Morris Sweetkind and "Poetry in a Scientific World"

Morris Sweetkind’s article “Poetry in a Scientific World” offers a different view on why poetry is still relevant to a society engulfed by technological advances.

Author: John Forster, 1678.
Source: Library of Congress via
Wikimedia Commons

Some of Sweetkind’s main points include the importance of poetry in curriculum. While it is true that many students do not see poets at the helm of society (primarily it is politicians and engineers), poetry has a place in education because it can teach things that science cannot. Sweetkind outlines the four components of a healthy individual that the writer Matthew Arnold once spoke of:

 (1) the power of conduct; 

(2) the power of  intellect  and knowledge; 

(3) the power of beauty;

(4) the power of  social life  and manners

In excluding poetry in the sole pursuit of scientific query, Sweetkind believes that a person is only reaching one-fourth of their potential (the power of intellect and knowledge), (360).

Even with all the knowledge of science at his or her fingertips, there is a still a question as to how it can be applied to the world. Will the student use the knowledge they have to judiciously better the world, or will they use it irresponsibly to destroy the world?

Though Sweetkind’s essay is written in the 1970’s, the points he makes about the division of poetry and science are still relevant. Our society today is still heavily centered around technology and advancement. It seems as if everyone has a Smartphone attached to their finger. Book sales have declined and everything is becoming digitized. Still, a complete digitalization of things like books, movies and music is not all bad. Inventions like Amazon’s Kindle have encouraged reading, and Kindles are even being used in some school classrooms.

Sweetkind spoke of technology as being desensitizing and I partly agree with him. Technology is efficient and convenient, but, as Sweetkind suggests, at what cost? 

Works Cited:

Sweetkind, Morris. “Poetry in a Scientific World”. The English Journal, 59.3 (1970): 359-36. JSTOR. Web. 3 October 2011.  

Moral Themes in "The Fellowship of the Ring"

The hand of Sauron, wearing the One Ring. 2005,
Author Katie Tegtmeyer.

Through the world of books, a reader can experience many things without leaving the comfort of their favorite chair. A book can take a reader to Phuket, Bath, or St. Louis. While reading, a person can meet new people, or imagine what it would be like to skydive, engage in espionage, or both at the same time.

Literature is far more important for another reason; it can guide a reader’s moral compass. Since long ago when fables and parafables were popular, literature and ethics were entwined. Stories like “The Tortoise and the Hare” and “Prodigal Son” explain to the reader life lessons in a simplistic way, much like the Bible. Somewhere along the years, literature and ethics began to part ways. 

According to Adia Mendelson-Maoz, the divide between ethics and literature began in the times of Aristotle and Plato, continuing on through the first half of the twentieth century, (112). Mendelson-Maoz takes a quote from writer Oscar Wilde in his preface to The Picture of Dorian Gray, which sums up the feelings echoed throughout the academic community about linking literature and ethics: “There is no such thing as a moral or immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.”

Times have changed yet again, and the parallel concerning literature and ethics has seen a revival. James Adamson writes, “Although literature and ethics have different methods, strategies, and goals, they are both forms of writing which deal with human lives; they both can be viewed as models of moral attention” (92–93). There are many books that include ethics or morals as part of the story. In Stephen King’s novella The Body, the reader understands why the lead character Gordy feels it best to leave the body ‘unclaimed’ by either group; it is a question of what is really right and what is really wrong. Flashfoward by Robert J. Sawyer takes the reader through a world where fate does not govern all. Sawyer’s story illustrates to the reader that the future can be changed, based on our own actions and choices, right or wrong as those choices may be. Another perfect example of moral themes found in literature would be The Lord of the Rings (or LOTR). J.R.R. Tolkien’s three story arc is set in a fantastical world beyond the imagination of many, and yet, he still manages to convey moral concepts in each part of LOTR, many of them found in The Fellowship of the Ring.

