Hailey Dolan Foer’s Everything Is Illuminated jumps back and forth between the past, telling the story of the speaker’s very-great grandmother, Brod, and the present, which tells the story of the speaker, Alex, himself. Because of these constant time changes, it can be a tad confusing at first, however, if we pay close attention, Foer uses different writing techniques to help keep us on track. For instance, when we are reading about Brod and her story in the past, the spoken words are italicized. At first I thought this was just a writing style that Foer liked to use—he used italicized words instead of quotations just as Grace Paley simply disregarded any indicator that the words written were dialogue in Zagrowsky Tells—but as I kept reading, I noticed the disappearance and reappearance of this style. That’s when I realized that speech is only italicized in the past. Another helpful hint Foer gives his reader, telling them they are about to step back into Brod’s world, is the curved line of the title of the chapter as well as the date next to the name. The date is only given when the title is curved, though; it does not appear when chapters about Alex (which have a straight-lined title) are about to begin. A final clue Foer gives his reader that a time jump is about to happen at the end of chapters about Brod when we are about to read about Alex. There is always a letter addressed to Jonathon, written by Alex. Everything Is Illuminated not only has a specific look to its structure, but the tone is distinctive. As I read, the tone was very matter-of-fact, straightforward. “Alex does this… Alex says that… He thought this about it…”, at least that’s how it read for me. However, this did not make the story dry like a textbook would using the straightforward approach. There are many places where I laughed, mainly instances when the father and grandfather were getting on to Alex. I also felt more connected to the story because instead of just merely reiterating that Alex has broken English, Foer shows us that within the dialogue between Alex and Jonathon. Alex constantly asks Jonathon to slow down and repeat himself and then we see that happen, it isn’t just implied. And although during these chapters quotations are used, Foer likes to leave out prounouns. For instance on pages 57-58 when Alex, Jonathon and the grandfather are all speaking, Foer doesn’t break up the quotes with “he said” or even with paragraph breaks, he keeps all the quotations side by side within the same paragraph, and normally that would seem like it would be confusing but he forms the dialogue in such a way that you don’t ever have to question who is saying what. I found that to be very interesting along with the fact that Foer is writing about his story but from the point of view of his English translator, Alex. How does he know what was going on with Alex before they met or during times he wasn’t around? I’m curious to find out.
I was frustrated with the constant transitioning from the past to the present. Until I deciphered the two separate writing styles, I was really confused. Like you, I also noticed that Foer uses italics in his quotes only when writing about the past. I like how you related this back to Grace Paley in Zagrowsky Tells, in which she does not use quotations or italics to separate thought from speech. The use of italics to differentiate between the two in Everything Is Illuminated was extremely helpful. I also noticed how every chapter that is about the past has a curved title, and a date next to it. The titles of the chapters in which we jump to Alex are straight, but bear no date. These chapters are generally transitioned to by means of an italicized letter from Alex to Jonathan. I related this to Maus, in that both authors used different visual writing styles to show the transition from the past to the present. However, I didn’t understand how the story from the past related to Alex’s story. I had assumed that the story would be entirely about Alex and his experiences, since he is the narrator. I liked how the novel was written in a tone that was very straight forward and to the point. While being extremely blunt about the character’s actions and dialogue, I feel like it also made the book more amusing in that it gave it a dry and almost sarcastic sense of humor.
Along with Hailey, I would have to agree the way this novel is put together can be very confusing at first. After reading a graphic novel for a month, transitioning to Everything is Illuminated was quite the jump. I started reading this novel before bed one night and honestly made it through the first two chapters wondering what I had just read. I’d be lying if I said I would have continued reading this novel if I didn’t have to. With that being said, after getting into the meat of this book I’m so glad I was forced to keep reading. After I understood the perspectives of where each chapter was taking place and from whom it was being narrated, I continued to enjoy the book more and more. I had to leave Dirac to read at home one day because I was sitting there laughing to myself like a total weirdo. I don’t know if it was just me but another reason I think it was hard to get into was the amount of new characters being introduced all together. I felt so overwhelmed and still when some characters come back into the later chapters I find myself looking back to make sure I know who we are talking about. A reoccurring theme within the novel concerns the idea of being ordinary. The comment is made over and over again, but I’m not sure what its significance is. It’s hard to even make an analysis of a novel that I’m not sure if I’m completely clear on in the first place. Although I am enjoying the book a lot more now, I definitely have a lot more questions.
So far, I'm not sure how I feel about this reading except that it is very interesting. Something that was very confusing and took time for me to figure out was the main point of this book. By this I mean it opened with Alex, but later on Jonathan's quest took center stage. Now I have come to the conclusion that there is not a true main character, but Jonathan's quest is the focal point of the books plot. I'm not a huge fan of the author switching between the past and present. I think that having three different stories being told at once is way too much for a novel, and I don’t think he pulled it off well so far. That being said, however, I am enjoying the story occurring in the past much more than the present. I'm not completely sure why this is, but the plot surrounding this child and town has drawn me in unlike the present. There is something about this plot that intrigues me and makes me want to know more. I like how Foer used the terms “uprighters” and “slouchers” to depict the spilt in Judaism in the town. This book does seem to contain a lot of Jewish Humor presented in a much more obvious light. A lot of it, however, does seem to be tragic-comedy, especially when it comes to Alex’s Grandfather. I have yet to encounter an author that writes with such a style that Foer uses. I'm not even sure how to describe it, but it adds to the originality of this novel. Alex's terrible grammar in the book definitely adds a level of realism to it. Something to stood out to me during my reading was how hard Alex seemed to try and impress Jonathan with his letters early on. He reached a level of boasting that just seemed ridiculous. This part did, however, remind me of past Jewish America Fiction from this class containing such sexual content. The first one that came to mind was Portnoy's complain. To both these men, the act of sex is parallel to control and power. Another connection I noticed between this and other readings was the emphasis on memory and the past. It seems like many of our readings have been about or touched on the holocaust. While this book touches on many themes, this event is again a least a part of this book. This relates it “The Shawl”, but also very much “Maus” because of how it also has multiple stories being told. In a more general sense though, we see once again how important memory is for the Jewish religion.
Overall I’m curious to see where this book goes. It’s seem have different themes pulled from past readings, while at the same time it is very original. Reading this book last has giving me a much different perspective. This is because during this semester I have learned so much about the Jewish religion. My first read left me with so many questions about the faith and not the reading. Understanding the Jewish Faith was a non-facotr for this read.
I share your confusion about the story being told from too many perspectives. When transitioning from chapter one to two I was extremely confused until I realized the perspectives switch from Alex to Jonathan. It took me reading certain lines over again to finally understand the switch. Concerning Alex, he reminds me of Alexander Portnoy in his bragging about women and he also has that semi-annoying feel that Portnoy had as well. I agree that Alex’s grammar mistakes aided in the originality of the story thus far just as it did in Maus. Vladek’s broken English added aiuthenticity to the overall story along with isolating him as an immigrant. Jonathan, on the other hand, strikes me as the classic Jewish storyteller in finding out about his roots and retelling them to us. What really intrigued me about the book is Alex’s grandfather. He instilled a lot of sadness in me with his depression from the death of his wife. It was also sad to see how the other men treated him, with little respect and care for his supposed “blindness.” This story to me seems to combine both the previous stories in some aspect but I’m not sure if Spencer meant for this to be intentional. Regardless, this story has been entertaining thus far.
I had the exact same response to this story as you did. It was extremely confusing to me the way that he switched around a lot. It was very hard for me to start this story because I had so much trouble deciphering what exactly was going on. I do however like the fact that you had brought up about how this stories style relates to Maus with the way it’s set up transitioning from past to present. The way he did it, which I figured out from another main post, with the chapter titles which I did not realize while reading was pretty clever. I do not like the fact that when he’s telling about another person speaking he uses italicized font instead of using quotations. That threw me off at first which contributed to why I was so confused until I finally realized what he was doing. I do agree with you that this was written with the same concepts as Portnoys Complaint. I feel like a lot of Jewish Literature has to do with having sexual freedom and power with that control they feel. So far I’m not really a fan of the story but I think that now that I understand the writing style it will be easier of a read and I’ll grow on to it.
I completely understand why it can be difficult to follow the stories going on in Everything is Illuminated, being that Foer’s style tends to be very scatterbrained and lacks a certain structure that most other novels do. Although Foer has probably one of the most unique styles of writing, his style and tone jumps off the page in a way that really makes me pay attention. I had to read his later novel, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, for a class last semester, and his style of writing is very similar in that book. There are a lot of flashbacks and jumping from one time frame to another, as well as many grammatical errors and informal writing in the narrative that make it seem more relatable (seeing as how it is told from the perspective of a 10 year-old boy).
Although Foer’s style can sometimes make his storylines more difficult to understand, I think he does it in a way that makes his stories very memorable ones. While I was reading Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close last semester, I too was a little lost at first when it came to what exactly was going on in the story. After further reading and observation, however, I saw that Foer has a way of having the multiple stories tie in with each other in a way that is so perfectly orchestrated, that I have no idea how he even comes up with all of these ideas. I’m definitely looking forward to reading the rest of Everything is Illuminated to see if it is just as satisfying as his other novel that I have read.
I was also confused for the first few chapters of the story. It seemed to be much jumbled through what seemed to be the use of non-chronological order. It started to become easier to follow the flow of the story when it was easily recognized who was speaking. For instance, the use of grammar through the narration of chapters makes a clear distinction between Alex and Jonathon. Like you were saying, both narrators have completely different structure and tone; and one you begin to see the pattern- the flow of the story becomes more fluid and precise. So far, I am a little overwhelmed by the structure of the story. However, it is evident through the use syntax and overall structure and grammar use of the given chapters to be able to identify who the narrator is, the story is at times still confusing. It’s interesting how you see the resemblance of this story and “Portnoy’s Complaint”. I must admit, some of the use of the explicit sexual references did make me ruminate to the story; however, I don’t seem to find the connection of existing themes- as of yet. Maybe in further chapters we will be ‘illuminated’ to more obvious themes of sexual freedom and expression.
