Word Choices - AP English Literature - Blog

Thoughts of characters

Not a huge revelation or anything, but I was thinking about the difference between single quoted thoughts and italicized thoughts last night. In class, there was talk that it maybe concious and subconcious. I just wanted to point out that all the italicized thoughts are in perfect english, while the singled quoted thoughts feature southern slang, almost as if to say the italicized thoughts are not from themselves (switching point of view in thoughts?).

This difference is true throughout all of Chapter 1, UNTIL the sour-deens. Those damn sour-deens are the one exception that break the rule. Is it Faulkner messing with me? Or is he trying to point out some significance in the sour-deens (motif?).

Light in August vs. The Scarlet Letter

After reading the first few chapters of Light in August, I have noticed some qualities that parallel with The Scarlet Letter. Most of us probably read The Scarlet Letter last year in English, and hopefully some people notice some similarities between it and Light in August.

The first instance in the story where I see similarities is when we discover that Lena is pregnant and not married. Not only is Lena not married, but Lucas, the father of her child, has run off. In The Scarlet Letter, Hester brings her child into Puritain society with her husband nowhere to be found. Both Lena and Hester appear to be single mothers in their stories.

In addition, the fathers of their children are both in disguise. We learn in chapter two of Light in August that Lucas disguises himself as a worker named Joe Brown at the Jefferson mill. Something similar happens in The Scarlet Letter. Hester's husband conceals himself within the Puritain society. He goes by the name of Roger Chillingworth and he secretly observes Hester throughout the book until his true identity is revealed.

There are clearly some connections between Light in August and The Scarlet Letter. I only mentioned a few ways in which both books relate, but I know there are more. Are there any other details present in both texts that complement well? I wonder if there are more parallels to come as we continue to read Light in August.

NO, You Cannot See.

I find it curious that no one ever seems to look at one another casually or in moments of great intimacy (Byron and Lena). However, when people do look at each other there is a sense of discomfort, as if the look was not meant and because of its spontaneity the reader feels the character's unpreparedness. "They look at one another, suddenly naked, watching one another" (17). Here Mrs. Armstid is questioning and judging Lena who is sitting poised and quiet. "To them it was as if he had arrived naked, or drunk." (42) The mill workers are aghast at Brown's jovial nature and childish play. I think that in both of these instances the respective characters are seen as the ones who makes the observation calling them "naked" view them. It is when people look at each other that real connections are formed, that it is obvious that these characters are not just slow, separated, and alone 100% of the time. But the fact that eye contact happens so little means that these connections are not formed so I think that one of the dominant themes that permeates this novel is isolation. One of my starting questions is: What does LIA say about the isolation of a person and how does that affect the quality of his or her life?

Trust

In class, we watched the movie Trust. A lot of people said they could not see the connection between the movie and The Stranger, but i noticed a couple of simliarities. I think Muersault and Matthew are very much alike in many ways. They both kind of live the same routine every day. Matthew fixes TV's for a living, while Muersault has court cases and now is in jail. Matthew and Muersault are both very plane people. They are also very honest. For exmaple, Meursault tells everyone how it is and if he's asked to lie he refuses. Matthew was very very blunt about telling, not asking, Maria to marry him. 

There are also a lot of differences between the characters. For exmaple, Muersault is very indifferent about his relationship with Marie while Matthew is more than positive that he wants to Marry Maria. 

Meursault Tells It How It Is

Meursault appers to be very truthful to himself and others throughtout the book, The Stranger.  He never feels it' necessary to lie in order to make others feel better. He doesn't really care if the truth hurts or not, he tells it how it is. For example, in chapter four Marie asked Meursault if he loved her. Instead of lying to her or giving a vague answer Meursault told her that he probably didn’t love her, but it wasn’t important anyway. 

