Hi students,
For this blog post I'd like to ask you to do something a little different. If you want to choose option B (sending me a question) please only do so if your question has to do with the meaning of the work as a whole (themes) of Sula. I think it will work better to have fewer questions and more responses. There are a lot of fantastic questions that you've already generated that I'd like to see more people respond to. So, for this assignment, you can either reply to a question (or two) in Sula blog post (the original) or Sula blog post #2 or send me a question for full credit. Again, only send a question if it is concerned with theme.
Happy reading!
I'm gonna stretch one one of the guiding questions a little bit and discuss how Nel can be seen as just as or possibly even more evil than Sula in the novel. After Nel visits Eva, she is shocked to realize that Eva only recognizes Nel as Sula, and feels that Nel simply watched Chicken Little die. At first, Nel's confusion is understandable, but the reader and Nel both realize that Nel did watch Chicken Little drown calmly as Sula freaked out. This suggests that while the book originally portrayed this moment as a splitting of the duo's personalities, they both in fact evil from the get go. As the book continues, Sula's evil is more prominently displayed in contrast to Nel's "normal" behavior in the town of Medallion. Sula's sleeping with Jude seemingly is the greatest evil that Sula has committed, as it betrays their meaningful friendship. Yet was this really evil? Sula and Nel, for the most part, act as one, and Sula's views of sex and passion are very little, so her act was considerably more for pleasure than spite. They are one person, why can't they share the same man. However, Sula views this as a complete betrayal and doesn't talk to Sula until she is about to die. Can Nel be considered evil becuase of her decisions? Possibly. Nel's new-found hate for Sula is a betrayal of their freindship, which is so great that they are considered the same person. one man shouldn't have been able to tear apart their relationship, because in reality, they are the same person, just with different goals. Eventually, Nel truly finds out that Sula was the good one, as the reality of her last name Peace was revealed on her gravestone, and it's true meaning reveals Nel's evil.
ReplyDeleteResponse to Ysabel’s question: Why does labeling Sula as ‘evil’ create a stronger sense of community among the residents of the Bottom? Do you think they exaggerate her evil qualities in order to improve their own lives?
ReplyDeleteSula gave the community something to fight against. Given that she disagrees with the community in almost all aspects, most prominently the idea of the dependence of women on men, she motivated the community to unite against her and uphold their own social beliefs. After she dies, there appears to be progress within the town, with the blacks moving from the Bottom and having a better lifestyle, but in actuality, there are now “separate houses with separate televisions and separate telephones and less and less dropping by” (Morrison 166), and the sense of community is no longer present. The residents needed Sula to keep a balance in the town, and now with her death, they no longer know what is considered “evil” to frown upon. However, I do not believe that the residents exaggerated her evil qualities; it is their ignorance that caused them to consider all of Sula’s actions as something negative rather than positive, to the point where they considered Sula’s death as “the best news folks up in the Bottom had had” (Morrison 150). At the end, when Nel finally realized that she missed Sula being in the community and not Jude, it was too late. A possible theme that can be derived from this is that “evilness” is subjective in the way that it depends on the social norms of the community.
To add on to Jennifer's response, Sula also gave the community a sense of what was right and what was wrong. Everyone in the community all knew that Sula was evil and Sula also served as the community's moral compass. When Sula died, the community didn't know what was good and what was wrong. For example, Teapot started to abuse her son and women started to take their husbands for granted. The community fell apart because Sula wasn't there to serve as their moral compass. Even though the community despised Sula when she was alive, the community took Sula for granted because they didn't know how Sula made such a huge impact on the community. She kept the community united and she served as a moral compass.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete
DeleteAlthough I do agree with Jennifer and Jane, I have a slightly different take on how the people of Medallion were affected by Sula’s death. As I read the last sections of reading, it became apparent to me that her death seemed to signify the changing of direction in energy of hatred among the people of Medallion. When Sula was alive, the idea that she was evil concentrated all of the negativities and hatred of the community on her, creating an outlet in which the troubled people of Medallion could channel all of their anger & spite. A quote that signifies how the community remained negative after her death is “the bubbles of relief that broke in the chest of practically everybody when Sula died did not soften their spite” (Morrison 171). Sula, their main subject to put negativity and anger into was no longer alive, and the people of Medallion still felt resentment. Therefore the positive outcomes of Sula becoming the town evil backlashed as Teapot’s mom turned on her son, and how overall “the Bottom had collapsed” (Morrison 165). Without anyone for the people of Medallion to put their contempt in, the town manifested off of their own directionless hatred (most likely stemming from earlier days of segregation and disrespect) until the communal feeling no longer existed.