Justin Huntman I agree with you that the transitions in this novel make the story extremely hard and confusing to follow. I feel as though we are reading three different stories and the transitions between them just don’t seem to flow. While the story is interesting and is very enjoyable to ready and follow, but it does take multiple readings to understand what is going on in the past vs the present in the story. While reading this I feel as though we are reading three different all interesting but all very different. I also find the broken English that is spoken is very hard to fall. The most obvious is when we are talking about the grandfather and it took a little while for us to understand that he is retired not retarded that he keeps calling himself. While I am sure that the broken English is part of the story being told it makes the overall story had to figure out what is going on with out constant re reading which also takes away from the flow of the story. While I agree that this novel is good and exciting I cant wait to see how the story continues and find out the result of everything going on.
I agree with Britton on my confusion at first with the novels characters. It is very confusing to have almost two different plots going and for someone like me who gets distracted easily, I have to pay great attention to who is being discussed. At first I did not like how there was not a true main character, as Britton stated. Usually in novels I love almost getting into the characters mind (as crazy as that sounds). Although, after reading most of the novel I have come to the realization that I actually like how there are two main characters. I also think it is very interesting how the author changes which of the three stories he is telling by switching his grammar and diction. Although the grammar is terrible, I absolutely love the way he represents Alex. Ever since reading the first page, when he describes what all the other people in his life refer to him as and why, I have been hooked on this character. I’m not entirely sure why I think it is so interesting, maybe as Britton said; it adds a lot of realism. I also agree with Britton in his statement that he has yet to encounter an author who writes with Foer’s level of humor. I like the sense of tragic humor he uses with the grandfather and his relation to Portnoys. I am excited to see what the upcoming chapters have in store and what the rest of the novel has to come.
When first reading Everything is Illuminate by Jonathan Safran Froer, I was very confused about the plot of the story. Because Alex narrates the story first I assumed that the story would be about him and his experiences. However when the story switched to the past, I became even more confused. I didn’t understand how the story of the past related to Alex’s story. Likewise it was hard for me to tell when the author was talking about the past and when he was talking about the present. However once I went back and read it more carefully I realized that he italicizes quotations rather than using quotation marks when the story is in the past. I also noticed that Froer had a very unique style of writing. His writing is very blunt and straight forward. It has a very matter of fact style about it that I am not used to. That said, I found the way he wrote it interesting. It seems that the style of how it was written makes the novel more comical. I found the very beginning of the novel most interesting. I always analyze the beginning of every novel the most because it has great significance. I try to ask myself why the author chose to open the novel the way they did. Froer begins the novel with Alex introducing himself. There was nothing uncommon about this except for the fact that Alex spent an unusual amount of time introducing himself. He lists all the different names that people call him and even explains some of the nicknames. At first I just assumed that it was a meaningless rant that the author included in the beginning of the novel. However when reading it again and reflecting back, I believe the author is trying to show the reader the many different sides of Alex. It seems like he is a different person in every relationship. It is similar to an actor playing many different roles. I think that Alex feels like he has to play a different role for each relationship in his life. I am eager to continue to read this novel and see where it ends up. I found so far that there are many reoccurring themes from this novel that has been seen in past stories we have read in class. So far I am really enjoying this novel and I think that our in class discussion will clarify any confusion that I have had so far.
I agree with your confusion. The book seems to have the multiple chapters reflect the narrations of the multiple characters. For instance the first chapter Alex is narrating and from the second the chapter seems to relate to Jonathan. The book opens up with the first chapter from the perspective of Alex. The reader automatically gets a feel for Alex’s personality. He seems to be cocky and confident. “I do not dig this name very much, but I dig him very much, so OK, I permit him to dub be Alli” (1). He later went along to brag about his good looks. Alex tends to speak in an unusual manor. I found it interesting how Alex’s father runs a travel agency to help Jews retrace the places where their ancestors had one existed. While at the same time Jonathan is the first Jew Alex has ever met. The relationship between Alex and Grandfather is interesting to me. They both seemed to have no interest in the trip at all or Jonathan. I am interested to see if their relationship develops even more as the story continues. I was confused with the entire story about Trachum. I assume it all ties in with Jonathans research and family ties.
I agree with Danielle in the fact that it took me a couple times reading the beginning of the novel to catch on to Froer’s style of writing. I admire his ability to go back and forth between the past and present so fluidly because as hard as it is to read, it is even harder to write. As Danielle stated above, Froer writes in a very blunt tone which I like because you really do not have to worry about searching for deeper meanings in his words and you can focus solely on the words and phrases themselves.
The one character that really caught my eye in the novel was that of Alex’s grandfather. He stood out to me because he is a very ironic character in the sense that he is both someone we laugh at one second and then feel bad for the very next. I thought it was hilarious that he claims to be blind and has a Seeing Eye dog, yet agrees to be the driver of the tour. But on the other hand he is very depressed as a person since the loss of his wife and only gets worse though the story.
CHynna Humphrey The first half of Everything Is Illuminated, though a tad confusing, has been the funniest of the three novels we’ve read in this class in my opinion. I found myself genuinely laughing at the text at times (which I have not yet experienced with the other novels). Along with its humor, I also think that this novel is very interesting because of Foer’s decision to have the narration switch between characters. I am very much in agreement with Danielle about how confusing this story was initially. I had to go back and reread the first chapter into the second chapter to realize that it was a switch in narrative between Alex and Jonathon. Another aspect of the novel that confused me a little was the way that the introduction of so many characters and names in chapter two. Sofiowka, Chana, Yankel D, Bitzl Bitzl R, Mordechai; all of these names introduced in a couple pages makes it hard to keep track of who is who because they all sound so foreign to me. Lastly, in terms of first impressions, I found it odd, yet kind of funny how repetitive Foer can sometimes be. You can see that just in the first few pages with Alex’s mother always saying “Alexi-stop-spleening-me!” Also, every time Alex’s father spoke to him, they would have that same argument where his dad calls him Shapka, Alex says “do not dub me that,” and his father would repreat the sentence using Alex instead.
I agree with you. Not only was I confused about the switching from past to present, but I was also lost when it came to Alex's speech and writing. It was like someone took a thesaurus while they tried to write. The use of uncommon words and odd speech patterns added to the humorous nature of the story as highlighted Alex's troubles with the English language. One of the more confusing aspects of the way the novel is written, for me, is the way that Foer does not create seperate paragraphs for each speaker in dialogue, which is the norm in writing. Instead he goes back and forth, not identifying the speaker, which made it difficult for me to follow who was saying what at some times in the story. This also helps to add to the humor of the story, as Alex and Jonathan go back and forth and get confused in the idioms and intricacies of English. AS I reread the first few chapters, especially the ones narrated by Alex, I came to understand more of the novel and how his troubles with the language and American culture add to the story itself. Alex's letters demonstrate his willingness to help as well as his improved in language skills.
Just like most of the posts I have read on here the first chapter is it a bit of a curveball in that it starts out from the point of view of Alex, not Jonathan, who the rest of the story is about. With that being said I do find that Alex is a very entertaining character to say the least. I find it funny that he finds the need to brag about his promiscuity and sexual prowess to Jonathan. It is also entertaining to see how Alex shows off his knowledge of American culture trying to make himself as cool as possible to Jonathan, which seems to be a bit over the top. Another thing I found quite amusing from the first chapter is the use of almost an ironic humor. No better example is Alex’s grandfather who is a legitimately depressed old man. Even though this man is depressed about his wife’s death you cannot help but laugh at the fact that he is chosen to drive Jonathan around on his trip since he considers himself blind. A lot of the humor I believe comes from the cultural differences between Alex and Jonathan. In chapter two the narrative switches to Jonathan’s voice and the imagery he uses to describe the wagon accident is just awesome. He uses such vivid images to describe the actions and he constantly changes the points of view so you have no other choice but to be wrapped up in what is happening in the scene. Also during chapter two you can see how detached the people of Trachimbrod are with the outside world. The sthetl itself is divided into the Jewish Quarter and the Human Three Quarter and does not even technically have a name. Since they have little concern with the outside world they have little need to comply with those standards. At the end of the chapter we get to see the marriage of death with new life as well, with the floating of a baby girl to the surface of the river. Chapter three for me includes some of the craziest bits of storytelling details I have read in a while. Every bit of the chapter is full of just absolute ridiculousness. From the story about the men who hang from ropes while they prey to be closer to God to then the description about those who let go of the rope (Uprighters) and those who hung on (Slouchers). All these traditions seem to be characteristic of the small town, once they adopt a tradition it sticks no matter how crazy it may be.
