Correct 2nd Youtube clip

Whoops, sorry! Although I could have sworn I did it correctly, my blog below put one Youtube clip up twice! Here, hopefully, is the second (and to my mind, best) one....!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh2w_0NUtC4&feature=related

The deception of work and fulfilment of the middle class in Richard Yates "Revolutionary Road" and Arthur Miller's "Death of a Saleman"

After watching and then reading 'Revolutionary Road' I thought another text which was worth looking at was Arthur Miller's 'Death of a Salesman' as although set slightly earlier and not strictly speaking in suburbia, I thought there were several comparisons. I therefore based my presentation on examining what these middle class aspirant characters felt about their lives - Was it a shallow existence? Was home and leisure promised in all the adverts 'a big fat lie?' I have chosen the book version of 'Revolutionary Road' which I believe has more subtleties and the 1985 film version of Death of Salesman as I think the flashbacks in the play are easier to understand visually on screen. Although Miller and Yates wrote fiction, it was interesting in researching background to discover that Miller wrote Willy Loman from a relative of his (Uncle Manny I believe) and Frank Wheeler was eerily like Yates himself - he was that man who went to Paris with his family.

I was particularly intrigued by the two characters who did not survive - April Wheeler and the salesman himself, Willy Loman. Was there something about them? Was their self deception too great? Studying both texts a striking element was a certain level of deception of most of the characters with a 'class as lifestyle' belief that a certain middle class respectibility would make everything wonderful when actually amongst some it breeds frustration and doubt, banality, dull work and constantly buying into the lifestyle.

Since Revolutionary Road has already been discussed previously, for those of you not familiar with Death of a Salesman, please look up a synoposis online. I found this one had a good summary:
http://summarycentral.tripod.com/deathofasalesman.htm

To give you a further idea, here are 2 useful Youtube clips.
In the first, Willy is playing cards with his friend and neighbour Charley. Willy's brother Ben appears - but is he real or a figment of his imagination, since he is everything Willy is not? There is a flashback outdoors, to when they could see countryside and the boys were in High School. What do you make of Ben's comments about walking into and out of the jungle?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY-FyfpELfg&feature=related

In the second, towards the end, in this powerhouse performance from John Malkovich, Biff understands who he is, cannot live the lie his father is making him live - but somehow Willy doesn't seem to understand...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY-FyfpELfg&feature=related

Presentation on work as play

I thought as we have looked at the views of the working class and the middle class workers of America I wanted to have a look at different viewpoint of work in America and that is the idea of work as fun. My presentation will be looking at the idea suggested by Jude in the handbook about the idea of the IT industry providing a life of both work and pleasure.

i'll be looking at what it is like to work at google and facebook, and how this relates to the values of work and fulfillment. From what i have examined they are not conventional work places, and they market their jobs as fun, exciting and innovative. I will compare these ideas to that of the themes that we have studied this module and also look at the downside to working at these so called "perfect" jobs.

Also i will be looking at the article from the keywords book- "Modern" by Chandan Reddy and seeing how this fits in with the idea of the "innovative workplace"

Here is a short video on what it is like to work at google-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aOZhbOhEunY

Presentation on crossing over class boundaries represented within the films Pretty Woman and Maid in Manhattan

The topic for the presentation will discuss highlights the US as a society that has class and social structures in place despite the myth that the US is a classless society. Using films such as Pretty Woman and Maid in Manhattan these will provide the emphasis that in order to rise up the social and class structure put in place, then you have to change your physical appearance and act according to customs in that social class. In mirroring the way the upper class act, they become transformed into a new identity, leaving their past one behind. Drawing upon Ehrenreich comments also, I will comment upon how the working class are often ‘invisible’ to higher classes and have to disguise themselves or change their appearance in order to be noticed.

Both these films are from a post feminist context and it will also discuss the dominant theme of patriarchy holding the power over these women, which suggests how they are still the dominant gender. The films imply that the only reason these woman are able to ascend up the career ladder or class status is because of their interest and money put into ‘making over’ them. This will thus be critiqued, as it implies that without the ‘hero’ saving them from the poor and working class status, they would not have changed and stayed at their low level struggling. It is because of the male focus that the women are the ones adjusting to suit his needs and his world.

The Working Poor

The presentation will look at the working poor in the United States and the extent to which they go unnoticed in modern socity. First of all I would like you to take 5 minutes to watch this video
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/video/2008/jan/23/america.poverty detailing the plight of those in America who barely scrape by whilst working menial jobs, or in some cases, unable to work due to injury; but do not have sufficient, if any, medical insurance. This gives a first-hand account of how difficult life can be on the breadline.

I will be discussing some issues raised by Barbara Ehrenreich in Nickel and Dimed regarding her experiences of trying to scrape by in low-wage America and the ways in which low-wage Americans are often trapped by the glass ceiling due to a lack of Education.

I will also discuss the extent to which poverty goes unnoticed in the USA, and look at some traditional attitudes towards poverty in order to create a framework for which to answer the question as to whether Americans beleive that poverty is the fault of the individual or of the society in which they exist

Sam B presentation

The presentation will focus on the lack of fulfilment within the work place in the movies Revolutionary Road(2008) and Fight Club (1999). The financial stability obtained by both parties within each movie doesn't provide them with the desired level of fulfilment both suffering a dissatisfaction with the monotony of their everyday lives. The family in Revolutionary Road exemplifies a family living the American Dream.

One defining difference between the movies is that they are both set at different times, the primary differences here only tend to be in relation to aspirations one would crave for influenced by the changing in social ideologies or trends. This also helps to define the ways in which the individuals involved intend to solve their problems. Revolutionary Road tends to follow a more conventional course in order to find their fulfilment, associated with the American dream by moving to France believing that will provide the answers they are looking for, ironic that they are intend to more to France to find their dream when many come to America to find theirs. Fight Club on the other hand discovers avenues in which the main character can find his fulfilment through far more unconventional but debatable more contemporary methods.

The ways in which the individuals attempt to achieve their desired level of happiness within their lives will be discussed along with reasons for these. The changes within the characters throughout the movies will be used to asses these changes in their life and whether this has any effect on them, showing examples of incidents which would fulfill an individuals desires.

Sam B on Tichi

Tichi identifies Ehrenreich's book Nickel and Dimed as a great example of a contemporary muckraker novel as it not only identifies the "could look no way but downward" mentality described by John Bunyan's Pilgrims Progress of the then muckracker, but also as an example of how this gap between the rich and the poor is still huge, with few signs of change. Tichi also identifies how Ehrenreich's admittance that she wasn't living without any cushions or comforts as helping to make the experience more real and believable for the reader. Finally the quantitative facts such as wage per hour in relation to what the employers are receiving found by Ehrenreich helped to show a definite corruption or injustice within the system.