Response to Stephanie’s question: What is the significance of the rose mark on Sula's eye? How does it connect to the epigraph at the beginning of the novel? What is the significance of the rose being "darker than [Nel] remembered" (96) and why do you believe that it got darker?
ReplyDeleteThe epigraph has a clear relation to Sula’s birthmark. While some may have viewed her birthmark as a snake, she always saw it as a rose. The birthmark is what separates Sula from the rest of society and defines who she is. I see her birthmark as a representation of her determination, since her bold and often wild actions are conceived as “evil” in the society’s eyes. Therefore, her birthmark correlates with the epigraph, which states that “Nobody knew my rose of the world but me…,” because the people from the Bottom do not respect her passion and individuality, nor do they accept it. Her identity is one with pride and glory, because she was able to live her life as she desired, redefining gender roles in women. The rose becoming darker than Nel remembered could symbolize Sula becoming a different person, or at least more independent, after she went to college. With Nel being “startled” (Morrison 96), Morrison is foreshadowing the changing relationship between Nel and Sula. In fact, this would prove to be true, given that their relationship has been stained with betrayal, and Nel does not acknowledge Sula’s actions until after her death and the community in the Bottom had faded away, suggesting that the way how people view glory plays a significant role in friendship.
Response to Ellis’s question: Should Sula's act of having sex with Jude be considered evil, or is Sula just acting by different social standards? Was it more of Jude's responsibility or Sula's to not betray Nel?
ReplyDeleteI don’t particularly consider Sula’s sexual encounters with Jude to be evil, as I don’t believe it was out of malice and vengeance to deliberately hurt Nel. Sula’s daring actions and unconventional behavior challenge society, and because it is so foreign to them, they are quick to put a label on her and call her a sinner and a “whore”. However, I think the reader is led to think the contrary because of the way Sula is consistently cast under a negative light. The reader is constantly reminded that Sula was the one who killed Chicken Little, the one who broke societal norms and demanded her own independence, the one who watched her mother burn alive and didn’t do anything to stop it, and the one who supposedly stole other women's husbands and slept with white men. Naturally, the reader begins to form this opinion of Sula, to label her as “evil” and forget that other characters also possess flaws. We begin to compare Sula to Nel, and automatically we feel sympathy for Nel because we already blame Sula for everything. On the other hand, as far as whether it was more of Jude’s responsibility or Sula’s to not betray Nel, I believe it was more of Sula’s because ultimately, Nel was only Nel in the presence of Sula. They grew up together as one, and when they ended their friendship for good, it was as if half of Nel was missing forever. It seems that Jude offered Nel the kind of affection that a man can offer, but it just wasn’t the same as Sula’s affection. On the very last page of the novel, Nel stops to look up at the sky when walking home from Sula’s grave, and whispers to herself, “All that time, all that time, I thought I was missing Jude... we was girls together. O Lord, Sula, girl, girl, girlgirlgirl” (174). Nel thought she missed her husband, but truly, it was her childhood best friend whom she missed the most.
Response to Lian's question: Why does Morrison repeat this theme of contradiction and inverted meanings and how does that affect the novel?
ReplyDeleteA typical society tends to believe in only one point of view. For instance, death seems to be a dominant theme in the novel. Yet in the novel, death is seen as a moment where one gets to truly “live” their life. Morrison is attempting to reveal several point of views that humans tend to often overlook. Plum burned to death with fire while fire is portrayed as “cleansing.” This ties back to the main theme of death, which suggests that death does indeed cleanse one from all the sufferings while they are alive. Morrison is intending to reveal multiple themes that often overlooked and she utilizes contradiction/paradox as well as several instances of symbolism. The moment where Sula does return is portrayed as a downturn for the town of Bottom offers an interesting point arguing whether Sula should be portrayed as “evil.” At that point, Sula has reached the stage where humans ought to be “mature” (since she went away from town for quite a time) and sometimes maturity can guarantee changes in certain relationships. Morrison is intending to reveal effectively through the use of contradiction that maturity, despite the fact that one should be “mature” at that point, may introduce deep changes in society including relationships. Above all, Morrison repeatedly uses contradiction/inverted meanings, and more generally imagery as well as symbolism to convey that humans often overlook the impact and message of several ideas including death, maturity, etc. The use of contradiction along with some instances of imagery and symbolism powerfully conveys multiple themes throughout the novel. Lastly, Sula, as a complex novel, demonstrates many interesting meanings and themes even if some ideas do not make any sense initially. Point of view seems to be another potential theme arising from the novel.
