Identity Ted Talk Response

Certainly stories can be dangerous for a common identity, for they can define these individuals wrongfully. Mediums like literature portray specifically what someone wants to see in these identities, therefore one should take into account different sources and mediums. Having the opportunity to read some wonderful Colombian books I can say that these define Colombian customs, culture and society. Specifically I refer to Gabriel García Márquez's One Hundred Years of Solitude and Love in the Times of Cholera. These masterpieces do not just tell wonderful stories of a variety of Colombians, but they walk readers along traits of our history that define this country. Colombia is characterized by the vast amount of civil wars that it had around the XIX century and today the country's political status is defined by the results of these. Colombians have always lived in a tumultuous and revolting society and Marquez parts from some of these aspects to show a recreation of the world or an extensive love story. Though I have not read foreign stories involving Colombia, I know foreigners perception of this country is not an accurate one. Even if they read one of the books I mentioned they would still be erroneous. In order to successfully understand an identity one must submerge in it and crawl up to the heart and essence of it. We must discern these cultures and societies, take them apart, and build up an identity from there.

A Journey of Choice

After finishing Heart of Darkness I am bewildered and confused. The first because I began to find Kurtz a compelling but judicious person (similarly to Marlow) and the latter because I do not know how to interpret Conrad's work. What exactly are the ends of earth and the heart of darkness? This darkness even seems to be present at the Thames suggesting the "darkness" in colonization is vast, but ambiguous.

The novella begins as a bright day finishes and ends in a very dark day, where even the Thames looked hazy. Marlow recounted his story noting his skepticism towards imperialism and at the same time he noted his admiration towards Kurtz: a different type of savage. I find Marlow somewhat of a hypocrite because he took no real stand towards either of the extremes. While he allowed imperialism to prevail, he allowed Kurtz's legacy to prevail too. Both of these extremes overcame Marlow and took over him. "'I was on the point of Crying to her, "Don't you hear them?" The dusk was repeating them in a whisper of a rising wind. "The horror! the horror!"'" (page 145), said Marlow proving that Kurtz's presence is over him even one year after his death. Darkness outshines every river, every empire and every conqueror. Those who went to the extremes or the ends of earth to achieve greatness the way Kurtz did were shadowed by Darkness, however those in between light and dark are trapped  too. Evidently Marlow feels the society that Kurtz envisioned is still on the ground and and furthermore he has yielded to it. Yet, Marlow lives under the English rule and is submissive to it too. Darkness seems to be present everywhere along the novella and it is part of the paradoxical society presented in Heart of Darkness. Light and dark, and good and evil are clashes that Condrad presents everywhere along his story that complement that ambiguity in the "heart of darkness". 

Darkness and evil are present everywhere in Marlow's journey. He is overcome by these, failing to see the horrors of life. For his misfortune, there was nothing to do. Certainly imperialists had evil ways, but Kurtz and his followers had too. As a reader I distrust Marlow because this darkness over him shadows us from a wider spectrum of imperialism, colonisation and persuasion. This second hand narrator did not provide a concise and direct statement, therefore I maintain that the darkness Conrad refers is open to ambiguity and interpretation. As a reader I feel I stand in the heart of darkness and now I have to begin a journey wherever I feel it right. Certainly I will not follow Marlow or Kurtz, but I could readjust some of Kurtz's charismatic techniques. 

Uneasiness

Marlow conveys an uneasiness all along the novel that even himself endures along others. His attitude towards Kurtz is not clear. Whether he is for or against him has been ambiguous even for him. The desire to meet Kurtz draws him away from his duties and furthermore, readers are drawn away from sense too. Inexplicably we are eager to meet Kurtz, maybe because some times people want guidance like Kurtz's: unconditional. 