His personal views and opinions come out as well. During the trial his lack of emotion about his mother’s death seemed to be more important than the murder he committed. From this it seems that truth is a crime and that Meursault is being punished for having non-conventional opinions. 
Meursault’s lawyer predicted that his mother’s death would be widely touched upon throughout the trial. He asked Meursault if he had felt sadness on the day of his mother’s funeral. When he said not exactly, the Lawyer asked Meursault to lie and say he did but Meursault said he refused to say it because it was a lie.

The Arabs?

I was definitely wondering where the arabs came from in this book and why they are even in it to begin with. It was completely random and a little confusing. Then I realized that even though they may have randomly popped into the book, it was the Arabs that created all the drama.

Mersault.. Is something else. I was very confused as to why he went back and shot that arab four times when this whole book he's been a calm easy going individual who for the most part let other people make his decsions for him. He could have just shot the Arab once, so why the 4 other bullets? This was the most action he's had in the book so i'm excited to see whats to come. My opinion is all the anger and sadness of Maman dying was building up inside of him and that was how he let it all out.

 

The Stranger

This book blew my mind and it exceeded any expectations I had for it. In my opinion, the power of the narrative voice is so strong. Even when Meursalt did things that were wrong for obvious reasons, I could easily identify with his train of thought. It was shocking how the story in some ways in a reflection of thoughts and feelings I sometimes have myself. Mersault portrayed an ordinary person stuck in a moment me may have found ourselves in as well. It was somewhat like a dream, when your body is responding in sort of the opposite way your mind is telling it.

When I started this book I felt lost in the randomness of it all but then i started agreeing with a lot of things in the book. Many things dont matter to the universe, there is no God, etc. I think one thing he never realized was you can attribute meaning to anything.

 

Crafted Imagery

After reading the Top Ten Tips regarding to Light in August i was convinced that it was going to be a very well written book. The most interesting rule i found was the fact that Faulkner had made all the characters foil each other. Having all the characters foil each other reminds me of Trust which i believe that Matthew and Maria were created so that they could foil each other because they were both the opposite of each other but yet they were so much a like and needed each other. When Maria needed a house to stay in Matthew offered. When Matthew needed someone he could talk to Maria was there. When Maria had no one to showing her appreciation and love Matthew was there. I found that interesting that the characters in Trust and the characters in Light in August foil each other because i had never knew that an author intentionally created characters designed for others. 

One of the more interesting facts about Light in August would be the fact that Faulkner loves to begin a scene with a cryptic sentence of what happened and then double and redouble. Drawing the audience in his the fun part for him. In order to read this book you must be able to actually be drawn into the language and his ability to write. The fact that physical descriptions are sparse is what probably surprised me the most. A book with no imagery is often a horrible book and a mistake many author makes but Faulkner intentionally uses sparse descriptions so you have no choice but to use your imagination. All good writers make their audiences use their imagination but having sparse imagery is very rare. 

It's Groundhog Day!

After reading The Stranger and watching the film Trust, both pieces of American culture that present existentialist characters, I thought about other artifacts or works that involved existentialists, people who realizes that their personal freedom includes the creation of their individual morals and the action based on their individual beliefs instead of conforming to society's expectations. One of the movies that came to my mind was Groundhog Day.

In Groundhog Day, the main character, Phil, is forced to relive the same boring, routine day over and over again. After going through many different coping cycles, including shock, depression, and social detachment, he ultimately learns that the ability to accept his situation is the only way to deal with this absurd predicament. 

Over time, Phil recognizes the fact that his actions don't really matter in the end because he will just start all over the next day. This is similar to life, because in the end, anything you chose to do in your life doesn't really matter because you will still end up dead one way or another. Therefore, this film questions people's decisions to acquiesce to society's standards and follow the unwritten rules of everyday life. 

Here is a trailer for Groundhog Day. Does this film share any similarities with The Stranger or Trust? Does support existentialism in that it encourages people to use their freedom and make their own, individual choices? 