Part one of LOTR, The Fellowship of the Ring, features many themes. None are as present as the theme of pity and mercy in the face of death. While Gandalf the Grey wizard is explaining to Frodo Baggins the origins of how the Ring came to rest in his fate, he describes the story of the creature Gollum. Gollum had the ring for 500 years, but the Ring chose to leave him. By chance, Bilbo Baggins finds the ring in Gollum’s cave and takes it for his own. Bilbo had the chance then to kill Gollum, who was a deranged and dangerous creature. Frodo wonders aloud at why his uncle did not, and he says to Gandalf, “What am I to do? What a pity that Bilbo did not stab that vile creature, when he had the chance!" Those words spark a conversation between the two that is as follows:

Joe Sofranko as Frodo, 2007
Theguyinblue 

           “Pity? It was Pity that stayed his hand. Pity, and Mercy: not to strike without need. And he has been well rewarded, Frodo. Be sure that he took so little hurt from the evil, and escaped in the end because he began his ownership of the Ring so. With Pity.”

            “I am sorry,” said Frodo. “But I am frightened; and I do not feel any pity for Gollum.”

            “You have not seen him,” Gandalf broke in.

            “No, and I don’t want to,” said Frodo. “I can’t understand you […] after he did all those horrible deeds […], he deserves death.”

           “Deserves it! I daresay he does. Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. For even the very wise cannot see all ends. I have not much hope that Gollum can be cured before he dies, but there is a chance of it. And he is bound up with the fate of the Ring. My heart tells me that he has some party to play yet, for good or ill, before the end; and when that comes, the pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many---yours not least.”-(Tolkien,  68-69).

Gandalf’s words suggest that a higher power may be at work, as he puts it “for good or ill". Even though Gollum is a reprehensible creature (a thief, traitor, and murderer), to decide his death or the death of others is not necessarily up to one person to deliver. Judgment in death must never be decided lightly, or (maybe as Tolkien believed) by human beings at all.

One of the recurring moral themes in The Fellowship of the Ring is the idea of temptation, and corruption from power. Several characters are offered the chance to have the Ring for themselves and do with it what they want, characters like Gandalf, Elrond, Tom Bombadil, Aragorn, and Galadriel. Though they may desire it, they do not accept the Ring because they know it has only the power to destroy.

Elrond is a very old elf, and saw the destruction Sauron wrought with the Ring during the Great War. For this reason, and others, he does not take the Ring. Men are easily drawn in by the power of the Ring; Aragorn almost could not resist Frodo’s offer to take the Ring from him. Aragorn is a hero of the story and displays more moral fiber than most, therefore he decides rather easily not to take the Ring.

Depiction of "Rivendell": Jardim Tropical Monte Palace in 
Funchal, Madeira. 2009, Author Tim Walker. 

One of the members of the Fellowship has a harder time withstanding the call of the Ring: Boromir of Gondor.

From the very beginning of the quest, he thinks the Ring can be used as an instrument of good. He believes that it might save his kingdom, Gondor, from ruin. At the end of The Fellowship of the Ring, he tries to physically take the Ring from Frodo. But Frodo is able to escape. Later, Boromir is asked to help the two Halflings Merry and Pippin from a group of Uruk-hai. Perhaps because it was meant to be, or perhaps because Tolkien wanted to show that giving into temptation brings dire consequences, Boromir is slain while defending Merry and Pippin. One could argue that he sought repentance in trying to save the two Hobbits. Either way, Boromir’s moral compass led him astray and with his death, he may have been able to find redemption.  

The Fellowship of the Ring is full of moral themes, such as pity and mercy, judgment in death, temptation, and redemption. However, LOTR is not the only story worth analyzing for ties of literary and moral themes.  Ford Jameson believes that “every text contains traces of social, political, and ethical issues, whether in an overt form, or unconsciously.” Whether delving into a romance novel or science fiction, elements of ethics are bound to be identified. There does not have to be a separation between ethics and literature. Ethics and literature naturally go together, and that is not a bad thing. Literature is a kaleidoscope of knowledge, rife with teachings about every facet of life. Ethics has found a niche in literature (again), whether some agree with its place or not.