Tichi doesn't so much change my understanding of Nickel and Dimed but highlights another level of the novel that I didn't focus on, or at least remember, as much before. Similarly to Christine when reading the novel I was very focused on getting the individual facts and incidents Ehrenreich had un-earthed treating the novel almost like crime fiction in the sense that I wanted to collect all the facts and add them together to create my conclusion. Thinking back the emotional connection, identified by Tichi made the reading of the novel fairly easy meaning I could engage with it possibly even relate to it more. Sam and Jo's insight into the working-poor being "unseen and invisible" is a very astute point as you would hope if the powers that be within America could see or chose to see these levels of poverty they would seek to solve the problem, especially within today's contemporary society.

Tichi

Cecelia Tichi recognizes Nickel and Dimed as a significant, modern outlook on "muckracking". As Tichi states Ehrenreich enters into these visions of muckracking in america to once again show the harsh reality of the underpaid and overworked in the US. Tichi identifies that Ehreneich raises the issues that have been seen in relatable literature such as in The Jungle. But this time it is the contemporary worker in the reality of the 21st century US. Tichi shows us that Ehrenreich is bringin up issues that relate to basic human rights, which are going unnoticed in the American workplace, and the worker in these conditions is the "invisible" of society, to which Tichi also likens to being an inmate in prison.

I think that Tichi's view on Erenreich is to the point and exaclty how Erereich would want her work to be percieved. Tichi helped me again view the book in terms of the bigger issues, with human rights and the gap between the rich and the poor, but it is also about the narrative and how it attracts a reader to either see a different way of life, or maybe in some cases highlighting relatable situations.

Tichi’s assessment of Ehrenreich

Tichi’s assessment of Ehrenreich’s book Nickel and Dimed observes it as a contemporary muckraker novel that echoes the precedent initial writers of this genre such as Upton Sinclair, Ray Stannard Baker, Lincoln Steffens and Ida Tarbell. Tichi notes that Enrenreich’s novel amongst many others who have contributed to this insightful genre highlights contemporary society issues in unfair paid work and the harsh living conditions people below the poverty line thus have to endure in order to struggle to survive. This book amongst many others in its contemporary era is used as an example to provide the exposé of a capitalist America that is profiting unjustly( in any form of human rights), off the victims of the poor labour force in America. As described by Tichi “they deserve a corporate culture that is not willing to sacrifice people in the pursuit of profits.” This thus raises the realization that America is in a terrible state of a split nation between the desperate poor, and the excessive rich, which can and should be changed seeing that it is one of the most richest nations globally.

What Tichi highlights having not read the text since year one is that I initially didn’t read the book as being ‘melodramatic’, to me I was engrossed in the narrative as it being represented as a documentary text, and oversaw the fact that Ehrenreich speaks out and “doubles both as narrator and as central character.” The feelings of frustration with the inadequate political and social system in place to try and stop people from suffering below the poverty line, transforms the narrative from an investigative document to comments that expose the angry and disappointed sentiment by Ehrenreich. As described by Tichi, “Barbara the character, lets loose her feelings in a broadly satirical barrage that reinforces nickel and dimed as civic melodrama.” However, there is obviously a reason why it was written with an angle. Otherwise for it to be a dull factual insight, no one would connect emotionally to the atrocities that Ehrenreich exposes and the book would not be considered to be published, as there would be a lack of interest in buying it. Further, Ehrenreich would not have been as successful making it on the top sellers list, having reached out to so many people interested in what she had revealed.
With the insights into the inequality of people’s living conditions, muckraker novels have been successful with its ability to have such an impact on their audience and change the political and social policies in practice. Tichi thus emphasised the importance of this, and without such stylish and emotional writing from other previous muckraker novels, which connected to audiences over one hundred years before, such reform would not have been taken into action. One important resultant to the muckraker genre is Roosevelt reacting to Sinclair’s novel, which introduced the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act.
In considering the reaction to what happened then, it makes me question whether the political use of these texts are not as effective now as they have been in the past, when Sinclair’s book emphasised and propagated the need for socialism. It seems like whilst people are easy to frown and feel sorry for the poor, they are however not willing to protest much on their behalf, despite the minor protests by students in the ‘janitors for justice’ campaign. What difference have these texts really made in comparison to their predecessors? Such an example of people’s non conformity to make a difference to the poor can be perceived in the debate over Obama’s health reform where there is much hostility nationwide for this service industry to be changed in favour of low income citizens.

Sam W on Tichi

Tichi assesses Ehrenreich's work as being a significant contribution to the modern day world of Muckraking, as it paved the way for television documentaries to be made, giving the general public a view on how such problems are evident in the USA, and also for students to protest in the "Justice for Janitors" scheme, which is an example of how the book has paved the way for young people to become politically active on social issues. Tichi also discusses how Ehrenreich had started her own website whereby regular blue-collar workers can send in their own stories and memoirs, many of which are described as being well-written, suggesting that many people who are stuck in dead end low wage menial jobs such as the ones partaken in by Ehrenreich, maybe educated to a better level than required for low-wage work or are naturally more skilled and could be in better paid, more rewarding jobs but instead are trapped in the cycle of poverty and cannot escape.

I found Tichi's work useful in reminding me of some of the anecdotal moments of the novel, as having not re-read it since the first year, it was not fresh in my mind. If anything, Tichis work has reinforced for me how significant and compelling Nickel and Dimed actually is. I also, along with Jo, found Tichi's point about how the working class are invisible to be of interest; Tichi discusses how they poor can masqurade their poverty behind clothing from "consignement stores and walmart" (Nickel and Dimed, 216) and can fit in with the middle-class; whereas the economic status of the poor of Garland's expose is evident from the way they dress and their appearance. The major point I would draw from this is that although a class divide exists in contmporary America, it is not as apparent as 100 years ago; the working-poor in the USA are, as Tichi describes, "unseen and invisible"

Tichi on Ehrenreich

Tichi sees Barbara Ehrenreich's "Nickel and Dimed" as very significant in modern muckracking investigation at the start of the twenty first century. She cites documentary TV programmes which were inspired by Ehrenreich's undercover investigative stint spending a month each in low wage jobs around America. The on-going significance in her book has meant it has been read in book clubs and has inspired protest action, for instance with a group of 2001 Harvard undergraduates occupying a building for a "Justice for Janitors" campaign, which successfully won them living wage and benefit provisions. Tichi places Ehrenreich as the successor to Upton Sinclair, George Orwell and Josiah Flynt Willard's books and articles of the turn of the previous century and the 1930s Depression era, in raising awareness of the plight of low wage earners and illegal and bordering-on-illegal work practices. Although America is no longer industrialised as before, Ehrenreich exposes not so much dangerous and unsanitary processes but, in the service economy of post-industrial America, demonstrating that working all the hours possible, basic living conditions can barely be achieved, along with criminalising 'jumping through hoops' inductions and easy lay-off from jobs, while giving a veneer that the person is an important cog in the whole machine. Tichi says that Ehrenreich is part of a long history of investigative writing that speaks for those that can't, highlighting their plight and, with Ehrenreich's website nickelanddimed.net allows the type of low wage workers she worked amongst to be aware of each other and share their stories/difficulties. Tichi sees her as being on the crest of the wave of interest in the reality TV of the current media era.

