I know Fatima created a post for all three books, but I figured we could talk about them seperately since they're three different books? Please tell me if I'm being obnoxious.
Heart of Darkness brings up an interesting point about human nature and coping for survival. Someone in class mentioned how Rachel's way of survival was to create her own little world. She's the one who suffers the least , emotionally, from this Congo adventure. She is not grieving and I feel like she has less troubles than her sisters and mother. Yet, we still see her as the bad charactor. Does this mean that in order to be a good person, you have to suffer, and in this case, suffer all your life?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
The way Rachel handles it makes her seem less of a human than the other characters. She isolates herself from Africa because she simply does not want to be there. I guess she has the mindset of blaming it on Nathan, saying "If you hadn't brought us to Africa, we wouldn't have had to go through that." So her guilt isn't as bad because she was detached from everything in the first place, and seemed to have shifted the blame quite well.
I think you're taking it to the extreme when you say that you have to suffer to be a good person. An example that comes to mind is Job. We see him as the epitome of suffering yet staying faithful to the God who is allowing bad things to happen to him.
Rachel isn't necessarily a bad person, just apathetic. Suffering, and revealing that you're suffering requires an emotional involvement that Rachel doesn't seem to have. I'm not quite ready to say that not caring automatically makes someone a bad person. Maybe her way of coping is just to forget about it and move on.
*shrug*
Post a Comment