Marlow has been secluded from the rest of his crew by the charisma of someone he does not even know. He sympathizes with this persona and seeks to meet him, but why? After being attacked by "savages" Marlow lingers on the thought that their search for Kurtz is futile because he is probably dead, and mourns for not being able to meet him. Marlow saw his possible loss and said, "I couldn't have felt more of lonely desolation somehow, had I been robbed of a belief or had missed my destiny in life…." (page 87). He felt abandoned, yet he has not met Kurtz. Marlow was holding on to something beyond materials and beliefs: Kurtz gave Marlow his legacy so he could hold on to it during his trip. Marlow was sent to stop Kurtz, nearly a savage, from his misdeeds and ended up admiring him. Marlow had traveled to the ends of earth and certainly wanted more of that presence. People attach to whatever or whoever gives them guidance, but Marlow is drawn over the edge inexplicably. I have beliefs and attachments that are part of my everyday life, but following someone (possibly dead) through the Congo river and admiring them seems irrational. 

Until now Kurtz has provided nothing, but suffering to Marlow. His voyage seems useless, but I believe it is not so. Kurtz's accomplishments seem admirable and like me, Marlow wants to understand what is it in this savage that has gained him idolization. In my irrationality, Marlow's uneasiness justifies because I feel equally ambiguous towards Kurtz. Knowing very little of this man, I think he accomplished what no one had before therefore he is worthy of my understanding. Kurtz beat colonization from both colonizer and colonized perspectives, making a whole new society. He created something quite similar to a theocracy with him as a leader. Kurtz is unconditional and he successfully won the "savages" support with his charisma, giving them something to hold on.

Living Dead

Heart of Darkness, written by Joseph Conrad, snatched my attention when Marlow began to recount his travels in Africa working for a trading company. I found a certain resemblance between the dehumanizing colonizing society Marlow encountered in his early days and the cataclysmic society presented in the t.v show, The Walking Dead. While The Walking Dead sees a group of survivors in a zombie apocalypse try to survive and reestablish society, but loosing social order and society's values, Marlow presents the decay of society in the colonization of Africa.

When Marlow arrived at the Company's station he encountered black natives in their final attempts to survive European order. These men were imposed a new social order and organization that ultimately failed, and it transformed them into nothingness. "They were not enemies, they were not criminals, they were nothing earthly now,--nothing but black shadows of disease and starvation, lying confusedly in the greenish gloom." (page 28): Marlow's description of these lifeless people reminded me of the zombies in The Walking Dead. Once a person dies, they eventually become a lifeless wanderer full of disease and nothingness. These soulless corpses eventually take the few survivors to the edge, making them loose their minds. They kill their relatives, become greedy, commit suicide and in the end, they will all end up like the zombies. For now what Marlow saw in Africa is uncertain, but the way Europeans stripped Africans from civilization is similar to the way Rick or Shane dehumanize and try to kill each other when they should have tried to survive together. The natives and the zombies have no opportunity to regain humanity, but colonizers and survivors do. Yet both survivors in The Walking Dead and European colonizers lost civilized and controlled ways. 

Regardless of what made Colonizers savages, or the pressure zombies put on survivors in The Walking Dead, they all end up decaying in the bits of society they have left. Marlow says these men have almost no human life left in them, the same as the zombies Rick fights against, but in the end these inhuman creatures can overrun humane people. The restrains civilized people oppose on uncivilized people take them to the brink of humanity and the preassure of survival or imperial growth imposed on themselves, pushes them over. They take the leap and dehumanize just like zombies or slaves that they see as empty bodies in death.

Marvelous Irony

Certainly Newman satirizes the brute and savage conquest of the Canary Islands. Irony is evident in the broad and amateurish explanation for their name. Actually the Guanches were conquered and these were said to worship dogs. Coincidentally Canary derives from "Canaria" meaning dogs". Following, Newman uses irony again saying there are no more Portuguese there. Now the Canary Islands pertain to Spain because coincidentally they conquered them. The song ends more burlesque and ironic than before saying "There on the horizon is the possibility that some bug from out of Africa might come for you and me destroying everything in its path from sea to shinning sea like the great nations of Europe in the 16th century". Newman suggests that now dark skinned people from Africa will do the same that Europeans did, but he is obviously being sarcastic. He does not think in any way that they will do it, but that is his way of mocking both easter and western world.