I believe Jennifer already used this question, but it's a good question, so here it goes again.
ReplyDeleteWhy does labeling Sula as ‘evil’ create a stronger sense of community among the residents of the Bottom? Do you think they exaggerate her evil qualities in order to improve their own lives? -Ysabel
Yes. Yes, they do. However, the first part of the question suddenly becomes more interesting after reading what happened to the Bottom after Sula's death. What I think happened was that hating Sula gave them something in common, which they didn't have before. While having a common enemy didn't necessarily make them all friends, it did bring them together because not one person alone could stand up to evil. Especially interesting was how (ironically) it brought married couples closer together, because the wives would try to make their husbands more faithful as a precaution against her seductive (man-izing????*) tactics. (*Is there a female equivalent of womanizing?)Strangely, after Sula died, all of these people reverted right back to their old ways, suggesting that it really was Sula who provoked all these changes. I also think that this response was less of a collective battle against "evil" and more like people huddling together because they're afraid. Maybe (as an extremely traditional community) they're just so shocked by her immorality that they're scared by her.
Response to Alex T.’s question: Factoring in all of the tragedy that followed her childhood and all the trouble she has supposedly caused since her return, Sula has been criticized by the Bottom as some sort of witch character. Is the townspeople’s intolerance for Sula justified by her “passive evil” or is she only accused and blamed of inflicting death around the town as a result of her naughty behavior shunned life choices?
ReplyDeleteThe whole interpretation of “evil” varies throughout the novel. Sula should not be instantly be regarded as “evil” throughout the entire community. The community’s point of view of Sula is very dominant throughout the novel and shines a “negative” spotlight upon Sula. The township’s intolerance for Sula is not justified by labeling her as evil. Sula is being constantly reminded of the atrocities she is associated with notably Chicken Little’s death as well as Hannah’s death. She is seen to be a bystander witnessing all the tragic situations taking place. Sula is indeed accused and blamed with the associating of death due to her “naughty” behavior. Sula’s name and origin connects to peace. Sula does attempt to bring “peace” within the community rather than being seen as an “evil witch.” During Chicken Little’s funeral, Sula felt that Chicken Little can now have all the fun and laughter he wishes to have in the afterlife. In other words, Chicken Little does not have to endure all the suffering while he is alive. Additionally, the town of Bottom can be seen as “evil” rather than Sula. At the beginning of the novel, the what-could-be bright atmosphere of Bottom was shadowed by the return of soldiers from World War I. Notably Shadrack encouraged the National Suicide Day. The atmosphere of “evil” has casted over Bottom. It is ironic that the citizens of Bottom are labeling Sula as “evil” when rather a gloomy atmosphere has already moved in when the Great War ended and give labels to people. “Evil” is loosely interpreted throughout the novel such as when mentioned earlier Sula is trying to help Chicken Little end any sufferings he has by just simply witnessing drown. Sula only intended to help people live their life and just follow her own life (such as the moment when she moved out of the town). However, it is unfortunate that the label “evil” and its meaning has been stretched and been used upon Sula.
Question from Johann: Although Sula tends to stray away from conventional social expectations, her feelings toward Ajax shows otherwise. She too, wants to experience the security that her love with Ajax seems to offer. What is Morrison trying to say about the independence and role of females in society through Sula's experiences?
ReplyDeleteNot to correct Johann’s opinion towards Sula and Ajax’s relationship, but I personally think that Sula’s feelings toward Ajax lean less towards love and more towards possessiveness. I find that Sula doesn’t necessarily want to experience security, more as fulfill her need to completely ‘own’ another person. In Sula’s casual relations with various men, some may seek to further get to know her, but she pushes away due to her desire to remain autonomous. Perhaps her role in yearning for Ajax’s time and spirit is based off the common cliché that people usually want what they can’t have.