 

As I Lay Trying

Finishing off Junior year's English Lit and Comp class with a brief and imcomplete analysis of William Faulkner's As I Lay Dying, I knew tackling Light in August was going to be a pain.   Yet, as I lay in my bed writing this post and re-reading chapter one, I'll try to remain optimistic as I attempt to decipher some meaning from this text.

The novel so far is no doubt intruiging.  We've been presented with a pregnant teenage girl who is on a mission to find her child's father.  While the plot so far seems simply enough, not everything is laid out so clearly as it was with Camus.  Reading carefully and slowly is going to be essential to understanding this novel. 

What has captured my attention the most so far has been Faulkner's syntax and structure of this first chapter.  The wording of thoughts subtly changes from somewhat simple to extremely complex within a matter of a few lines.  In the context of the entire novel, Faulker writes in third-person omniscent, yet in the context of each section of each chapter, he writes in third-person limited.  Faulkner is limited us to only experiencing one character at a time and each character has subtle differences in their thought processes that help distinguish them from the next.

Another intruiging point in the novel is the structure of thoughts.  Some seem to be italicized while others are surrounded by European quotation marks (or they look like apostrophes to us).  Certainly this helps us distinguish between thought and dialogue, but I'm curious to see if there is a pattern between the different ways that Faulkner exptresses thoughts.

I look forward to analyzing this novel further, and hopefully soon I will be able to delve into something other than Faulkner's style.

When we watched "Trust" in class, we were supposed to make connections between the characters in the film and in The Stranger, but I had trouble doing this. I found Maria's story interesting and almost admirable because of how she dealt with her pregnancy, her family trouble and her relationships. Although she was also a very dry character just like Meursault, I think that there was some depth to her, unlike Meursault. Meursault was living in the same routine every day and was even given the opportunity to escape it when he was offered a job in Paris, but turned it down because his existential personality only allowed him to live life by the definition of breathing, not by having fun or acheiving ambitions. Maria, on the other hand, wanted to make herself better than a high school drop out and a teen mother. Instead of staying with her deadbeat boyfriend, she dumps him for a more mature man who will take care of her, unlike Meursault who is indifferemt to his relationship with Marie but stays with her anyway.
If any character was like Meursault in this film, I think that it would be Matthew. While I was reading The Stranger, I pictured Meursault as Matthew and imagined his personality just like Matthew's, so I don't understand how Maria and Meursault are supposed to be alike, do you?

New Ideas Practiced by the Learned, Not the Creator

"I'll marry you if you admit that respect, admiration, and trust equal love." - Maria

"Ok. They equal love." - Matthew

But, Maria ultimately decides not to marry Matthew.

Why? She has become the existentialist. It is a reoccurring theme in literature for the student to rise above the teacher, or achieve what the teacher never could. For example, in Oscar Wilde's "Picture of Dorian Gray," Dorian is taught by Lord Henry and becomes what Lord Henry feigns to be.

Matthew denies love. ("I don't love anybody.") However, he is the one who wants to marry Maria. ("Marry me! Have the baby. We'll start a family.") Matthew denies the institution of his work when he confronts his superiors about corruptions and quits. However, when Maria criticizes his job, Matthew defends it. ("My job is making me a respectable member of society.")

 

The student rises above the teacher. When a new thought is born inside a brain through no influence, it is often doubted within itself even as it is taught. But the brain being taught does not have the delusional self-doubt. It only has the skeptical doubt. When there is agreement and trust, the skeptical doubt is gone and only the self-doubt of the teacher remains. Without doubt, the student is free to explore and practice the thought.

Does Work Have Meaning?

Does work have meaning?  In the ancient story of Sisyphus, work seems meaningless because all Sisyphus does all day is push a rock up a hill which then rolls back down.  In the film "Trust," Maria's work seems meaningless because all she does all day is drill holes.  Her situation, and the situation of Sisyphus remind me of some of the lyrics of "Mad World" by Gary Jules.  He describes people going off to work everyday, "going nowhere."  

