If John Gardner were still alive how would you respond to the tone and ideas in his letter to the students. Write a letter in two parts. The first part should explain and justify your reaction to the tone of his letter. Quote him; base your opinion on exactly what he has said and how he has said it. The second part should explain and justify your thoughts about one or more idea brought up in the essay. Again, make sure you respond to exactly what he has said. This second part should show that you have understood what he has written (in the letter and in the novel) and that you have thought about it deeply. (For an example, think about what Christian T said on Friday. He reacted to this part of Gardner's letter: "There are basically two choices: either you behave as if there were a god and try to determine what's right, in other words you make up values, you dream up a future better than the present and try to create it; or else you accept the world as it seems to be and scoff at all values (dreams for the future) because according to what is true at this moment they're lies." Christian pointed out that "making up values" is a kind of lie and accepting the world as it is is at least a kind of truth. That's the kind of statement (but more developed) that I'm looking for.
Post your letters in the comment box below. If you have problems with the comment box email me at jcook@gloucester.k12.ma.us.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Dear John Gardner,
I read your letter to Susie West and Students. My opinion of your letter was I thought you were very rude and obnoxious. I know that you were trying to explain the purpose of your book to them because they obviously weren’t getting it. But there is a more accepted and more patient way to handle it. The thought that you told them you were kidding at one point but that doesn’t matter. I know that they are AP students but they still need to be treated like human beings. They need to be respected like you would expect some respect from them. In one point you said, “But the point is this: You’ve read, all of you, too quickly, too innocently--too much like children.” There is a nicer way to put it. You could say maybe you didn’t understand it because you just read it a little too quickly try reading it again a little more slowly. Maybe they did read it slow and just didn’t understand it. You didn’t see them read it, so who are you to say they read it quickly and carelessly? At another point you stated, “I’m a little insulted that all three of you, Teresa, David, and Robin, assume my opinions about life on earth must correspond with the opinions of a snake. (Take it easy; I’m kidding).” First of all that was extremely harsh to say even though you state you were kidding. I don’t think you were really kidding. People have their own opinions and from reading this I think you have the opinions of a snake. You are very rude, obnoxious, and harsh and you really need to chill out. That’s my opinion.
Not to just beat on you the entire time but there’s one part of your letter that I just disagree with completely. You state, “We all react in the same way to humiliation or sickness, betrayal, praise, cheap flattery, and so on: though it’s of course true that in the long process of living, each of us learn to handle his emotions in a unique way.” I think you are completely wrong on that part. We all deal with things totally differently. I may be hurt more when someone close to me dies than you are. I might deal with pain harder than you. We all react to things differently; it’s part of our build and our personality. If we all reacted to things in the same way then our world would be a very boring place to live. So yes I would have to say on that part you are definitely wrong.
Dear Mr.Gardner,
I took the time to reread your letter to Susie West and students, in behalf to know the true understanding to what had been passive and highly distinguised to others.While reading your letter i noticed comments that you made were rather degrading and very judgemental. The dialect was clear to some,as it was also a bit of a blur to others who couldint quite pin point the true understanding. It was nice of you to take the time of day and explain its true concept, but your explanation was also a bit shady and harsh because i dont think anyone was asking to be ridiculed. I understand your frustration but you could of dealt with it in a more gental,mature and respectable way, in order to be taken seriously. If you dident so much point out certin individulas such like david, and ctitisize his approach on "fast reading" you should of also scrutinized your own writing.I get that you were insulted but i dont think necessarily that was the picture they were trying to paint. They implied to you that they dident fully understand the true concept of grendel, and you abruptedly misenturpted their requests by blurting out needless remarks. Their was a certin comment in which you completly blew out of porportion"But the point is:You've read, all of you, to quickly, too innocently--to much like children" it was there where i became more angered at the fact that you were more into belittleing people rather then being helpful. I also noticed that you contradicted yourself when you stated that "but if hes a true artist, he doesint ram it down the readers throat: he sets the alernative possibilities, he explores every avenue of the question, and he leaves the reader free. From reading what you wrote there and reading the above paragraph im a bit flabergasted because thats exaclty what you did, you not only ramed your hurtful comments down their thorat but you also did the same with reteaching the story, by throwing it right back in their face and manipulating their feelings, and twisting their thoughts about your story and turning it into an argument.In what context did you set Teresa, David, and Robin free? in which sentece did you set alternative possibilties without being rude? Your fully aware their AP student and yet, still you treat them with total disrespect. Alhough everyone has different implications about certin aspects, it affects different people in different manners and thats what you need to understand, so my advice to you is when reteaching a story, do it in a softer more irrational approach., in order to recieve the respect you deserve.
