tell_room:Caliban leaves west. say:Caliban enters. say:Caliban says: march 5 tell_room:Caliban leaves west. say:Caliban enters. say:Caliban says:Week Nine Mud Transcript East Room tell_room:Caliban leaves west. say:Rhefner enters. say:Carljohn enters. tell_room:Carljohn leaves west. say:Carljohn enters. tell_room:Carljohn leaves west. tell_room:Rhefner leaves west. say:Rhefner enters. tell_room:Rhefner leaves west. say:Rhefner enters. say:Caliban enters. tell_room:Caliban leaves west. say:Caliban enters. tell_room:Caliban leaves west. say:Lance enters. say:Steele enters. say:Freeman enters. say:Freeman says: Will someone please confirm that I am in the East Room? say:Steele says: yep, you're in the east room say:Ahern enters. say:Freeman says: Thanks. say:Carljohn enters. tell_room:Carljohn leaves west. say:Auld enters. say:Auld says: hello? say:Freeman says: Hello, Auld. say:Auld says: there IS life say:Freeman says: Is Lane here tonight? say:Bekas enters. say:Auld says: I dunno, who is "lane" say:Freeman says: Our fearless leader. say:Auld says: Lane if you are here please let us peons know. say:Mambrose enters. tell_room:Mambrose leaves west. say:Auld says: so shall we start talking memory anyway? say:Freeman says: I think that's a good idea. say:Foreman enters. say:Foreman says: hello cybers say:Auld says: no one's father is actually present, they are all memories. say:Ahern says: on the subject of transference/substitution/replacement, it is interesting to note what Fuentes says about what we pass on: On page 79 (Eng Trans): "the old gringo feared . . . seeing the face of his father; he was riding beside a son: Arroyo, the son of misfortune." And later: ". . . the son, the gringo thought, not of misfortune but of a complex inheritance" (83). I find this idea/trope of inheritance another way of looking at the layering that we've been talking about. Words can be invested or layered with meaning as can our lives. The inheritance Fuentes/Bierce speaks of is a parallel to the inheritance inherent in our language and its individual words. Memory may play a bit part in this. . . . say:Lane enters. say:Rhefner says: say rachel: a bit part or a big part? say:Foreman says: yes the intertwining of father imagery is pervasive...at one point Harriet/gringo are father/daughter, at another Gringo/Arroyo are father/son, etc.. say:Auld says: does the "son" inherit what the father leaves, or what the "son" chooses to remember (or percieve) say:Foreman says: inheritance should work both ways...receiver/received perceptions intermingle say:Freeman says: The only way that we can gain any insight into the experiences of the characters is through a reliance on memory. However, because memory is largely a human construction, we cannot rely upon it for absolute clarity. This serves to problematize our understanding of the character's experiences. say:Rhefner says: auld: the "son" inherits bothtell ahern got you covered, as well as you can take notes in that obtuse class! say:Bekas says: Early in the novel the old gringo says, "There's one frontier we only dare to cross at night the frontier of our differences with others, of our battles with ourselves." Perhaps this signal Fuentes fascintation with memory as an inderdictory force within a discurs. This passage signals that what's at conflict in the novel is more than just a character juxtaposed to another character. We involved deeply with a conflict of memories. say:Ahern says: I meant to say a BIG part, although, yes, it may also be a "bit" part for some or in some instances. . . . For instance, are we conscious of the layering and, if so, does this impact our perceptions??? say:Rhefner says: the son inherits a real legacy of memories from the father as well as his own memories say:Lance says: Each of the main characters are wrestling with memories that they cannot resolve. These memories are the driving force of the novel. Without Harriet's memories of her father and her lost-life as a rich girl, it is fair to say that she may not have journeyed to Mexico on her quest to "live". Without Arroyo's memories of his father and the Mirandas, he would have probably continued on his way to join up with Villa's guys, without indulging in his hatred and revenge for the Mirandas. Finally, if the Old Gringo were not so haunted by his own demonic memories, it is safe to assume that he would have lived quietly in the United States and would have eventually died by falling down the cellar stairs. say:Bekas says: isn't this layering much like a compilation of various frontiers constructed by the remembrance of memory? say:Auld says: could Arroyo be "father" to the revolution, how will they keep his memory, or does Harriet inherit his memory, INSTEAD of the revolution (his rightful heirs) say:Foreman says: the memory trope is one that speaks to the layer within a layer...All of the story is Harriet's memory, while in the memory there are, for example, Arroyo's memories of his experience with the