When first reading "Everything is Illuminated" I did not expect the story to jump to the past. I do not know the significance or link between the stories, but in the end I am sure that everything will be illuminated. Even though the plot of the story is for now a little unclear and the role the characters play as well, I think that everything is somehow connected. I think that this story could almost be like Maus. The past and present were one and the same in Maus. Maus showed us the readers that the past clearly influences the present. Art's father and his experiences and life during World War II and the Holocaust influenced how he in turn raised his son and the life he lead after those events. I believe the same is happening in this novel as well where the past is or has set up the present. It is unclear now of the connection or importance, but later I think it will be seen. The past too really I think is being used to talk about the Jewish faith and its people. In chapter two a wagon falls into river and no one really knows what to do or how it happened. Despite not knowing the right answers, the villagers each believe and argue that they are right about an issue. I think this goes back to faith in general, where each person and religion has their own ideas and even though they do not really know the truth they still firmly believe that they are right. I think the third chapter as well is trying to expose something about faith, but I am not sure if my interpretations are right because it just seemed really bizarre. As someone else mentioned earlier, the Slouchers and Uprighters shows the old world Jewish people and the new Jews that emerged. The Uprighters are the old school kind of Jewish people and it is clear that they disapprove of how the Slouchers behave. Then there was the whole thing with the baby that emerged from the wagon and how she was put into an arc. They left her in the arc and let the men just stare at her until she decided on who her father will be. As the other posts have included, the writing style is definitely different than those of which we have seen in previous readings. It took me awhile to get the hang of it and to decipher, but after the first bit I think I got it. The writing is very detailed and I can picture a lot of the actions and scenes through the imagery. I also noticed how the tone changes from character to character which is interesting. Also it was interesting how it opened in Alex’s voice even though it is Jonathan’s journey. I think that the author possibly chose to do this because Alex is essentially his guide for his trip, thus making Alex an essential part to it. It is then important that the reader get to know this guide as he guides both Jonathan and the reader through the Ukraine. Also through the way Alex exaggerates about himself shows the reader that he may not be a really reliable guide. It is clear that he is trying to impress Jonathan and be part of the American culture that he clearly loves. I think the story is interesting and I am looking forward to the rest of the book. On a side note I kind of miss having pictures, which shows I am a five year old
Devin Harkins I agree that Everything Is Illuminated is going to be similar to Maus when it comes to the weaving together the past and present. Although I feel as though that is a main part to Jewish literature as a whole. Jewish literature is influenced by the need to tell stories whether it’s the author’s personal story or a fictional one. These stories often take place in the past because that is where most of the religion lies. The Jewish religion has been kept alive because of storytelling. Also because of assimilation the roots of the Jewish religion and most of the serious practices happened in the past. It took me a few times to figure out when the author was writing about the past because it was so easily woven into the present. The way this novel is written is very different from others at the same time. The writing style is very matter of fact which I find interesting because the author is not trying to pull a certain emotion out of his readers; this allows readers to make up their own minds when it comes to reacting to the story. I also found it interesting in chapter 2 that death and life go hand in hand. When Trachim dies from the accident it starts the baby girl’s beginning of life. She is born amongst death and is unharmed. I believe she represents hope during destruction. I am definitely interested to see how the past and present connect as I read further into the novel.
After reading the early chapters of Jonathan Safran Foer’s Everything is Illumiated, just like the previous posts, I also had a difficult time breaking down this story. I noticed similarities to the last two novels we have read. Conflicting narrators, similar to Maus, is found in this piece. We read the point of views of both Alex and Jonathan as the chapters continue. When Jonathan corrects Alex it reminds of instances in Maus, where Art would morph Vladek’s story to make it more intriguing. Although, in this case, Jonathan is mainly focused on fixing Alex’s mistakes in order to please a larger audience. Another relation can be seen through Froer’s use of italics. Like Maus, he uses the change in font style in order to inform the readers of whether we are dealing with the past and the present. Little hints like that go a long way in this book due to its constantly shifting point of view and structure. Hailey’s post above also points a few more stylistic elements incorporated by Foer used to assist the reader in understanding the time, place, and point of view of the specific chapter. Alex’s initial introduction gave me a few chuckles based on his high confidence and eagerness to express his promiscuity. I also saw brief moments of Portnoy, but was very happy that those connections quickly went away. I enjoy Alex’s writing style, he gives a strong sense of realism and the idea that he calls it as he sees it, similar to Vladek. . I agree with the point made above that it helps hold truth to the story in the same way Vladek did in Maus, He is doing a fine job of assisting Jonathan in the story and provides the story with several instances of humor. Moving on, at first I was saddened by the grandfather’s story but those feelings changed as he ironically is the driver, in spite of the fact that he proclaims that he is blind. Foer uses a different style of humor that is somewhat ironic rather funny. Alex’s over the top view of Americans is evident through his attempts to impress Jonathan. In all, after getting through the first several chapters of the book, I gained a much deeper respect for the novel and the difficulties involved in such a different form of writing. I enjoy the way the story is portrayed, it serves to depict exactly what is going on in the story and scene rather than adding unnecessary details and I look forward to our in class discussion.
So far, I have enjoyed this book. You can actually download it on Kindle if anybody wanted to know that, which available for Ipad too!
This book started off extremely confusing to me. The constant switching between time and character really threw me off in the beginning. It somewhat took away from the story to me because I would get into one chapter and have to try to remember where the other chapter left off. I think, perhaps, the book would have been a better read if the first half was one point of view, and then it switched. I honestly liked Alex's tone of voice better than Jonathan's, a more serious less humorous tone. Alex's style and tone are more relatable to our age range but we also see the reason for the different age groups all along for the ride (young, middle aged, and old). Alex is a very unique character and I find his family very interesting.
Throughout the novel, Alex begins to discover more and more about his family and so does the reader. The cultural differences between Jonathan and Alex, although vastly different, begin to become very similar in the essence that they are discovering them together in this journey in the Ukraine. Alex begins to uncover his only family history as well. Through just a mere piece of paper, Alex tries to discover so much and although we learn he never finds it from the letter that Alex wrote, the reader and all the characters know that there was much to be learned in the experience alone. Like many of the novels we have read this semester, this is another novel about finding one's place in the world, community, culture, or heritage these characters come from. After finishing the book, I am excited to check out the movie as well.
Some questions do arrive through the novel for me as well. For one, I find it interesting that the author's name is the main character in the story, the jewish one who travels all the way to the Ukraine to discover his history. I did a little research to figure out how Foer connected to Judaism in such a personal way. I basically wanted to figure out if there was any truth to the novel. I didn't find much but what I did discover was that his mother was a child of a Holocaust survivor born in Poland. I think this connection most definitely sparked his curiosity but it would have been cool if it hit a little closer to home other than just using his own name in the story.
Vanessa Previl Everything is Illuminated… hmmm, where can I begin to explain? I’m not really sure how I feel about this novel. I just know that I had a hard time reading it (I actually fell asleep three different times while reading this book). It is not because it is boring; I guess I’m just not into this book yet. But it was a little difficult for me to read and comprehend – a little probably had to do with the wording. Jonathan Safran Foer, as well as main other Jews writers we had read, wrote Everything is Illuminated intertwine of the past and present – this also had a play why this book was a little difficult for me to grasp. The plot is what really threw me off. At first I believed that this story would be about Alex and his experience with Jonathan but then the next chapter had nothing to do with Alex and for a moment I did not know why it was there; this pointing back to why the intertwine of the present and past had me a little confused. But this also made it interesting for me to reach the reading limit so that I can understand the novel more and see where the author Jonathan was going with this book. This is also what makes Jonathan unique. Also how Jonathan during the second chapter, gave each character a different sentence format. Whenever the Well-Regarded Rabbi was talking, his words were all in caps. When the village spoke, the words were in italic. And when the narrator spoke, the words were regular. This also helped to know who was talking without have to introduce the speaker. I wonder if there was another reason why Jonathan decided to format those sentences like that. The rest of the story had an okay… reaction from me. The rest of the novel had to do with Jonathan. This is also something new that I have not seen in other writings – the main character not opening the story. And the letters Alex wrote to Jonathan was like an introduction to the next chapter to make it more understandable. I have not read any book that have the same writing style as Jonathan. With this I believe I can come to like this story from where I left off since now I am getting a little bit comfortable with reading how Jonathan writes.
Cristina Diaz Hate to sound like a broken record, but I have to agree with Vanessa and half, if not all, the class. Everything was NOT illuminated, at least not from the very start. Familiar with Foer's style of writing ( I read his second novel "extremely loud and incredibly close" for another class last semester) I assumed I knew what to expect. Of course, leave it to Foer to prove me wrong ( he is also responsible for my shamefulness, seeing as to he wrote this as an undergrad). Truly a genius, Foer has a unique way of imagining different realities and then making them,well, real through his writing. I must say Alex is one of the funniest characters I have ever met ( for some reason or other he reminds me of Borrat, yesss? ). It is amazing how Foer can manipulate language to create such different and distinct voices among his characters. Although I'd like to note that the whole 1791 was a bit far fetched for me. Unless he had someone else's account ( like in the case of Art with Vladek), I was driven to question the whole authenticity of it. I had to read for about 4 chapters ( if you can even call them chapters) before I got into the actual novel, meaning some what grasping where Foer was trying to go with it. Truthfully, I don't think Foer is successful at keeping the readers attention at bay. I'm sure a lot of people would just put the book back on the shelf due to the drastic contrast. Of course, since we must read it, we become familiar with it and once that occurs then there is no putting the novel down ( at least personally).
Alex Dishman I agree with Vanessa that the different sentence formats was a really unique and cool feature of the novel. The fact that each characters words were typed out a different way almost made you feel like you were actually engaged in a conversation with these people and as if you were there. As I was reading this, not only was it clearer to me who was speaking and helped me keep track of the different conversations easier, but I found myself wondering why each character was typed a certain way, just like Vanessa mentioned. Was the Well-Regarded Rabbi written in all caps because he was so well-regarded that his words stood out and needed meaning in the novel? Why were the villagers words italiscized? Why not the narrator? I thought this added an edge to the novel and really helped me (as a reader) engage myself more into the conversations (I could hear the people speaking more and that made the words mean more). I also want to mention that I agree with Vanessa that the intertwine of the past and present made the book slightly confusing to read but I think that it gave the book another edge as well. I’m not saying it didn’t make this book completely confusing (because it totally did), I’m just saying that I think that is a cool tactic used and it was exemplified well in this novel.