"All around me are familiar faces

Worn out places, worn out faces

Bright and early for the daily races

Going nowhere, going nowhere."

Does the fact that work provides the money for support of ones family give work more meaning?  Meursault finds no meaning in his work, but his work was not adequate to support his mother.  If his job paid him enough to take care of his mother, would it then have had meaning to him?

Sometimes work is meaningless because we cannot see the goal or the larger project to which we are contributing.  There is a story of two stone masons who were part of the project to build the Cathedral of Notre Dame.  Their job was to break up stones with sledgehammers all day long.  When asked, "What are you doing?" they had different answers.  One said, "I'm just breaking up these rocks."  The other said, "I am building a great cathedral."  The second stone mason found meaning to his work because he could see the larger project to which he contributing.  The other couldn't see this and found his work meaningless.  

Red-Hot Politics

In class, we talked about the political happenings between Algeria and France during the time that The Stranger takes place. What if Stranger is an allegory for the relationship between France and Algeria? Meaning, what if Meursault represents those of French nationality residing on the Algerian coast? They are strangers to their homeland.

The most prevalent colors in The Stranger, which Meursault observes in his environment and on/in other people, are red, white and blue-- the colors of the French flag. Each color (red is associated with the sun and the judges at his trial, Marie wears a white dress and it also shows up in Maman's funeral, and several characters have blue eyes/ articles of clothing, as well as the ocean where he kills the Arab) is part of an entity outisde of Meursault, and in their own ways represent societal conventions that pressure Meursault, but which he does not partake in. Meursault separates himself from all of them, just like Algeria was very much separated from France.

Meursualt's awareness of these three colors suggests that Camus is aware of the conflicting identity of French Algerians. The are part of a community, the nation of France, but they are also separated from it politically and socially. This resembles Meursault's relationship with his community; he lives in and Algerian coastal town, but he does no prescribe to the values that it abides by. The prevalence of the three colors in Meursault's envorinment show that French national identity is in the environment, but not quite internalized by the Algerian colonists as it is in France. Similarly, Meursault views his environment objectively; he has not internalized its mores and his separation from society is evident to the reader. Perhaps Camus is making the statement that Algerian colonists of French descent are the political "strangers" of the time.

Faulkner's Decisions

When I began reading the first chapter of Light in August tonight, I was not sure what to expect.  Once I read the first paragraph, though, the book immediately intrigued me.  The first sentence reads, "Sitting beside the road, watching the wagon mount the hill toward her, Lena thinks, 'I have come from Alabama: a fur piece" (3).  From this I could tell that the point of view of the story is not first person, but rather third person that has accessibility to the character's inner thoughts.  But as the paragraph continues, Faulkner changes Lena's thoughts into italicized text.  This caused me confusion.  What is the difference between the italicized text and the apostrophes?  They both seem to be thoughts of the characters, but what significance does each have? 

Something else that I noticed while I was reading the first chapter was Faulkner's word choice.  When the chapter switched to third person point of view of Armstid, I found it interesting that Faulkner referred to Lena as "the other."  On page 18 in the last paragraph it reads, "The other does not answer for a moment."  Why did he choose to call her "the other" instead of simply saying, "Lena does not answer for a moment"?  

A LIGHT bulb in my head

To be completely honest everything I have heard about Light in August has been horrible, plus it's about 500 pages so it is not exactly a quick or easy read. However I am about half way through the first chapter and something caught my attention. It definitely was not the plot, which I find dull so far, although other then that I am having a hard time pin pointing the exact aspect of the book that catches my eye. 