Tichi, for me, highlighted or made clearer a few things about N & D that I had only half thought about. When first read, I considered the workers as just 'the poor,' but having since learnt how many Americans, who barely technically are above poverty level, see themselves as middle class I read Tichi's comment "The poor are invisible as they themselves are undercover, passing as middle class" in a different way now in terms of relating to the 'characters' in the book. On first reading I did find Ehrenreich's emotion and rage as veering on being unprofessional in trying to be serious about what she was putting across, but on reflection a tedious figure/statistic-laden report would have been tedious; to grab attention and be a bestseller you have to appeal to everyone. Tichi highlights that this occasional emotion is needed to strike a good balance between narrator and character so it is part memoir and part report. As it is, I see that Ehrenreich's science and social science background has provided enough ' serious footnoting' to back up her assessment whilst grabbing the attention of her readership, galvanising them to think with, as Tichi says, "A sense of social urgency." While I was aware that cleaners, waitresses, etc are often overlooked/invisible and when they are seen, looked down on, I was taken by Tichi's comment "It is the two Barbara's who cry 'Shame!' at the book buying readers who have the time to read Nickel and Dimed in part because they - no, we - hire others to clean our homes and serve us, wait on us." I thought this really brought it home that we are all guilty within the modern capitalist system, we all have the time to read such a book and that we all need to look to ourselves and mores to the point look to them and really see these invisible people and make a stand on their behalf.

Sam W on Revolutionary Road

Revolutionary Road tells the story of April and Frank, a middle-class suburban couple who are dissatisfied with the uniformity and monotony of their everyday lives, in which they are comfortably off and on the surface embody the American Dream, an affluent family living in Suburban Conneticut. April aspires to leave behind the suburbs and start a new life in Paris, taking her family with her. She, especially, is unfulfilled by her life in suburbia, and feels that a move to Paris will give her the urban vibe she so desperatley craves, and will get her away from what she sees as a cultural wasteland. However, Frank, although at first dissatisfied with his office job, is offered a promotion and feels compelled to stay. this shows how the capatilist structure entraps people into a cycle of monotony that is manifested in Suburbia. This is also shown through the attitudes of their neighbours who disapprove of their idea and find it absurd, and question why anybody would want to change from the suburban lifestyle.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/film-reviews/film-review-revolutionary-road-1003897431.story

This reveiw lambasts the film as "a didactic, emotionally overblown critique of the soulless suburbs". It does take into account that the suburbs are anomic and culturally vapid, and deals with the question that neither can be satisfied there, arguing claiming that both April and Frank are equally as bad as each other- "But Frank hasn't calculated on a stubbornness and selfishness in April worse even than his own."

The review ultimatley is negative of the film, drawing similarities between Titanic and American Beauty, Mendes' previous work

Revolutionary Road

In the film adaptation Revolutionary Road the representation of fulfilment seems to be an unattainable goal for both Frank and April. Throughout the movie some areas of their life would seemingly be fulfilled, such as their own house, a steady well paid job, two children, something which would fit into a description of the American Dream. However the combination of both individuals need for arguably further fulfillment causes their problems and eventual dislike for each other, almost blaming each other for the lack of an unquantifiable desire for an undefined object. April begins by trying her hand at acting which fails in an attempt to rid herself of the monotony of the life of a housewife. One specific aspect of her character suggesting she has no idea what she wants is that she never wants to "talk things out" with Frank, this is because she wouldn't know what direction she is arguing in, not knowing what she feels about certain situations. She sleeps with Shep and immediately wants nothing to do with him similarly to Frank with the receptionist, the irony is that two people so similar, in the way neither know what they want both acting out in similar fashions don't talk frankly about it to each other as they may have found the fulfilment they were looking for here.
Link to a review of Revolutionary Road: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/revolutionary-road-15-1520128.html
This review tends to focus on a comparison between the novel and the movie at some points but does provide some interesting points with relation to the literature. It comments on how the male and female roles are some what inverted at some points something which may contain an insight as a reason for why the couple is so dysfunctional. There is also comments on how the characters are difficult to understand and their representation complex which can make this message difficult to understand, this being attributed to the direction Sam Mendes although this may be a desire of the writer, a struggle for the reader as it is for the characters?

Revolutionary Road

http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117939047.html?categoryid=3266&cs=1
It is clear that in Revolutionary Road, the Wheelers find their sub-urban life too typical and mundane. Both April and Frank Wheeler had a very different vision of their lives in the beginning and felt that they had not achieved their original goals. April aspired to be an actress which she thought would provide a life which was unpredictable and exciting. Frank's dreams involved travel, and doing something which was intellectually stimulating and ultimately different to the life his father had. They were both left unfulfilled by the domestication of their lives i.e. marriage, children, big house, Frank working a typical 9-5 job and April being a housewife. And this is where they locate the downfall of their lives. This idea is interesting as is an opposite view of the typical American Dream and goes against typical American Values. They consider this life "hopeless" and Paris is where they see their dreams being fulfilled.
I thought that the main message of the film was that these two characters are blaming everything around them for their own personal failures. Even though they have what is seemingly the perfect American life, they want more for themselves which is clearly a middle class point of view as they feel that they have the choice to decide what their life involves. If they really wanted to they could have had their life in Paris, but it is Frank’s fear that holds them back, Frank differs to April as he is seemingly content with the family life and his job where as April is not. I read a review of the film from Variety and it picks up on several crucial plot themes and how this relates to ideas of work and class. The film portrays the downside of suburban life and how as nice something looks on the outside there is a darker depth on the inside (much related to Mendes’ other film American Beauty) But where Rev Road differs from American Beauty is that both the characters actually admit that their lives are empty. It is all based around these views of working for enjoyment rather than money.
Many elements of the film are notable such as the insane character, who is the only other person in the film who agrees with The Wheeler’s and as the Wheeler’s realise does this make them also insane? I would suggest that the film is about conforming to typical American Values and that the characters are both scared of losing the security of family life, and Frank’s job as they would feel at a loss. But in turn they also feel at a loss for staying and so becomes a situation that cannot be helped.