Kyndall Herman I agree that Everything Is Illuminated took to a difficult start from a reader’s standpoint. I was also confused between the first and second chapters until I realized the author was jumping between his family’s past and that of his own in the present. This is a reoccurring theme we have seen throughout the course, and really highlights how rooted in the past the Jewish culture can be, and how they carry it around with them and pass it on through the generations. I think that the elaborate story at the beginning of his very great grandmother shows again to us that Jewish people love telling stories. I think we are shown 4 different explanations for how the wagon could’ve gone fallen into the river, and multiple ways for how the driver could’ve died and so on and so forth. This shows to us how story telling is embedded in their culture. I agree with Vanessa that the different italics did help to point out who was talking, but there was so many different characters and names being mentioned I couldn’t keep up with if they would be important or not. I was also a bit confused about the part where they all read aloud their dreams that had been put into the book. Such a large part of that chapter was about their dreams, and I feel as if it is significant in someway but it just sort of confused me.
The most astonishing part of Everything Is Illuminated by Jonathan Safran Foer is how he tells the story. The subject matter is another family coping with the ramifications of the Holocaust. However, instead of using Art Speigleman’s technique of creating an anthropomorphized world to be able to handle a subject matter so tragic, he made it funny. Jonathan Safran Foer weaves together a realistic, reliable narration of events and those same events re-told by the literally unreliable translator. He engages the idea that a story is more than just the plot or characters, it is also an engagement with a different mindset given to each character.
Alex’s translations are another version of oral history. Like Maus, Jonathan Safran Foer’s novel is partly an oral history told by Alex in a second language. In the same way that Vladek sometimes failed to properly use the English language, Alex also tells this story in broken English. This makes the reader wonder what we are missing by hearing the story out of his native tongue. It is this perspective that makes one wonder how stories related to the devastation of the Holocaust should be told. Should they only be documentaries that are grammatically correct and portray a precise, accurate account of the tragedy? Or should the native voices of the victims, though imperfect in their facts or language, be the only way these stories are heard?
It also distances America from the gruesome events of the Holocaust, events that began while America was still enforcing an isolationist policy instead of one which shut down the Third Reich. Hearing the narrative told in broken English makes it foreign to an American or English-speaking reader. The narrator is instantly set apart from the world of the reader. This is even more strongly emphasized by his attempt to use thesaurus words with connotations that hugely affect the message of his sentences.
In the case of Maus, the reader only got Vladek’s side. Everything Is Illuminated shows the reader the actual facts, and we also get the added benefit of hearing it being told to us, with flair and awkward grammar, by a participant in the story. This syntax also gives Alex’s narrated world a sense of profound and poetic power. To the reader, each phrase is fresh. There are no clichés because Alex does not know any common English colloquial phrases. Jonathan Safran Foer’s style in this narrative is almost a nod to magical realism.
I was pleasantly surprised to find that this novel is so similar in its content to Maus and even to Portnoy's, yet so refreshingly new. As I read, it doesn't even occur to me that I'm basically reading the same story about the trials and tribulations of the Holocaust that I've been reading for the past couple of weeks. This is solely because, like you said, the humor, the broken English, and the straight bluntness of the story gives it real character. Though I love the way in which it's written, I'm curious to reach the real dramatic parts of the book. I want to see how Foer addresses those instances in which humor isn't really an option as an escape mechanism. Maybe I'll once again be pleasantly surprised to see that he can actually pull off sarcasm in such a serious situation, just as Spiegelman managed to stick to his ways through all the traumatizing parts of his story.
As far as the actual style of translation goes in all of these Holocaust-based stories, I feel that there is not an exact template for retelling them, as we've seen already with so many diverse stories about the same subject. I personally love the way that Alex conveys his story, and I love even more that Foer made no drastic changes to it. I believe that it gives the reader a much more real, personal view on their story, but I also feel that not every novel that contains this kind of subject matter should be written in that way.
Firstly, I really enjoyed the way this book was written. The way Foer breaks the book into sections written by different authors not only kept my attention, but added a beneficial layer of depth that truly adjoined to the story. Within the first few chapters, you already begin to get a sense of Johnathan's narrative voice; extremely whimsical and full of magic and ambiguity. The imagery describing the wagon accident is vivid and visceral, and it switches back and forth between various points of view. There is the horse pinned to the riverbed by the wagon. There is the flotsam in the water, a confusion of organic and inorganic things. There is the buzz of the townspeople. We experience these things all at once, but the effect is not bewildering, as we might imagine that the people experience it. . The twins hide under their father's prayer shawl like ghosts, the horse dies, and the ant in Yankel's ring hides its face in shame. All of these events are small relative to the whole accident, but somehow they give it great importance. We may never know the truth about Trachimbrod and the accident, but we can know about some of the incident's intimate details. Clearly this is a big event for the town, and we receive glimpses of clarity about the apparent nature of Trachimbrod and about how its residents approach new things.
Right away, vagueness becomes a defining characteristic of Trachimbrod. Not only is it on the Polish-Ukrainian border, but the shtetl itself is divided into the Jewish Quarter and the Human Three-Quarters. In fact, it does not even have a name. All this is very telling about the way the shtetl operates. The people of Trachimbrod are not concerned with the outside world, and therefore they do not need to be defined in its terms. They need no nationality and no name. They know who they are, and this sense of dormant confidence is maintained throughout the novel. I feel like in other books this sort of ambiguity would be questioned or threatened or a way, but Foer’s presents it in a way that makes it easy to accept and digest. Another of the novel's major themes I noticed was the conjoining of death and destruction to life. The end of the world for Trachimbrod is the beginning for the newborn baby girl. She is born amidst death and refuse, but she is untouched by it, a clear representation of hope. Also the act of the wagon crashing seems to feed new life into the town, adding to the culture and heritage of the people, enlivening them and inspiring them to greater things.
Leslie Oxford From my reading of Everything is Illuminated, I have found the story-telling both familiar and original at the same time. Foer's writing is familiar in the sense that it involves themes that have already been dealt with extensively. Through the interaction between Alex's interpretation of events in the past, Jonathan's portrayal of the present, and the letters between the two characters, there is a definite connection being made between the past and present. This interaction is not dissimilar to other Jewish-American literature which has been explored in this class, such as with Spiegelman's Maus, Schwartz's "In Dreams Begin Responsibilities", and Bellow's "A Silver Dish". However, the interplay between the past and present through Alex and Jonathan's letters adds a new dynamic to this manner of storytelling. The letters add supplementary material which allows for the audience to see the transformation throughout the story. The part of the story which best demonstrates this idea is when Alex writes in his letter to Jonathan, "With writing, we have second chances." (pg. 144) In my opinion, Foer seems to be telling the reader that writing provides both the characters and for himself another chance to have a fulfilled existence. "Sentences became words became sighs became groans became grunts became light." (pg.97) which points to the importance of language and telling a story occurs when Brod is raped. This particular passage demonstrates the importance and finality of verbal expression. During actual moments, words are not easy flowing, but upon reconsidering such moments characters such as Alex and Jonathan can provide light and a "second chance". Another connection throughout the story, which I have already alluded, is the prominence of light and the idea of storytelling providing illumination. While on the first look, it appears that Jonathan's research into his family is the "illumination" of the story. Be that as it may as the story continues to unfold, it is shown that the "illumination" of the story could be more a result of the embellishments and usage of fantasy by Alex and Jonathan. This usage of fantasy not only causes a richer story to unfold for the reader, but it allows for an extra emphasis of the tangible themes throughout the novel. However, the use of fantasy is somewhat of a double-edged sword. For while the fantasy elements of Everything Is Illuminated does highlight important elements of the story, it also Alex and Jonathan use so much fantasy in their writing that it is difficult to distinguish fact from fiction.
In Johnathon Foer's Everything Is Illuminated I love his the story jumps back and forth between the present and past. These are definitely my favorite types of books because the stories always have common threads that reveal themselves and I am sure that once we are finished with the book we will notice some prominent foreshadowing through out the book. I love the book and how Alex is always looking to fit in with his out of date references. To me when I travel outside of the United states I notice how a lot of people try to do this and it can get pretty old, which obviously is how Johnathan feels. The switching between back and forth is a bit confusing, just Ike the first chapter, I was confused as to why Alex began the book but I like the structure so far. The plot is a bit messy to me, I'm not sure what it is yet but I believe that this switching back and forth is going to leave perfect room to develop johnathan. I also love how Johnathan is a very vivid story teller. It is very cool because it paints very amazing and graphic images in your head which is very essential when telling a book that flips between points of view, time , and stories. Creating a very solid image makes me follow a book or story that otherwise would be very confusing. Also I like the letters becaUse it offers informatIon in a different way without having it just said by a character or just thought about. Themes in Jewish fiction are really becoming quite dominant through out each book and short story read. The idea of a conflicted narrator especially seems to be the main theme. Although Everything is illuminated really uses a fantasy element that I have not seen before in this class.
In the beginning of Everything is Illuminated by Johnathon Foer, I was thinking that since it begins with Alex narrating the story it would typically stay this way throughout the book and it would be about Alex and his experiences. But as i continued reading on I didn't realize he was switching between the past and present. I kind of had to read it a little slower and take in the past and present tense words because it began to confuse me. I didn't grasp how Alex's past was being related to his story. As soon as I got the idea of past and present it became a much quicker and more understandable read. Theres little puzzle pieces that will eventually get filled in the more and further you read the book. The book is extremely "colorful" but yet very blunt on how he really explains things to the very last bit without going into a lot of depth. He uses his words very well. This gives the reader enough descriptions to really feel for the characters and to paint a picture as you read along. I'm not quite sure on how I like the book so far. It's not really like any of the other books I have read in the past. The switching between past and present I think is what I'm really not used to.
Hailey Dolan
ReplyDeleteFoer’s Everything Is Illuminated jumps back and forth between the past, telling the story of the speaker’s very-great grandmother, Brod, and the present, which tells the story of the speaker, Alex, himself. Because of these constant time changes, it can be a tad confusing at first, however, if we pay close attention, Foer uses different writing techniques to help keep us on track.