Overall, I think Morrison is trying to say that either one of two things—
1. Downplaying women: It’s the instinctive nature of women to need men in order to feel complete.
2. OR: Further liberating women: Sula represents the greater majority of women, and sets the example that women aren’t always the emotional and reliant ones that society brands them as.
An interesting thing I noticed in these last two chapters was pertaining to the theme of contrast between life being freedom or imprisonment. To me, Sula’s death was nothing like a tragedy to her because she didn’t put up a fight against death & welcomed it with open arms. When she died, she even “felt her face smiling” (Morrison 149), thinking of how easy it was to die. People tend to fear death throughout life even considering its inevitability, and seems to imprison people as they inch closer to death. Contrastingly, Sula was able to see it as a way to free oneself from life. Shadrack also saw death as a way to free oneself from the vice of life, and was seen “high up on the bank ringing, ringing his bell” (Morrison 162) after so many people of Medallion died destroying the tunnel they weren’t permitted to help build. It’s almost as if he was championing the fact that people finally followed him on his idea of National Suicide Day, even though they didn’t go into the march thinking it would lead to their deaths. The last few chapters of reading present life as imprisonment, especially in the scene where Nel visits Eva. Nel calls the elderly “old birds” and refers to their bedrooms as “sterile green cages” (Morrison 167), which connects to the ongoing motif of birds in this novel. The plague of robins that came with Sula when she came home from college could represent the freedom she has obtained as a woman getting an education. In a way, these elderly in the homes of Medallion have their freedom to die taken away, and are stuck in life like a bird in a birdcage. Nel was met with complete negativity and harshness from Eva when she met her at the home, signifying the bitter closing of Eva’s long life. Sula died fifteen years earlier, although three generations younger, with a much more confident and positive outlook on her past life. This contrast of life before death really shows how the persistence of life past personal enjoyment can feel more like imprisonment than freedom. A possible theme to go with these ideas of freedom and imprisonment could be: Although the threat of death inevitably looms over every person’s life, the capacity to accept it as simply another stage of life and a freeing of soul makes life more personally bearable.
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Forest: Why did Toni Morrison choose to bring up the color yellow again? First Jude leaves his tie with "scriggly yellow lines"(104) and immediately after that says she mentions Judes look reminding her of "when my mother turned to custard"(106). I also wondered why Morrison is choosing to use the color yellow to represent insecurity and internal pain?
ReplyDeleteBased off the meaning of colors commonly referred to in the novel: Blue, Green, and Yellow, I think its important to know the ‘meaning’ behind these colors in general.
Blue represents faithfulness and honesty, connecting to the lack of integrity between both Sula and Nel’s friendship, and Nel and Jude’s marriage. Blue also represents peace, hence ‘Sula Peace’.
Green represents equality and growth, while also connoting the meaning of independence and possessiveness. Perhaps this signifies both the free-spirit and domineering ways of Sula, and her need to expand her lifestyle past the stereotypical expectations of Bottom society.
And lastly, yellow. Yellow is the color of intelligence and optimism, but also the color of timidity and reproach. I think this color is a valid representation of Sula because of its mixed meaning. While Sula’s presence causes a great amount of criticism, in the end she generates unity between individuals in the Bottom.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteResponse to Ysabel’s question: Why does labeling Sula as ‘evil’ create a stronger sense of community among the residents of the Bottom? Do you think they exaggerate her evil qualities in order to improve their own lives?
ReplyDeleteLabeling Sula as “evil” caused greater attention to her and her unconventional ways. It was a way for the community to draw closer together and unite to go against an evil force, which in this case was Sula. What they did not realize at first however, was that Sula’s evil ways, and that attention that was focused on her, actually turned into a positive for the community’s people and their lives. Despite her being evil, she actually served as a way to balance the Bottom and make the Bottom be more of a collective whole. After her death, the Bottom believed that her death was a good thing for the community. They even believed that conditions improved after her passing; however they were blind to the fact that their community as a whole suffered a downfall as the Bottom transitioned from a collective whole to an isolated community. Sula’s evil opened the eyes and ears of the community, but unfortunately the people did not look and listen to the right things.