Federales. say:Rhefner says: lance: isee that we cannot avoid the temptation to use famous "bierceisms" say:Ahern says: I like what Freeman has to say about memory being a "human construction." How true. Harriet Winslow reconstructs the memory her mother has worked so hard to construct. . . . ! In this is what . . . her freedom? say:Lance says: Ron, certainly not! say:Freeman says: The various individual's constructions of memories do seem to create a sense of layering. say:Foreman says: and this layering adds to the sense of what is "real" being problematic. since we are given memories of memories. say:Bekas says: Can we inherit memories? If we inherit them Do they still belong from their owner? Isn't inheriting impossible? Maybe we inherit what we want to belong to someoneelse. We attach the disclaime, "This was told to me by . . ." Yet it us who bring up this memory within a context that will be vastly different from its origination. say:Foreman says: we inherit in the sense of those passed =down memories that become the stuff of family lore. say:Lane says: Dr, Sipiora asks asks the important question about memory and its relation to theme and technique. We can see mmory as technique in so many ways in this nove - to discover intention, recall, for erasure, displacement,, revivification - all seemingly occuring in complex ways throughout the novel. Memory can be seen as a means of transparency, as resentment, as discovery of self. Some metaphorical techniques seem to be the importance of night (Derrida's "disappearing sun) as revealing and renewal vs day (Sun) as obscuring, "eyes" as both revealing and as "invisible. Can you think of other tropes of memory and their thematic significanc? say:Rhefner says: the trope of memory is useful for explaining behavior of the characters and leading us to evaluate our own behavior. Memories, good or bad, can grow in our minds like a cancer for years--then, one day, they come to fruition and we then act: as arroyo did, to punish the wrongs done to his people; as bierce did, to escape the disappointment he felt toward his own country; as harriet did, to escape a different kind of disappointment. memories are, in my mind, often acutely detailed and accurate--therefore, when we are prompted by a memory to act, the result is usually quite dramatic say:Ahern says: Foreman, right on target as usual! I agree (passed-down memories become the stuff of family lore). say:Steele says: does it matter what are "real" memories in the novel? it seems as whatever the characters believe whether it be true or false leads them in their actions. say:Fluharty enters. say:Foreman says: other tropes include that of imagination. On p. 143 there is the quote..."we are the products of another's imaginations" This is clearly related to the idea that we are created to some extant by the eye of the other, which includes the memory of the other, as well. say:Auld says: I agree that regardless of the accuracy of the memories, they are a construct of the rememberer say:Rhefner says: lane bierce's memory of the civil war, in which he was at several major battles (chickamauga) has given him a jaded outlook on war and the "pride" (arroyo) that always seems to fuel it say:Bekas says: memories seem to me to be highly inaccurate and a way of positioning ourselves away from who we are. It's like Harriet beginning the novel by discussing "what she could be" as if you can ever be anything but what you are at that moment. Memory in this novel is an attempt to control being which proceeds without us and in spite of us. say:Foreman says: And rhefner, the intext reference to "Occurrance" became part of the memory of the Gringo. say:Rhefner says: steele: as to the truth or falsehood of the characters' memories: perhaps their memories have somewhat altered what really happened in their pasts. Yet, it is the emotional content of memory which prompts the action--and that part is quite "true" and real to them say:Steele says: also the theme of "time" in the novel is relevant to memory. time allows for many changes in how we remember certain people and events. say:Bekas says: Rhefner: Yet despite this jaded outlook war and the death in war attracts him. say:Foreman says: Bekas, since the novel is memory, and not what is ( the "is" of Harriet's life is sitting alone , remembering, then what she is or is not may not be important. say:Ahern says: what is the literal translation of "Gringo"? say:Fluharty says: rhefner memories definitely can be selective and thus alter their life evento reflect what they wished they had been or what they wished had happened say:Freeman says: Doesn't gringo stand for American? say:Auld says: but isn'y Harriet accurately describing what she remembers experiencing, regardless of whether or not she experienced it in reality say:Lane says: Yes, Foreman. And this imaginative part of memory seems closely related to the theme of fantasy and reality in the novel, the intertwining of "dreams" and the