For instance, when we are reading about Brod and her story in the past, the spoken words are italicized. At first I thought this was just a writing style that Foer liked to use—he used italicized words instead of quotations just as Grace Paley simply disregarded any indicator that the words written were dialogue in Zagrowsky Tells—but as I kept reading, I noticed the disappearance and reappearance of this style. That’s when I realized that speech is only italicized in the past. Another helpful hint Foer gives his reader, telling them they are about to step back into Brod’s world, is the curved line of the title of the chapter as well as the date next to the name. The date is only given when the title is curved, though; it does not appear when chapters about Alex (which have a straight-lined title) are about to begin. A final clue Foer gives his reader that a time jump is about to happen at the end of chapters about Brod when we are about to read about Alex. There is always a letter addressed to Jonathon, written by Alex.
Everything Is Illuminated not only has a specific look to its structure, but the tone is distinctive. As I read, the tone was very matter-of-fact, straightforward. “Alex does this… Alex says that… He thought this about it…”, at least that’s how it read for me. However, this did not make the story dry like a textbook would using the straightforward approach. There are many places where I laughed, mainly instances when the father and grandfather were getting on to Alex.
I also felt more connected to the story because instead of just merely reiterating that Alex has broken English, Foer shows us that within the dialogue between Alex and Jonathon. Alex constantly asks Jonathon to slow down and repeat himself and then we see that happen, it isn’t just implied. And although during these chapters quotations are used, Foer likes to leave out prounouns. For instance on pages 57-58 when Alex, Jonathon and the grandfather are all speaking, Foer doesn’t break up the quotes with “he said” or even with paragraph breaks, he keeps all the quotations side by side within the same paragraph, and normally that would seem like it would be confusing but he forms the dialogue in such a way that you don’t ever have to question who is saying what. I found that to be very interesting along with the fact that Foer is writing about his story but from the point of view of his English translator, Alex. How does he know what was going on with Alex before they met or during times he wasn’t around? I’m curious to find out.
I was frustrated with the constant transitioning from the past to the present. Until I deciphered the two separate writing styles, I was really confused. Like you, I also noticed that Foer uses italics in his quotes only when writing about the past. I like how you related this back to Grace Paley in Zagrowsky Tells, in which she does not use quotations or italics to separate thought from speech. The use of italics to differentiate between the two in Everything Is Illuminated was extremely helpful. I also noticed how every chapter that is about the past has a curved title, and a date next to it. The titles of the chapters in which we jump to Alex are straight, but bear no date. These chapters are generally transitioned to by means of an italicized letter from Alex to Jonathan. I related this to Maus, in that both authors used different visual writing styles to show the transition from the past to the present. However, I didn’t understand how the story from the past related to Alex’s story. I had assumed that the story would be entirely about Alex and his experiences, since he is the narrator.
DeleteI liked how the novel was written in a tone that was very straight forward and to the point. While being extremely blunt about the character’s actions and dialogue, I feel like it also made the book more amusing in that it gave it a dry and almost sarcastic sense of humor.
Along with Hailey, I would have to agree the way this novel is put together can be very confusing at first. After reading a graphic novel for a month, transitioning to Everything is Illuminated was quite the jump. I started reading this novel before bed one night and honestly made it through the first two chapters wondering what I had just read. I’d be lying if I said I would have continued reading this novel if I didn’t have to. With that being said, after getting into the meat of this book I’m so glad I was forced to keep reading. After I understood the perspectives of where each chapter was taking place and from whom it was being narrated, I continued to enjoy the book more and more. I had to leave Dirac to read at home one day because I was sitting there laughing to myself like a total weirdo. I don’t know if it was just me but another reason I think it was hard to get into was the amount of new characters being introduced all together. I felt so overwhelmed and still when some characters come back into the later chapters I find myself looking back to make sure I know who we are talking about.
DeleteA reoccurring theme within the novel concerns the idea of being ordinary. The comment is made over and over again, but I’m not sure what its significance is. It’s hard to even make an analysis of a novel that I’m not sure if I’m completely clear on in the first place. Although I am enjoying the book a lot more now, I definitely have a lot more questions.
So far, I'm not sure how I feel about this reading except that it is very interesting. Something that was very confusing and took time for me to figure out was the main point of this book. By this I mean it opened with Alex, but later on Jonathan's quest took center stage. Now I have come to the conclusion that there is not a true main character, but Jonathan's quest is the focal point of the books plot. I'm not a huge fan of the author switching between the past and present. I think that having three different stories being told at once is way too much for a novel, and I don’t think he pulled it off well so far. That being said, however, I am enjoying the story occurring in the past much more than the present. I'm not completely sure why this is, but the plot surrounding this child and town has drawn me in unlike the present. There is something about this plot that intrigues me and makes me want to know more. I like how Foer used the terms “uprighters” and “slouchers” to depict the spilt in Judaism in the town. This book does seem to contain a lot of Jewish Humor presented in a much more obvious light. A lot of it, however, does seem to be tragic-comedy, especially when it comes to Alex’s Grandfather. I have yet to encounter an author that writes with such a style that Foer uses. I'm not even sure how to describe it, but it adds to the originality of this novel. Alex's terrible grammar in the book definitely adds a level of realism to it. Something to stood out to me during my reading was how hard Alex seemed to try and impress Jonathan with his letters early on. He reached a level of boasting that just seemed ridiculous. This part did, however, remind me of past Jewish America Fiction from this class containing such sexual content. The first one that came to mind was Portnoy's complain. To both these men, the act of sex is parallel to control and power. Another connection I noticed between this and other readings was the emphasis on memory and the past. It seems like many of our readings have been about or touched on the holocaust. While this book touches on many themes, this event is again a least a part of this book. This relates it “The Shawl”, but also very much “Maus” because of how it also has multiple stories being told. In a more general sense though, we see once again how important memory is for the Jewish religion.
ReplyDeleteOverall I’m curious to see where this book goes. It’s seem have different themes pulled from past readings, while at the same time it is very original. Reading this book last has giving me a much different perspective. This is because during this semester I have learned so much about the Jewish religion. My first read left me with so many questions about the faith and not the reading. Understanding the Jewish Faith was a non-facotr for this read.
I share your confusion about the story being told from too many perspectives. When transitioning from chapter one to two I was extremely confused until I realized the perspectives switch from Alex to Jonathan. It took me reading certain lines over again to finally understand the switch. Concerning Alex, he reminds me of Alexander Portnoy in his bragging about women and he also has that semi-annoying feel that Portnoy had as well. I agree that Alex’s grammar mistakes aided in the originality of the story thus far just as it did in Maus. Vladek’s broken English added aiuthenticity to the overall story along with isolating him as an immigrant. Jonathan, on the other hand, strikes me as the classic Jewish storyteller in finding out about his roots and retelling them to us. What really intrigued me about the book is Alex’s grandfather. He instilled a lot of sadness in me with his depression from the death of his wife. It was also sad to see how the other men treated him, with little respect and care for his supposed “blindness.” This story to me seems to combine both the previous stories in some aspect but I’m not sure if Spencer meant for this to be intentional. Regardless, this story has been entertaining thus far.
DeleteI had the exact same response to this story as you did. It was extremely confusing to me the way that he switched around a lot. It was very hard for me to start this story because I had so much trouble deciphering what exactly was going on. I do however like the fact that you had brought up about how this stories style relates to Maus with the way it’s set up transitioning from past to present. The way he did it, which I figured out from another main post, with the chapter titles which I did not realize while reading was pretty clever. I do not like the fact that when he’s telling about another person speaking he uses italicized font instead of using quotations. That threw me off at first which contributed to why I was so confused until I finally realized what he was doing. I do agree with you that this was written with the same concepts as Portnoys Complaint. I feel like a lot of Jewish Literature has to do with having sexual freedom and power with that control they feel. So far I’m not really a fan of the story but I think that now that I understand the writing style it will be easier of a read and I’ll grow on to it.
DeleteI completely understand why it can be difficult to follow the stories going on in Everything is Illuminated, being that Foer’s style tends to be very scatterbrained and lacks a certain structure that most other novels do. Although Foer has probably one of the most unique styles of writing, his style and tone jumps off the page in a way that really makes me pay attention. I had to read his later novel, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, for a class last semester, and his style of writing is very similar in that book. There are a lot of flashbacks and jumping from one time frame to another, as well as many grammatical errors and informal writing in the narrative that make it seem more relatable (seeing as how it is told from the perspective of a 10 year-old boy).
DeleteAlthough Foer’s style can sometimes make his storylines more difficult to understand, I think he does it in a way that makes his stories very memorable ones. While I was reading Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close last semester, I too was a little lost at first when it came to what exactly was going on in the story. After further reading and observation, however, I saw that Foer has a way of having the multiple stories tie in with each other in a way that is so perfectly orchestrated, that I have no idea how he even comes up with all of these ideas. I’m definitely looking forward to reading the rest of Everything is Illuminated to see if it is just as satisfying as his other novel that I have read.
I was also confused for the first few chapters of the story. It seemed to be much jumbled through what seemed to be the use of non-chronological order. It started to become easier to follow the flow of the story when it was easily recognized who was speaking. For instance, the use of grammar through the narration of chapters makes a clear distinction between Alex and Jonathon. Like you were saying, both narrators have completely different structure and tone; and one you begin to see the pattern- the flow of the story becomes more fluid and precise.
DeleteSo far, I am a little overwhelmed by the structure of the story. However, it is evident through the use syntax and overall structure and grammar use of the given chapters to be able to identify who the narrator is, the story is at times still confusing. It’s interesting how you see the resemblance of this story and “Portnoy’s Complaint”. I must admit, some of the use of the explicit sexual references did make me ruminate to the story; however, I don’t seem to find the connection of existing themes- as of yet. Maybe in further chapters we will be ‘illuminated’ to more obvious themes of sexual freedom and expression.