Works Cited

Adamson, James. Against Tidiness: Literature and/Versus Moral Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Print.

Jameson, Ford. The Political Unconscious. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1981. Print.

Mendelson-Maoz, Adia. “Ethics and Literature: Introduction”. Philosophia 35  (2007) 35:111–116. Web. 25 Aug. 2011.

            

           Tolkien, J.R.R. The Lord of the Rings, Part One: The Fellowship of the Ring. Toronto: Methuen, 1971. Print.

A Summary, Analysis, and Opinion of "La Belle Dame Sans Merci" by John Keats

"La Belle Dame Sans Merci" by Frank Bernard Dicksee.

One of the most famous poems by John Keats is "La Belle Dame Sans Merci" (meaning "the beautiful woman without mercy" in old French). It is not exactly a short poem, but twelve stanzas is not exactly that long, either. There is an alternate manuscript version, but I chose the 1819 published version to dissect. I chose it because of the supernatural elements suggested in the poem, alluding to a 'farey', her powers, and her merciless disposal of men. A few relevant stanzas are: 

Oh what can ail thee, knight-at-arms,
    Alone and palely loitering?
The sedge has withered from the lake,

    And no birds sing. 

I met a lady in the meads,
    Full beautiful - a faery's child,
Her hair was long, her foot was light,

    And her eyes were wild.

I set her on my pacing steed,
    And nothing else saw all day long,
For sidelong would she bend, and sing

    A faery's song. 

-(English, 2011). 

 To begin with, a paragraph of a summary of the poem reads:  

"La Belle Dame Sans Merci" by Robert Anning Bell

“La Belle Dame sans Merci,” written in 1819 and published the next year in a form slightly different from the one here, depicts a knight-at-arms who has been seduced and abandoned by a capricious fairy. Told in the form of a dialogue, the poem recounts the experience of loving dangerously and fully, of remaining loyal to that love despite warnings to the contrary, and of suffering the living death of one who has glimpsed immortality," (enotes, 2011). 

This poem could be interpreted in a myriad of ways. There are some people who think that the fairy exists only in the imagination and others who believe her to be equitable to a siren, luring men into become her emotional slaves. One analysis takes a different route:

"The references to "faery" and "elfin" suggest enchantment or imagination. Her "sweet moan" and "song" represent art inspired by imagination. The lady, symbolizing imagination, takes him to an ideal world. The knight becomes enraptured by or totally absorbed in the pleasures of the imagination--the delicious foods, her song, her beauty, her love or favor ("and nothing else saw all day long"). But the imagination or visionary experience is fleeting; the human being cannot live in this realm, a fact which the dreamer chooses to ignore. The knight's refusal to let go of the joys of the imagination destroys his life in the real world," (Melani, 2010). 

In poetry analysis, it may be hard to differ opinion from objective analysis. While searching articles and websites online, I was struck by how similar they all sound. After reading a number of them, I was able to tell them apart more easily. Here is one example of an opinion about Keats' poem:  

"La Belle Dame Sans Merci" by Arthur Hugues.

“La Belle Dame sans Merci” is one of Keats’s most beloved poems and one of the few important works that seems to evade the kind of critical argumentation invoked by the odes and long poems. Typical of critics’ magnanimity toward the ballad is T. Hall Caine’s 1882 assessment of the poem as the “loveliest [Keats] gave us.” He writes that the ballad is “wholly simple and direct, and informed throughout by a reposeful strength. In all the qualities that rule and shape poetry into unity of form, this little work strides, perhaps, leagues in advance of ‘Endymion,’”  (enotes, 2011). 

One can tell that it is an opinion because of the use of words like "beloved" and "important". The author believes the poem to be a beloved and important work, and that is all based on the author's own opinions. This opinion offers little in the way of new information or analysis.  

