| Author |
Message |
|
| mitty |
 Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2004 3:48 pm |
 |
|
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 1359
Location: Way Down Yonder.......
|
marantzo wrote: She never had any humanity in the first place. She's feeling self pity not any remorse. She's got nothing and her offspring have thrown her worthlessness in her face and she can't stand to look at it. She wants to disappear because she has been forced to face her ugliness through no act of her own. She wants to stop her own suffering from this unwelcome breach of her armour. I don't see any remorse accept for herself, not her actions.
If she did not have any humanity to begin with, she would not care what her offspring did or said to her. It would be immaterial. And being forced to face her own ugliness would not have the outcome of her killing herself. You speak of the breach in her armour. That breach is her humanity attempting to surface. She would not suffer otherwise. I suspect she was running from the feelings the twins brought out in her. She was so used to not feeling, or caring what people said, that she could not stand it. So she escaped.
She'd told her mother that she could be like Alice (in Wonderland) and just become so small she could disappear. So she did. |
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Sat Dec 25, 2004 4:51 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Quote: And being forced to face her own ugliness would not have the outcome of her killing herself. You speak of the breach in her armour. That breach is her humanity attempting to surface.
When I speak of humanity, I'm speaking of having humane feelings. Everyone who is human has humanity in a literal sense. Most people use humanity in describing someone's feelings or actions, in a figurative sense. When she is being beaten to within an inch of her life she feels great fear. For the first time if I remember the book correctly. Is this her showing humanity? When she is pushed over the edge by her offspring it seems to confirm to her that she is truly one who is different from everyone else and they are closing in and she doesn't have the equipment to get away with all her self-serving crimes anymore. She's showing fear and cowardice. She wants to disappear because she can dish it out but can't take it. Surely a human if not universal reaction. I see no change or revelation in her actions, just a logical step for a sociopath who has lost her power to have things her way.
I think she left her money to Aron because of two different reasons. 1) He was the one who looked like her so she felt like there was something of herself in him. 2) She wanted this person who was so disgusted with her and her world to have the dilema of accepting this small fortune made from what he found so disgusting. In other words, corrupting him and proving that all people save herself are hypocrites
She always speaks or thinks about how everyone is so dishonest and hypocritical and sets out to prove it in the whorehouse she runs. She sees herself as superior because she can see the truth. Never entertaining the notion that she has done far worse things than the people she holds with such disdain. She wants to include her son Aron in this hypocritical world that she is not a part of.
Her reasoning is always 'poor me, surrounded by people who aren't like me'. She's a colossal whiner who blames everyone but herself. Interesting that her offspring seem to blame themselves for everything.
An evil person to the end. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mitty |
| Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2004 10:29 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 1359
Location: Way Down Yonder.......
|
marantzo wrote: I see no change or revelation in her actions, just a logical step for a sociopath who has lost her power to have things her way.
I think she left her money to Aron because of two different reasons. 1) He was the one who looked like her so she felt like there was something of herself in him. 2) She wanted this person who was so disgusted with her and her world to have the dilema of accepting this small fortune made from what he found so disgusting. In other words, corrupting him and proving that all people save herself are hypocrites
Her reasoning is always 'poor me, surrounded by people who aren't like me'. Interesting that her offspring seem to blame themselves for everything.
You may well be right. But I did see a very slight understanding of her previous actions, maybe it wasn't remorse, but isn't the realization or understanding the beginning of remorse? Perhaps I am projecting how she would have felt if she had not killed herself. In killing herself, she was a coward, refusing to walk down the road of remorse.
Reason #2 is the best.
And yes Cal has the most well developed sense of guilt though. The idea of his burning that money was just plain...............I could just scream! If he decided that the money was too "dirty" to use himself, could he have not given it to, I don't know something/anything . Ye Gods, 15,000 was a lot of money then. Its not too shabby Now even, but then it was a fortune. There was no nobility or sacrifice in that burning, just blindness and selfishness. Mostly selfishness. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2004 1:19 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
All in all, we are just splitting hairs here, mitty. And I found Cal's burning the money completely unrealistic and unbelievable. And when I was struggling to get on with the book, that I didn't like any of the characters (except for some very minor ones) in the book, I've finished the book and still don't like any of the characters, though Abra didn't bother me.
