Thursday, February 14, 2013
Sydney Thiessa Post #2
"What We Talk about When We Talk about Love"
Reader-Response Analysis
What We Talk about When We Talk about Love, by Raymond Carver, is a short story published in 1981 in a larger book of stories with the same name. The story centers around four characters: Mel, who is married to Terri, and Laura, who is married to Nick, who is the narrator. The two couples enjoy a day of conversation and gin inside Mel's house. In the style of reader-response criticism, the story creates various gaps upon first reading, which are answered as the reader goes along. In the first paragraph, Nick says "We lived in Albuquerque then. But we were all from somewhere else." This quotation begs the question: does Nick literally mean they came from different cities, or does he mean they come from different mind-sets? As I continued reading, I realized that he meant the latter. All of the characters do come from different mind-sets, which means they all have different views of love because of how they experienced it. Terri's view of love is that it becomes so consuming that one will want to hurt the person one loves. This made me think about the cliché "You always hurt the ones you love. The ones you shouldn't hurt at all." Because of that line, I sympathized with her opinion of love. Her view becomes clearer when she says "he didn't love me the way you love me. I'm not saying that. But he loved me." Mel's view on love then becomes questionable to the reader. What is the way he loves Terri? Mel calls his opinion of love "physical", "that impulse that drives you to someone special"; "carnal", and "sentimental love", "the day-to-day caring about the other person". Terri's view is more of a violent nature, whereas Mel's view is spiritual and soulful.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Sydney,
ReplyDelete“in a larger book of stories with the same name” = “titled eponymously” (means title with the same name)
“The story centers around four characters: Mel, who is married to Terri, and Laura, who is married to Nick, who is the narrator.” I know you mention all four names here, but the syntax suggests the story centers on Mel and Laura. I don’t think you mean to, though.
“In the style of reader-response criticism, the story creates various gaps upon first reading, which are answered as the reader goes along.” I know exactly what you mean, but the story contains “gaps”, per se, whether or not someone uses reader response criticism. Just a bit of rewording, perhaps: “Reader response criticism highlights various gaps . . .”
“does Nick literally mean they came from different cities, or does he mean they come from different mind-sets?” – good question; even though you’re not doing New Criticism, this example is perfect for highlighting ambiguity.
“The ones you shouldn't hurt at all." – is this dialogue: As presented, it seems to come from you ,but you then say, “because of that line . . .”
“I sympathized” – present tense . You might explain a bit more about why this line initiates sympathy.
This is an interesting question: “Mel's view on love then becomes questionable to the reader. What is the way he loves Terri?” Are you suggesting this is a gap?
“Mel calls his opinion of love "physical", "that impulse that drives you to someone special"; "carnal", and "sentimental love", "the day-to-day caring about the other person". Terri's view is more of a violent nature, whereas Mel's view is spiritual and soulful.” Well written and observant here, but what’s the significance of their seemingly opposite views? What should, for instance, the ideal reader take from this? Or, do these oppositional view generate expectations (i.e., a reader might adjust expectations when confronted with Mel and Terri’s viewpoints and decide they’re likely to separate). Or, you could address this from the personal (i.e., you empathize with one or the other based on your definition, etc.)
I hope this provides a few ideas of how to fill out what you’ve already got. You do need to implement the language of Reader Response criticism more explicitly, but I can tell you’re getting the process. Looking forward to seeing how this develops, Sydney.
A