Possibly the beginning of the song is not ironic because it sets up the context. Europeans gathered on the shore after they all conquered and dominated what they could and then it was time for them to look West. This could be wrong because even "West" is a relative term. It could also be "East".

He who Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

From McMurphy's arrival to Nurse Ratched's ward, up to his death, several changes in the other patients occurred. Most evident is Chief Bromdem's transformation from a delusional schizophrenic with no confidence to a "Big" free man. This is all due to the rehabilitation that McMurphy induced in the patients with his uprising towards Ratched's abusive power. Kesey suggests that even selfless beings like Bromden can take control of themselves and liberate themselves from others (mostly society) grinding and crushing.

In the beginning of One Few Over the Cuckoo's Nest Bromdem was overwhelmed by a poor mental state therefore he was hid by the fog. He was almost invisible and had no personality, but he was satisfied being almost no one. Even though he was physically big, a war veteran and football player, Bromden convinced himself he was extremely weak because of others oppression over him. As McMurphy begins to "pull out patients out of the fog" even the Chief takes a stand and lifted himself out of it. "No. That's not the truth. I lifted myself." (page 123). Slowly the Chief got ahold of his own voice and began to use it. He was no longer the pusillanimous automaton that simply lived. He began to build himself towards the Big Chief.

Bromden developed his own individuality as he saw McMurphy taking a stand against the Black Boy's and the Nurse's authority. He had the initiative to fight alongside McMurphy and eventually defeated the control that insanity imposed over him. "It's fogging a little, but I won't slip off and hide in it. No… never again…" (page 248) said Bromden as he realized he would hide no more. McMurphy inspired courage and determination in Bromden throughout rebellious actions that ended up instigating him the need of freedom. McMurphy was a hero and a savior for the patients after sacrificing his own health so Bromden killed him to finally give him rest and freedom. Bromdem's transformation from being almost invisible to being a hero similar to McMurphy is evident, but he is certainly more than that. It is up to one to challenge authority and control to find freedom even though sometimes a savior is needed to ignite an insurrection. Kesey portrays a structure like any society where repression must be fought because those who enforce authority are just as sane and mortal as those who obey.

Executioners

Women are depicted in a harsh and recriminating way In One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest: they deprive men from almost everything. Personally, I know a man who I believe has been unmanned by a woman, much like many of the patients in Nurse Ratched's ward. This man goes "cuckoo" most of the time and deviates from that, but occasionally, when he is unsexed and emasculated, he reacts. Unfortunately he always fails and in the end he is oppressed by that strong, demanding, and big woman.

There is a trend in Kesey's novel, where always it is women who command, give orders, and direct men's lives. Right from the beginning, not just the Big Nurse is presented, but along we are told of Hardings seducing wife. Harding believes he may give her reasons to "seek further sexual attention" (page 39). Then it is told that McMurphy is charged of raping a little fifteen year old girl. McMurphy claims she said she was seventeen, but it really made no difference since he believes she was willing to do it. There are a couple other women like Billy Bibbit's mom and the nurses, but the spotlight is on Ratched even though they all strain men in one way or the other. As a big breasted middle-aged woman, Nurse Ratched conveys Kesey's perspective of woman perfectly: they dominate men in a social order were men are treated as inferior sinners, at least in the ward. Ratched's indifference and superiority are her notable defenses to men, "even going so far as to step up to the Big Nurse in the hall one time and ask her, if she didn’t mind tellin’, just what was the actual inch-by-inch measurement on them great big of breasts that she did her best to conceal but never could. She walked right on past, ignoring him just like she chose to ignore the way nature had tagged her with those outsized badges of femininity, just like she was above him, and sex, and everything else that’s weak and of the flesh," (page 138). McMurphy expresses his sexual discrepancies towards the Big Nurse to minimize her and appeal as the strongest, but she is ultimately given more reason to continue emasculating men. 