Response to question from Farah: What seems like a social flaw, turns out to a "peace" maker in a messed up neighborhood.In what ways does Sula, now being labeled as "evil", change the community positively, what does this prove about her character and her significance within the community, use Teapot's mother as an example to show the positive impact Sula has made and draw a connection to Toni Morrison's theme of evil.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Sula is perceived as evil by the townspeople, her existence can also be seen as beneficial to the Bottom and sympathetic for the reader. With Sula's decision to put Eva in a nursing home and to have an affair with Jude, she is criticized by the community. As people begin to blame all misfortunes on Sula and label her as "evil", they become more connected as a community. By connecting Sula's presence to unrelated events such as the "plague of robins", Mr.Finely's death by chocking when he sees Sula, and Teapot's fall from her porch, the community is able to come together and live more harmoniously with one another. After Teapot's accidental fall, his mother begins to care for him more due to her resentment towards Sula. Similarly, Sula's affairs with white men causes people to become more aware of their racial identity and pride. In addition to indirectly improving the welfare of the Bottom, her experience with Ajax also evokes a feeling of sympathy. Despite being so independent, Sula still feels the desire to possess her lover but Ajax doesn't feel the same way. Even though she condemns traditional social expectations, Sula finds herself at a loss when trying to find security of love. Through Morrison's portrayal of Sula's misfortunes, it conveys the idea that evil is essential in society and it creates a contrasting 'good' in people. It almost seems like the two opposing sides keep each other in balance and one cannot exist without the other.
Response to Ellis’s question: Should Sula's act of having sex with Jude be considered evil, or is Sula just acting by different social standards? Was it more of Jude's responsibility or Sula's to not betray Nel?
ReplyDeleteSula was brought up under circumstances different than many of the people of the Bottom. She was born into a family that already had a bad reputation and that didn’t comply with the social norms of society. Having a pretty much broken and “evil” family, Sula had nobody around her that could serve as a proper role model. Sula was unable to grow up with the proper morals and values that people carry to keep the humanity in their lives. Sula herself even told Nel in a conversation they had, that the actions she performed were just “something to do.” Sula’s act of having sex cannot be considered evil due to the fact that she believed it was only an action and she had no idea that it was a morally wrong thing to do. Sula’s standards are different than those around her, and her standards are why she acts in an unconventional manor compared to those in the Bottom. I believe that it was Jude’s responsibility to not betray Nel, because he was the one who was married, and he was the one who knew the responsibilities he held. Sula did not realize that what she did betrayed Nel. Another reason I say this is because Sula and Nel were seen as a part of each other. Together they made one, so Sula, thinking in the unconventional way she does, believed that it was not a problem to have sex with Jude. All in all, I believe that Sula’s act of having sex with Jude should not be considered evil due to the factors in her life that I mentioned above.
Response to Ellis’s question: Should Sula's act of having sex with Jude be considered evil, or is Sula just acting by different social standards? Was it more of Jude's responsibility or Sula's to not betray Nel?
ReplyDeleteI believe that Sula having sex with Jude shouldn't be considered evil despite how wrong it is that she slept with a married man and he's married to her own best friend. Sula didn't have an intention to hurt anyone in an emotional or physical way. She was being careless but that's the way she is naturally. It would be unfair for her to be blamed for being who she is and taking into consideration the influence her family had on her. Sula didn't even expect Nel to react so hurt and betrayed . In a sense she is just acting by different social standards but it's just that it's not very common among people, which is why she's deemed as such a horrid person. It's really hard to say who's responsibility it is more of to not betray Nel because one's her best friend and one's her husband. Sula and Nel were seen as one and the same. They were such close friends that grew up together and did so many things together up till the point where Nel got married. Jude's her husband. He's the man that Nel basically gave everything to. She gave her virginity to him, children , a home, and comfort. Both Sula and Jude had a obligation towards Nel and neither should've betrayed her but it's hard to tell which betrayal was worse.
Response to Monique's question: “Nobody knew my rose of the world but me… I had too much glory. They don’t want glory like that in nobody’s heart” –The Rose Tattoo
ReplyDeleteHow does Sula’s rose-shaped birthmark connect to the novel’s epigraph regarding the “Rose Tattoo?” Does the “glory” mentioned in the quote relate directly to define Sula’s pride and the Bottom’s conflicting reaction to her great sense of individualism? Or is “glory” seen in a much more negative connotation, where “glory” is known to be the inhibitor of evil?