external present and/or past realities. Also, Memory plays a big part, whether fantasy or reality in the 3 main characters quests for self identity. say:Foreman says: I understood from a Spanish friend that Gringo HAS no translation. say:Bekas says: Foreman: Exactly, it's impossible to know what is we create and memory plays a subversive role in beings creation because it is not a stable reference. say:Fluharty says: Harriet is definitely describing her perception and what is a real memory to her say:Rhefner says: bekas: bierce was always fascinated with war although he considered it foolish and a waste of time. this was one of his many inconsistencies--but it makes him a perfect character for this story, in which ideologiogy is usurped by personal revenge say:Foreman says: Lane, thanks....those dream tropes were also structural,,,they occur at moments of great interaction, usually between Gringo and Harriet. say:Lane says: It seems to me that accuracy might be subjugated to process in the importance of memories say:Fluharty says: I thought the translation of Gringo had something to do with ethnic or cultural aspects say:Lance says: The image of the mirror reappears throughout the novel. They seem to be related to memories in that those who dwell on or accept their memories embrace their reflections (or at least can bear their reflections), while those that are trying to escape from their memories (as Harriet was at first) avoid the reflection of themselves. At the end (on page 167), the troops urge Arroyo that "It's time to leave the mirrors behind." In essense, they are urging him to leave his poisoned memories behind and move on. say:Ahern says: someone told me this week that Gringo meant "foreigner." I had always thought that it referred to Americans, that's why I ask. Does it make a difference? Since it is the title of the book, the "naming" issue comes up. say:Steele says: discussing memory reminds me of the film, "Blade Runner" in which the machines, the replicas were implanted with memories that made them believe they were real because they had a past which gave them unique qualitites. it think tha that the relevance of that to the novel is that no matter if the memories are real or not, they still contribute to the essence of the person. say:Fluharty says: I thought Americans, too or those Americans who crossed the border say:Foreman says: also notice that both Arroyo and Gringo "see" Harriet primarily through the mirror reflection,,,smbolic of the way they see her in reality. say:Freeman says: This concept of memory reminds me of what Hayden White said about the writing of history in the Tropics of Discourse. Memory seems to be something that is constructed based upon the kind of story the teller wants to tell. The person who is recalling the memories, structures them to fit a mode which is appropirate for them at the time. say:Lane says: Yet, as Bekas notes, memories can be both a means of escape and/or a means of discovery. These process can help, or even thwart self-identity. say:Ahern says: Lance: Interesting analysis of the purpose of the mirrors. I was trying to figure out what one feared from their own reflection. . . . Is it that the eyes are "the mirror of the soul" and to stare into yourself, therefore, is to realize or accept [something] as you suggest? say:Lane says: Does "Gringo" stand for "white man" or "fair man"? say:Lance says: Ahern, that' say:Bekas says: isn't our adoption of ideology that positions as insider/outsider and also controls our memory of memories. Bierce may have thought war foolish and a waste but the Old Gringo finds war a good ideology for the moment. Bierce is not the old Gringo nor is the Old Gringo Bierce. say:Auld says: doesn't harriet "revive" the memory of her father through Bierce say:Foreman says: Are we saying, then, that all 3 are subsumed by their memories, or are they merely fragmented by them? As to mirrors, aren't they also reflections of the other's view of the soul? say:Lane says: Bekas, right, memory itself is unstable, acc. to Fuentes. say:Lance says: Rachel, whoops, sorry! I hit enter too soon. Anyway, as I was trying to say, that's what I got out of it. That interpretation made the most sense to me; what do you think? say:Auld says: the peons can't see themselves as whole until they view themselves through the eyes (mirrors) of the Miranda's say:Ahern says: Bekas, what do you mean by "Bierce is not the OG nor is the OG Bierce"??? say:Foreman says: Rhefner, would you agree that perhaps Bierce saw war as an ultimate mirror of Mankind's darker side? say:Rhefner says: ahern: the "old" (experienced, disillusioned) "gringo" (foreigner who has an outsider's perspective on the mexican struyggle and its inherent corrupt qualities--adds another perspective to arroyo. seen through the eyes of someone who hates ideology, hates pride, considers all of these qualities to be frivolous and sillysay bekas: I disagree that bierce embraces any kind of ideology in going