English. (2011). La belle dame sans merci. Retrieved on July 25, 2011 from http://englishhistory.net/keats/poetry/labelledamesansmerci.html

Enotes. (2011). La belle dame sans merci: summary. Retrieved on July 25, 2011 from http://www.enotes.com/la-belle-dame-sans-meri/summary

Melani, L. (2010, September 27). The significance of 'la belle dame sans merci'. Retrieved on July 25, 2011 from http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/english/melani/cs6/belle.html#sig

Global Perspectives in the Development of Gender Studies

Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony are two names synonymous with women’s suffrage in history. They are two women who made a difference in the world of women’s rights, but at the same time, their experiences make up only a small part of women in society. 

When most people think of gender studies, they think of women’s suffrage. However, there are many other important facets of feminist history and societal impacts that make up gender studies; “The history of notable women is the history of exceptional, even deviant women, and does not describe the experience and history of the mass of women,” (Lerner, 1975, p. 5).

Gender studies was once referred to as women’s studies. However, many universities on an international scale felt the term turned students off and so women’s studies changed to gender studies. By using ‘gender studies’ as opposed to ‘women’s studies’, universities in Mexico and the U.K. were able to legitimize the study of gender and feminism, (Stromquist, 2001, p. 375). Stereotypes about gender studies have slowly begun to fade. While there are still many pre-conceived notions regarding the main points of gender studies (feminism, female history, and women’s roles), global perspectives have helped to change the field of gender studies.

            The term ‘global perspectives’ can be described as the collective voice of the international academic community on any given subject. For example, it is how the study of gender studies would differ in the U.S. and in Spain. Women are regarded differently in both countries; both countries have a different status for women, and show their expectations for women through media or cultural forms. Religious views in either country, along with the roles of high officials (queens, politicians) compared with that of other women (artisans, teachers) can produce new insights. When both the American and Spainish perspectives on gender studies are analyzed together, they can complement one another to create new schools of thought. Global perspectives in the field of gender studies has raised new questions and shaped new theories. 

As observed by Nelly Stromquist, gender studies were once generalized by the following sub-topics: family, work, motherhood, marriage, science, the state, power, law, social class, and ethnicity. In more recent applications of gender studies, it has become apparent that there are more complex sub-topics that made up gender studies. New questions have been raised and changes in gender studies include: “marriage and divorce, educational opportunities, economic struggles of working women, female sexuality, the subordinate position of women,” (Lerner, 1975, p. 7). A big part of creating new and varied perspectives on gender studies is  remembering that while women have been largely victimized throughout history, that should not be the central theme when relating their experiences, thoughts, and roles to society.

In literature and other forms of mass media, women’s roles have been generalized. At times, it is hard to set women apart from their described roles in media from their actual lives. Though mass media is an ethereal part of life, it can sometimes infiltrate conceptualized versions of reality.  In the Victorian era, society’s expectations of women dictated a woman’s place.

Mass media is not the only hindrance to gender studies; racial inequalities in gender studies can create generalizations as well. White women do not have the market on gender studies, nor do African Americans. There are other marginalized groups like Native Americans, Asians, and Hispanics that were almost ignored in relation to gender studies up until the 1990’s (Dubois, 2003). Marginalized views are necessary to the diversification of gender studies. At the same time, Ellen Carol Dubois feels there is a danger in creating a narrow lens that focuses on the racism of early white feminist, and how feminism can be inherently racist in and of itself. Again, that is an unfortunate part of gender studies, (much like women’s suffrage and victimization), but by no means should it become the core of any gender studies curriculum.

            
One more assumption of gender studies that has been renewed is the belief that U.S. gender studies have been internationalized successfully. Dubois strongly believes that that is not the case. She believes that U.S. women’s history has failed to include anything beyond our own national interests. Dubois feels that scholars in continents like Europe, Asia, and Africa will shape the perspectives needed to open up American gender studies to a fuller extent.