1 Pearly Gates
Heaven
November 7th, 2008
Dear John Gardner,
Forgive me for not giving you this letter 28 years ago so I could receive feedback, but I question a few views you have on your book Grendel. I enjoyed reading the way you spoke to Susie West and her colleagues and giving your own interpretation of this book. Like you said in the letter to Susie, “Serious works of literature not like sermons at church, telling you directly what you should or shouldn’t do.” Most high school students who read what you just said would ask questions such as, ‘ If I can’t take this serious work of literature to get a direct point than how will I get the true meaning of the work?’ The answer would leave many of these students sitting there and getting indefinite answers because with books like Grendel are made for the sake of argument of the open enders you leave upon this whole book, like when Grendel interprets the sleeping noises of Grendel’s mother saying “warowish” into “beware of fish” there is no definite way to prove or disprove she knew of the oncoming death of her son coming from a water bearer like Beowulf. Another point in your letter that I would like to comment upon would be this excerpt from paragraph 8. “One of the most exciting things in a great work of art is that it makes the reader realize things before he didn’t know before-about himself and the world.” I think that you got a good point here saying that about a great work of art but I did not think was as great as you made it out to be. (joking) In this masterpiece you tell us that we realize things like, Grendel becoming less of a villain and the Dragon only being a figment in a messed up mind of a confused monster. The book Grendel shows us that his relationship with his mother is like some teenage boys, estranged.
Dear Mr. Gardner
I very much enjoyed your response to the letters from the students. I found them to be very helpful in understanding the meaning of your book. I found your passionate tone to be very amusing. I especially enjoyed your definition of "true art" as presenting all of the options in a thought provoking way and letting the reader decide what he or she thinks.
I found it interesting when you tried to point out the hypocrisy of Abraham Lincoln in issuing the emancipation proclamation. There is no denying that the emancipation proclamation was a step forward for the civil rights movement. Weather Abraham Lincoln issued the document due to genuine feelings of remorse over slavery or to give him leverage in a time of war is irrelevant. I found this to be analogous to Beowulf's motivation for fighting for good, because the theory of inner heroism ,although appealing, is merely a falsehood. Beowulf did not fight for good but for his own glorification. Because Beowulf fears death much alike the dragon he attempts to immortalize himself in the memory of his good deeds. There is no way that one can argue the existence of a selfless hero without there being question as to the morality of their actions.
The question that the book proposes "how should I live?" is merely a question of philosophy. If one is an existentialist then one should create meaning by which to live by. If one does not believe that life can be improved then they should seek instant gratification. In Grendel's case however, Grendel does not stand a chance with Beowulf's philosophy of existentialism because there is no way that he could improve his life or be accepted by the people as he is. Every person has the ability to become whatever their heart desires but, Grendel is trapped in the body of a monster and is not given the same possibilities. Thus justifying suicide for Grendel. If grendel had known that beowulf was coming to fight him and at which point craved death, had grendel killed himself it would have not only been a way out of his agony but would have also prevented beowulf from succeeding. Thus making suicide a glorious thing for Grendel.
In your response you said that before Grendel dies he accepts Beowulf's philosophy of existentialism and discovers that "imagination can reshape and ultimately improve the world". This was shocking to me because I was lead to believe that grendel was not in a position to improve himself and that even if he could at one time in his life it was far too late for that. Grendel had a long established reputation as a monster and it is very unlikely to change his mind after a few persuasive words with Beowulf.
Dear John Gardner,
I took the time to read the letter that u have sent the students. I enjoyed the humor that u gave back to the kids. My opinion about the letter is that I liked the way you played everything out. As I was reading the letter I really started to understand the book more. Before I red this letter I understood the book but this letter made everything more clear. No offense to your actual book but the book didn’t really interest me but the letter, the way u put the letter really interested me. Maybe because I have a different perspective towards books and letters.
In the novel and as in the letter you mentioned that grendel had his own values. Most people these days have there own values also. People have there own point of views. Grendel has a very unique value. Grendel feels like he could do anything he pleases. Some people believe in god but not everyone can or want to believe in god.
