? Did anybody understand it? Here it is again in case you haven't seen it yet:
"Every human has certain ideals that they would like to attain or change themselves into, But in order to attain these characteristics that are within this ideal, they must let the ideal go."
This quote attempts to explain why Leggat being let go was such a positive thing for the Captian. And it uses Leggat as the inbodiment of the Capitain's ideals that he has for himself. Does it make more sense now?

The Non-Juicy Gay Reading

I was glad that we had an extensive conversation about The Secret Sharer's gay subtext in class. Too often, alternative readings are dismissed (A Separate Peace, anyone?. Or how about Harry Potter, unhappy tenant of the closet under the stairs?).

That said, I don't know quite what to make of The Secret Sharer's homoerotic themes. Are the Captain and Leggatt meant to be an item, or is their relationship simply an allegory of what gay relationships are like in an oppressive society?

While reading The Secret Sharer, I was struck mostly by the homoerotic nature of the language itself. As Mr. Heidkamp pointed out, the narrator seems to dwell endlessly on Leggatt's body. On p. 130, for instance, he lingers over every aspect of Leggatt's face, and on p. 140, mentions his need to give the "amazing swimmer" a lift into the lofty bed. On p. 154, the Captain is acutely aware of Leggatt's panting and out of breath whispering. And of course, there is the famous passage on p. 167 in which they... grope each other. Kind of.

All this has been discussed in class. So I guess my question is: acknowledging that all of this gay content exists in the text, what is its purpose?

It seems to me that the language is meant to clue the reader into a homoerotic/homosexual interpretation of the text, but not necessarily a romantic interpretation. The actual physical relationship between the two main characters seems less significant than the societal parallels that it gives rise to. Almost every aspect of their interaction seems to reflect closeted relationships in a repressive society; the whispers, the hiding, etc. This to me seems more compelling than the petty aspects of their personal relationship, a.k.a the juicy whispers and implied... intimacy.

I think it's important to consider your personal reaction to their relationship. For example, I personally didn't care whether or not the Captain and Leggatt were together. Their personal relationship isn't portrayed very depply; we witness their whispers and close physical proximity, but that's about it. Where's the emotional development? Where's the complexity? It seems that it exists to serve the story's gay themes, but is not the actual focal point of the story. If the actual relationship was supposed to be a bigger deal, wouldn't Conrad try harder to make it matter to us? (and of course, by us, I suppose I mean me, because I can't attest to anyone else's reaction...)
This implies to me that Conrad had bigger fish to fry.

What do you think? Was anyone particularly affected by the Captain's relationship with Leggatt? Am I just a cynic for thinking that the romance itself is, to a certain extent, expendable?

Seeing Double

In The Secret Sharer, Conrad dwells on a motif of duality.  There is the obvious case of the captain and his "double" Leggatt, but I will not go into that since there are so many posts solely about that topic.  But from the very beginning, Conrad explores the relationship of the land and the sea.  In the very first paragraph the captain notes the joining of the shore to the tide.  The sea is beautiful and serene whereas the land is full of anxiety and unrest - yet one cannot exist without the other.  For the captain especially, there exists the division between being a landsman and a seaman. 

In another way, the captain's estrangement provides a duality as well: that of being a stranger to the ship, and also a stranger to himself.  Because he is new to the ship and does not know his crew, he feels awkward and misplaced.  At the same time, he is rather immature and unsure of himself, and how to handle things - he does not realize his ability to take control, which is best evidenced by his standing night watch, a task unfit for a captain.  However, by the end he has matured into confidence of himself and the ship.  Another duality, the split between immaturity and maturity, is healed by the end of the story. 

What if Leggatt Was Female?

I can't help thinking that if the only difference in The Secret Sharer were that Leggatt were female, but all other plot lines remained the same, no one would doubt a romantic connection between Leggatt and the narrator (Obviously, considering the time period, Leggatt would never have been a girl, so this is just hypothetical to help me make a point). I am still not sure if I think that the narrator was gay, but I do find it disturbing that it's so much easier to assume that there was a romance between Leggatt and the narrator if Leggatt was a woman, but we're much more tentative about the possibility since they're both men. And I understand that because of when the book was written and what society was like at that time, it would be more plausible for there to be a romance written with a female Leggatt than a male Leggatt, but if the same story had been written yesterday, I think the heterosexism would still apply. It takes effort to not be heterosexist in a society that conditions us to think and form impressions on those terms. It'll be a few (I use that term loosely) years until we see a commercial on TV for something like pancake batter where there's a family with a kid and two dads sitting around the kitchen table eating breakfast. It's not necessarily our fault that we automatically think this way, but I think it's important that as our generation gets older, we work on compulsive heterosexism and realize that it is an issue that is detrimental to a percentage of people that is larger than many people realize. If anyone is confident that their first impression of the narrator and a female Leggatt would not be one involving romance, please say so.