to the mex. revolution. He stated for years that all human endeavor was nothing more than an amusing spectacle for him say:Bekas says: Mirrors in the novel represent a concrete way of seeing abstractions of self that each character wants to remember as being there just for a moment, just for a memory say:Fluharty says: Bekas Gringo finds war a better way to death than other options say:Foreman says: and of course all mirrors distort or at least reverse the self. say:Auld says: but is the old gringo's death a result of war, or a miranda's pride say:Fluharty says: mirrors can also reflect what the person desires to se can distor relatity say:Rhefner says: foreman: as much as i know about bierce, i don't recall him ever formally addressing any kind of "dark" side in man. according to his works, man is more of a joke than anything evil or dark say:Bekas says: ahern: sorry Bierce is not the old gringo nor is the old gringo Bierce. Typo? Or do you mean that the historical figure bierce has nothing to do with the "historical" figure bierce in the old gringo? say:Lane says: As unstable, memories are complicated by different perceptions, cultural milieus (sp?), time, exterior intrusions (such as revolutions). say:Sipiora enters. say:Foreman says: the whole trope of memory/dream/reflection seems to reinforce the idea of inheritance, too....the impact of the past on the present. say:Bekas says: Fluharty: So war is essential to him in that it represents an ideal way to die in a sense war has a purpose for the old gringo it is not a waste; it is not senseless. say:Auld says: inheritance as an active thing, like seeking your reflection say:Foreman says: to see the joke of man is a form of darkness say:Fluharty says: Bekas perhaps it is the Gringo's way of a heroic death say:Ahern says: That's what I am asking: WHY do you say that Bierce is not the old gringo and that the old gringo is not Bierce. We are told that the old gringo IS Bierce. I'm trying to figure out what you were implying or saying in your post. Explain/Expand on that thought, please. say:Ahern says: Last comment to Bekas say:Rhefner says: fluharty : i don't think the old gringo was much concerned with a heroic death as with an appropriate one say:Bekas says: Time is construct of the discourse we are within at the moment. In the same way subjectivity is created through abstract references to supposedly concrete memories. Ambrose Bierc exists prior to this novel but also within this novel. We have many Ambrose Bierces but they are not the same. Just because Fuentes uses bierce in his novel does not mean that this is the same bierce who wrote the Devil's Dictionary. say:Fluharty says: rhefner appropriate as compared to what, expound say:Steele says: i think it is more of a romatice rather than appropriate notion of the gringo's wanting to die in mexico. say:Foreman says: do we see the time trope as being a part of this whole involvement? For example, the time of the present is only that of Harriet, who sits an d remembers, while the 2nd chap. is the past of the exhumation, also a digging up, as of memory, followed by past time, interspersed with references to Harriet in the present...all memory wrapped in time and buried/exhumed repeatedly. say:Fluharty says: steele yeah I think that it does foster a romantic concept say:Rhefner says: bekas: i absolutely agree that the "bierce" here is one construed by fuentes, who projected a lot of his own images upon the character. if you have read a lot of bierce's journalism, you can see this clearly say:Freeman says: Are there other questions on the handout that we would like to address this evening? say:Lane says: Memory also seems to play a part in Fuents's novel to reveal oppositions within characters. Memories show Gringo as cowardly and brave, rigid yet open to differences, Arroyo as both sensual and violent, etc. Even the lands (both American and Mexican, reveal oppositions of Wastelandic and beatiful, Mexico as both "corpse" and "fists" to pry open to reveal new life. These oppositions seem to reinforce Fuentes creation of ambiguity. In addition, they seem to reveal both G's. desire for effacementof memories and "naming" say:Foreman says: yes, this Bierce/Gringo construct is one of Fuentes' reflection/creation/memory. say:Rhefner says: fluharty: what i mean by an "appropriate" death --relates to bierce's black humor: truly, everything seemed a joke to him: "to die a gringo in mexico--aah, that is euthanasia!" he really said that in a letter to a friend say:Fluharty says: Lane: I think you have a valid point there, I too recognized the oppositions say:Fluharty says: rhefner: I see the connection now say:Lane says: Yes, Bekas, it seems that both memories and time are conflated so as to be confused say:Foreman says: Memories here are at once created and destroyed , just as memories both created and destroyed the characters themselves. say:Ahern says: In the novel Harriet, the old gringo, and Arroyo share a history. This