Dear John Gardner,
I have read your letter and I can see how some could see this letter as mean or harsh. But, in my opinion I think that the tone you used was appropriate. These kids did write to you and ask your opinion on topics related to the book Grendel. You even said you were just kidding when you said “I’m a little insulted that all three of you, Teresa, David and Robin, assume my opinions about life on earth must correspond with the opinions of a snake(take it easy; I’m kidding)”. I’m assuming that these kids in their letters talk to Gardner as if had the same beliefs as a snake (metaphorically). I guess I could see how this could be mean but since he said just kidding then I don’t see how that’s mean. Also when you said “You've read, all of you, too quickly, too innocently--too much like children”. Maybe some would assume that would be mean, but these kids are high school kids right so they should be treated like adults. He explains that these kids read too quickly and didn’t take into effect that as you say “Serious works of literature are not like sermons at church, telling you directly what you should or shouldn't do. It's true (as Robin understands) that a good writer is indeed a careful philosopher; but his method is not to argue for a single position--in the way Nietzsche did, for instance--but rather to explore, with all the care and wisdom he's capable of mustering”. So I understand what you saying that these kids just assume you believe what the protagonist of your story believes when that is not the truth. A good author makes a characters beliefs and personalities not to be like his but to make a point or to contrast another character. And I’m sure that’s what you did. But, what I got out of this book and your letter is, that while these nihilistic views, while at times may seem true is not the way you should look at life and will lead you down a bad path. If these nihilistic views hold up then I believe that as you say you should “behave as if there were a god and try to determine what's right, in other words you make up values, you dream up a future better than the present and try to create it”. You shouldn’t (as you say) live like Grendel, because as you can see from Grendel there were some clear signs that he was suicidal and I’m sure that, that empty view of life would lead to suicidal thoughts. This book has introduced me to nihilism and I’m sure you don’t want people to think like that but, these views could hold truth but it’s not the way to think, having a faith in god or another higher power is a good way to repel those thoughts. Even though you may, at heart not believe those views or beliefs, so you may be lying to yourself but even though that may be bad it’s a lot better than be nihilistic. That is the message I got out of your letter and this letter helped me to clear up the novel Grendel.
Dear Mr. Gardner,
I think that it is very thoughtful that you had written back to Miss Susie West and the students. The way that you wrought back to those students was not the best way. You could have been a little bit nicer. For instance when you said "You've read, all of you, too quickly, too innocently--too much like children." For one thing we do not have a lot of time to go deeply in depth in a novel because we have to read other novels for our curriculum that the state requires. Also students might read innocently because some students it might be hard to read in between the lines for example me. Some students are straight forward and are serious about their reading and have a hard time understanding when someone is kidding. For instance when you said "I'm a little insulted that all three of you, Teresa, David, and Robine, assume my opinions about life on earth must correspond with the opinions of a snake. (Take it easy; I'm kidding.)" I would have never gotten that you were kidding unless you wrote that. Also it did not seem like it was presented in the nicest manner either. Students may not take criticism as well as adults because there is a different level of maturity. The only thing that really needs to be worked on is the attitude.
In your letter when you wrote "But the point is this: You've read, all of you, too quickly, too innocently--too much like children." What I have realized about reading the novel Grendel is that if i read the chapter too quickly I would miss great detail. For instances sometimes I would have to read a chapter a couple of times so i could know what season it was through the zodiac. Things were represented very subtle in Grendel. I do realize now after reading the novel Grendel and then reading the letter made me realize how much information i had missed. All this had happen from reading the novel to quick. After reading that letter that you probably have put time and effort into and it had made me understand the novel Grendel even more. My point is that if you read something too quickly then miss thing but read intently then you won't miss as much detail. In other words you are right about reading too quickly.
Dear John Gardner,
I read your response to the students letter. In some way I agree with you, maybe they did read your story to fast. However I think you could have responded in a kinder way. You did not have to act as though you were speaking down to them. I understand how you might have felt insulted, but they were asking for you to help them and give them your advice. At one point for me you went to far when you stated “I’m a little insulted that all three of you, Teresa, David, and Robin, assume my opinions about life on earth must correspond with the opinions of a snake. (Take it easy; I’m kidding).” First of all there was no reason to point them out by name they know who they are. Second of all you weren't really kidding atleast that's how I felt, I mean if you were really kidding then you wouldn't have continued to be so harsh and rude to them through out the whole letter. As for your book there were some part i was interested in and I enjoyed how you used to horoscope, but it was a book i would just read on my own. I would not tell anyone they have to read this book, because to be as honest as you were to those students your book was boring. You lost my interest in many parts the only part that really stuck in my head was when you gave a description about the goat in one of your chapters. So for someone who acts so above other people such as Susie West and her students I expected better work from you now knowing what you act like in response to people who ask for your help.