Justin Huntman
DeleteI agree with you that the transitions in this novel make the story extremely hard and confusing to follow. I feel as though we are reading three different stories and the transitions between them just don’t seem to flow. While the story is interesting and is very enjoyable to ready and follow, but it does take multiple readings to understand what is going on in the past vs the present in the story. While reading this I feel as though we are reading three different all interesting but all very different. I also find the broken English that is spoken is very hard to fall. The most obvious is when we are talking about the grandfather and it took a little while for us to understand that he is retired not retarded that he keeps calling himself. While I am sure that the broken English is part of the story being told it makes the overall story had to figure out what is going on with out constant re reading which also takes away from the flow of the story. While I agree that this novel is good and exciting I cant wait to see how the story continues and find out the result of everything going on.
I agree with Britton on my confusion at first with the novels characters. It is very confusing to have almost two different plots going and for someone like me who gets distracted easily, I have to pay great attention to who is being discussed. At first I did not like how there was not a true main character, as Britton stated. Usually in novels I love almost getting into the characters mind (as crazy as that sounds). Although, after reading most of the novel I have come to the realization that I actually like how there are two main characters.
DeleteI also think it is very interesting how the author changes which of the three stories he is telling by switching his grammar and diction. Although the grammar is terrible, I absolutely love the way he represents Alex. Ever since reading the first page, when he describes what all the other people in his life refer to him as and why, I have been hooked on this character. I’m not entirely sure why I think it is so interesting, maybe as Britton said; it adds a lot of realism.
I also agree with Britton in his statement that he has yet to encounter an author who writes with Foer’s level of humor. I like the sense of tragic humor he uses with the grandfather and his relation to Portnoys.
I am excited to see what the upcoming chapters have in store and what the rest of the novel has to come.
When first reading Everything is Illuminate by Jonathan Safran Froer, I was very confused about the plot of the story. Because Alex narrates the story first I assumed that the story would be about him and his experiences. However when the story switched to the past, I became even more confused. I didn’t understand how the story of the past related to Alex’s story. Likewise it was hard for me to tell when the author was talking about the past and when he was talking about the present. However once I went back and read it more carefully I realized that he italicizes quotations rather than using quotation marks when the story is in the past.
ReplyDeleteI also noticed that Froer had a very unique style of writing. His writing is very blunt and straight forward. It has a very matter of fact style about it that I am not used to. That said, I found the way he wrote it interesting. It seems that the style of how it was written makes the novel more comical.
I found the very beginning of the novel most interesting. I always analyze the beginning of every novel the most because it has great significance. I try to ask myself why the author chose to open the novel the way they did. Froer begins the novel with Alex introducing himself. There was nothing uncommon about this except for the fact that Alex spent an unusual amount of time introducing himself. He lists all the different names that people call him and even explains some of the nicknames. At first I just assumed that it was a meaningless rant that the author included in the beginning of the novel. However when reading it again and reflecting back, I believe the author is trying to show the reader the many different sides of Alex. It seems like he is a different person in every relationship. It is similar to an actor playing many different roles. I think that Alex feels like he has to play a different role for each relationship in his life. I am eager to continue to read this novel and see where it ends up. I found so far that there are many reoccurring themes from this novel that has been seen in past stories we have read in class. So far I am really enjoying this novel and I think that our in class discussion will clarify any confusion that I have had so far.
I agree with your confusion. The book seems to have the multiple chapters reflect the narrations of the multiple characters. For instance the first chapter Alex is narrating and from the second the chapter seems to relate to Jonathan. The book opens up with the first chapter from the perspective of Alex. The reader automatically gets a feel for Alex’s personality. He seems to be cocky and confident. “I do not dig this name very much, but I dig him very much, so OK, I permit him to dub be Alli” (1). He later went along to brag about his good looks. Alex tends to speak in an unusual manor. I found it interesting how Alex’s father runs a travel agency to help Jews retrace the places where their ancestors had one existed. While at the same time Jonathan is the first Jew Alex has ever met. The relationship between Alex and Grandfather is interesting to me. They both seemed to have no interest in the trip at all or Jonathan. I am interested to see if their relationship develops even more as the story continues. I was confused with the entire story about Trachum. I assume it all ties in with Jonathans research and family ties.
DeleteI agree with Danielle in the fact that it took me a couple times reading the beginning of the novel to catch on to Froer’s style of writing. I admire his ability to go back and forth between the past and present so fluidly because as hard as it is to read, it is even harder to write. As Danielle stated above, Froer writes in a very blunt tone which I like because you really do not have to worry about searching for deeper meanings in his words and you can focus solely on the words and phrases themselves.
DeleteThe one character that really caught my eye in the novel
was that of Alex’s grandfather. He stood out to me because he is a very ironic character in the sense that he is both someone we laugh at one second and then feel bad for the very next. I thought it was hilarious that he claims to be blind and has a Seeing Eye dog, yet agrees to be the driver of the tour. But on the other hand he is very depressed as a person since the loss of his wife and only gets worse though the story.
CHynna Humphrey
DeleteThe first half of Everything Is Illuminated, though a tad confusing, has been the funniest of the three novels we’ve read in this class in my opinion. I found myself genuinely laughing at the text at times (which I have not yet experienced with the other novels). Along with its humor, I also think that this novel is very interesting because of Foer’s decision to have the narration switch between characters. I am very much in agreement with Danielle about how confusing this story was initially. I had to go back and reread the first chapter into the second chapter to realize that it was a switch in narrative between Alex and Jonathon. Another aspect of the novel that confused me a little was the way that the introduction of so many characters and names in chapter two. Sofiowka, Chana, Yankel D, Bitzl Bitzl R, Mordechai; all of these names introduced in a couple pages makes it hard to keep track of who is who because they all sound so foreign to me. Lastly, in terms of first impressions, I found it odd, yet kind of funny how repetitive Foer can sometimes be. You can see that just in the first few pages with Alex’s mother always saying “Alexi-stop-spleening-me!” Also, every time Alex’s father spoke to him, they would have that same argument where his dad calls him Shapka, Alex says “do not dub me that,” and his father would repreat the sentence using Alex instead.
I agree with you. Not only was I confused about the switching from past to present, but I was also lost when it came to Alex's speech and writing. It was like someone took a thesaurus while they tried to write. The use of uncommon words and odd speech patterns added to the humorous nature of the story as highlighted Alex's troubles with the English language. One of the more confusing aspects of the way the novel is written, for me, is the way that Foer does not create seperate paragraphs for each speaker in dialogue, which is the norm in writing. Instead he goes back and forth, not identifying the speaker, which made it difficult for me to follow who was saying what at some times in the story. This also helps to add to the humor of the story, as Alex and Jonathan go back and forth and get confused in the idioms and intricacies of English. AS I reread the first few chapters, especially the ones narrated by Alex, I came to understand more of the novel and how his troubles with the language and American culture add to the story itself. Alex's letters demonstrate his willingness to help as well as his improved in language skills.
DeleteJust like most of the posts I have read on here the first chapter is it a bit of a curveball in that it starts out from the point of view of Alex, not Jonathan, who the rest of the story is about. With that being said I do find that Alex is a very entertaining character to say the least. I find it funny that he finds the need to brag about his promiscuity and sexual prowess to Jonathan. It is also entertaining to see how Alex shows off his knowledge of American culture trying to make himself as cool as possible to Jonathan, which seems to be a bit over the top.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing I found quite amusing from the first chapter is the use of almost an ironic humor. No better example is Alex’s grandfather who is a legitimately depressed old man. Even though this man is depressed about his wife’s death you cannot help but laugh at the fact that he is chosen to drive Jonathan around on his trip since he considers himself blind. A lot of the humor I believe comes from the cultural differences between Alex and Jonathan.
In chapter two the narrative switches to Jonathan’s voice and the imagery he uses to describe the wagon accident is just awesome. He uses such vivid images to describe the actions and he constantly changes the points of view so you have no other choice but to be wrapped up in what is happening in the scene.
Also during chapter two you can see how detached the people of Trachimbrod are with the outside world. The sthetl itself is divided into the Jewish Quarter and the Human Three Quarter and does not even technically have a name. Since they have little concern with the outside world they have little need to comply with those standards. At the end of the chapter we get to see the marriage of death with new life as well, with the floating of a baby girl to the surface of the river.
Chapter three for me includes some of the craziest bits of storytelling details I have read in a while. Every bit of the chapter is full of just absolute ridiculousness. From the story about the men who hang from ropes while they prey to be closer to God to then the description about those who let go of the rope (Uprighters) and those who hung on (Slouchers). All these traditions seem to be characteristic of the small town, once they adopt a tradition it sticks no matter how crazy it may be.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen first reading "Everything is Illuminated" I did not expect the story to jump to the past. I do not know the significance or link between the stories, but in the end I am sure that everything will be illuminated. Even though the plot of the story is for now a little unclear and the role the characters play as well, I think that everything is somehow connected. I think that this story could almost be like Maus. The past and present were one and the same in Maus. Maus showed us the readers that the past clearly influences the present. Art's father and his experiences and life during World War II and the Holocaust influenced how he in turn raised his son and the life he lead after those events. I believe the same is happening in this novel as well where the past is or has set up the present. It is unclear now of the connection or importance, but later I think it will be seen.