makes them "insiders." Harriet, in contrast to the other two, has never been (allowed to be) master of her own destiny. In Mexico she has and makes choices, as do the other two. Harriet also enjoys an "insider" status with the two men by virtue of her American foreignness; she is not required to adopt any of the other possible roles as suggested by the women around her, who find her a (pleasing) oddity. say:Steele says: i thought it was interesting how memories are associated with dead flowers. such as the bunch of dead roses on harriet's mom's chest and that she sneezes "as if her flowers were still fresh". here, she can't get over the memory of her husband that abandoned her. and also with the dead magnolias that harriet associates with washington which is draining the life out of her. say:Rhefner says: ahern: I agree that harriet is embracing the opportunity to influence her own destiny. however, i think that the ambiguous characters of both bierce and arroyo undermine that: neither of them are really masters of their fate; they are merely "playing" at it say:Bekas says: Isn't Fuentes shifting time in order to call attention to memories position outside and inside time. By flagrantly shifting tense, fuentes tries to create an abstract reference to memory and time as being difficult to grasp for any long term monolithic presence. Harriet in a sense is grappling with memories that cannot be resolved that cannot be re-remembered as they were or might have been remembered. Her state od sitting at the beginning and the end is constative to memories continual movement which can appear to freeze our physical progression. say:Fluharty says: rhefner when you say they are not really masters of their fate, would you then classify them under the concept of determinism, no free will say:Bekas says: Rhefner: I agree. I thonk playing is a nice way to express Fuentes' treatment of them. say:Rhefner says: bekas: yes, the "sitting" construct is appropriate, it makes the "action" seem like a figment of imagination say:Auld says: Harriet is an outsider in Washington far more than she is an outsider in Mexico. In Mexico she, like Arroyo and Bierce, is "making her memories", aren't they really all successful at this? say:Foreman says: Harriet is the fitting one to begin and the end the novel, not only as the repositiory of memory, but because she is the ultimate outsider by reason of gender and foreign-ness, but she also partakes of both the mastering of her fate (chooses Arroyo) but also like both of them is at the mercy of fate. say:Ahern says: how about the dead flowers that La Garduna wears that are curiously absent in the movie? I pictured much of this taking place in a much more remote locale, by the way. . . . say:Lane says: Mirrors seem to both obscure, revealing only images of wholeness, thus synechdocically (sp) "mirroring the fragmentation of life, as seen by the characters. tell_room:Freeman leaves west. say:Foreman says: the shifting of time also reinforsces the trope of memory, which at best is elastic in its adherence to the "truth" of the event. say:Auld says: isn't the hacienda a mirror for fragmented mexico say:Lane says: Interesting that "Spectors" are not spectors on the first page. They are just re-invented selves, thru remembering. say:Bekas says: Foreman: Yes, It's almost like Mexico represents a frontier that has to be explored: it's like a psychological manifest destiny for Harriet, the Old Gringo and Arroyo. say:Freeman enters. say:Ahern says: Ron, et al: perhaps none are true "masters" of anything in the novel and that is one of its themes: note my earlier post about the role of inheritance; Fuentes seems to suggest that individuals are bound by certain of their histories. . . . say:Lane says: One more thought on Memory - We can also see memory as loss - "lost in the desert," loss as a military family member, loss of parents. . . tell_room:Sipiora leaves west. say:Fluharty says: ancestory does seem to play a part there, Ahern say:Foreman says: Lane you mean a kind of Alzheimer's of the soul? say:Auld says: ahern do you mean to compare them to the old masters, whose paintings were not appreciated say:Bekas says: Is fragmentation necessary for memory. Wouldn't be impossible to reconceive of everything as "it happened" sort of Like Borges' Aleph. Fragmentatiuon allows us to corrupt our past into a momentary presence. say:Lance says: The Gringo and Harriet have created, in a sense, their own little Americanized world in Mexico, of which they are both insiders and outsiders. In their cozy world, they are insiders since they share the same culture and pain of lossof a loved one(s). However, they are outsiders to each other since they are, of course, different people with different desires. He wants to die; she wants to live. Both of them are outsiders in Mexico, obviously, due to their American upbringing and mindset. They are always referred to by the Mexicans as "gringo" or "gringa". To the natives, they seem to