Hey! Lately in ASTU we’ve been discussing articles written by Ilka Saal (“Regarding the Pain of Self and Other: Trauma Transfer and Framing in Jonathan Safran Foer’s Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close“) and Judith Butler (“Survivability, Vulnerability, and Affect”). Saal’s article consists of an analysis of Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close by Jonathan Safran Foer, and what Judith Butler’s interpretation of the novel would be. Butler’s article, on the other hand, covers a wide array of topics, such as the acknowledgement of ourselves through others and our tendency to view some lives as more grievable than others. Many of the blogs I’ve read this week focused more on Butler’s article, and the various interpretations that can be drawn from it.
Many discussed Butler’s extensive analysis into why we tend to perceive some lives as a loss, and others as hardly lives at all. Olivea mentioned the distinction between “us” and “them” and how Butler’s explanation that “I implicitly hold to the view that I am responsible only for those who are recognizable to me in some way” (36) further solidifies this acceptance of this idea in many societies. Kennedy analyzed how this distinction is often used to “justify the horrible atrocities that we would typically consider unjustifiable.” Although this may be the way things are, it is not the way things should be, as he says “…just because somebody comes from a different place than me, or looks different than me, or even fights against me, does not take away their inalienable right to be considered human.” Martin further analyzed “who is considered as an ally (the ‘we’) and who counts as the enemy.” He discusses how culture reflexes has led to many believing that some lives are more important than others in terms of race. He concludes with saying that we must alter this idea in order to rid of mourning for some lives but not others.
Others did not chose to discuss Butler, and instead opted to further discuss Foer’s Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close. Magda mentions the theme of grief being present in the novel. She discusses how finding where the key belonged (although irrelevant to Oskar’s father) provided closure and allowed Oskar to rid of his “heavy boots.” Whereas Magda discusses theme, Inneke analyzes the personal connections within the novel. She relates the trauma of 9/11 to what her grandmother endured in Jakarta, Indonesia. Her grandmother lived through the 1998 tragedy as she moved from place to place to avoid the riots following severe economic problems.
The blogs this week were very intellectual and incredibly fascinating to read! The themes and ideas brought about by Foer, Saal, and Butler provide a great deal of interpretation and much to think about. Thank you for reading!
-Erin 🙂
Comment for Magda’s blog post from Jan. 28:
Magda’s blog post examines the theme of grief and how Oskar connects to that theme in the novel. She observed that Oskar comes to terms with his grief after his conversation with William Black. She went on to explain that once Oskar discovers the key is meant for Mr. Black and not him, he is able to “find some peace for the first time since his father had died.” I totally agree with Magda in that this is a key moment in the novel. Oskar was carrying around a burden throughout the novel, a burden made up of his grief, his pain at not being able to pick up the phone when his dad called and the need to figure out what this key meant. When the mystery of the key is solved, he is able to also release his other burdens. Oskar finally finds forgiveness first in Mr. Black and then in himself for not picking up the phone. Once that wound has started to heal, Oskar can now focus on rebuilding his connections with others and through those begin to heal from the loss of his dad. Overall I found Magda’s analyses of the text interesting and important. Great job!
– Clara