In both these stories, individuals try to understand their parents' ethical choices. In Nathan Englander's "Free Fruit for Young Widows," Etgar tries to make sense of his father's kindness to Professor Tendler, whom he judges to be a bad person. In Edwidge Danticat's "The Book of the Dead," Ka tries to take in her father's revelation that in his past he was "the hunter" and "not the prey." Interestingly, Englander lets us (and Etgar) hear the details that explain why Tendler elicits Shimmy's empathy, while Danticat gives us (and Ka) much less to work with in our attempt to understand Mr. Bienaime's dark past.
Why do you think the authors made these choices to reveal or not reveal more of the character in question's past? What is the effect of that choice in each story? How does that choice contribute to the meaning of the work as a whole?
PS. Here are links to both stories:
"Free Fruit for Young Widows"
"The Book of the Dead"
It was a little difficult for me to understand "Free Fruit for Young Widows." I didn't understand why Shimmy was angry when Tendler killed the people on the opposing side. I do think that the reason why readers were given a more detail explanation is because it has a lesson that anyone can learn from. Everyone in life would probably have to make a life threatning decision one day that no one else would agree with. Tendler made a decision that would probably save the soldiers on his side and at that time, Shimmy did not agree with it one bit; he was very disappointed in his friend for doing that, but as time passed, I guess that Shimmy finally understood and was thankful for his friend's decision. In "The Book of the Dead," Ka wasn't really sure as to why her father did what he did and readers would probably in question as well. I didn't know why killed those people and he's probably not sure either. In life, we are going to meet people who do things and don't have a reason or answer as to why they are doing it. We won't always get an answer.
ReplyDeleteIn Danticat's "The Book of the Dead," I think we are given less details to work with because the author gives off a sense that the man Ka thinks she knows as her father is not the man he really is. By the end, we see that Ka doesn't really know her father because he never revealed who he really was to her.By leaving out some of the details that readers are eager to learn, it emphasizes the relationship between Ka and her father as well as the lie that both of them have been living. The author probably made this choice because she doesn't want to give the readers too much information that not even the main character knows. It makes the audience feel just as confused as Ka does which contributes to the confusion of the entire work. In "Free Fruit for Young Widows" however, I think we are given more information to work with because their is a better relationship between the parent and the child. The father was the "good guy" in his past and is not ashamed of his history as a soldier. He is more willing to share with his son because he is not defeated, Tendler is. The war ruined Tendler but Shimmy turned out to be okay. Since the father and son seem closer, it is clear to why we have more details. This choice definitely contributes to the work as a whole it shows that people with good pride are more willing to share with others than those who are ashamed.
ReplyDeleteThe Book of the Dead may have been so vague so the readers could identify more with Ka and her reaction towards her father. When Ka's father reveals his past, Ka is beyond shock, specially since her mother knew and stayed by his side. As a reader, one tries to to relate to the character's viewpoint. In The Book of the Dead since the reader knows so little about the dad's reason of being in jail, it gives them a chance to see why Ka is so upset by her father's unexpected revelation.
ReplyDeleteHowever, Free Fruit for Young Widows gives the reader enough information for them to understand why Shimmy is so kind to Tendler, regardless of his violent past. Shimmy sees that, as a man in the army, Tendler had to make life long dicisions that may not seem so effective now, but were his form of survival back then.