My personal dislike and inability to catch the nuances in language in so called great works of art may have some affect on how I view this book. I think it is particularly the use of  language and point of view in this novel which strikes me. It's really interesting. It's clearly from the third person but at the same time it is expressed in a person way. Faulkner is the omniscient god and knower of all thoughts and feelings. That in itself is pretty cool, but the best part is his ability to then switch to another point of view, as he switches from Lena to Armstid, and still give Armstid a great personality and his own unique voice and views. That is truly creating a character and in such an original way, maybe the book does not have to have a good plot. 

Future Predictions?

The ending of Trust is very vague about what is going to happen in the future with Maria and Matthew. Originally, they were both set on getting married but then Maria tells Matthew that she had an abortion and no longer wants to get married. Matthew seemed very upset by this but by the end of the movie (when Maria came into the factory while Matthew had his hand grenade), they were back to talking about being together and running away. Then, Matthew gets taken away by the police for using the hand grenade and Maria stands watching as the cop car drives away. The ending makes me question the future of Maria and Matthew. I’m not sure how much trouble Matthew will be in but if he is allowed to leave after a short amount of time, will he go back to Maria and will she want to get married? I personally think that Matthew definitely would go back to Maria and I think they would run off together and possibly get married.

If Matthew isn’t allowed to leave right away, what will Maria do? Will she go back to her mother and sister or will she start a new life? Once Matthew and Maria found each other, they began to stop accepting how their parents treat them. Both of them eventually stuck up their parents, which I think is because they found strength through each other and realized that they shouldn’t let their parents treat them like that. Matthew actually fought his dad and Maria talked back to her mom when she told Maria to get her hair clip. Maria also told her mom that she has her own life and can make her own decisions when her mom asked if she was going to marry Matthew. I feel like Maria and Matthew rebelled against their parents because they saw life differently after being with each other. But if Matthew now has to go to jail, I just wonder if Maria will give in and go back to her mother because she has no other choice or start a new life somewhere without her mom.  What do you think she will do?

So Many Meursaults!

In watching the movie Trust, I've noticed that there is not one clear character who entirely embodies Meursault in The Stranger, yet I get the sense of Meursault throughout the movie. At first, I thought it was possibly just the way the plot progressed, but now I'm noticing that it is more likely that almost every character in the movie seems to demonstrate certain definite elements of Meursault while none of them perfectly embody him. Perhaps Matthew is the closest character to Meursault, although even he is not completely like him. While Matthew demonstrates the same insistence on honesty and staying true to your beliefs along with Meursault's characteristic lack of deep emotion, he does at times seem to express emotion or compromise his morals for something else he finds important. For example, when his dad yelled at him early on for leaving his cigarette in the bathroom instead of cleaning it, Matthew initially seemed to apathetically agree with his father and take the consequences, but he seemed to snap into emotion as he tells his dad "I don't know what you want from me," instead of just agreeing with his dad. He then demonstrates a willingness to put aside his morals twice in order to gain a different benefit. First, he agrees to work fixing televisions even though he is against television in order to make money, and then he returns to the company that he knows is immoral in their manufacturing practices because he thinks he'll need the medical benefits when he marries Maria.

Another character that shows similarities to Meursault is Maria. She seems somewhat willing to trust anyone and not judge them as a whole but only by their pieces, which is similar to how Meursault acts when meeting and dealing with people such as Raymond and Salamano. Maria refuses to see her mother as cruel and Matthew as trouble, even when she is told so on numerous occasions.

Maria's mother also demonstrates the lack of reasonable emotion that is characteristic of Meursault in that she doesn't seem to truly care that her husband is dead except for the income loss, and she doesn't have any heart or sympathy towards her daughters at all. Peg seems to hold to her morals some of the time, such as initially refusing to seduce Matthew, but she is too willing to push them aside to truly represent Meursault. However, she does seem to lack emotional attachment to most people. Even the woman who Maria meets on the bus seems to represent Meursault's lack of emotion, although she doesn't demonstrate his strict moral code. She is deadpan and miserable, but is all too willing to steal a baby off the street.

Is it just me looking in to these characters too much, or do all of the major characters in Trust seem  to reflect Meursault in one way or another?