From Jo's and Christine's posts to the Yates Interview

Two excellent reviews, from the New Yorker and the Guardian. It is significant that as you both point out, they see Revolutionary Road as dramatising contemporary issues: Friedan's 'problem without a name,' and the sense of despair at the apparent success of the US in the 1950s (Eisenhower smugness; the suburbs). Behind both of these, I would suggest, is a still-relevant sense of the wider inabililty of capitalism to deliver the fulfilment that it promises. It is significant also, again as you both point out, that the reviews position the film as dealing with these wider issues tangentially; suggesting that its dynamic derives instead from the pecularities of the relationship between the central couple. Christine notes how Denby foregrounds April's 'neuroses' as sufficient explanation for the film narrative and emphasises the 'theatricality' of Mendes' approach as a director; Jo similarly echoes French's sense that the opening revelation that the couple 'hate each other' drives the narrative. In which case, any commentary on the wider issues would be beside the point.
This question is very similar to that dealt with by Richard Yates in the interview, which pivots exactly on insisting what is 'the problem'. Yates denies that either 'the suburbs' or 'marriage' (which links to the Friedan-informed reading) is the problem - referring to the blaming of these things as the 'Wheelers' delusion.' Where do you think this leaves us? Must this short-circuit into the film's apparent emphasis on the couple's personalities and relationship? I would suggest not: and that Yates is trying to insist on two things in the interview. First as a novelist he is insisting on the specificity of his art (literature as not being reducible to sociology - see the Denby and French reviews). But at the same time, he seems to be thinking of the suburbs, and marriage, as symptoms rather than causes. Symptoms of .....capitalism; and thereby perhaps, of individuals' relationship with work.
A final thought: both blogs and reviews refer to Friedan and the beginnings of second-wave feminism, which the book immediately pre-dates, and the film, arguably, post-dates. It is worth thinking through these relationships by reference to work: How far are the couple's problems circumscribed by the gendering of work?  

Review of Revolutionary Road

Revolutionary Road



The film adaptation of Revolutionary Road, which was originally published as a novel in 1961 explores the themes of fulfilment, and the American Dream in a suburban, mid 1950s backdrop. Prior to the 1960s women’s right movement, the 1950s era for women remained to be a struggle, with “the problem that has no name” as described by Betty Friedman in The Feminine Mystique. The Wheelers’ problems as depicted by this film, are largely manifested by April’s unhappiness who encounters this problem and stimulates a plan to move away from what they feel is the ‘suburban trap’ and lead a more happier life in Paris. There she plans to let Frank stay at home or do whatever he feels, whilst she works to maintain the family income, suggesting how bored she feels in becoming stuck in her role as ‘housewife’ and yearns for a change. It is mostly through April, in my interpretation that the Wheelers’ hold such contempt through their marital problems and lifestyle, as she clearly is not happy with her current role and feels trapped by it. This is further reflected through the change of mind by Frank. Whilst Frank shows dissatisfaction with his job, he becomes more than content with the idea to stay in America when he is offered a promotion at his job, thus illustrating that his dissatisfaction with life is based upon his lack of success he had previously. By following the footsteps of his father who also worked at Knox and never managed to progress up the career ladder, he embodies the positive aspect of the American Dream, whereby through his success he becomes a lot more happier.

The problems encountered by April, and the reason put forth by Frank why they cannot move to Paris is surfaced around April’s conception of their third child, which she strives to terminate in the chances to continue her dream for Paris. During their argument it becomes suggested that April’s unhappiness has been long running, signifying that they had their second child to prove that the first was not a mistake. April exemplifies the feelings of women in America during this era of not feeling fulfilled being a housewife and looks for excitement in relocating to Paris.

The website I have chosen is from the New Yorker: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/cinema/2008/12/22/081222crci_cinema_denby. It is quite a lengthy review that sums up the Wheelers’ problems rather well as, “in revolt against the suburbs, against conformity, against playing it safe, [in] believ[ing] that they are marked for some extraordinary destiny. Somehow, they will escape.”

The writer David Denby, additionally illustrates a feminist consciousness within the text as he notes the comparison between Betty Friedman’s book (being published two years after the original novel was released), and the frustrations that the character April encounters. Conversely however, he cites April feeling isolated due to her neuroses and not an issue due to her boredom as a housewife.

Revolutionary Road

Is there some misnomer/irony in the title? - A picture of comfortable 1950s middle class suburbia called 'revolutionary' road? A good phrase to sum up the Wheelers suburban nightmare is one of them says "We bought into the same delusion." They have each other and children and a comfortable lifestyle and no apparent money worries and yet are desperate for fulfillment. April harboured ideas of being an actress but, as is shown, this may have been another dream of hers like the family going to live in Paris. She is obviously intelligent but is stifled in domesticity - putting out the garbage, doing the laundry. You even get the impression that her children were 'by accident' and because it was expected of her. Frank, meanwhile, appears bored with an office job in the same company his father worked for. They have it all and seem well liked and yet barely like each other - the only time they appear happy is when they believe in their unrealistic dream of escape. This was a period of rampant consumerism and, as today, adverts selling a middle calss suburban dream, but as the Wheelers discovered, it was just an illusion/delusion. Within themselves and the bigger suburban dream sold to them they believe that their middle classness can free them - why not move to Europe? - Until friends and neighbours question why they are going, how April will magically acquire a good scretarial job and Frank will 'think of something.' One of the neighbours calls the idea "immature."

The link I have chosen is from The Observer:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/feb/01/revolutionary-road-review-winslet-dicaprio

It reiterates the 'seemingly placid, self satisfied surface' of the 1950s, when actually there was both political conformity (the McCarthy communist 'witch hunts' etc) and a social conformity after the disruption of the War years and certainly April's neurotic desparation reminded me very much of Betty Friedan's phrase "Is this all?" (The Feminine Mystique) in their clearly defined gender roles. Another thing the review highlighted was the fact that both Wheelers think they are somehow special, when in fact they are not. Some people even give them that impression but, like the marriage/twokids/white collar office job/nice suburban home/wife with glossy hair and nice frock/all mod cons, is an illusion, a lie, which is shown in the voice of conscience and truth which is the mentally ill John and at the end when 'friends' voice an opinion that they weren't the right sort of people. The truth would appear to be that is you really are special and are not a drone, then you don't live in the American 'burbs....

Hapke and Beinstein

(Sorry this post is late, I did find this reading quite hard to get into and understand fully. Nevertheless I got there in the end and have tried to make a good blog to make up for it.)