This depiction of woman is certainly the correct one for someone like Nurse Ratched or the woman I mentioned before, but still, not all women are like this. The woman I previously mentioned reminds me of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest to great extent because of her resemblance to the Big Nurse of course, but also of  McMurphy. She works up to the same social order of her as the sovereign, but like McMurphy, she uses sexual jargon and insinuations and intimidates her man.  When McMurphy tried to intimidate Nurse. Ratched with his sexual comments, she was given more reason to think that McMurphy was actually mentally ill and not so "ordinary" as she thought before. Women are seen as the fixers and castrators over men since men are numerously mentioned to lose their "nuts" and even self castrate themselves along the novel. Men are weak and at the mercy of women in Kesey's novel, breaking the common or natural order of life.

Literary Haze

Fog: a thick cloud of tiny water droplets suspended in the atmosphere at or near the earth's surface that obscures or restricts visibility  
Fog clouds and blinds humanity. It is uncontrollable by most means and it is just an occurrence of nature. Some days are foggier than others, making things more or less visible. Chief Bromden, the narrator of Ken Kesey's One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, employs the word fog as a metaphor of his situation. When the Big Nurse and her Black Boys shave Bromden he hallucinates being surrounded by fog in the midst of his paranoid. After getting shaved and put to sleep with medication, Bromden says ,"When the fog clears to where I can see, I'm sitting in the day room. They didn't take me to the Shock Shop this time. I remember they took me out of the shaving room and locked me in Seclusion" (page 8). Before the fog completely blurred Bromden, he was screaming in fear, but after being completely clouded by "fog" he was himself again. His fears were overcome by medication and fog. By not knowing what he lived he evaded suffering. "One of these days I’ll quit straining and let myself go completely, lose myself in the fog the way some of the other Chronics have, but…" (page 37). Bromden faces two options: stress about being medically treated by the insensitive staff or simply going along with whatever insanity puts before him. Kesey's use of the metaphor of fog gives a much more profound meaning to this word. As of now I see it as a deviation from suffering in unavoidable conditions, like it is in this ward, but one can not simply avoid insanity. Fog could potentially be a cure to insanity or insanity, or maybe the patients' escape of the hospital.

Mood is affected by a variety of factors, one of them being sound. Bromden does not talk a lot with others and fakes being deaf. As he was approached for his shaving he began to scream, but what mood does the fog he faces give to the novel? Even though he was stressed, the fog seems rather comforting for him. Faking deafness Bromden takes a stand of solitude apart the rest of the hospital. Sound is essential for everything, but faking it seems like part of the fog. It is part of avoiding suffering by being talked to. Insanity is accompanied by sound, but Bromden deviates from it. When Bromden was completely blinded by fog, it felt as if he simply gave in and everything went back to normal. He had no need to scream anymore.

Film of the Absurd

Waiting for Godot is widely known for being the exemplary theatre of the absurd tragicomedy, but its film adaptation went too absurd. The final scene portrays Vladimir and Estragon contemplating their lives, their time and their long days. It concludes in a medium-wide shot of Estragon, the tree, Vladimir and behind them the desolate road and the moon. Motionless, Estragon says "Yes. Let's go," and the two friends remain still for about ten seconds. This impacting shot made the whole point of Beckett even more clear than it was by reading the play. The viewer feels uncomfortable and awkward just seeing these two vagrants do absolutely nothing for such a long time. The lack of belief and decision is evident. They have no will or initiative to move along, therefore remain there, probably for the rest of their monotonous lives. Not too often a film has such a boring and disturbing shot, but with such significance. Absurdity is evident in the film with the use of exaggerated statements and stands, equally to Beckett's suggestion that life can be nothing more than what is seen. 