Dear Mr. Gardner,
I have recently read your letter to the students. I appreciate how blunt and to the point your letter was. You answered many questions many questions that I had after reading your book. The book was excellent. I liked all the philosophical ideas you weaved into the already exciting plot. One thing I didn’t like was the fact that Grendel was a nihilist. I don’t think that anyone can legitimately have no beliefs or believe in nothing. He had to believe in something because at the end he was suicidal. I think he was suicidal not as a way out but because he failed at making friends or, succeeding at any attempt to make himself not alone in his world, because of this he asserts his will on other people to me that says he does have beliefs just twisted crazy ones. I think it started a cycle like a snow ball effect of failed beliefs and attemts.
Dear Mr. Gardner,
I just recently read your letter to Susie West and her students. I liked they way you responded in your letter because got right down to the point in telling them there thoughts were wrong especially in paragraph 3 were you say “I’m a little insulted that all three of you Teresa, David, and Robin, assume my opinions about life on earth must correspond with the opinions of a snake. But the point is this: you’ve read, all of you too quickly, too innocently”. I like that because not only do you tell them that there wrong you also tell them why there wrong. What I also like about your letter is that you can admit that your book is not a master piece as said in paragraph 6 because I did not find Grendel to be one of the better books I’ve read but I do like your ideas that are brought up and the book and I think it’s a great way to get people to think about how they should live there lives. Something that kept appearing as a question in my mind that was not answered in your letter was why you used all of the zodiac symbols in your story.
Your book Grendel made me think about the way I should live my life (even though I didn’t like your book). And at this point in time my beliefs are very mixed up for example I do not believe in a god or that any thing happens after death and your going to die any way, but I also think you should enjoy your life and have some values in witch you should live by, but I’m still thinking about.
Sincerely
Donny Parsons
Dear John Gardner,
I have spent the time to read the letter that responded to the student questions and concerns. I do believe that you were harsh in how you wrote to the students who spent the time to read and ask valid questions. Even though you had said that you were “just kidding” it does not give you the right to criticize the people who were interested in your thoughts when you were writing the novel. In your letter you stated that everyone has different perspectives. This makes you contradict yourself when you down people on their opinions of your novel. Also, you stated that people read too quickly and didn’t understand your point of view on this novel. You be should more understanding when people ask questions because your work is complicated. All in all I do not agree with how you responded with questions and concerns of the students.
Dear John Gardner,
I have read your letter that you sent in response to Susie West and her Students. My initial reaction to the letter was that it may have been a little harsh. After learning that these students were AP English Students, I could understand where you were coming from. One thing though, that I think you should know, especially since we are on the topic of beliefs, values...etc is that I don't believe there is one true meaning to the book Grendel. I’m sure you wrote it with your own intentions but people read differently and understand things differently so who is to say they are wrong? You stated that "if he’s a true artist, he doesn’t ram it down the reader’s throat: he sets the alternative possibilities, he explores every avenue of the question, and he leaves the reader free.” That statement right there would defend the reader’s confusion, would it not? So saying that “But the point is this: You’ve read, all of you, too quickly, too innocently--too much like children” is quite ignorant because they, like you said, explored other possibilities even though they may not be correct. The level of ambiguity in this novel is so much though; that I don’t believe there is one set meaning, therefore your criticizing of the students is somewhat ignorant.
The novel is based off of one basic question which is about how one should live; what their morals, values, and beliefs are, if any. Christian basically explains it the most accurate way possible I believe. There are basically two different sets of people per say, the ones who have morals, values, codes to live by, and those who are nihilistic “monsters”. Even the nihilist doesn’t necessarily have to be a monster but in this case it happened to be. Grendel actually seemed to smart to be a monster though. His level of intelligence, and also the lack there of at times when he is so influenced by the dragon, proves to be too much for Grendel’s own good. He is like a human trapped into a monsters body. He wants to relate to them, to befriend them, but is completely deterred by the debauchery the dragon lays upon him.
Brett C's Letter to Gardner -- not Gardener :-)
I liked your letter a lot. Your reasoning and explanation for things have helped me understand the book and why you did certain things. I like how you went straight to the truth and told it how it is. You explained the perceptions of the characters very well so we understand can understand them. You explained the real truth of some national idols.. You gave choices of how people get values and they can think.
