N.B. We've cut the Nabokov piece, so pose these questions to Bierce alone. Please post your own question about Turgenev or Bierce in the comment thread.
The two short stories for next Tuesday’s class are remarkably different in setting and style, yet, because of their protagonists, have interesting points of similarity. If we pursue a comparative analysis, how would you describe the main characters? What are their relationships to the outside world? To the “news” that frames their narratives? How do they respond to the violence and torture around them?
How would you characterize the narrator and the style of narration in these stories? What does the narrator tell the reader—in accordance with or in excess of the main character’s knowledge? What kinds of clues does the author leave for the reader’s collection alone? In what does the reader’s surplus (or shortage) of knowledge consist? How does that affect the way we experience the text? As with Turgenev’s text, we should ask what narratorial mode the muteness of a main character elicits or compels.
Both of these texts can be read through the prism of history: for Bierce, the Battle of Chickamauga in the American Civil War; for Nabokov, the Weimar period in Berlin (when the Nuremberg statues were introduced) preceding the Holocaust and WWII. With this background in mind, how would you pursue an allegorical interpretation?
Useful URLs:
Ambrose Bierce Site: http://donswaim.com/bierce.resources.html
Battle of Chickamauga: http://ngeorgia.com/history/chickam.html
Vladimir Nabokov in Berlin: http://www.standpointmag.co.uk/node/3157/full
In reading Chickamauga, there did not seem to be a clear divide between the child's imagination and that of reality. Why doesn't Bierce make a clear distinction between the two? Why does he use the experiences of a six year old child (the epitome of innocence) to exemplify the gruesomeness and corrupt nature of war? How does this contrast add to Bierce's antiwar sentiment?
ReplyDeleteAccording to the notes, the boy is described as “a symbol of the human race… ‘born to war and dominion.’” Would the boy and the fallen soldiers in the text contradict Aristotle’s claim that a “political man” must be involved in society, or would it substantiate his belief that man without a state would be warlike and uncooperative?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHow does the fact that the boy slept through the rustle and gun fires of a battle reinforce the Aristotelian ideas of deaf mutes? Furthermore, how is the boy portrayed with the animal like characteristics that Aristotle assigns to deaf mutes?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe child, obviously was not scared of the group of men, the woods, the blood, or the just overall terror. What is Bierce trying to say about a child or perhaps a deaf mute's innocence and unawareness about war?
ReplyDeleteIn discussing Bierce's "Chickamauga," how is the deaf mute child, commonly a symbolization of innocence, victimized and corrupted since birth? Consequently, how is the boy's innocence portrayed in a passage immersed in war and violence?
ReplyDeleteThis young boy seemed to be enchanted by war, blood, and death, but when faced with a small harmless creature he could not flee any faster. Why is it that the true fear that grips children is something that is harmless while the things that are feared most by adults are fascinating to children? Why does it make a difference that he is a deaf-mute? Does being a deaf-mute mean you are more childish than most children?
ReplyDeleteDoes Bierce's gory depiction of the aftermath of a major battle echo Rousseau's belief that society corrupts man (assuming, as is the case in this story, that war is born out of politics)? Or does it show that men are inherently primal but try to mask these animalistic urges with some political facade?
ReplyDeleteFrom the end of the piece: "He uttered a series of inarticulate and indescribable cries-something between the chattering of an ape and the gobbling of a turkey..." What is the significance of this passage, especially when compared to how he and the wounded soldiers were described earlier?
ReplyDeleteHow is the loss of the boy's wooden sword significant to the piece's overall impact?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWe are informed of the child's thoughts and actions mainly through the narration in "Chickamauga." How did the child's perception of the mangled men, as presented through the author's descriptions, affect how he viewed his own position in relation to the men and his initial reaction to them?
ReplyDelete-Fanny Du
“He uttered a series of inarticulate and indescribable cries” page 652. How does the language and the imagination of the boy, “wild, uncertain gestures,” enhance Bierce’s expression of antiwar sentiment in the story? Why choose a deaf-mute to characterize the gory scene of the battle? What significance does the wooden sword have, even though “the eye of his father would hardly have known it for what is?”
ReplyDelete- Gagandeep
In displaying an innocent, deaf-mute child in the middle of a gory battle, is Bierce illustrating that human nature will inevitably always turn towards war?
ReplyDeleteThe story Chickamauga is portrayed from the view of an innocent child. It's apparent in the story that the child has little idea what's going on, shown by his attempt to ride one of the men. Does this innocence from the truth of the situation change our perception of the events of the war?
ReplyDeleteThroughout the story, the narrator neglects to mention or describe the young child's sense of touch. In what ways does this affect the story and could this be a minor oversight of the author?
ReplyDeleteWhen running with the wounded soldiers, the boy is finally terrified by the man without a lower jaw. What is the significance of the terror being instilled by a man who has been violently reduced to silence?
ReplyDelete