The problems mentioned within Hapke’s article outline Gold’s difficulty with was that he “could not yet render urban ghetto life artistically”. This was due to the lack of models around. There were only a few ‘leftist’ articles that had been translated from Russian to English, for Gold to get influence from during this time. Furthermore proletarian magazines hardly ever published American authors and were non existent. In addition, Alfred Krymbourg and Elmer Williams his colleagues from the Liberator held the “old Progressive Era trope of the bestial, wordless worker” which was prevalent amongst its time.
Gold became the only writer producing ‘proletcult’ literature whilst his other colleagues wrote fiction that was irrelevant to their workers revolution views. Therefore he struggled to make a convincing narration and characterization of his fiction whilst the success of the movement was also doubted by Lenin and Trotsky and the writers of this movement therefore felt alienated.

The resolution that Hapke suggests represented within ‘on a section gang’ which is a well adapted piece of leftist writing. Hapke states it “blurs the boundary between short story and reportage” and the Marxism references made are witty. The story is full of humour, which makes it enjoyable for a wider range of readers, such as Gold’s correlation between comparing the workers being paid, to it having an effect as an addictive narcotic.

Bernstein highlighted Gold’s intention of displaying “racial oppression [as] merely a subset of class oppression”. With the influential character of Nigger who is portrayed and seen by the boys as a heroic figure. He is also loathed against by the adults of the tenements on Christie St. Where Beinstein suggests that Gold has portrayed that the reason behind Nigger’s adopted name that the boys call him, is because of his fearless and plucky characteristics he holds. “This pejorative nickname is assigned because …. The boys feel he resembles a stereotypical African American man”. This nickname however was common to be used against “darker skinned Jewish criminals during the Depression”.

The adults of the tenement however would be torn between crossing racial boundaries as there would be pressurised to become Americanized and assimilate to the white supreme ideals of the time, as Beinstein expresses: “Facing nativist pressure that would assign them to the dark side of the racial divide, immigrants Americanized themselves by crossing and recrossing the racial line”. Such an example of the adults dislike towards the Nigger character is represented when Mikey is scorned for upsetting the prostitute. Her mother demonises his influence from the Nigger character, as addressed by Beinstein “His mother uses the word as an epithet (that Nigger) rather than as a name”. However Gold’s prime belief was that !in the working-class movement there is not race problem; that is a problem made by capitalism” and therefore by advocating the working class towards socialism it would alleviate such discrimination.

Hapke And Bernstein

Hapke suggests that the main problem with Gold bringing the ideas of proletarian fiction from Russia to America is the fact that noone was doing the same thing at this time and so there were a lack of models for Gold to get an idea from.
Gold was seen as the only member of this culture of 'workers' in America who wanted to copy the Soviet's idea of making 'art' dedicated to the world of revoluinary labour i.e. through literature. Early 'alienated' authors who were like Gold, shunned these new ideas as they thought that they did not translate well for America. And so having no support Gold had a few failed attempts at making proletarian fiction as it was hard to make the depression that they were living in seem anything but joyless and dull.
But Hapke thinks that Gold picked this up through "on a Section Gang" by using humor and becoming a worker-correspondant, as if he were reporting to the world the ups and dopwns of life in this culture. He does this by mixing fiction with real life, adding humor and anicdotes and i think this is why he made Jews, only semi-autobiographical as to keep up with this proletcult art, he had to add somethiong different.



Lee Bernstein is suggesting that even though Gold is know for his representation of Class identities, Jews also has strong connections to racial ones. Bernstein says that Gold plays with the boundaries of race and class and that they always differ. He thinks that Race is importanat in Jews, and this is seen trhough the kids racism which wasn't something of white supremecy but more of a relation to power. The bad guys were racist and so they were tough. The book is about avenging anti-semitism and as said playing with racial stereotypes of which Gold does with the character Nigger. Even though Nigger is a Jew like the rest in the story, his name can give him the percepion of the African American. But saying that he is called Nigger becuase he has power, "bold, tameless and untouchable" is how is described which turns around racist views of white power. And so this is how Gold uses race beyond the physical.

Sam W on Hapke and Bernstein

Hapke suggests that a problem encountered by Gold in his writing were “trying to work out problems of characterization and narration”. It is also suggested that there was a lack of mediums through which to convey proletarian literature in America without appearing to be too soviet-leaning; the “protecult” was seen as communist; with an estimated 450,000 members in the USSR expressing worker and revolutionary arts. The solution, expressed by Hapke, and seen in “on a section gang” is the blurring of the lines between fiction and non fiction, the lack of distinguishing between storytelling and reportage; and also a use of humour to keep the interest of the reader. Hapke argues that Gold even mixes wit with his Marxism by playing with the old adage “Payday is the opium of the people”, showing that within proletarian culture money is substituted for religion.

Bernstein argues that race is important in Jews Without Money. Whilst the character Nigger is “attractive and daring to the young boys, he serves as a reminder to the parents that their own place in the racialised hierarchy remained unclear”. He also discusses how the parents see articulating with white supremacy as a means to being assimilated as an “American”, and see “nigger” as the embodiment of all things bad in America, both in his behaviour and negative characteristics, despite not actually being African-American. Gold ultimately believes that race problems are created by the capitalist structure and that socialism would help to alleviate both racial and class issues in the United States.

Hapke & Bernstein on Gold

The problems that Hapke suggests Gold encountered with proletarian fiction:
a) A lack of models of this sort of writing - in the 1920s there were only a few texts which had been translated from Russian to English and virtually nothing in modernist American magazines
b) 'Liberator' colleagues colleagues Kreymbourg and Williams work of the 1920s retained the progressive era's "trope of bestial, wordless worker" - hardly inspiring.
c) A question of authenticity - were artists providing this type of work genuinely working class?

According to Hapke, Gold was unsure how to articulate his writing. So far, his work showed the joyless defeatism of the Jewish garment workers. It was bleak, pessimistic and oppressive which provided no alternative to making money. 'On a section gang' - as a combination of short story and reportage - was witty even when being political (for instance the comment about pay being the opium of the masses and "the gang spent most of it by the next morning"). Gold also learnt not to try and adhere American worker art to concepts of Russian cultural production, since they were culturally different and it didn't work in America. Instead, he decided on more American populist and sentimental models.