I liked when you said that there are basically two dragons in the book, the dragon and Beowulf, and compared them to God and the devil. I believe this based on my knowledge and values from God who is like Beowulf showing Grendel the positive things to life as he brutely beats him up and the devil who is like the dragon showing Grendel the negative things to life in which Grendel bought into and becoming the monster of murder. Beowulf and the dragon represented the two choices to Grendel in his life. He was indulged into the dragonʼs obviously because he saw this one first and only believed this so when Beowulf came it was to late to change his mind. This is very relevant to God and the devil as God is good and positive like Beowulf and the devil who is evil and negative like the dragon.
Ali's John Gardner Letter
Dear John Gardner,
I’ve read your letter to Susie West and Students; I greatly enjoyed reading your letter. It helped me to understand how you write and how to better read and understand great works of literature. Your letter shows that there are often hidden meanings and it is left up to the reader to explore these meanings. “A true artist sets up alternative possibilities, he explores every avenue of the questions, and he leaves the reader free,” writes, John Gardner. “Once he’s developed the infallible gift of mimicry, that is, understanding others, he becomes able to present various points of view on any given question-and thus he becomes able to write a philosophical novel.” I agree with this because in his gift of understanding others and being able to mimic others, he is able to reach many people. Everyone has some good as well as some bad and even though most people only let the outside world see the better being, they know the hidden being that lurks beneath the surface isn’t always the desirable self that they want the world to see. Unfortunately for Grendel, his undesirable being is out in plain view where he is judged for his looks before anything else. Being viewed like this is a contributing factor in his behavior and most people can identify with that. Being able to write so that everyone can identify with the characters makes a good author and a good novel.
Nick T's John Gardner Letter
I feel John Gardner handled this letter perfectly. The kids at the highschool, along with the teacher, were searching for constructive critiscism and thats what they got. He gave them every in-depth detail about the book. Like when he says "I'm a little insulted you thought my views of life were that of the dragons" though he was kidding that gives you alot of insite into the book that makes you wonder who the author was speaking through. The tone of the letter was fine, he was stern yet playful when he says (Take it easy: I'm kidding). This shows that even though he writes these 5 star novels, hes a human too and likes to joke around. Gardner says "I dont claim this book is a masterpiece", this shows he can poke at his own work and show the flaws, as well as point out the beautifully created symbols also.
The idea brought up in the letter that I have put alot of thought into is the part where Gardner says "young people do not realize that not only themselves will die, but their whole civilization." This sentence has haunted me long before reading the book Grendel. He says we have a choice to either make up our own values like a god, or to just accept the world as it is and go along with it just excepting death, and looking for short term happiness. I'm on the line as for which one I've chosen for my life because I see the good and the bad for both sides. If you do want to make yourself some values and play "god" thats good because you have something to pass the time while your on earth. But then again whos to say whether your values are right, or not. Then again you could just say forget it and accept life as it is and just go along for the ride. I dont think I could ever agree with that way of life because I meen, we were put here for something, we may not know that something but we are here none the less. You cant just say nothing is real except your own mind, thats ignorant. To be put on this earth and be breathing is enough reason for me to believe that just accepting the world for what it is would be very immature. I also feel that accepting the world for what it is, is "giving up" in a sense. Why not set goals for yourself? Hold yourself to some standards instead of just giving in. Mostly everything John Gardner wrote was right on the money (probably cause he wrote the book). He left the kids with a lot of stuff to have them thinking about Grendel for months, and probably will make them read it again.
Jared W's John Gardner Letter
Dear John Gardner,
I read your letter to Susie West and friends and i am writing to you to explain to you how i feel about your tone while writing to these children. When i first read your letter i got a real kick out of your funny sense of humor. Like when you said, " I'm a little insulted that all three of you, Teresa, David, and Robin assume my opinions about life and earth must correspond with the opinions of a snake." I thought that was a comic relief to the serious response you have given these students. I also believe this tone is what attracts many people towards your writing. it catches people's eyes while reading, its good for a change.
When you stated, "Grendel gives up all hope and faith-Beowulf turns out to be all grendel hoped for." I completely, one hundred percent agree with you. When i first read this part in the actual book Grendel i could find the relationship between Beowulf, and grendel wanting to die. Mr. Cook informed us if grendel could possibly be suicidal and i immediately began to take note of this. I read chapter twelve over twice to finally realize that grendel is suicidal and is actually happy to find out he has met his match. I wasn't all too convinced when grendel first met beowulf that he wanted out of his cruel world until i got to the very end of this chapter. When it became known that grendel wanted to jump off the chasm and end his life. I believe this is a fine ending for Grendel. No one should have no beliefs, you should always have something to look forward to day after day, many things to base your life upon. or else you can really never have any fun or live life to the fullest.
Post a Comment