merely exist as labels, not individuals. They are insiders in that they have been accepted, at least superficially, by the revolutionaries and are allowed to witness the upheaval of a revolution. say:Rhefner says: ahern: no doubt, there is much determinism in fuentes. this is what makes arroyo seem like such a macho caricature; he is so desperate to "act" and make a difference. the old gringo, on the other hand, knows better. the papers which arroyo covets so much --the gringo knows how meaningless they are say:Lane says: In terms of applicatios of the inside/outside theme, there seems to me to be quite a bit of confusion as to who is inside and who is outside. How do we define such? say:Ahern says: Auld: no, that comment was in reference to Harriet's gaining the power to have control over her life, control denied by her mother, beau, etc. in Washington. I called her a "master of her own destiny." say:Auld says: but is she actually successful but unappreciated say:Foreman says: doesn't it depend on inside/outside of WHAT? say:Fluharty says: rhefner that was a response intended for me, I think say:Ahern says: Auld: however, there is the uncle who "blows" all the money by not knowing the value of art. Hmmm. . . . say:Bekas says: lane: We avoid defining inside/outside we adjust our position to the context we reference to say:Auld says: isn't her memory art tell_room:Freeman leaves west. say:Steele says: but is harriet really a master of her own destiny now? it seems as if she is in the same position before because she can never be what she could be and is now waiting alone again. say:Foreman says: the trope of corruption ties into the trope of time, as well, since Arroyo is corrupted primarily by his ties to the past, which keep him at the hacienda, instead of rejoining the Revolutionaries. say:Ahern says: Steele: for a short while, perhaps, yes. If she feels power, then she has it, no? say:Rhefner says: lance: in this one, i see fuentes as the insider, "inside" the heads of the characters, while the characters themselves (except bierce?) seem to be unaware of what really motivates them say:Auld says: I think she is master, because what she created has beauty say:Steele says: but she does not seem to feel it anymore. she seems helpless to obtaining her desires. say:Foreman says: But does have any power in the present? the only thing left to her is powerlessness (sitting) and memory say:Auld says: the artist does not have to appreciate the greatness of their work for it to be great say:Fluharty says: I'm not sure that she is helpless to obtaining desires, perhaps confused as to how to obtain those desires say:Steele says: Auld: what has she created other than a memory that is beatiful? say:Freeman enters. say:Bekas says: I think Arroyo is corrupted only if we view him from the perpective of another character. The Gringo thinks he is and perhaps Harriet does. I don't think Arroyo relly knows if he is corrupt. The question is can anyone ever be corrupt? say:Foreman says: in the past, Harriet is also powerless because she knows she doesn't belong, the thing for which she will not forgive Arroyo. say:Fluharty says: Arroyo is definitely corrupt in comparison to the other characters in the book say:Auld says: she is an insider just as much as Arroyo and bierce because she fashioned her life, just as they fashioned their deathes say:Bekas says: Fluharty: How so? say:Ahern says: "IS Arroyo corrupt?" Now, there's a question. To be corrupt, one must be something whole and intact first. Corruption implies imperfection as well as t_the_ imperfection that we associate the word with: dishonest, untruthful, deceitful, greedy, immoral, etc. say:Lance says: I define corruption to be an outside force that changes and individual's motivation and goals. In this sense, Arroyo is corrupt since his hatred of the Mirandas has altered his entire course of life. His corruption comes from within and eventually destroys him. say:Ahern says: I agree with Lance. say:Rhefner says: bekas: of course anyone can be corrupt: all it takes is a personal left turn out of your supposed "idelogy," fueled by some kind of self-interest. this describes arroyo to a t. bierce is exempt from corruption because he has always rejected ideology and felt that man was essentially self-serving say:Freeman left the game. say:Auld says: corruption Is a trope; Washington is an oozing corrupt place for Harriet, the newspaper business is an open sore for Bierce say:Bekas says: Lance: But what was he corrupted to. Was not this hatred of the Miranda's his construct of his own character, his own devotion to a cause which he allowed to define him. How is this corrupt? say:Rhefner says: lance: i define corruption as an inside force, not outside say:Ahern says: I like Ron's take on Arroyo as fueled by self-interest. This is interesting as we all are to some extent. I guess the "corruption" begins when that self-interest dictates self-service! say:Foreman says: Arroyo is corrupteds