Moonie's Ramblings

[Prof. Moonie]

I'm very impressed with the articles I ended up bookmarking - especially the ones that I randomly just added because the article's title sounded like it applied. Some of them even provide information backing up some of the ideas I came up with on my own with the Message Box I had to do for the project. biggrin So glad that I now have evidence to back it up.  

[Prof. Moonie]

A half hour until I'll have to leave for lunch and then class.  

[Prof. Moonie]

I'm heading off. Later.  

[Prof. Moonie]

Hello everyone.  

[Prof. Moonie]

*sighs* For my Young Adult Literature class, we recently had to start posting an electronic copy of our text analysis responses on our school forum website thingy called Angel. But the thing is... I don't know if we're allowed to respond to people's papers or not.

I only bring it up because I was looking at the newest papers that have been posted. Normally I just briefly glance over them and say okay - since it's not required for us to read them. But there was this one particular response that caught my eye, especially when the person's last few words was saying that they found the book boring. That intrigued me. So I decided to read it. After reading it, I suddenly had an urge to respond to it.

But then I chose not to finish my response to it, because I wasn't sure if we were allowed to comment on people's papers or not. And I also thought about how some of my classmates are very debatable, and just by the tone of the person's paper, I had a feeling they were one of those folks that just love to debate. That is just not something I want to get involved in. I don't mind friendly debates, but when it gets to the heated debates where people just want to debate to debate, then I get annoyed with it - mostly because it starts sounding more like arguments than a debate.  

[Prof. Moonie]

Hmm... maybe I should make my comments here. sweatdrop Sounds like a good idea. I can state my opinions into a basically void area, getting the need to respond off my chest... but without having to deal with a possible heated debater and I get to earn gold while doing it. 3nodding I think I'll do that.  

[Prof. Moonie]

First off, the book this response is about is: Charles and Emma: Darwins’ Leap of Faith by Deborah Heiligman.

Okay... now for my comments on the things that he said.  

[Prof. Moonie]

Quote:

Attempts by the author to make this book both engaging, relatable, and maintaining a degree of historical authentication all failed. This book is filled with inaccuracies, the most notable is the modernization of the feelings of its characters.

I find it intriguing that he said that the modernization of Darwins' life was a failure. I actually found the book quite enjoyable, and fairly accurate. Especially when the author uses quite a few quotes directly from letters written by Charles, Emma, other family members, or friends.  

[Prof. Moonie]

Quote:

While it is foolish to discount the idea of a parent grieving over their child’s deathbed, the tone the author sets is that of a modern father grieving for their child. As the book mentions over and over, there were several epidemics that rampaged across England and Europe that claimed the lives of children, including cholera and scarlet fever. The period was one of fear, because anyone could be struck down at any point.

And yes, there was tons of epidemics going on across the country ((Note that England is part of Europe, lol... so there's one amusing aspect)). But there's been epidemics going on in present day as well - like the Swine Flu. Just because there's an epidemic going on doesn't mean that people are suddenly going to become unemotional. People are still going to cry and be depressed by the loss. There's been countless accounts of that.

So what is this "modern" aspect he's talking about? I really don't understand that.  

[Prof. Moonie]

Quote:

The tone set by the author does not match that of what actually takes place. As mentioned before, the author creates a tone that seems too modern and it does not reflect what actually took place.

How does he know whether the author's tone was correct or not? And once again he brings up this "modern" term...

Not to mention, this is a Young Adult novel. Not everything is going to be portrayed within the context. The young reader may start losing interest. It'll just be another history book for them. This is meant to be something that gets young readers interested in history while still providing something entertaining. Considering my classmate is wanting to be a teacher ((the class is directed mostly towards future teachers)), I would have thought he would have taken this more into consideration.  

[Prof. Moonie]

Quote:

Another issue that arose in the text was the author’s indiscriminate attitude to put thoughts and emotions in Darwin’s head. Using the same example of Annie’s death, how does the author know that Darwin was struck down by grief? She states that while his letter was “calmed and composed. He [Darwin] had been anything but” (151). Discounting the possibility that the author has the ability to time travel, I do not see how she can accurately depict the level of emotion that Darwin was experiencing at the time of his daughter’s death. One can imagine it was a stressing time, but the author adds too much conjecture in this portrayal.

And how do you know, fellow classmate, on what Darwin's true feelings are? Have you seen all of the letters that were written that the author looked at? Probably not.

This brings me to the letter aspect. Many letters were missing or destroyed, so the only accounts of most events came from outside letters from family and friends or very brief notes in journals. With that being said, the author may have had to take her own interpretation of events as she pieced bits and parts together. So, yeah, there is a likelihood of false portrayal. But this novel seems more like a non-fictional biography than a strict, hard-core biography. With that being said, there might be some fictional spin to it.  