Hapke sees Gold as individualising and humanising Jewish worker culture. Mikey's father story of his labour (and failure to succeed) and his bourgeious psychology is a rememberance which is put to and assessed by his son who then ultimately has his own political awakening in realising collectivism is the answer. Both Hapke and Bernstein demonstrate a certain retaliation in the text, a small 'revolution' if you will, with Hapke highlighting Mikey's 'argument with God' and a realisation of the victims of competitive individualism, and the Christie Street gang retaliating against parental bourgeious dreams for them and, to a certain extent, 'society.' Bernstein revises Hapke by linking class oppression with racial oppression - more collective then individual. The boy gang identifies with black masculinity as personified by the heroic 'Nigger.' Rather tellingly Bernstein says, "Rather than African Americans being 'one of us' the Avengers of Christie Street want to be 'one of them.' " In performing blackness they reject the hopes of upward mobility that their parents have for them and 'thumb their nose' at authority, demonstrating their oppoisition to class expolitation and anti-semitism. They also 'colonise' the Italians as identifying them as Indians to protect their own Jewish collectivism. According to Gold, socialism would be the answer to both class and race problems. As he wrote to Dreiser, "In the working class movement there is no race problem; that is a problem made by capitalism."

Sam B's blog on Laura Hapke

According to Hapke, Gold struggled with his project to write "proletarian fiction" because he was primarily, for the first decade, distracted by his left-sided communist politics. He struggled to express urban ghetto life artistically attributing this in part to the lack of relevant models, these being hard to attain. Hapke believed he found characterization and narration as the largest problems; problems which could have been solved with increased levels of self involvement using his own experiences and observations. Gold struggled to see U.S. working deprivation through soviet culturally centred eyes.

Solutions to this, suggested by Hapke, are found within "On a section gang" where Hapke comments on how Gold blurs the line between a short-story and a report and how this works to add an element of witty Marxist humour into the piece, that these almost layers of anecdotes form the correct level of individualism needed to give his work success. Not to create a solution to the workers problem or to create a false yet successful end, a "workers revolution" but to simply show how the workers do what they do day in day out to try and make their existence as enjoyable, well bearable as possible.

Michael Gold Biography

American Jewish Fiction by Joshua N. Lambert (p.38)

http://books.google.com/books?id=08QctHhKdcgC&pg=PT54&lpg=PT54&dq=michael+gold+jews+without+money+bio&source=bl&ots=m7LpbqXI-X&sig=VH9tZCVnTG-A5wkZSR2lM20TDlk&hl=en&ei=jtSeS9T1L46i0gTNmcWlDA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CCkQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=&f=false

• Poverty forced him out of school at the age of 12 but briefly attended Harvard in later years as a young man

• He published Jews Without Money as his only novel, and wrote hundreds of essays and polemics against capitalism and corruption

• "He was a communist first and a writer second"

• "Gold’s novel is an expression of communist thought, it reflects the a major trend in the politics and ideology of early Jewish life in the U.S"

• Part of Gold’s novel appeal to internationals is within the final pages of the book in its “call to revolution… (O workers’ Revolution… You are the true Messiah)”

Chapter 12 entitled “The Gangster’s Mother” I felt was quite interesting in how it used the character Aunt Lena to repeatedly emphasise how immigrants felt when they had arrived in America. Her gaily attitude and excitement towards arriving in America is set up for a massive contrasting downfall on the harsh reality of America’s poverty within the East Side of New York. Therefore, setting up the reader in the introduction of her character:

“Everything was wonderful to my Aunt Lena… [she] was afraid of nothing, she laughed and all of us laughed with her. She was so happy at first, it made us all happy. Then everything came to an end”.

With Lena’s youthful naivety she soon finds out that she has to work to support the family to pay rent and her dreams of seeing New York city with thrilled eyes become deteriorated as she loses the energy and eagerness from when she first arrived. Constraint to the working life she becomes entangled in the long, tedious hours of manual labour at a clothing shop and no longer has time or willingness to go ‘see the boats at night’.

Additionally, not only does this chapter introduce the disintegration of an immigrants hopes and dreams in what they expect from the ‘promise land’, it also notes the dangers of the city for Lena, as she is pursued by the most feared gangster on the tenement, Louie One Eye. Here, there is a scene of him forcing himself on her and the mob of neighbours saving her.

Sam B's blog on "Jews without money"

A link to a biography of Michael Gold: http://www.jrank.org/literature/pages/4174/Michael-Gold-pseudonym-Itzok-Granich.html

Five biographical facts about Gold that readers of Jews Without Money should know:

· He was born to a poor immigrant Russian-Jewish family.

· He was educated at New York and Harvard Universities.

· He was brought up in the Lower East side of New York but became politically active from an early age and through his work met the likes of Eugene O’Neill so therefore kept himself partially outside this bottom rung of society enabling him to understand its intricacies better.

· His Anthology Proletarian Literature in the United States (1935) was an important source-book for radical writing in the USA in the inter-war years.

· He co-founded the New Masses and was its editor; through this journal Gold promoted a proletarian, neo-Stalinist view of the place of literature in society. He remained one of the most influential members of this left wing intellectual group between 1916 and 1930.

I chose paragraph 17 titled “Two Doctors”

This chapter has examples of people who have the same advantages as each other when younger showing one more successful than the other, it also has an example of how quickly a man’s work can change either for better or for worse. The chapter starts off by talking about the two doctors and how a job like that holds them as some of the most important people in the area, “In the old country the Jews worshiped their Rabbis. In this country the doctor was the community idol”. This helps to indirectly show how disease ridden the streets within the novel are, with many people falling ill, for example the father of the house is currently ill from the lead in the paint. Both doctors are mentioned at the start but one of them, even as highly valued as a doctor seems to struggle labelled as growing “thinner” and that “his eyes were sunk for want of sleep” over the winter.

The doctor and the father then speak about when they were younger and how they both used to go to the same school in “Roumania”, the doctor comments on numerous occasions about how the father could be the doctor if he hadn’t acted in such a way when he was younger. This shows an example of how people could get out of their difficulties if only they had realized what state they would be in when they had a chance to change it. This is supported by the father’s “But I am a man in a trap” quote after he attempts to go back to work, fails and then discusses how if he could buy a shop he would be fine although he needs $300 to buy that shop.

Michael Gold

Short Biography-
http://www.jrank.org/literature/pages/4174/Michael-Gold-pseudonym-Itzok-Granich.html

Michael Gold

1. Real Name Itzok Granich
2. Jews Without Money has been translated in more than fourteen countries, including Germany, where the novel was employed against Nazi propaganda.
3.Graduated From Harvard
4.was one of the most important and influential members of the group of left-wing intellectuals associated with such publications as Masses, The Liberator, and the New Masses between 1916 and 1930.
5. Also a playwright and his anthology Proletarian Literature in the United States (1935) is an important source-book for radical writing in the USA in the inter-war years

Like the others i also think that chapter 2 "how babies are made" is significant in how the street kids first learned about work, from the most popular job in their surroundings. And also how we get the perspective of different pimps, the kids and the mother on how they view the girls.
Throughout these early stages of the book i thought soem notable factors were-
How the descriptions of the summer were to the kids in the tenements just like the descriptions of the night in sister carrie, were to the adults. There is a sense of magic and in sister carrie the lights are likened to fairytale where as the kids in Jews, play games out in an unused piece of land which is their fairytale.
Also the early stages in the book where there is a sense of realism through joey Cohen getting run over, and the pervert and the descirptions of the horrible conditions and decay i.e. the buildings, cats and "bums", i think sets up for the book to show the need of working and being successful to get out of these conditions.