Matthew and Maria, meant to be?

Within Trust, the two main characters Maria and Matthew have an interesting relationship. I feel from a shallow viewpoint one can see a creepy thirty year old man desperate for a woman. He needs someone to commit to him because he feels it is the time to marry in his life and would take a depressed and fragile seventeen year old to fill this position. If we were to look at it in almost deeper sense, there is the hope that this plot was not the director's intentions. Matthew can parallel Mersault in the sense of pushing the boundaries of human nature. They are both complex in the sense that they perceive the world in an almost emotionless way and yet in the same instance  simple because they objectify their observations and do not allow the complications of feelings. Matthew does this by not expressing any feeling or emotion, he for the most part goes through his day with a lack of motivation. When he meets Maria, it seems that he has found something in his life that is not routine, he has found a sense of purpose. It is as if it's something he could potentially have feelings about. Maria is also looking for direction. She is a young girl who is pregnant and a drop out, she gradually begins to understand the need to change her life. Matthew brings a sense of structure in her life. He represents a possible future that could entail not so much, happiness, but something different, something that is for the most part honest. I feel that these two are meant for each other because they both share something, providing security for each other, which is what entails the key component to trust itself.

Parenting,how should we see it?

Within the movie Trust, it seems patenting or the idea of parents becomes a central motif. Even in the very opening of the movie, there is this deep disconnection between the mother and father's opinions over their child being pregnant and kicked out of school. After Maria kills her father, her mother kicks her out. As the story progresses though, it seems that her mother has less and less of a hold on happiness and good look on life. She tries to forcefully put her older daughter with Matthew, she says she stopped truly loving her own husband, and just seemed like her life was full of regret and sadness. This then begs the questions of whether she is a qualified parent or whether parenting is a very qualified job? If parenting is qualified, and by this I mean enough to seem a justified system, then we can say that Maria's mother does not properly tend to her children. She has not be successful in having her daughters find the traditional pieces of being "successful." Peg is divorced woman with children, something society frowns upon and Maria is pregnant and out of high school. If we were to assess the sole idea of parenting though, we can find that this system of parenting in a sense is detrimental. The mother is miserable with being married to the father of her children as well as being exhausted over having to demand things from her children. The children are also miserable because they are berated constantly by their mother to do chores and demands which they are for the most part compliant to, including Peg trying to seduce Matthew. This then can express the negative effect of parenting and questions whether it is needed within the structure of society or whether it is an unnecessary institution?

The Stranger as an Unrequited Lover

I've really been putting off this blog since I've been unable to really think of anything interesting to talk about.  I could write a post about about how nothing has really interested me enough to discuss it, but I feel like that would be a waste of a blog.  Instead, I thought of something kind of out there.

Is Marie's love for Meursault unrequited?

A general and pretty basic definition of unrequited love is when one loves someone who does not love them back.  But what if that person is incapable of love?  Usually in literature, unrequited love is coupled with some sort of complicated love-triange, such as in A Midsummer Night's Dream.  Each person loves someone, but who loves whom back is a bit hazy.  Lysander and Hermia are initially in love, but Demetrius also loves Hermia.  Helena loves Demetrius.  Yet even all of these connections become more confusing as the play goes on.

Poor Marie just spends her time with someone who can't ever love her back.  I guess what I'm really trying to get at is does Meursault's inability to love Marie make Marie's love unrequited, or does this in fact just nullify that idea.  I feel like the obvious answer would be the former, but I also wonder if love is only unrequited if there is a chance that one could be loved back.  If this chance is taken away, there is no suspense in the matter.  When one learns that their crush does not feel the same way that they do, the wondering is gone and the person can choose to move on.

I know this is kind of a messy way to go about explaining this, but I was just curious about Marie's love and what it could possibly be.

