To Myself by W.S. Merwin

"Even when I forget you
I go on looking for you
I believe I would know you
I keep remembering you
sometimes long ago but then
other times I am sure you
were here for a moment before
and the air is still alive
around where you were and I
think then I can recognize
you who are always the same
who pretend to be time but
you are not time and who speak
in the words but you are not
what they say you who are not
lost when I do not find you"

The first response I receive from this poem is the choppy–ness of it. The first four lines start out nicely, ending the phrase with a complete thought. Nevertheless, slowly it moves from smooth connected thoughts, to a more frantic phrasing (sometimes long ago but then… other times I am sure you… were here for a moment before) and ending in near incomprehensible words (what they say you who are not… lost when I do not find you.) However it is the last phrase “I do not find you” that jumps out at me (I would warrant that would be climax.)

But luckily, I did not despair at the complexity, but was rather intrigued at what an Author would want to say in such a masked way, for does not the poet write but to lead the reader to be understood? Re-reading (several times) the poem reveals the search that Merwin wants the reader to feel. Reading the disconnected run-on thought (for me) expresses the convoluted thoughts on his search for “you who are always the same…who pretend to be time but you are not time…” From this, one can interpret that this is his search for an other worldly power or state (supported by him being a devout Buddhist according to Poets.org). “Who speak in the words, but you are not what they say, you who are not lost when I do not find you.” [Punctuation added] The Words, or perhaps teachings, contain a piece of the searchéd, but is not contained, and is not dependent on the searcher if not found.

The Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini

           What a horribly fascinating book. It has been quite a long time since I have read a novel in which the main character has real problems and defects within himself, not outside.  Most books out there, especially fiction, but other genera too, make the main characters so that they can do no wrong. Sure, they may make a wrong choice, but there is always an excuse that saves them from being bad. Amir, on the other hand, is given a choice, but fails (literally) miserably, which haunts him the rest of his life.

            What I really admire about the story is how Hosseini lures one into feeling for Amir. The perfectly timed phrases, like the reoccurring “a thousand times over,” bring memories of other characters, which in turn brings a sense of reality to the reader. Then there are the memories themselves, which collectively reveal the true nature of all the characters within the book. Finally, the descriptive nature of Hosseini’s style brings all the events into clear focus, moving the reality up one more notch, almost but-not-quite to sureality.

            The only thing that I found that I disliked was the lessening realism toward the end. Everything was flowing smoothly (as in it made sense, not that the events were smooth) until (spoiler alert!) Sohrab attempts suicide. From there, the main characters no longer seem as true within their nature. Sohrab, for example, goes from being able to take care of himself (nailing a thug in the eye) to a wisp of a person. To me, if this was how Sohrab responded to the orphanage news, then he would have committed suicide far earlier, at least when Assef got his hands on him. At first Sohrab is strong, but overnight becomes weak.

            On the whole I greatly…experienced (enjoy would not work for it was not full of joy, but pain and redemption) this book and would suggest it to anyone else for its richness in style and culture.

The Devil's Highway by Luis Alberto Urrea

What an amazing book. I was impressed with this book, the largest reason being is that it opened my eyes to the border “war” going on. Surprisingly, the two factions are not America versus Mexican Illegal Immigrants, as most imagine, but more of the local enforcement (both American and Mexican  Border Patrol, nearby Police localities, ect.) versus the “Coyotes “, organized crime that charges the immigrants to cross, only  to be mistreat and sometimes outright abandon their charges, leaving them to often death in the desert. The Immigrants are the ones caught up between them, just because the Coyotes see an opening that people are willing to pay for and the BP trying to stop them.

What also intrigues me is that there is no uniform “Bad Guy.” One by the end begins to feel for all the pre-determined “Bad Guys”, whether that is the Immigrants, Border Patrol, Coyotes, or Governments. In the end, at least for me, the characters that are consistently the antagonists become the Coyotes, but at least one feels for some of them, and the politics and/or corruption in both governments, which is in some cases bad on both sides.

Lastly, one starts to actually understand why one would make the choices that the poor make. One example in the book was that politicos often have the idea that if the poor would stop having more children, then there would be more food/jobs/ect. However, they do not understand that the children are an investment to the future. When so many die young from various “environmental” pressures, the few that grow up become the insurance to the parents so that they can be taken care of when they are unable to work. To not have children would endanger your their own life, because few would then care if they became sick or injured, and also another source of income when well.

I would definitely recommend this book, so that it at least would dispel the myths surrounding the Border.

The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald

            I enjoyed this book thoroughly. Just like Heart of Darkness, this story has a dream- like quality throughout it. However, unlike HoD, which is feverish in its dream- quality, with its over descriptions and representations in smaller subjects but the lack in seemingly large subjects, TGG is like the dreams that come along that at the time feel vivid and make complete sense until  one wakes up, but still linger on and hold a strange fascination. What I perhaps love the most about the story is that during much of the book, the characters (except perhaps Carraway) seem very un-real, much like machines and animals. But somewhere between [Spoiler Alert!] Mrs. Wilson dying and Gatsby getting shot, the dream ends, and the characters become all too real. Ironically perhaps the most dream-character, Daisy, evaporates from the story at this time. The whole outline of the narrative is quite the piece of art, with clever tones preceding each other. 
          In addition, what I admire is the character Gatsby himself, and how he is created. He reminds me much of Tom Hamilton in East of Eden (for those who have read it) by John Steinbeck, because both characters have the possibility to take the easy road of mediocrity, take the hard road of being great and upstanding, or perhaps the hardest of all the road of balance of the two. And sadly, both end up dying, one because he could not bear himself, and the other by taking the fall for another’s wrong. It is when Mr. Gatz shows the book to Carraway that one realizes how real Gatsby was and how great he could have been. He had ambitions and faults and virtues, like most of the important characters towards the end. The exceptions to this are the Buchanans, where Tom seems to be all faults and Daisy all virtues.
          I would recommend this book, if only for the fact to experience the feel of faux-carefree-ness of a lifestyle few can handle.

Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad

     I was slightly disappointed in this book. Perhaps it was just me, but I felt that this story had little narrative. From what I have gathered is that the story was not about the retrieval of Mr. Kurtz per se, but about how the people around Marlow act and respond to given circumstances, and the description of the general atmosphere and layout of the setting in which Marlow experiences. In taking this, I agree, from his description of his experiences, that the whole thing was him “trying to tell you a dream- making a vain attempt, because no relation of a dream can convey the dream sensation…” Like when he introduced a new character: the character did not seem human, but a machine or animal, unpredictable and having no rationality to it. The descriptions of the landscapes and settings, they too had a surreal feeling to them. “[A] touch of fantastic vanity which fitted well with the dream-sensation that pervaded all my days at that time.”

                Along with the dreamscape, I felt that what added to the lack of narrative was the lack of tension and release. Some instances I found particularly singular were when Marlow was waiting for his boat to be repaired and when there was the difficulty along the river with the natives. For the ship, he first describes his problem in waiting for days for just some rivets to arrive. Yet he never explains when they do come, he just suddenly jumps into being on the river, without any transition between. In addition, when Marlow is describing the fight, and the doubt that Mr. Kurtz is dead, he immediately jumps into his experience in the future describing Mr. Kurtz, in try to console himself of the possibility of not meeting him. The only time I felt in the whole book of a tremendous pulling and then a satisfying release was when he went to Mr. Kurtz’s Beloved, and gave her the letters. There, the climax was tangible and, I felt, most willing to be taken with and “sucked in”.

                So yes, this book was fine, but I have certainly read more profound books dealing with Human Character or in Jungle Adventure, or whatever one interprets as the purpose of the book.