Both the film and the play portray a world like any other. Beckett does not seek to tell a story of heroes and revelations, but rather a story of life. One does not look forward to a monotonous life, but waiting for a god, a special person, an object of value, or any desire, are futile in preventing this type life. In the eyes of absurdity Godot could be anything, and simply watching the end of Vladimir's and Estragon's wait, portrays the bluntness of this wait. The plot could have been the same if Godot was something else. The point lies in the ridiculousnesses that satisfy people. People get lost into useless desires of anything and wait for them, loosing track of everything else, but this is valid. Waiting for nothing or waiting for everything is just the way people go. Watching the film of Waiting for Godot takes almost two hours of one's time and it surely makes its point. Two hours of nothingness are pointless. Two days of Vladimir's and Estragon's life are useless. 

Optimistic Existentialism

Even though very similar, both acts of Waiting for Godot end with the same dialogue, but slightly differential. Act I finishes with Estragon asking "Well, shall we go?" to what Vladimir responds "Yes, let's go" while Act II finishes conversely. Could Beckett suggest that as long as we continue waiting for changes and not make them, we are all the same? Voltaire's picaresque satire Candide, criticized the European civilizations, from their religious aspects, the government, colonization, social status, and the recent uprisings. It ends with optimist Candide saying “but let us cultivate our garden”. After a vast endurance of misfortune and suffering, Candide realized he could not complain about anything or wait for things to change and rather had to work for himself. With whatever he had, he would have to learn to work with to make the best with it. This certainly would be a very interesting lesson that Vladimir and Estragon could learn because they have certain resemblance to Candide. In the end -Estragon or Vladimir- realized they had to go, but they never "went". They made no difference in their own lives or in others lives, but Candide decided to do something for himself. Voltaire and Beckett wrote very different works in every way, but both suggest changes in attitude that can save helpless characters like Candide, Vladimir or Estragon from their own doom.

Before Candide suffered all around the whole world, he embraced the philosophy of "the best of all possible worlds" and that "all is for the best", but failure after failure, Candide realized he needed a change. In all that failure he would at least seek success, but Vladimir and Estragon are still doomed. These two interdependent middle aged men concluded they would leave, but they did not even move. Probably the boring cycle of their life would have kept repeating itself. The failure of Vladimir and Estragon makes me think that Lucky is actually lucky. To the contrary of the others, he has some guidance and task in life. It is not one that one wants to have, but it is more than waiting for nothing. Beckett's message succeeds to deliver and consequently, the play ends on a good note: Vladimir and Estragon are still helpless, but in the eyes of Beckett, we are not.

Strange Style

In The Stranger, Meursault portrays many aspects of existentialism, mostly pertaining to absurdist philosophy. This refers to the failing efforts of humanity to find meaning. To begin, the idea that "existence is essentially absurd" is a major concept conveyed and shown by Meursault form the beginning of the novel, until the end.. "Maman died today. Or yesterday maybe, I don't know. I got a telegram from the home:'Mother deceased. Funeral tomorrow. Faithfully yours.' That doesn't mean anything"(page 3). What did it meant for this existentialist that his mother died? Absolutely nothing. She did what everyone eventually does: die. When Meusrault talked with the examining magistrate about his crime he showed no interest in giving life a meaning, but at the same time found no inconvenient with the magistrate putting his life in the hands of God. "That was his belief and if he were ever to doubt it, his life would become meaningless. 'Do you want my life to be meaningless?' he shouted. As far as I could see, it didn't have anything to do with me, and I told him so"(page 69). The concept of existence as an illogicality is pointed out again by Meursault, but with no interest. He has nothing to say about this because it is essentially that, and nothing more. This reminds be of Billy Pilgrim, the main character of Kurt Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five, who embraces an alien belief of existence: everything has happened, will happen, and is happening without any question (Tralfamadorian belief). There is no concrete or fully explained belief of existence and humanity has failed to explain it coherently, so why not believe it is absurd or that it can be lived in four dimensions like the Tralfamadorians?

