This Blessed House

I enjoyed “This Blessed House,” thoroughly. I thought the writer had a very simple yet unique style of writing. The author wrote in third person, while switching constantly from a narrator perspective to the perspective of Sanjeev, the main character. The author developed the characters very well. I was able to feel the way Sanjeev felt about Christianity, as well as how he felt about his wife Twinkle. It was obvious throughout the story that Sanjeev was slowly but surely getting irritated more and more with Twinkle. This is apparent when the author reflects on Sanjeev’s thoughts on page 142. The author, Lahiri, writes, “Now in the second month of their marriage, certain things nettled him – the way she sometimes spat a little when she spoke, or left her undergarments after removing them at night at the foot of their bed rather than depositing them in the laundry hamper” (Lahiri 142). I was also able to grasp Sanjeev’s emotions toward his arranged marriage. Although I did not exactly agree with the thoughts of Sanjeev, I completely understood how he felt.
When I first began living in the dorms at Southeastern University, I was struck with the concept of living with a complete stranger, before I could wrap my mind around the fact that I was now on my own. Before classes even began I was trying to get to know my roommate as well as I could. While doing this, I was forced to accept the personal habits of my roommate as well. This became extremely difficult to juggle when classes began. However, I soon was able to love my roommate and accept her the way she was. I believe Sanjeev also goes through something similar to what I went through my first semester of college. I can see how Jhumpa Lahiri's, life would relate to this story considerably.

Reading for Transformation through the Poetry of Gerard Manley Hopkins

Reading for Transformation through the poetry of Gerard Manley Hopkins by Francis X. McAloon SJ was an interesting read. As I began reading this essay I somehow was caught up in relational thoughts to the author. I completely understood where he was coming from and this is what intrigued me to read the essay, paying attention to every detail. It was very easy for me to relate to McAloon in the very beginning of the writing when he said, “Along with others in my class, I struggled to comprehend his difficult syntax and obscure vocabulary, as in the opening line of his sonnet ‘The Windhover’: ‘I caught this morning morning’s minion, king-/dom of daylight’s dauphin, dapple-dawn-drawn Falcon. . . .’ Sure it sounded marvelous, but what did it mean” (McAloon 1)? McAloon begins the essay with his thoughts of Gerard Manley Hopkins poetry, when he was just an undergraduate. He was once a college student reading deep complex poetry, not understanding it as much as he could. This I can relate to completely. I feel that many college students eventually go through something similar to what McAloon went through in those four years of college. It intimidates many of us who didn’t come from deep, literary backgrounds. Most high schools don’t require their students to really dissect complex literature like college would. For many of us we’re caught off guard when we enter into college and are required to read, no, feel poetry or literary works that we’ve never encountered before. This initial reacting McAloon has to Hopkin’s writings is the reaction many student have when reading complex literature. They will read the literature, as it is required for class, not really, truly thinking about what it is they are reading. Then the students usually put it down and never again go back to really read it at all. Throughout the rest of their lives they’ll hear of certain literature by specific authors that may have turned them off during college and they immediately have a negative reaction to it. I’ve been in that position many times throughout my life. I was never as open to literature as I needed to be until I really got into reading for pleasure during high school. However, I am cured of bypassing good literature on the first read.

What We Talk About When We Talk About Love by Raymond Carver

The story “What We Talk About When We Talk About Love,” is one of the weirdest short stories I’ve ever read. I could see where the author was going with it; however, it mostly seemed like scattered thoughts. The author jumped from dialogue to descriptions to thoughts of the narrator, making it difficult to follow. It seems like the author’s purpose in the structure of the short story was to list the events in sequence. The random thoughts of the narrator where scattered amongst descriptions and stories being told by the characters. The fact that the characters were mostly drunk and jumping from subject to subject seemed a little too realistic. I feel like the author may have been intoxicated while writing this. I also feel like some of the scenarios in this story where unrealistic. It was hard to relate to the different stories. It was also difficult for me to feel empathy for the characters. I felt like the characters were not developed well enough. Because the story began with the story of Terri being abused by a man who promised he loved her, it just struck me as shocking rather then making me feel any empathy for her. The way Terri viewed the extreme actions of her ex-boyfriend as a sign of love for her, made me sick. It’s hard to feel empathy or even a relation to someone who would be stupid enough to view a psychotic man as someone who loved her deeply. I think many times people confuse obsession, infatuation and lust with love. It is very obvious to me that none of these characters understand what love really is. I feel like this may be why the divorce rate is so high these days. People are so quick to get married and they don’t even know the true meaning of love. It’s sad to see the world become so meaningless. I believe the story was porely structured and difficult to grasp the meaning.

"What you get out of what you read is determined by how you read"

While reading the essay “Active Reading of Literature,” I realized that I have come across similar writings on the same subject. It is very easy to read something and not take in fully all the author is portraying. It’s like when the author says,
“Although people are surrounded by music much of the time, they don’t always listen to it. When the radio is on in the backround- in the cafeteria, in the car, at the gym, at home- people rarely really pay attention to the music. They are aware of it, but they don’t appreciate it fully.”
Information like this is very helpful for people who have a low reading comprehension level. When I was younger I hated reading. My reading comprehension level was always average. I would read words off of a page while allowing my mind to wander in many different directions. I found it difficult to pay attention to what I read. I wasn’t stupid. If I really wanted to read something I could read it properly. However, if something I was reading was not interesting to me it was hard for me to understand what I was reading because I wasn’t really reading. There is a big difference between reading the words off of a page and really reading words off of a page. I was able to get over this, as I matured and began to appreciate reading, through guidelines like the guidelines given in this essay. That is why I believe the statement “what you get out of what you read is determined by how you read,” is completely accurate. For instance, I may read a statement and believe it is a literal statement, but my peer may read the same statement and believe it is a metaphorical statement. There are different ways to read things. It all depends on the person and their perspective.

My Literary Profile

Some of my earliest literary experiences began when I was just an infant. My mother was, and still is, a die heart fan of literature. She loves a good book. Therefore, my house in south Florida is packed with books. Every bookshelf is barely holding the hundreds and hundreds of books my mother refuses to get rid of. Literature has been a part of my life ever since I was born. One of my favorite books I read when I was just a toddler was "The Giving Tree." I would look at the pictures in this book until I was capable of reading this book to myself. I loved literature so much that I began working at Barnes and Noble when I turned 18. Being surrounded by literature made me feel at home. Some of my most recent memories of literature would include winter break of 2009, when I saw "Twilight" for the first time. I thought the movie was alright, however, I was raised believing that movies that are based off of books are never as good as the book itself. Immediately after watching the movie I borrowed the book from a friend, and read the entire thing in 2 days. It wasn't the best literature I ever read, however it was intriguing enough for me to finish all four books by the end of that week. One of the most significant literary texts I've ever read was "A Room With a View" by E.M. Forster. This book is significant to me because of the way it drew me in. It is very rare for me to find a book that keeps me interested throughout the entire book. I was able to put myself in the characters shoes and feel what they were feeling and it was hard for me to put this book down. Needless to say this book inspired me.


My initial thoughts about Corrigan’s Essay are that Corrigan would confirm the way I view literature as a part of life. I'm excited for this course because I love literature.