I don't know why I've been analysing the book so much, I didn't even like it. In fact I disliked it quite a bit. I guess I just have a hard time keeping my thoughts to myself. It's been a problem of mine in some relationships too. I have to learn to lie also. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mitty |
| Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2004 2:00 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 1359
Location: Way Down Yonder.......
|
marantzo wrote: All in all, we are just splitting hairs here, mitty. And I found Cal's burning the money completely unrealistic and unbelievable. And when I was struggling to get on with the book, that I didn't like any of the characters (except for some very minor ones) in the book, I've finished the book and still don't like any of the characters, though Abra didn't bother me.
I don't know why I've been analysing the book so much, I didn't even like it. In fact I disliked it quite a bit. I guess I just have a hard time keeping my thoughts to myself. It's been a problem of mine in some relationships too. I have to learn to lie also.
The odd thing is, when I was reading the book, I did not like the characters particularly, but really enjoyed Steinbeck's writing. The book was full of grand gestures that actually meant nothing, and I agree it was a struggle in places. I mostly enjoyed the Samuel Hamilton sections, and Lee most of the time. Although I kept expecting more of Lee.
I think you (we) are analyzing the book so much because in spite of not liking the characters, they were meaty and well worth discussing. Even if I felt like slapping some of them (Adam in particular!).
And why on earth should you keep your thoughts to yourself. I always figure if someone does not like/love you for what you really are it is a lie, so lying does no good. Besides its way too much trouble to remember the lies!! 
Some fairly abrasive things have been said in the discussion of this book. So what. Its what we think, and if someone else does not like it so what? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. And you and I certainly have plenty of those! Thats good.  |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2004 3:27 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Quote: And why on earth should you keep your thoughts to yourself. I always figure if someone does not like/love you for what you really are it is a lie, so lying does no good. Besides its way too much trouble to remember the lies!!
mitty, I was kidding about the lying, but 'the keeping my mouth shut' part has been a problem at times. Like when I was living in New York and about to head back to Winnipeg in a week or so. I met a very nice woman and we talked and got along great. I asked if she would like to go out and she said sure and gave me her number. We continued the coversation and I mentioned that I was heading back to Canada in a couple of weeks. When I told a friend about it he said, 'What are you, nuts? You never tell a woman that.' Well I argued that if she really liked me it wouldn't matter. Who knows what will happen in the future? He said something like a dismissive, 'Oh man!'
To make a long story nauseating, as my mother would say, I called her for the date to fix a time etc. and she was very sorry but she was seeing a friend who just came to town, and since I was leaving she figured she wouldn't be seeing me and that I should have a nice trip. She was very nice about it, but my friend called it. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mitty |
| Posted: Sun Dec 26, 2004 6:29 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 1359
Location: Way Down Yonder.......
|
My mouth rarely wants to keep shut either, so I can empathize. But all in all I (somewhat egotistically) think thats the better course. I have often been accused of being abrasive and way too direct. But it is what it is.  |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 5:10 pm |
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
I've been reading and loved your discussion of humanity. I feel if I were to join in now, it would be an imposition on a personal conversation. So, I'll just applaud you all and butt out for now.
But know, if and when you go back to a discussion that is not quite so personal, I will be back. |
|
|
| Back to top |
 
|
| mitty |
| Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 5:21 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 1359
Location: Way Down Yonder.......
|
Marj! We have been just two abrasive opinionated fogeys lonely for someone else to come on in!! Notice I did not say old fogeys! He may be, but I will be diplomatic..............HA! That would be a change. 
I'd love to know your take on the remorse/guilt issue with Cathy/Kate. I've had some interesting conversations regarding this very issue outside the forum. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mitty |
| Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 5:44 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 1359
Location: Way Down Yonder.......
|
| Besides, theres still timshel!. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| marantzo |
| Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 6:31 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Mitty and anyone else who is interested (Marj?), your mention of 'timshel' reminded me of something I meant to bring up. Of course the discovery of the hebrew word by Lee and its translation solved a puzzle that they were discussing about the Cane and Abel story. I had the same type of experience twice. While in university I was dating someone who was going to St. Paul's College. One time I was waiting for her in the college's biblical library. I took the biblical dictionary and looked up 'virgin'. In the definition it said that it was translated from the hebrew word (I don't remember what the word was) which meant one not having had sexual relations also/or unmarried. This of course would make a big difference in the fable of virgin birth. More recently I heard a hebrew scholar explain that the work 'kill' in the ten commandments means kill and also means murder. Apparently there is another word which means 'slay'. This also gives a very different slant to this commandment.