by his ties to the hacienda, which engender his unfaithfulness to the revolutionary cause.. His regard for the (meaningless) papers is against the principles of the revolution , since the papers establish his ownership of the land...he feels he is the one true heir. say:Lane says: The mirror images seem to reveal a "mask," an opaqueness (?), "illegible" words. G. cannot sem to find H's. "inside." Does she have one? Is she an outsider only, seeing and seen through the exterior world. G. seems to have his own inside (though a doubting one), but cannot seem to exteriorize it, even though he seeks the frontier, the revolution to find "himself." He can reveal his own "inside" only to himself, a visionary unable to speak. Such seems to be his limitation. In his visionary quality, he can see the "endless ebb and flow" of life, of "beginnings and dissolutions," but he is unable to be agentive in his interiority. Yet, H. helps him to overcome his interior desire. Or does she? It seems that his interior self is his real "frontierand "other presences" are intrusive. Yet, at times G's. "inside" is in combination with his "outside." say:Bekas says: Rhefner: But what was his ideolgy but to return "home"? Isn't this what he has intended all along? say:Fluharty says: corruption is internal but causes external results . . . affects others . . .causes pain et cetera say:Rhefner says: ahern: it is not inherently self-interest which is the problem. it is the failure to recognize it. say:Auld says: didn't Harriet corrupt Arroyo by influencing his stay and his eventual death say:Ahern says: Ron: yep! say:Lance says: I think of corruption as always coming from the outside. Of course, if you are corruptible then you can be corrupted by this outside force. Take money, for instance, the biggest culprit out there for corruption. It is an outside force, like the abuse at the hands of the Mirandas, that affects those who are corruptible, such as Arroyo. To be corrupted, there must be a weak link in the character, a bit of a diathesis stress theory. say:Bekas says: Arroyo is not corrupt he is true to the self he is at any given moment. The situation is his ideology, the situation is he determinism. say:Foreman says: Bekas, Arroyo's intent wasn't to stay home...his motive of vengeance becomes one of usurpation...of wanting it for himself.. That's a corruption of his former ideals. say:Lane says: Foremen, maybe you're right, an Alzeimer's of the soul." There can be loss through memory's effacement? say:Rhefner says: how about the metaphoric aspect of harriet's sexual union with arroyo? is she now corrupted? was she always? how about a metaphor of american and mexican ideologies joining together? say:Fluharty says: money is an outside force but the corruption comes from the way it is used which is decided internally by the user say:Rhefner says: fluharty is correct say:Lance says: Right, that weak link I was talking about. say:Bekas says: Foreman: And in returning home he was able to usurp to exact vengance. Isn't this part of returning home: an usurpation of the past. say:Steele says: how would the sexual union corrupt harriet? wouldn't it liberate her? say:Auld says: I thought Arroyo's corruption centered around power rather than money say:Bekas has gone net-dead. say:Ahern says: Bekas, if you take "corruption" to be some kind of crack in the whole, Arroyo, though he may be true to himself, becomes corrupted by his preoccupation with his bastard birth and the wealth that he and others have been denied. It is this preoccupation which causes him to lose "control" as a general by staying at the hacienda when he should be moving on by Villa's orders. say:Foreman says: yes, Lane isn't that just what has happened here? the loss of the past is the loss of memory...the events are recreated, exhumed but are they an "accurate" memory? say:Rhefner says: steele: perhaps it would liberate her in some ways, yet she hates him at the same time? doesn't this suggest some kind of curruption? say:Fluharty says: I tink she does hate him and I think the hate dominates say:Lance says: Good-night everyone. Have a good Spring Break!! say:Foreman says: they are all corrupted by the past, and all corruptions revolve around the father memories. say:Auld left the game. say:Lance left the game. say:Foreman says: bye everyone...we all are about to become memories. say:Ahern says: Good night, all! See you on the beaches!!(?) say:Fluharty says: anyonee in Tampa how as the movie? say:Fluharty has gone net-dead. say:Foreman left the game. say:Rhefner left the game. say:Steele left the game. say:Ahern says: the movie was _very different_ from the book as you might imagine. One of the controlling differences was that it was told in linear fashion (chronological sequence)! say:Ahern has gone net-dead. say:Caliban disintegrates Bekas [disconnected] say:Caliban disintegrates Ahern [disconnected] say:Caliban disintegrates Fluharty [disconnected] say:Caliban disintegrates A Scribe