Work and the Workman

Meursault is an existentialist. Matthew is an existentialist. Marie is rookie, but an existentialist at heart. All three of these characters display distrust for what an existentialist would call a social system and define their respective worlds according to their own terms, but not even one of them is able to break free from the absurdity of work. 

In The Myth of Sisyphus, Camus compares the fate of Sisyphus to the everyday life of today’s workman. He explains that the fate of these men is “tragic only at the rare moments when it becomes conscious.” Meursault, Matthew, and Marie are aware of the absurdity of their jobs. Matthew is constantly quitting or getting fired. Marie is bored of “drilling little holes.” Meursault seems to be happier of the three; he completes his job, but has no goals of professional advancement.

Work seems to be one of those fates humans cannot escape. Existentialists claim that leading an authentic life is what one does to find meaning, but I’m not sure if this includes taking control of one’s job. I can’t think of any jobs, besides those of artists and philosophers that would satisfy an existentialist. All of us are not artists or philosophers, so what are we supposed to do? Are we supposed to be content, like Meursault, with knowing our jobs are unimportant and potentially tragic?

Not Quite Like Mersault

In the beginning of Trust I could clearly see the parallels between Matthew and Mersault. They don't take the rules of society into account when they go through their days. And that's where I thought their similarities end. Although they don't consider what others think about their actions, Matthew is more expressive than Mersault. His short temper and condescending attitude towards the multitude of people he encounters portray his obvious aversion to the accepted role one plays in society. Mersault outwardly gave the appearance of an accepting person, while not being outgoing. He was able to blend into society, unlike Matthew who actively clashes with society's victims.

Further into the movie it appeared that Matthew was giving into society's demands. Something Mersault never allowed himself to do. I predict that Matthew will return to his ways but with the almost morbid undertone to the film, I cannot say this with confidence.

Sincerely Dangerous?

When we first started watching the movie Trust, I could only vaguely point out the similarities between The Stranger and the movie. Sure, Matthew and Meursault both seemed to be indifferent to many things, and Matthew did remind me of Salamano's dog in the way they were both being mistreated and pushed around by their "owners". But one line from the movie really struck me, and I understood the relationship between Meursault and Matthew. When Maria was talking to the nurse at the diner, Maria described Matthew as "dangerous but sincere". The nurse then said "Sincerely dangerous." Maria corrected her by saying "No, he's dangerous *because* he's sincere". I then found the connection between Meursault and Matthew. Both of them are very honest people, and it can get them into trouble with others. With Meursault, he never played games and even while on trial, he would not even tell a white lie that he regretted his decision. Their honesty is something to admire, and fear at the same time.

Terrible Parents

When Matthew sees Maria's plight he responds with protection.  I think he does this because he is worried that she could end up in his situation, under the overcareful protection of a parent who works him too hard.

Matthew's relationship with his father is complicated.  Even though his father treats him so terribly, making him wash the bathroom time and time again, he still tries to protect Matthew and defend his genius when he is fired from the television repair shop.  Deep down, he is still the normal father who wants the best for his kid, but he does not express that sentiment most of the time.

This seems similar to Maria's relationship wit her mother.  Even though her mother was so terrible after she blamed Marie for killing her father, she still let her stay at home.  But she takes advantage of Maria's guilt and works her too hard and tries to set up her fiancee with Maria's sister.

Do you think the director and or writer are making a statement that deep down all parents love their children, or that all parents are terrible to their children despite this love?

Parallels Between "Trust" and "The Stranger"

I see two characters in "Trust" that are similar to two characters that are in "The Stranger."  Matthew Slaughter is similar to Meursault, and Maria is similar to Marie.

Matthew is similar to Meursault.  Both characters are seemingly detached from everything.  Both seem to only care about certain things.  Both seem incapable of lying.  It almost seems that Matthew's character was based on Meursault.