Gender studies is still a new field, even though it was introduced into the university system in the 1970’s. Forty years for an academic interdisciplinary field is not that impressive when traditional disciplines like history, philosophy, and literature have been part of the academic world for centuries. Given that gender studies is still in its infancy, it is changing everyday and global perspectives has a lot to do with said changes. When society is analyzed from only one nationalized perspective, the study itself becomes severely limited. In the United States, there are so many classes to be studied, both by race and class. There is much to be gained by looking at gender studies through the kaleidoscope of a larger worldview. The understanding of women evolves as each international school of thought is added to the mix. Gender studies will continue to adjust to the changes brought on by global perspectives and marginalized voices.    

Dubois, E, C. (2003, May 16). “Three decades of women’s history”. Women's Studies, 35(1).

Retrieved on July 17, 2011 from the Utrecht American Studies Network.

Lerner, G. (1975, Autumn). “Placing women in history".  Feminist Studies, 3, (1/2), 5-14.

Retrieved on July 17, 2011 from JSTOR Database.

Stromquist, N., P. (2001, June). “Gender studies: a global perspective of their evolution,

 

contribution, and challenges to comparative higher education”. Higher Education, 41,

 

(4), 373-387. Retrieved on July 17, 2011 from the JSTOR Database.  

"N."- A Short Story of O.C.D., Different Dimensions, and Stonehenge

Stephen King is the author of countless short stories. Two of his most famous short story collections are Nightmares and Dreamscapes and Just After Sunset. Recently, he released another set of short stories titled, Full Dark, No Stars. Many people that have reviewed Full Dark, No Stars have said it is a book of dark stories with dark endings. While that may be true, perhaps one of his most strange and terrifying short stories would be "N.".

"N." was featured in Just After Sunset and is longer than most of the stories in the book. The length of the story is part of the allure; it is a long enough story to build the story and characters, but the reader is relieved the story ends because of how truly disconcerting it is. "N." is a told from the perspective of different patient-case studies written down by N.'s psychiatrist. N. used to be a regular man with a boring job as an accountant. When passing by Ackerman's Field one day, he is drawn to explore the field by a force he cannot name. Once at the field, he is changed by what he finds there. He realizes Ackerman's Field is a "thin" spot in reality, where demons are trying to break through to the human world.

In order to protect the world, he feels he has to go through obsessive compulsive behavior (OCD) rituals to keep balance in the world. After completing each OCD task, N. believes he has kept the monsters at bay by maintaining the rituals that a sane world needs in order to function. It is his newly-acquired OCD symptoms that prompt N. to see a psychiatrist. Yet, by sharing his discovery of the field, N. passes the torch on to someone new after he commits suicide. Suicide, as N. believes, is the only way to end the guardianship of the field. Though the psychiatrist is not sure whether to believe N.'s fantastical story of Ackerman's Field, he was also wants to see the existence of the field for himself.

Due to the increased demonic presence in the field during summer months (after the Summer Solstice), the psychiatrist also cannot handle the immense responsibility that comes with merely knowing about Ackerman's Field. He too commits suicide. His sister finds his patient transcripts from his sessions with N., though they are labeled "BURN THIS". Curiosity drives the sister to visit the field as well, even as it is only implied that she does so through her letter to a friend, warning said friend not to go to Ackerman's Field. The last few pages of the story show that the guardianship of the field is ceremoniously passed down by a cycle of discovery, insanity, and suicide.


Ultimately, "N." perfectly sums up the feelings behind OCD behavior. Indeed, many people afflicted with OCD feel that their monotonous rituals "right the world", and that if they don't carry them out, it would put their whole world out of balance. Those who have OCD repeatedly wash their hands, check the locks, or touch a surface to assure themselves that the world is still there, and that the world is okay. N. feels the same way: "I had to keep renewing the protection [of the field] with symbolic acts," (King p.316).