[Prof. Moonie]

Quote:

Earlier in the book this same mistake is made in the death of Charles and Emma’s baby. Despite the only written record that is given in the book about the death of this child given by Emma, the author describes the reactions of Charles. Emma writes to her sister “Our sorrow is nothing to what it would have been if she had lived longer and suffered more” (Heiligman 117). This letter does not match the description given of Charles being devastated (117). How is Heiligman able to inform the reader, based on the note from Emma, that Charles was devastated by this event? As mentioned before, older children were mourned for what they were and for what they could have been. Young infants were treated in a different light. Infants and younger children did not typically receive the same amount of grief as older children, as they were typically mourned for what they could have been (Pollock 141). Applying this to Charles and Emma, it does not discount the possibility of extreme grief, it merely questions how the author can know how Charles and Emma felt.

The letters aren't the only resources she looked at, mate. There were other resources she mentions that she used. You just needed to do some research - outside of the book! - to learn that.

And once again, just because the author quoted certain letters, doesn't mean she got more information from other letters not mentioned. So, the author may have been able to piece together the emotions that took place. *shrugs*  

[Prof. Moonie]

Quote:

It was frustrating to read the simple recount of Darwin’s theory on the origin of species, which failed to even address Darwin’s frustration with peacocks, which would lead to an adaptation of his theory in regards to sexual selection. Darwin himself was reported to have said “The sight of a feather in a peacock’s tail, whenever I gaze at it makes me sick” (Buss 6). While this text is meant for young adults, it doesn’t seem that providing Darwin’s own doubts/difficulties with his theory, outside offending his religious wife and using actual scientific problems, would be a difficult concept to grasp.

This book is meant for young adult readers. Most of them are just learning about evolution. If they were suggested to read this book, they would want something to enjoy reading. Not a typical boring history or science book that they read in school.

Also, there is absolutely no way that the author is going to incorporate every single detail into this small novel. The goal of this book was to portray the relationship between Charles and Emma (and family). Not another summarized version of Charles' theory - even though it is mentioned. But it's only mentioned because his family is involved - Emma reads the drafts, the kids become observation experiments, the family gets involved with the worm observation, etc. If you want all of the facts, just read the actual Origin of Species book!

Having doubts about his own theories is concept that isn't too hard to grasp? For us older folks who have gone through countless educational classes - yeah, it's not too hard to grasp. But what about these Young Adults? We're not just talking about high schoolers here. We're also talking about middle schoolers. The concept might be a bit harder to understand. Especially when they live in a different world that Darwin did. Darwin had to live in fear of going against the religion, because that was the time. Now a days... you can go against the religion all you want and have no major consequences... well, for the U.S. and Europe mostly. Other countries might not be so acceptive - but that's beside the point.

Finally, what is the importance of this peacock? Is it really important that the author include that tidbit? I ask even more - did Emma or any of Darwin's family take part in it? Ah... there's the point that should be really addressed. Remember, fellow classmate, this book is about Charles and Emma's relationship. So unless there is some evidence that the family, especially Emma, was involved in this peacock observation or whatever, then I see no reason to include it.  

[Prof. Moonie]

Quote:

The historical inaccuracy of the emotions felt by Charles Darwin and his wife mixed with a failure to address one scientific problem held by Darwin made this a difficult read. While the parts surrounding tragedy were, indeed, tragic, the rest of the book read like a cheap biography. This book is not only inaccurate, but incredibly boring.

Historical accuracy of emotions? It's hard to say how accurate they are when neither of us have read the actual letters. If we had those letters on hand, we might have a different point of view on the matter.

Is the peacock observation really that important? Once again, I must repeat - this is a novel about the relationship between Charles and Emma - hence the title. It's not completely focused on Darwin's evolution theory.

Cheap biography? Well... it is a biography. So if you were looking for a fictional novel, then clearly you set yourself up for reading the wrong book. sweatdrop Cheap? I don't know if I would call it that - at least in the price manner.

"Incredibly boring"? Ah, I come to the words that caught my attention. I find it interesting that my classmate goes on degrading the author's portrayal of emotions and lack of showing certain bits... but fails to explain this final part. Why do you find it boring, dear classmate?  

[Prof. Moonie]

Blah... I am so glad I'm done with that. *shakes head* I can just feel the heated debater aura coming from the words. I don't like it. *fans hands at the words* Go away you tainted thing! Go away!

Anyway... I hope you got a sense of what I was thinking about when I read his paper.