I completely agree with Ellen. At first, both stories to me seemed very unclear as to the meaning that was trying to be brought out. In "The book of the dead", Ka was shocked to hear that her father murdered people. He called Ka and her mother, his masks behind that secret. Though in "Free fruit for young widows" there was more of a connection and therefore led to and easier confession of a violent past.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell it seems like in both these stories the reaction of the kids made an impact on the reader. In "The Book of the Dead" the story of the father's past wasn't told to the reader because through context it is understood that Ka's father had a deep troubling past. We felt more connected to her emotions because without truly knowing the details odher father's past, we can understand what she is going through. If the author would have actually told us the tragic life of Ka's father, the reader wouldnt't really be able to identify with Ka's betrayal. In "Fruit For Young Widows", the story was told of the father's past and Tendler's past, so there could be an understanding of what Etgar thought was right and how his father portrayed the situation. The fact the story of the past was told in Etgar's situation changed his life more than it did with Ka's situation. Ka saw her father in a new light and Etgar began to see the world in a new way. I think if Ka's father would have told his story, her outlook on her father would be different.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ellen's comment about "the book of the dead". Ka was not sure why her father did what he did, however i think that her father knows why he murdered all those people. The fact that that it wasn't revealed to the readers was an author's choice. In "fruit of the young widows," I was surprised that shimmy did not fight back against tendler but when he didn't, i expected to read about some great deed that tendler had done for shimmy so he felt indebted. I was surprised to hear about tendler's past in the holocaust and in my opinion, Shimmy did not do anything because he felt sorry for tendler. I do agree with Mel-lisa's comment that Etgar's life may have been changed by her father's story because i believe that story exposed him to the suffering and tight bonds that people go through.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Claudia that the details in The Book of the Dead are limited so that the reader can identify more with Ka. I think the author wanted us to follow her emotions because the point of the story was that a stunning truth came to light; her father wasn't the prey but the hunter. The daughter's belief and portrayal of her father is crushed down and the way she sees him is changed. It’s interesting though because in Free Fruit for Young Widows, through Shimmy’s detailed story telling to his son, Etgar’s perception of his father is built up once he understands the complex why’s of Shimmy and Tendler’s relationship. These stories are similar in the fact that they revolve around a father’s history and how it affects their child. As Shimmy points out, there is always context. In Book of the dead we are not told the context of her father’s reason for murdering who he did and exactly why. But in Free Fruit, we are and to the reader that makes all the difference. With this being said, both stories choose to leave or include the context because perhaps the authors wanted to connect to Ka and Etgar. The power of the message in these stories, after all, from the story is felt by the daughter and son themselves.
ReplyDeleteI agree with janelle's response, In "The Book Of The Dead," since the very beginning of the story there is a sense of mystery and uncertainty about the man Ka seems to be describing as her father. As the story goes on we see how Ka's idea of her father was totally misguided, he really wasn't a victim, on the contrary he was the one who did wrong by killing all those people. As Jannelle said the relationship between Ka and her father wasn't as deep and sincere as the relationship between Shimmy and Etgar. I also think that the reason why Danticat doesn't give us reasons to feel sympathy is because I think Ka's father only told her the truth because he felt guilty, due to him feeling this way he didn't really try to justify himself he just wanted to get a weight lifted off his shoulder by telling Ka the truth. On the other hand Shimmy is telling someone else's story and not his own, the reason why he told Etgar the story was because unlike Ka's father Shimmy wants his son to understand Tendler's actions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Angie's Response. In " The Book of The Dead" , Ka has been living all her life looking up to her father and seeing him as such a great man , when she decides to make a sculpture of him as a victim and show how much she appreciates him . He couldn't handle it because his been telling her a lie her whole life. His actually the " hunter" and not the " prey" i think the author revealed the information because in the beginning we were misguided and the information changes the whole short story and we look at the relationship between the two differently and i think ka's father just told her because he got rid of the sculpture if she would have never had did that i don't he would've ever had told her. Shimmy's and his son relationship seems more sincere also because his telling a story of murder and sadness but a situation many people faced. He tells etgar to show him society isn't what it seems and when it comes down to that situation you have to do what you have to do.
ReplyDeleteIn The Book of the dead, ka's father is not portrayed as she has always known him.When he tells Ka the story of him being the "hunter", she gets a chance to meet her "real" father. I think that Englander was hoping to portray that history is bound to repeat itself. I say this because Englander shows that Tendler is given food by both the soldiers and Etgar and killed enemies and his nanny's family. The Egyptians and his Nanny's family is portrayed as the enemies of Tendler's life; constantly trying to take away everything he has. Danticat probably left out the reasons why he killed people becasue he wanted to portray the before and after reactions or emotions towards her father, when he tells KA the story.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Janelle and she wrote a lot. =]
In The Book of The Dead i found that there was less revealed and more secretive almost. Ka knew thought she knew her father really well and she saw him as a person who was hurt, abused, and suffering but she loved him. When he revealed his secret she was upset because she was mislead her whole life but she did realize that he had still suffered. It puts more emphasis on the importance of the story by revealing so little towards the end. In "Free Fruit for Young Widows" I felt like more was revealed. Although Etgar was young and never really understood why Shimmy gave Tendler the fruit when he was a little older he was told. He was still told at 13 years old which is still pretty young so he grew up to understand it more. Ka was told at such an older age that she didn't know how to react. The revelation in this story was more understandable and less shocking to me.
ReplyDelete