Ackerman's Field is a loose representation of Stonehenge. King even has N. refer to Stonehenge in comparison with the field: "[Stonehenge could be] protecting something  [...] Locking out an insane universe that happens to lie right next to ours," (King p.317). N. knows that without the formation of the stones at both Stonehenge and the field, the other universe would be allowed to come into the human world. The problem with the stones is that there has to be a specific number of them to keep the protection going strong, eight total (a good and even number, as far as OCD N. is concerned). When human eyes look at the field, there are only seven stones, and that's bad. Only a camera or anything else with a lens can restore the eighth stone. Even then, the stone is only replaced temporarily. The guardian of the field has to keep coming back to the field to restore the stone, because the eighth stone sometimes winks out of existence by pure will of the demons that are trying to get through.

"N." is comparable to stories like "The Ring" or "The Grudge", as they are all similar stories depicting an entity that infects, kills, and spreads. However, "N." is a much scarier story because of the monsters N. describes seeing in the field, and because of King's trademark in being able to manipulate such a simple setting (Ackerman's Field) into a horrifying one.

Three Dimensional Villains in "Under the Dome"

Of all of the notable antagonists in literature, most derive their key actions from a desire for greater power: Grendel, Claudius, Sauron. Then there are the villains who only do what they do because they can. However, the best villains are the ones with depth, or three dimensions. Two lead antagonists from Stephen King's Under the Dome illustrate what makes a three dimensional character. 

"Big" Jim Rennie is a used-car salesman, town Second Selectman, and the head of the country's largest methamphetamine distribution. To himself, and to others, he rationalizes away his sins by saying what he does is always "for the good of the town". Even the murders he commits is part of the greater good, including the smothering of his late wife. She was in pain and going to die anyway, Rennie thinks to himself. The other citizens he kills to cover up his other crimes, as they were the two people bent on exposing him. Again, Rennie believes he killed them for the greater good, because he is the best leader for the town. A leader can't lead from jail, now can he? Though Rennie swears he only deals meth to raise money for the town and strengthen the business district, the only businesses he props up are those directly linked to him or his co-conspirators. Theoretically, Rennie can retire on any beach of his choosing, considering the millions he's made for himself. Yet, on a beach, Rennie would become just a man. By staying in Chester Mill, his supposed talents are put to good use as Second Selectman. What makes Rennie a more realistic character is his heavy Christian background, and his love for his son, Junior. Even as he snaps the neck of innocent women, Rennie does not forget to thank the Lord Almighty, or tell his son he loves him. 

 

Junior Rennie is another great antagonist in Under the Dome. Unlike his father, Junior does not want power. What Junior wants is an abatement to his chronic migraines, which he does not know are caused by a brain tumor. In part, his migraines (and tumor) are to blame for his bad behavior, but then again, the apple does not fall far from the tree. Junior murders his fair share of people, even keeping them in a pantry to visit and sleep with, calling them his dead "girlfriends". As mentally ill as he is, Junior is able to recognize his father's own disconnect from reality and remarks upon it: "Dad, has anyone ever told you that you're crazy?" Junior is also smart enough not to take part in the gang-rape of Sammy Bushey. There is also a point in the book when Junior does a genuinely good thing; he and a fellow officer rescue two abandoned children from starvation. When one of the kids wrap their arms around Junior's neck in gratitude, he thinks that he has never felt better.

Rennie and Junior's characters are reprehensible, but they are also human, and their depth leaves room for the reader to hate and understand them at the same time. 

Tragic heroes and Perspective in "Carrie"

Stephen Kings first and iconic novel, "Carrie", is as much a chilling horror story as it is one about tragic heroes. Heroes may be too broad of a term for the characters of Carrieta White, Tommy Ross, and Sue Snell. Certainly, in the small world of Chamberlain, Maine, they were heroes in their own way.