Maria and Marie are also quite similar.  For one thing, their names are almost exactly identical.  They also both fall in love with a man who can never love them back.  Meursault thinks that it isn't important to love, and Matthew would agree.  Matthew goes further however, and says that he "respects and admires" Maria.  What we often get from Meursault is saying how Marie is a beautiful woman. 

Maria and Marie are also similar in their both wanting to marry a man that does not love them.  Not only do they fall for men (Maria actually literally falls and forces Matthew to catch her) who cannot love them, but they are willing to marry them.  However, Marie is more willing to marry Meursault, saying that she probably loves him because he cannot love her.  Maria forces Matthew to say that he loves her, even though he does not truly believe it.

Those are the main similarities that I noticed in between the movie and the novel.  Did you notice these, or any other similarities?  Or do you disagree with my findings?

Matthew and Meursault?

In some ways the qualities of Meusault seem to be present in Matthew Slaughter in "Trust." He seems to be emotionally detached from almost everything he encounters. He offers to marry Maria, who seems to be a complete train-wreck of a person, with almost no thought and a lot of ambivalence. I believe he offers to marry her out of connivence. This relationship he has with her is similar to the ones he has with the other characters of the movie in terms of emotional attachment. 

However, I think Matthew's character is also strikingly different from Meursault. After just one day of working Matthew seems to be defeated by the world. He gives into society's pressures and norms in almost a heart beat. This contrasts to Meursault, who under pain of death, refused to be a member of mainstream society.    

Why Fall?

In Trust Marie decides to test Matthew's trust by falling off the wall and seeing if Matthew would catch her. These action could have easily gone the other way because Matthew, with no notification that Marie was jumping, could have easily have let Marie fall to her death or at least get injured. This in a way relates to Meursault because he shows at the end of the novel that he isn't scare of dying and that death will eventually get everybody. In a way Marie and Meursault are similar for having death around their life. Marie accidentally killed her father just like Meursault killed the Arab and in a way contributed to his mother's death. How much do you think Marie and Meursault are the same?

Also Matthew does not fit in with society and does not love anybody just like Meursault. How much are Matthew and Meursault alike? What character is more like Meursault?

Maria's mother, express what is needed in society?

Maria's mother is clearly very controling, but she has depth to her role within the movie. To begin, even when she learns of Maria's pregnancy, she is still very strict about what Maria should do. After her husband dies, though she seems to audience to be devastated, we later learn that she was almost releaved that she did not have deal with her husband anymore, she felt that he had "poisoned [her] life for twenty years." When we first see her though, she is wearing black and mourning over her husband and kicks out Maria. It almost seems that her first initial actions to the death of her husband was the way that she was "supposed" to feel about it when concerning society. When she realizes how she really feels about it I think she feels miserable knowing that she did not really care for her husband. This then also explains her other actions,such as pushing Peg towards Matthew because she feels they are good fits by society's standards. She feels that they are of similar age and are both in times of their lives to settle down and have a life together. I feel she knows that her action to do this and how she really feels are two very different situations.

Maria, what does she represent?

Within the movie Trust, the main character Maria at first seems to express a selfish and careless teenager. As the story continues though she seems to change. She goes from this shallow and materialistic girl to someone who wishes to almost start a new life. I think this is due to the burden of feeling that she has failed herself. Despite the fact that she has realized becoming pregnant and dropping out of school are probably not productive things to do, she stills seems to avoid them until she meets Matthew. From there it seems as if she just starts to strip back the covering of makeup and flashy clothes and decides she wants to discover who she is. For instance, she starts writing in a journal about how she feels about herself. Though it consists of her calling herself "stupid," the sheer fact of trying to undestand how she feels expresses how much she wants to feel the real pain she harbors. I believe that Maria almost expresses and represents how humans if they can push away from materialistic things and culture you can find what is truly important to you. Once you realize how little depth there are in things in fads and pop culture, you understand that there are timeless and exuberant parts of ourselves that can never change, such as feeling, emotion, and the want to comprehend.