Life is obstructed by choices and some assume it with greater preoccupation than others. These choices are given importance and for many they create stress. Definitely choices were no stress for Meursault. "I knew I had shattered the harmony of the day, the exceptional silence of the beach where I'd been happy. Then I fired four more times at the motionless body where the bullets lodged without leaving a trace. And it was like knocking four quick times on the door of unhappiness"(page 59). Meursaults worse decision was killing the Arab, but this was no commotion for him After his final sentence was given he thought about escaping, but realized it was absurd and that his ultimate fate was death. He overcame stress and choices by facing whatever he had to without any expectations. One could think Meursault was stoic or brave, but he was boldly existential. 

Existentialism values individual experiences to be "authentic" and find one's own self. To achieve this "we are alone". Meursault chose to be lonely and decided to loose contact with his mother. Whereas she proved to be in company, at least of Thomas Perez. She decided to pass her last days and took a fiance, but Meursault decided to face his last days with acceptance and nothing else. "For the first time in a long time I thought about Maman. I felt as if I understood why at the end of her life she had taken a 'fiance,' and why she had played at beginning again"(page 122). Meursault alone made a resolution similar to Maman's, and he was alone. Everything that made him who he was had affected him personally, but he was numb to others influence. Maman never made him think much, or Marie, but Meusrault alone took what he valued from each of these relationships. This "outsider" was careless of others thoughts, emotions, and decisions and that is why he lived a fulfilled life, without regret or oppression. The stranger was free.

Complete Closure

In Camus's The Stranger gaps lead the reader to infer more about who Meursault is and his views about the world. Or rather to infer who he is since Camus does not give too much of who he is. Not till the end of the novel. Meusraults disengagement and indifference to everything around him is evident throughout the whole novel, but his thoughts can be lightly inferred. "I recognized it as the same one that had been ringing in my ears for many long days, and I realized that time I had been talking to myself. Then I remembered what the nurse at Maman's funeral said. No, there was no way out, and no one can imagine what nights in prison are like." (page 81). In Meursaults nights of solitude boredom and reflection in prison, he is revealed more than in the first part of the book.  Why remember what a nurse told him at his mothers funeral? Both seemed irrelevant to him, but the nurse sympathized with Meursaults existential views of the world. Muersault remembered the nurse telling him "'If you go slowly, you risk getting sunstroke. But if you go too fats, you work up a sweat and then catch a chill inside the church.' She was right"(page 17). Both the nurse and Meursalut believe that one way or another death is inevitable and it is the only thing that is certain. Later, Meursault reveals how death will come soon or late, but it will come so there is no difference in living more time or less time. In page 81, before Meursault's trail or his final conversation with the Chaplain, Camus already gave away Meursaults thoughts on everyones destiny. There is nothing missing to Meursaults thoughts when he remembers the nurse, just interpretation. Meursault has contemplated death before his final trail and after and his thoughts on it have always been the same. The difference is that when he gave them all, death was just around the corner.

The novel finishes with Meursault's final wish: "For everything to be consummated, for me to feel less alone, I had only to wish that there be a large crowd of spectators the day of my execution and that they greet me with cries of hate"(page 123). Meursault feels he successfully overcame judgement and society and wants people to remember him with hatred for that. He welcomes with satisfaction whatever is to come, if it is his death or his final moment of happiness. There is no need to read if Meursault was executed or not, he probably would have been executed, but instead the narration keeps suggesting that execution, or judgement, are meaningless. It is who we build of ourselves throughout self experience that matters and not what society makes of us. Why keep on writing about Meursault and his coming death, when the core of who Meursault was and how he overcame judgement were clear? Camus's invitation to infer more about this outsider make him a very complete character, and not the blunt, emotionless character that Meursault is thought to be in the beginning of the novel.