Strangers Like Me

As the captain discovers the similarities between Leggatt and himself, I was reminded of the scene in Tarzan where Tarzan sees another human for the first time, in the classic scene where Tarzan compares his hands to Jane's.  Like the captain, Tarzan knows that he is different from his peers.  And, through the help of Jane, to whom he is similar in so many ways, Tarzan is able to understand himself more fully.  In turn, he also becomes more at peace with his co-inhabitants.

There is no obvious epiphany that the captain achieves through Leggatt, unlike the Disney movie.  However, if the text is understood with a gay subtext, Leggatt may have helped the captain grow in ways the narrator did not reveal outright.  No longer lost as to where he fit in, the captain could fully focus on his duty toward the ship.

While they put their peers in danger (the captain bringing the ship so close to land; Tarzan unintentionally aiding the hunters) both the captain and Tarzan use their newfound strength to save the day.

Embracing Our WORST features...

When we were talking about the message Conrad tries to portray in the Secret Sharer in our collaborative groups the other day, it kind of hit me, that the captain doesn't seem to react to his so called "double" as most people would. Most of us (or maybe by most of us I mean me), when faced with our own reflection or someone who is strikingly similar to ourselves would tend to reject that image. Reflections often show us the things we least want to see and so our tendency is to reject them or act as if they don't exist.

Why do you think the Captain doesn't react like we normally would?
Do you think that the Captain's estrangement from his crew and shipmates accounts for his strange personality and attachment to Leggatt?

Maybe the Captain is actually better off than us. Instead of rejecting our own images and refusing to accept that we do have flaws, maybe we should actually be embracing our reflections as the Captain did and using them as growth...

Captain and Meursault

After reading The Stranger and Secret Sharer i found that both characters are VERY similar. They are both "strangers" in their societies. Meursault not willing to adapt to the society he lives in was a very problematic and in the end, led him to his execution.

However, the Captain did not get executed. He did also feel that he was a stranger to his community like Meursault, since he was only the going home captain for the ship. He also did not feel a bond with the other men because he has only been on the boat for two weeks whiles others been with each other for the whole journey. When Leggatt came in the picture he felt relieved. Someone to talk to and spend time with. However when they parted, one can derive that the Captain was really sad and maybe his emotions were executed .

Meursault and the Captain both felt like an outsider in their community and in the end both were executed in some way. Can one say that an execution has to result a physical death? Or can we say that suffering from an emotional execution is just as bad?

The Captain's Journey

I think that the character of Leggatt is a foil of the captain. All of the good qualities that the captain does not posess are embodied in Leggatt. Evidence is seen throughout the story, and the ending, in which Leggatt finally leaves the boat, represents the end of the captain's journey to find himself.

Some examples are

• "All of it's phases were familiar enough to me....except the novel responsibility of command" (126)
• "...made me appear eccentric." (127)
• "...real alternative in the view of a strong soul." (129)
• "He was not a bit like me, really;" (135)

All of these examples represent how the captain is different from Leggatt, or not a full person because of some qualities that he's missing.

Identity transfer

While reading The Secret Sharer, I had trouble recognizing Leggatts true impact on the captain. With Leggatt's knew presence on the ship, the captains attitude, does seem to change, but does it change for the better. While Leggatt has a part in the captains life, the capaain loses part of his identity because of all of the similarities these two characters share. It is interesting to find a person who is similar to you, but after you are in company with this person for awhile, you begin to adapt to their behaviors and lose part of who you are, along the way.

The connection between these men from the very start is so great that they start to blend together into one person. "A mysterious  communication was established already between us two..." (129) "Anybody would have taken him for me." (144).

When Leggatt leaves the captian, do you think apart of Leggatt stayed with him, and inturn a part of the captain transferred into Leggatt?

Fight Club

When reading The Secret Sharer, I couldn't ever make the connection that secret and imaginary may sometimes go together. In class when we heard that Legatt may be a figure of the captain's imagination, I was completely surprised, and a lot of things made sense to me.
In the movie Fight Club, or Secret Window, I spent all of the movie, until the end, completely naïve to the fact that characters were imaginary. Throughout both films, the plot had a strange, but understandable feeling to them, until the climax of both films when the real characters who imagine the imaginary characters, are finding out that these people who they have been conversing with for such a long time were in fact imaginary.
I feel it takes a great deal of courage to try and write about an imaginary character, because it is open to even more criticism. The Secret Sharer is not a very advanced story, because of the simplicity of its plot. The way that Joeseph Conrad wrote about Leggatt, never fully telling the audience whether or not Leggatt was a real character or an imaginary character, makes this seemingly simple plot have more to it. I feel it was very well done on Conrad's part.