Carrieta White (or Carrie) was a girl conflicted to belong and to ultimately destroy everything she touched. She was driven to a state of rage over a long period of time after years of bullying from girls at school. Underneath the latent rage was a sweet, vulnerable girl, and at times, a beautiful one, "She felt that her heart would break if he [Tommy] uttered so much as the wrong sound, and if he laughed she would die," (King, 1974, p. 127). None of her classmates would have pegged her as either of those things, but before the terror of prom night came to fruition, Carrie was a shining star, flashing brightly, and fading just as quickly: [Tommy to Carrie] "You're like Galatea [...] We read about her in Mr. Ever's class. She turned from a drudge into a beautiful woman and nobody even knew her," (King, 1974, p. 134). The tragic part of Carrie's character is the betrayal she feels at being humiliated at the prom during the King and Queen coronation, which she and Tommy Ross unexpectedly won. It was not the two buckets of pigs blood that drove Carrie White over the edge; it was the subsequent laughter that followed, largely mixed in with her horror over the sudden death of Tommy Ross.


Tommy Ross could have been pigeon-holed as a jock character, intent on popularity and chasing the hottest girl in school. He was all those things, but with a conscience. Not only did Tommy possess a moral compass, but he also displayed the ability to look ahead, to see past high school: "High school isn't a very important place. When you're going you think it's a big deal, but when it's over nobody really thinks it was great unless they're beered up," (King, 1974, p. 48). That is not to say that Tommy's character was above reproach, because he admitted to doing a despicable thing, possibly to grow closer to Sue Snell, or to put the Carrie White situation in perspective for her. When in seventh grade, Tommy relates how he kicked a bully in the stomach when he had already been passed out on the ground. Clearly, it was a cowardly act, but one he felt was not entirely merit less since his victim was a bully. However, he told Sue, Carrie had never harmed her and her friends, so why oh why pick on her so? Despite his good advice and good intentions, Tommy was the first to die on prom night, thanks to a quarter-full bucket of pigs blood striking him on the skull as it fell to the stage. What was most tragic of all about his character (and for Carrie) was that he had begun to love Carrie, even after knowing her for only a short while. This did not deflect from the love he felt for Sue, it was merely another woman in his life.


Sue Snell was as popular and beloved as Tommy Ross, but not as confident to stand alone in matters when it came to doing the right thing. All that changed after the shower incident with Carrie White. After whole-heartedly taking part in bullying Carrie, Sue felt actual remorse and wanted to make Carrie feel as though she belonged. Sue struggled with this, questioning if she was helping Carrie to abate her feelings of hypocrisy, or if it really was a selfless act. This sort of honest self-analyzation shows a certain maturity and morality in Sue. In the end, she gave up her own prom date (Tommy Ross) for Carrie, an act that had unintended consequences. The tragic part of Sue's character was that she lost her high school sweetheart, and most of her friends in during the hellish prom night.

During the story, King highlights different character perspectives that make for an interesting insight on what people see happening, and what 'really happened'. For example, Carrie reflects on her power as something unknown, and not really evil. Yet, her mother thinks of it as a devilish creation, stemming from the way she saw the power drive her grandmother insane. Also, it is interesting to note that once the blood came down on Carrie, most of the students watching were just as horrified and confused as she was. Really, to break the silence and to keep from going insane, they turned to laughter, and only so because the image of Carrie's bright eyes surrounded by all the red was a comic one. When she tripped on her way off of the stage, the laughter was easier to come by, and when a student tripped her, the laughter positively swelled. To Carrie, once the blood came down, there was silence and then she finally heard the expected laughter. It broke her heart, along with the knowledge that Tommy was dying right next to her. In her grief, she hurried off of the stage, only to stumble slightly. The final cap on the night was when a student cruelly tripped her and she fell to the floor, blood smearing everywhere. She even waited for someone to kick her while she was down, but that did not happen. Perspective is a funny thing, and not one easily written.