Why do we Fall?

        "As for the dog, he's sort of taken on his master's stooped look, muzzle down, neck straining. They look as if they belong to the same species, and yet they hate each other. Twice a day, at eleven and six, the old man takes the dog out for a walk. They haven't changed their routine in eight years. You can see them in the rue de Lyon, the dog pulling the man along until Salamano stumbles. Then he beats the dog and swears at it. The dog cowers and trails behind. Then it's the old man who pulls the dog. Once the dog has forgotten, it starts dragging its master along again, and again gets beaten and sworn at. Then they both stand there on the sidewalk and stare at each other, the dog in terror the man in hatred. It's the same thing every day." (page. 27)

        Existential philosophies sought to build one's character throughout individual experiences. In Camus's The Myth of the Sisyphus man's pointless search for meaning or explanations and the absurdity this brought upon mankind were exposed. Like Sisyphus going up a hill with his boulder and never succeeding at it, Camus argues men repeat meaningless and absurd tasks because in the end these tasks satisfy people. Similarly to Sisyphus, Meursault's neighbor Salamano, has been attached to a futile relationship with his dog. He hates him, but that is part of his life. It has an incomprehensible meaning to Salamano. The "stinking bastard" was essential for Salamano's sanity: "They're not going to take him away from me, are they, Monsieur Meursault? They'll give him back to me. Otherwise, what's going to happen to me?" (page 39).

        "He told me that he'd done what he wanted to do but that she'd slapped him and so he'd beaten her up. I' seen the rest. I told him it seemed to me that she'd gotten her punishment now and he ought to be happy. He thought so too, and he pointed out that the cop could do anything he wanted, it wouldn't change the fact that she'd gotten her beating. He added that he knew all about cops and how to handle them. Then he asked me if I'd expect him to hit the cop back. I said I wasn't expecting anything, and besides I didn't like cops." (page. 37)

        Meursault reserves judgement from Raymond's immoralities and is careless about what he does. He helped Raymond for no reason at all by writing the letter, but he expects nothing of this. He rather concentrates on whatever happens to him and not others. Meursault has no standards of himself or others and rather simply does what he feels he should do. This is a very existential behavior since his "essence" or who he is is only affected by his own experiences. His mother's death did not affect him much, what he saw around his home either, but his encounters with other women did. Meursault is being defined as who he is as he progressively lives new encounters, experiences and events, but his in unaffected by others lives.

The Blunt Intermediate

 "This is a valley of ashes—a fantastic farm where ashes grow like wheat into ridges and hills and grotesque gardens where ashes take the forms of houses and chimneys and rising smoke and finally, with a transcen- dent effort, of men who move dimly and already crumbling through the powdery air. Occasionally a line of gray cars crawls along an invisible track, gives out a ghastly creak and comes to rest, and immediately the ash-grey men swarm up with leaden spades and stir up an impenetrable cloud which screens their obscure operations from your sight.

But above the gray land and the spasms of bleak dust…" (p.23)

In F. Scott Fiztgerald's The Great Gatsby the color gray symbolizes the ethical, moral, social and even economic deterioration in America. All the ashes and residues from the wealthy industry have come to rest upon the Valley of Ashes making it gray. People selfishly sought great wealth and were careless about the repercussions of their ambitions and the poor ended up covered by their wastes. In the Valley of Ashes even people look gray and are covered by gray dust: most of them poor. There was nothing worthwhile in the Valley of Ashes all along the novel. Just lust, death, loneliness and as its color suggest's, darkness. Two characters are presented to live in this dark area and both of them ended up losing everything. Myrtle Wilson was killed in the valley after she tried to walk away from her husband because he discovered she was unfaithful and he committed suicide after killing his wife's supposed killer. The desolate, gray valley was unremembered by everyone because they found no interest (money) in it, just darkness.