Sam W's post on Michael Gold

sam123 said...


Biography of Michael Gold –

http://college.cengage.com/english/lauter/heath/4e/students/author_pages/modern/gold_mi.html

Five interesting facts about Michael Gold –

1. Took his pseudonym from a Jewish civil war veteran he admired

2. Jews without money was published around just after the wall-street crash, during a time of economic turmoil; Barry Gross argues that had it been published a few years earlier it would have gone unnoticed, and had it been published later it would have seemed old – hat

3. in 1933 he became a columnist for the daily worker – a communist newspaper

4. Jews without money was circulated by German radicals as propaganda against the “Nazi anti-semetic lies”

5. Gold was a life-long Marxist; he never changed his views to go with the times throughout his life

Chapter 2 is a very significant chapter that looks at the attitudes towards work in Jews without money. Gold talks about the prostitutes and pimps that were so prevalent in the lower east side of New York City, and shows the darker side of life within the city. The chapter examines how people made money through the sex industry; although an amoral means to an end, the characters still became better off than people who worked in industries such as factories. Although Gold as a child found the act of sex disgusting and was horrified when it was pointed out to him that it was a part of life and “where babies come from”, he later accepts this. Whilst realising that sex is something that happens in life, he also recognises that selling sex is something which happens on a regular basis, symbolising an acceptance that pimps and prostitutes are big business in a metropolis such as New York; a part of the darker and seedier part of life.

Jo's post on Michael Gold 1

Jews Without Money (Gold) - 1st week


The biography of Michael Gold I chose is:

"Masterpieces of Jewish American Literature" - Stanford V Sternlicht
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=iutOijQDzNUC&pg=PA37&lpg=PA37&dq=Itzok+Granich+Biography&source=bl&ots=MSRHUvvgej&sig=0QzqXhsjJmgOfHD7DwPynIYciEY&hl=en&ei=1AWZS6KsA5aSjAfxxZH4Dw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CAkQ6AEwAjgK#v=onepage&q=&f=false


5 facts about Gold that readers of “Jews without Money” should know:

• His name was originally Itzok Isaac Granich. His gradual Americanization of his name growing up (and pen name of Michael Gold) reflects his having left his immigrant ethnicity (so prevalent in the story) behind. To get on, he has become more ‘American’ and English-speaking…something repeated in the story at least a couple of times
• Gold didn’t make it implicit that the story was fiction. It is in fact semi-fiction – a fictional interpretation of his own background in the Lower East Side of NYC
• Gold’s dislike of capitalism stemmed from this father’s failure to succeed and had to resort to being a handcart pedlar – although he had always worked so hard.
• Unlike some writers who flirted with Communism, Gold was a life long Communist. He had already been to the Soviet Union by the time he wrote JWM but was disillusioned by the country. His communism was more of the heart rather than cerebral adherence to theory. (This shows in his very heartfelt depictions of the conditions of the working poor in JWM)
• While Gold may have known the seedier side of the Lower East Side himself, when writing this book, he was part of the Greenwich Village set, being friends with fellow writers like Dreiser and Eugene O’Neill (which may be reflected in his lack of moralising).

The chapter I find very interesting in relation to understanding American work attitudes is Chapter 2 “How babies are made.” The story of JWM catalogues many instances of poor immigrant types struggling to earn money, to live an “American Dream” of at least being comfortably off, but not succeeding despite all their hard work and effort. Chapter 2 highlights how some of what might be considered the dregs of the city – prostitutes, pimps, bar and gambling house owners, actually manage to earn a good living. What is put across is the ability to become ‘American’ to succeed. ‘Mikey’ is influenced by Harry the Pimp and Jake Wolfe the saloon keeper in the importance of English: “That is what I am always preaching to our Jews; become an American. Is it any wonder you must go on slaving in sweatshops?”
Characters understand capitalism and that morals of the old country can be put aside in the big American city: Ida the Madame ‘brags about the tenement houses she owned.’ Harry the Pimp is seen as a bit of a philanthropist, who teaches the girls he controls the value of thrift! ‘Rosie’ worked in a sweatshop until she became ill but on being rescued by a pimp, got on so well she could bring her parents over from Europe. The landlord Mr Zunzer ‘a pillar of the synagogue’ who appreciates in a truly capitalist way that the whores pay ‘3 times the rent you do’ (and promptly!) and was only too happy to fill his properties with them. All of these characters, no matter what their age, appear to have left the ways of the old country behind. They understand market forces and their niche in the market and the importance of becoming ‘American’ – or at least appearing to perform being one.

Michael Gold 1st session posts

Post a link to a biography of Michael Gold (sometimes known as Mike Gold).


List what are in your view five biographical facts about Gold that you think a reader of Jews Without Money should know.

Identify the chapter of Jews Without Money that you consider is the most interesting, and describe why.

Sam's blog on Seguin

Stephen Ross's review on Robert Seguin's Around quitting time located at muse journals http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/modern_fiction_studies/v048/48.2ross.html identifies Seguin's primary notion is that :

"we must adopt a dialectical perspective which analyzes class as a fluid process rather than a category with determinate content"

He identifies how a class labelled "middle-class" has become so broad that it both identifes everyone as belonging to this group of people therefore in effect removing all class systems. He additionally identifies two of his theories as "broad contentions"; one being the pastoral and the other being the frontier and the idea that the combination of the two concludes in a distictively middle class utopia of leisure. This basically means that by the American people percieving leisure as their Utopia they detatch themselves from work; work being labelled as one of the major signifiers of class.

Robert Seguin's study looks at the cultural context of the American middle-class during the modernist era; Seguin draws primarily from a Marxist and cultural understanding and study. The notion of middle-class is labelled as a fantasy one which is created by the reformulation of the past pastoral discourse that has ideological, material, and physical elements. The "updating or refunctioning" of such elements is what Seguin calls a middle-class space. This space suspends class itself, therefore creating "classlessness." In other words, there is no difference between being middle-class and being classless.

The article "the toil of labour" counters this arguement however depicting the view of the working man being a struggle, arduous and backbreaking. Work is something you do because you must but you loathe every minute of it, there is no reward other than the money which you need to survive, survival being the primary objective.