It seems funny that these things aren't generally known. Sounds like a cover-up to me. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Marj |
| Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 8:39 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 10497
Location: Manhattan
|
When I was reading your last post Gary, I realized I wanted to look up the word timshel again, just to make sure I had the definition correct. So I googled it, and guess what I found?
http://timshel.org/timshel.php
I don't know how much of a cover up is going on as opposed to a lack of publicised discussion. It's sophisticated theology, and just not something many people know about. But I don't feel qualified to comment. Because as interesting as I may find it, I am not that well versed in theology or even Judaism! I wonder what my father may have thought about it?
Mitty, what I find so interesting about assessing remorse or regret to Cathy, is actually your need to do so! I personally don't know how we can make such an assessment. I have never know anyone devoid of humanity. I doubt I ever will. So, I have no basis for comparison or analysis.
How does one attribute remorse, regret or any such human emotions to someone who isn't human? What if Steinbeck wanted to do so, for argument's sake? Then he would have had to make a complete 360 as far as Cathy was concerned. Oh, I know he back pedaled some, but did he ever go so far as to call her human? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mitty |
| Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 9:01 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 1359
Location: Way Down Yonder.......
|
Steinbeck did not do a complete 360 on Cathy, but I believe he softened considerably. Look on p.548:
"It was when she had been thinking of her yellow-haired son tht the fragment had first come to her mind. His face-hurt, bewildered, despairing--had brought it. Then she remembered. She was a very small girl with a face as lovely and fresh as her son's face--a very small girl. Most of the time she knew she was smarter and prettier than anyone else. But now and then a lonely fear would fall upon her so that she seemed surrounded by a tree-tall forest of enemies. Then every thought and word and look was aimed to hurt her, and she had no place to run and no place to hide. And she would cry in panic because there was no escape and no sancuary."
Then it goes on about her reading and being able to retreat into Alice In Wonderland.
My point being taken from the section that talks about the "yellow-haired son' being so hurt. In a way it was a full turn around or circle closing whatever you want to call it. She had done all those terrible things including killing her parents, destroying that teacher and those boys lives. They were experiments in just how far she could go, or get away with things. If she had not felt any remorse at all, the sight of her son would not have bothered her a whit. She would have laughed him off with no problem. It was a case of what goes around, comes around. She destroyed her parents, and her children destroyed her. Or at least triggered her self=destruction.
As I pointed out before, she knew she was missing something. Imagine going thru life knowing something is missing from your emotional makeup. She knew. Steinbeck said she knew. She simply matured to the point that she had to examine herself, and could not stand the sight, as she saw herself thru Aron's eyes.
A person does not commit suicide if they do not hate themselves and what they have done in their lives. And that shows remorse. She was hurting, and could not face the hurt, and the continuance/strengthing of remorse. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mitty |
| Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 9:07 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 1359
Location: Way Down Yonder.......
|
marantzo wrote:
It seems funny that these things aren't generally known. Sounds like a cover-up to me.
Well, think about the Spanish Inquisition. It was a crime to own a bible. These guys made Hitler and his gang look like Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm. All the way back to Emperor Constantine, cover up upon cover up. So that now "tradition" has become more important than the source. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mitty |
| Posted: Mon Dec 27, 2004 9:37 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 02 Aug 2004
Posts: 1359
Location: Way Down Yonder.......
|
Regarding "thou mayest". The simplest way I can put it is that when it is said thou mayest, you can look at the opposite option thou mayest not. That would indicate a question rather than a command to overcome sin. In other words, will you or won't you master this sin?
Cain chose not to follow God's counsel.
Gary You are certainly correct in thinking that here are many errors in for example the King James Version of the Bible. I have actually read the figure of 20,000 errors. Of course King James had his own agenda. Which is a whole 'nother ball of wax. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