ReplyDeleteThe past too really I think is being used to talk about the Jewish faith and its people. In chapter two a wagon falls into river and no one really knows what to do or how it happened. Despite not knowing the right answers, the villagers each believe and argue that they are right about an issue. I think this goes back to faith in general, where each person and religion has their own ideas and even though they do not really know the truth they still firmly believe that they are right. I think the third chapter as well is trying to expose something about faith, but I am not sure if my interpretations are right because it just seemed really bizarre. As someone else mentioned earlier, the Slouchers and Uprighters shows the old world Jewish people and the new Jews that emerged. The Uprighters are the old school kind of Jewish people and it is clear that they disapprove of how the Slouchers behave. Then there was the whole thing with the baby that emerged from the wagon and how she was put into an arc. They left her in the arc and let the men just stare at her until she decided on who her father will be.
As the other posts have included, the writing style is definitely different than those of which we have seen in previous readings. It took me awhile to get the hang of it and to decipher, but after the first bit I think I got it. The writing is very detailed and I can picture a lot of the actions and scenes through the imagery. I also noticed how the tone changes from character to character which is interesting.
Also it was interesting how it opened in Alex’s voice even though it is Jonathan’s journey. I think that the author possibly chose to do this because Alex is essentially his guide for his trip, thus making Alex an essential part to it. It is then important that the reader get to know this guide as he guides both Jonathan and the reader through the Ukraine. Also through the way Alex exaggerates about himself shows the reader that he may not be a really reliable guide. It is clear that he is trying to impress Jonathan and be part of the American culture that he clearly loves.
I think the story is interesting and I am looking forward to the rest of the book. On a side note I kind of miss having pictures, which shows I am a five year old
Devin Harkins
DeleteI agree that Everything Is Illuminated is going to be similar to Maus when it comes to the weaving together the past and present. Although I feel as though that is a main part to Jewish literature as a whole. Jewish literature is influenced by the need to tell stories whether it’s the author’s personal story or a fictional one. These stories often take place in the past because that is where most of the religion lies. The Jewish religion has been kept alive because of storytelling. Also because of assimilation the roots of the Jewish religion and most of the serious practices happened in the past. It took me a few times to figure out when the author was writing about the past because it was so easily woven into the present. The way this novel is written is very different from others at the same time. The writing style is very matter of fact which I find interesting because the author is not trying to pull a certain emotion out of his readers; this allows readers to make up their own minds when it comes to reacting to the story. I also found it interesting in chapter 2 that death and life go hand in hand. When Trachim dies from the accident it starts the baby girl’s beginning of life. She is born amongst death and is unharmed. I believe she represents hope during destruction. I am definitely interested to see how the past and present connect as I read further into the novel.
After reading the early chapters of Jonathan Safran Foer’s Everything is Illumiated, just like the previous posts, I also had a difficult time breaking down this story. I noticed similarities to the last two novels we have read. Conflicting narrators, similar to Maus, is found in this piece. We read the point of views of both Alex and Jonathan as the chapters continue. When Jonathan corrects Alex it reminds of instances in Maus, where Art would morph Vladek’s story to make it more intriguing. Although, in this case, Jonathan is mainly focused on fixing Alex’s mistakes in order to please a larger audience. Another relation can be seen through Froer’s use of italics. Like Maus, he uses the change in font style in order to inform the readers of whether we are dealing with the past and the present. Little hints like that go a long way in this book due to its constantly shifting point of view and structure. Hailey’s post above also points a few more stylistic elements incorporated by Foer used to assist the reader in understanding the time, place, and point of view of the specific chapter.
ReplyDeleteAlex’s initial introduction gave me a few chuckles based on his high confidence and eagerness to express his promiscuity. I also saw brief moments of Portnoy, but was very happy that those connections quickly went away. I enjoy Alex’s writing style, he gives a strong sense of realism and the idea that he calls it as he sees it, similar to Vladek. . I agree with the point made above that it helps hold truth to the story in the same way Vladek did in Maus, He is doing a fine job of assisting Jonathan in the story and provides the story with several instances of humor. Moving on, at first I was saddened by the grandfather’s story but those feelings changed as he ironically is the driver, in spite of the fact that he proclaims that he is blind. Foer uses a different style of humor that is somewhat ironic rather funny. Alex’s over the top view of Americans is evident through his attempts to impress Jonathan. In all, after getting through the first several chapters of the book, I gained a much deeper respect for the novel and the difficulties involved in such a different form of writing. I enjoy the way the story is portrayed, it serves to depict exactly what is going on in the story and scene rather than adding unnecessary details and I look forward to our in class discussion.
So far, I have enjoyed this book. You can actually download it on Kindle if anybody wanted to know that, which available for Ipad too!
ReplyDeleteThis book started off extremely confusing to me. The constant switching between time and character really threw me off in the beginning. It somewhat took away from the story to me because I would get into one chapter and have to try to remember where the other chapter left off. I think, perhaps, the book would have been a better read if the first half was one point of view, and then it switched. I honestly liked Alex's tone of voice better than Jonathan's, a more serious less humorous tone. Alex's style and tone are more relatable to our age range but we also see the reason for the different age groups all along for the ride (young, middle aged, and old). Alex is a very unique character and I find his family very interesting.
Throughout the novel, Alex begins to discover more and more about his family and so does the reader. The cultural differences between Jonathan and Alex, although vastly different, begin to become very similar in the essence that they are discovering them together in this journey in the Ukraine. Alex begins to uncover his only family history as well. Through just a mere piece of paper, Alex tries to discover so much and although we learn he never finds it from the letter that Alex wrote, the reader and all the characters know that there was much to be learned in the experience alone. Like many of the novels we have read this semester, this is another novel about finding one's place in the world, community, culture, or heritage these characters come from. After finishing the book, I am excited to check out the movie as well.
Some questions do arrive through the novel for me as well. For one, I find it interesting that the author's name is the main character in the story, the jewish one who travels all the way to the Ukraine to discover his history. I did a little research to figure out how Foer connected to Judaism in such a personal way. I basically wanted to figure out if there was any truth to the novel. I didn't find much but what I did discover was that his mother was a child of a Holocaust survivor born in Poland. I think this connection most definitely sparked his curiosity but it would have been cool if it hit a little closer to home other than just using his own name in the story.
Vanessa Previl
ReplyDeleteEverything is Illuminated… hmmm, where can I begin to explain? I’m not really sure how I feel about this novel. I just know that I had a hard time reading it (I actually fell asleep three different times while reading this book). It is not because it is boring; I guess I’m just not into this book yet. But it was a little difficult for me to read and comprehend – a little probably had to do with the wording. Jonathan Safran Foer, as well as main other Jews writers we had read, wrote Everything is Illuminated intertwine of the past and present – this also had a play why this book was a little difficult for me to grasp.
The plot is what really threw me off. At first I believed that this story would be about Alex and his experience with Jonathan but then the next chapter had nothing to do with Alex and for a moment I did not know why it was there; this pointing back to why the intertwine of the present and past had me a little confused. But this also made it interesting for me to reach the reading limit so that I can understand the novel more and see where the author Jonathan was going with this book. This is also what makes Jonathan unique.
Also how Jonathan during the second chapter, gave each character a different sentence format. Whenever the Well-Regarded Rabbi was talking, his words were all in caps. When the village spoke, the words were in italic. And when the narrator spoke, the words were regular. This also helped to know who was talking without have to introduce the speaker. I wonder if there was another reason why Jonathan decided to format those sentences like that.
The rest of the story had an okay… reaction from me. The rest of the novel had to do with Jonathan. This is also something new that I have not seen in other writings – the main character not opening the story. And the letters Alex wrote to Jonathan was like an introduction to the next chapter to make it more understandable. I have not read any book that have the same writing style as Jonathan. With this I believe I can come to like this story from where I left off since now I am getting a little bit comfortable with reading how Jonathan writes.
Cristina Diaz
DeleteHate to sound like a broken record, but I have to agree with Vanessa and half, if not all, the class. Everything was NOT illuminated, at least not from the very start. Familiar with Foer's style of writing ( I read his second novel "extremely loud and incredibly close" for another class last semester) I assumed I knew what to expect. Of course, leave it to Foer to prove me wrong ( he is also responsible for my shamefulness, seeing as to he wrote this as an undergrad). Truly a genius, Foer has a unique way of imagining different realities and then making them,well, real through his writing. I must say Alex is one of the funniest characters I have ever met ( for some reason or other he reminds me of Borrat, yesss? ). It is amazing how Foer can manipulate language to create such different and distinct voices among his characters. Although I'd like to note that the whole 1791 was a bit far fetched for me. Unless he had someone else's account ( like in the case of Art with Vladek), I was driven to question the whole authenticity of it. I had to read for about 4 chapters ( if you can even call them chapters) before I got into the actual novel, meaning some what grasping where Foer was trying to go with it. Truthfully, I don't think Foer is successful at keeping the readers attention at bay. I'm sure a lot of people would just put the book back on the shelf due to the drastic contrast. Of course, since we must read it, we become familiar with it and once that occurs then there is no putting the novel down ( at least personally).
Alex Dishman
DeleteI agree with Vanessa that the different sentence formats was a really unique and cool feature of the novel. The fact that each characters words were typed out a different way almost made you feel like you were actually engaged in a conversation with these people and as if you were there. As I was reading this, not only was it clearer to me who was speaking and helped me keep track of the different conversations easier, but I found myself wondering why each character was typed a certain way, just like Vanessa mentioned. Was the Well-Regarded Rabbi written in all caps because he was so well-regarded that his words stood out and needed meaning in the novel? Why were the villagers words italiscized? Why not the narrator? I thought this added an edge to the novel and really helped me (as a reader) engage myself more into the conversations (I could hear the people speaking more and that made the words mean more). I also want to mention that I agree with Vanessa that the intertwine of the past and present made the book slightly confusing to read but I think that it gave the book another edge as well. I’m not saying it didn’t make this book completely confusing (because it totally did), I’m just saying that I think that is a cool tactic used and it was exemplified well in this novel.