Christine on Seguin

The Review ‘Producing Middle classlessness’ by Amy L. Blair on Seguin’s article, at http://www.jstor.org/stable/30041934?seq=6  notes Seguin’s contended notion of ‘class as lifestyle’. Seguin finds the idea of middle-classlessness problematic in what he sees as a “symptomatic, unproductive, peculiarly ‘postmodern’ preoccupation with the consumerist element of class.” Blair expresses that middle classlessness is different to ‘classlessness’ as “it is not just a desire to weaken class structures but a utopian wish for the ‘felt elimination of these - a freedom from class altogether’”. Seguin thus proposes that once ‘class’ becomes synonymous with ‘lifestyle’ then anyone can conform towards a class society and therefore Seguin suggests in theory that the U.S becomes a ‘classless society’.

However, as noted by Blair Seguin’s most important interest is to emphasize that “class has not been treated with the kind of analytic power it deserves, and those who would downplay the material underpinnings of class risk adding to the suppression of the potential for class consciousness in American society”.
Dreiser’s extract of Toil of the Labourer contradicts Seguin’s notion of a classless society. In Dreiser’s view and experience he expresses how the labourer is constrained to his role as a manual worker. Usually worked hard, beyond his ability, Dreiser states “There is no provision made for the future of those who will be as tattered remnants when the things they laboured for have been accomplished”. With this negative opinion on the future of the working American, it contrasts Seguin’s optimistic look upon the collapse of class divide.

Jo on Seguin

Seguin "Around Quitting Time"
The review of Seguin's book "Around Quitting Time: Work and Middle Class Fantasy in American Fiction" I have chosen is :
Producing Middle Classlessness

* Amy L. Blair

* American Quarterly, Vol. 54, No. 2 (Jun., 2002), pp. 341-348

* Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press on JSTOR.
(I personally found Seguin's ideas very difficult to understand but hopefully the I have got the general idea in the following summary!)

Robert Seguin is of the Marxist school of thought and seeks to correct a postmodern preoccupation with consumer culture whereby class and lifestyle are intertwined - you are defined by what you desire, therefore in a truly American way of thinking anyone can participate in class identity, making the U.S. a classless society (in theory, at least!) Seguin sees that there are differences which are not purely material. Middle classness rather than classlessness. People are identified by the question, "What do you do?" To understand middle class functions Seguin cites 'quitting time' as the crux of this, a shifting and variable state between working and not working as work prepares to end and leisure prepares to start. (Seguin also quotes Andre Gorz who identifies modern leisure with being solitary, compared historically to it being a group activity). While he says that class is at heart about economics, he also says it is about time and this shifting time at that part of the day is one which could be possibly understood in future as important in a non-alienated relationship to labour.
Seguin explains that Dreiser positions Carrie's arrival in Chicago (a big American city at the start of rabid consumerism)at 'quitting time' shows American middle classness with a synthesis of frontier ideology of forward movement and dynamism and pastoralism, citing the text where the street lamps stretch out further and further to the prairie, which can also be read in reverse. Seguin suggests that the twilight time which Carrie arrives at of finishing work is interpenetrated with the approach of leisure - it is a moving, interconnectedness of all these things; what Seguin says of Dreiser as a 'utopian breathlessness' moment.
In "The Toil of the Labourer" Dreiser explains how hard work is artless and thoughtless. It is hard graft with a taskmaster foreman and paltry wages with no humanity, and even when he is made foreman himself he has a problem with equating his ideals with getting the job done or losing it. However, when the work is completed he could see 'that this lovely thing might be' - that all the trials and tribulations of hard graft made something beautiful. As he finishes work in the end, he exhibits that 'utopian breathlessness' at all the incredible sights of the city around but knows the labourers will not get to share it. Ultimately seeing the contrast of this, watching the Italian workers trudge wearily home, he decides he does not want to be a part of it. Both "Sister Carrie" and Dreiser's own labouring experience reflect the time where there is a certain excitement at the end of the day in this transitional period, but of a time when consumerism was coming to the fore but working roles, although changing, were clearly delineated.

Posted by Jo Wrigley at 11:55

Sam on Seguin

Seguin and Toil of the Laborer
The review of Around Quitting Time I have found is from http://www.amazon.com/Around-Quitting-Time-Middle-Class-Americanists/dp/0822326701. This site gives two reviews from academics, and is aimed at people who are possibly contemplating buying the book.
Seguin aims to look at the notion of Middle-classness in the united states, and juxtaposes this with the notion that America is a classless society; on page 2 he argues "the term "middle class" itself in effect becomes synoymous with "classlessness", an ideologico-practical inhabitance of the world wherein class has been putatively superseded, or at least temporarily suspended".

Seguin aims to outline that although America views itself as a largely classless society, most Americans describle themselves as middle-class, therefore showing how America is imagined as an ideological utopia by its residents.
The extract of Dreiser's Toil Of the Laborer counters this, showing how the working man is exploited, overworked and underpaid. He describes from his own experiences how manual labour is hard and boring and meagerly rewarded; the worker, he says, is treated like a machine and pushed to his physical limits. He also shows from the perspective of a foreman how the hierarchy is so powerful; although he wishes to ease the lives of the laborers in his promoted role, there are many constraints from above, showing how the world of work involves taking orders from superiors, and in Drieser's experience, is unfulfilling.

Posted by sam123 at 11:53

Rich on Seguin

As I am late to post, I really couldnt find anything that wasn't sam or Jo's reviews but instead everywhere i looked i got the sort of "synopsis/review" from the publisher-

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Around-Quitting-Time/Robert-Seguin/e/9780822326755

I thought Seguins first chapter was as the others have previously said much about the idea of class in America or more so the lack of classlessness. He is comparing the idea of middle class in America in which is hard to define as it has become a mutual understanding for Americans, from low paid workers to the higher end, the majority feel middle class. So in some ways this works out well and does suggest a somewhat classless society. But what is happening in fact is that America considers itself classless and almost utopian as it does not follow the class system as Europe does.

It tries to deny class in its society by cutting off from the aristocratic European ways but in fact builds a class system through captialism. He talks about how middle classness is rooted in the mainstream of everyday life- capitalism and also has strong feelings about the link between capital and time. i.e. how capital does not exist withough human's time and labour. He calls America's class struggles "violent" and this is due to its sheer capitalised society.

One point which was unclear to me was the reference to the frontier and pastorialism as i couldnt figure out if he was being literal, meaning the sort of city vs the rural, or more like cooperation vs the small business but i guess both views are quite similar metaphorically.

In regards to Sister Carrie he is very interested in detailed descriptions of the cities visual elements, just like the book is and the idea of how the city becomes a different place at night, more alive and somewhat enchanted. This links to Seguins reference to labour and time, as he is saying that the night time is to be admired as it is when the worker can explore the night and the city. This is the Utopian element.

Posted by richt53 at

This blog is for Jude's SIS II group