Kyndall Herman
DeleteI agree that Everything Is Illuminated took to a difficult start from a reader’s standpoint. I was also confused between the first and second chapters until I realized the author was jumping between his family’s past and that of his own in the present. This is a reoccurring theme we have seen throughout the course, and really highlights how rooted in the past the Jewish culture can be, and how they carry it around with them and pass it on through the generations.
I think that the elaborate story at the beginning of his very great grandmother shows again to us that Jewish people love telling stories. I think we are shown 4 different explanations for how the wagon could’ve gone fallen into the river, and multiple ways for how the driver could’ve died and so on and so forth. This shows to us how story telling is embedded in their culture. I agree with Vanessa that the different italics did help to point out who was talking, but there was so many different characters and names being mentioned I couldn’t keep up with if they would be important or not.
I was also a bit confused about the part where they all read aloud their dreams that had been put into the book. Such a large part of that chapter was about their dreams, and I feel as if it is significant in someway but it just sort of confused me.
Isabel Willetts
ReplyDeleteThe most astonishing part of Everything Is Illuminated by Jonathan Safran Foer is how he tells the story. The subject matter is another family coping with the ramifications of the Holocaust. However, instead of using Art Speigleman’s technique of creating an anthropomorphized world to be able to handle a subject matter so tragic, he made it funny. Jonathan Safran Foer weaves together a realistic, reliable narration of events and those same events re-told by the literally unreliable translator. He engages the idea that a story is more than just the plot or characters, it is also an engagement with a different mindset given to each character.
Alex’s translations are another version of oral history. Like Maus, Jonathan Safran Foer’s novel is partly an oral history told by Alex in a second language. In the same way that Vladek sometimes failed to properly use the English language, Alex also tells this story in broken English. This makes the reader wonder what we are missing by hearing the story out of his native tongue. It is this perspective that makes one wonder how stories related to the devastation of the Holocaust should be told. Should they only be documentaries that are grammatically correct and portray a precise, accurate account of the tragedy? Or should the native voices of the victims, though imperfect in their facts or language, be the only way these stories are heard?
It also distances America from the gruesome events of the Holocaust, events that began while America was still enforcing an isolationist policy instead of one which shut down the Third Reich. Hearing the narrative told in broken English makes it foreign to an American or English-speaking reader. The narrator is instantly set apart from the world of the reader. This is even more strongly emphasized by his attempt to use thesaurus words with connotations that hugely affect the message of his sentences.
In the case of Maus, the reader only got Vladek’s side. Everything Is Illuminated shows the reader the actual facts, and we also get the added benefit of hearing it being told to us, with flair and awkward grammar, by a participant in the story. This syntax also gives Alex’s narrated world a sense of profound and poetic power. To the reader, each phrase is fresh. There are no clichés because Alex does not know any common English colloquial phrases. Jonathan Safran Foer’s style in this narrative is almost a nod to magical realism.
I was pleasantly surprised to find that this novel is so similar in its content to Maus and even to Portnoy's, yet so refreshingly new. As I read, it doesn't even occur to me that I'm basically reading the same story about the trials and tribulations of the Holocaust that I've been reading for the past couple of weeks. This is solely because, like you said, the humor, the broken English, and the straight bluntness of the story gives it real character. Though I love the way in which it's written, I'm curious to reach the real dramatic parts of the book. I want to see how Foer addresses those instances in which humor isn't really an option as an escape mechanism. Maybe I'll once again be pleasantly surprised to see that he can actually pull off sarcasm in such a serious situation, just as Spiegelman managed to stick to his ways through all the traumatizing parts of his story.
DeleteAs far as the actual style of translation goes in all of these Holocaust-based stories, I feel that there is not an exact template for retelling them, as we've seen already with so many diverse stories about the same subject. I personally love the way that Alex conveys his story, and I love even more that Foer made no drastic changes to it. I believe that it gives the reader a much more real, personal view on their story, but I also feel that not every novel that contains this kind of subject matter should be written in that way.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, I really enjoyed the way this book was written. The way Foer breaks the book into sections written by different authors not only kept my attention, but added a beneficial layer of depth that truly adjoined to the story. Within the first few chapters, you already begin to get a sense of Johnathan's narrative voice; extremely whimsical and full of magic and ambiguity. The imagery describing the wagon accident is vivid and visceral, and it switches back and forth between various points of view. There is the horse pinned to the riverbed by the wagon. There is the flotsam in the water, a confusion of organic and inorganic things. There is the buzz of the townspeople. We experience these things all at once, but the effect is not bewildering, as we might imagine that the people experience it. . The twins hide under their father's prayer shawl like ghosts, the horse dies, and the ant in Yankel's ring hides its face in shame. All of these events are small relative to the whole accident, but somehow they give it great importance. We may never know the truth about Trachimbrod and the accident, but we can know about some of the incident's intimate details. Clearly this is a big event for the town, and we receive glimpses of clarity about the apparent nature of Trachimbrod and about how its residents approach new things.
ReplyDeleteRight away, vagueness becomes a defining characteristic of Trachimbrod. Not only is it on the Polish-Ukrainian border, but the shtetl itself is divided into the Jewish Quarter and the Human Three-Quarters. In fact, it does not even have a name. All this is very telling about the way the shtetl operates. The people of Trachimbrod are not concerned with the outside world, and therefore they do not need to be defined in its terms. They need no nationality and no name. They know who they are, and this sense of dormant confidence is maintained throughout the novel. I feel like in other books this sort of ambiguity would be questioned or threatened or a way, but Foer’s presents it in a way that makes it easy to accept and digest. Another of the novel's major themes I noticed was the conjoining of death and destruction to life. The end of the world for Trachimbrod is the beginning for the newborn baby girl. She is born amidst death and refuse, but she is untouched by it, a clear representation of hope. Also the act of the wagon crashing seems to feed new life into the town, adding to the culture and heritage of the people, enlivening them and inspiring them to greater things.
Leslie Oxford
ReplyDeleteFrom my reading of Everything is Illuminated, I have found the story-telling both familiar and original at the same time. Foer's writing is familiar in the sense that it involves themes that have already been dealt with extensively. Through the interaction between Alex's interpretation of events in the past, Jonathan's portrayal of the present, and the letters between the two characters, there is a definite connection being made between the past and present. This interaction is not dissimilar to other Jewish-American literature which has been explored in this class, such as with Spiegelman's Maus, Schwartz's "In Dreams Begin Responsibilities", and Bellow's "A Silver Dish".
However, the interplay between the past and present through Alex and Jonathan's letters adds a new dynamic to this manner of storytelling. The letters add supplementary material which allows for the audience to see the transformation throughout the story. The part of the story which best demonstrates this idea is when Alex writes in his letter to Jonathan, "With writing, we have second chances." (pg. 144) In my opinion, Foer seems to be telling the reader that writing provides both the characters and for himself another chance to have a fulfilled existence. "Sentences became words became sighs became groans became grunts became light." (pg.97) which points to the importance of language and telling a story occurs when Brod is raped. This particular passage demonstrates the importance and finality of verbal expression. During actual moments, words are not easy flowing, but upon reconsidering such moments characters such as Alex and Jonathan can provide light and a "second chance".
Another connection throughout the story, which I have already alluded, is the prominence of light and the idea of storytelling providing illumination. While on the first look, it appears that Jonathan's research into his family is the "illumination" of the story. Be that as it may as the story continues to unfold, it is shown that the "illumination" of the story could be more a result of the embellishments and usage of fantasy by Alex and Jonathan. This usage of fantasy not only causes a richer story to unfold for the reader, but it allows for an extra emphasis of the tangible themes throughout the novel. However, the use of fantasy is somewhat of a double-edged sword. For while the fantasy elements of Everything Is Illuminated does highlight important elements of the story, it also Alex and Jonathan use so much fantasy in their writing that it is difficult to distinguish fact from fiction.
In Johnathon Foer's Everything Is Illuminated I love his the story jumps back and forth between the present and past. These are definitely my favorite types of books because the stories always have common threads that reveal themselves and I am sure that once we are finished with the book we will notice some prominent foreshadowing through out the book. I love the book and how Alex is always looking to fit in with his out of date references. To me when I travel outside of the United states I notice how a lot of people try to do this and it can get pretty old, which obviously is how Johnathan feels. The switching between back and forth is a bit confusing, just Ike the first chapter, I was confused as to why Alex began the book but I like the structure so far.
ReplyDeleteThe plot is a bit messy to me, I'm not sure what it is yet but I believe that this switching back and forth is going to leave perfect room to develop johnathan.
I also love how Johnathan is a very vivid story teller. It is very cool because it paints very amazing and graphic images in your head which is very essential when telling a book that flips between points of view, time , and stories. Creating a very solid image makes me follow a book or story that otherwise would be very confusing.
Also I like the letters becaUse it offers informatIon in a different way without having it just said by a character or just thought about.
Themes in Jewish fiction are really becoming quite dominant through out each book and short story read. The idea of a conflicted narrator especially seems to be the main theme. Although Everything is illuminated really uses a fantasy element that I have not seen before in this class.
In the beginning of Everything is Illuminated by Johnathon Foer, I was thinking that since it begins with Alex narrating the story it would typically stay this way throughout the book and it would be about Alex and his experiences. But as i continued reading on I didn't realize he was switching between the past and present. I kind of had to read it a little slower and take in the past and present tense words because it began to confuse me. I didn't grasp how Alex's past was being related to his story. As soon as I got the idea of past and present it became a much quicker and more understandable read. Theres little puzzle pieces that will eventually get filled in the more and further you read the book. The book is extremely "colorful" but yet very blunt on how he really explains things to the very last bit without going into a lot of depth. He uses his words very well. This gives the reader enough descriptions to really feel for the characters and to paint a picture as you read along. I'm not quite sure on how I like the book so far. It's not really like any of the other books I have read in the past. The switching between past and present I think is what I'm really not used to.
ReplyDelete