I don’t really think that the epigraph at the beginning of the novel was intended to reflect Sula’s actual birthmark, but rather to reflect her life, personality, and actions in general. I believe that Sula is relevant to this quote in the same way that Hester Prynne from The Scarlet Letter could be. I do however think that the “glory” is meant to represent Sula’s pride and individualism... in the form of sex. To answer your question, just imagine the words of this quote coming out from Sula’s mouth (and likewise, Hester’s as well) as she says them out loud except replace the word glory for its analogy for her pride. In the novel, Sula went around town willy-nilly sleeping with several men and strangers and this was the main reason why the people of the Bottom despised her. Bear with me here, but if Sula was the one saying, “I had too much glory. They don’t want glory like that in nobody’s heart.” she would have meant that she had too much sex and fun but everyone else looked down upon her as a result. It’s quite simple really, sex = sin = evil, just like in the Scarlet Letter. I never really thought that Sula’s supposed witchcraft was a good enough reason to declare her as evil, but after revisiting the epigraph, things became clearer to me. Sula never afflicted any physical harm to the people of the Bottom (except maybe in bed she might have) because she was only ever accused under speculation, but there was never any evidence. There is however, solid evidence that Sula is a straight up sinner and as a result, she bears a passive evil within her but nevertheless, in the eyes of the Bottom she is still nothing more than a witch. Lust for having too much sex, and pride for taking joy in it but never feeling regret. So in conclusion, Morrison included this particular epigraph in the beginning of the novel in order to signify that Sula was a proud individual with her own way of life that faced ridicule from her community as a result of their morals and norms conflicting with her actions and beliefs.
Response to the question from Ellis: Should Sula's act of having sex with Jude be considered evil, or is Sula just acting by different social standards? Was it more of Jude's responsibility or Sula's to not betray Nel?
ReplyDeleteEllis, you bring up a very good point. Sula, I feel, definitely does live by completely different social standards than the rest of the people of the Bottom, and likely elsewhere as well. To respond to the first part, whether or not her act was considered evil. I ask that we first define evil, in order to more fully be able to answer this question. Yahoo's dictionary states that evil is defined as morally bad or wrong. By the rules of the society in which they live in, there is definitely a large contradiction of morals. To sleep with one's husband is considered very wrong, and this is shown by Nel's and everyone else's reactions to Sula's behavior. So, based off of this incident, all hands point towards the labeling of Sula as "evil." Now you bring up that Sula lives by different morals, which could explain why Sula believes that what she did was not evil; she simply doesn't see it as against the rules.
Now as far as who's responsibility it was to remain faithful to Nel more, I think it needs to pertain to Nel's viewpoint. We see in the very end of the novel, Nel states that she thought she, "was missing Jude," (Sula 174), when in reality she realizes that the loss of Sula in her life was far more disruptive for her. So, because of this, I think it was MORE of Sula's responsibility to stay loyal because of her closer relationship with Nel, but both Sula and Jude reserved no right to go behind Nel's back and cheat.
Maybe we should consider the cliche 'You don't know what you've got until it's gone.' It is very applicable, but also swayed by societal view. Nel's mourning for Sula was masked by the expectation for her to miss Jude. So perhaps a possible them might be:
One's desire can only be truly understand after disregarding the outside influence of media and society.
I feel silly. The text note should be (Morrison 174), not (Sula 174).
DeleteResponse to Ellis’s question: Should Sula's act of having sex with Jude be considered evil, or is Sula just acting by different social standards? Was it more of Jude's responsibility or Sula's to not betray Nel?
ReplyDeleteI think that Sula reflects the environment that she was brought up in. Her mother, Hannah, had multiple sexual partners, many of whom were married men. Even though she did that, Hannah was still praised around the town. Sula, doing the same thing she saw her mother do many years ago, probably doesn’t know any better. Sula grew up thinking that that was the norm and that it was okay to do so. As for who was more responsible, I think that Jude had more of a responsibility to not betray Nel. Jude, of course, was married to Nel. As a husband, it was his duty to remain faithful to Nel, yet he did not. When Nel asked Sula why she slept with Jude, Sula replied that Jude just “filled up the space” in her head (Morrison 144). To Sula, the act basically meant nothing to her, and obviously didn’t intend for anyone, especially Nel to be affected by it in any way. Although I do not believe that Sula was entirely innocent in this situation, I feel that her backwards standards make her less responsible than Jude.
Response to Angela’s question: In Sula, Nel and Sula are called "pig meat" (Morrison 50). Hannah is described as having many sexual relations with different men. Both of these things are not portrayed as anything negative. Traditionally, being cat called and sleeping around are viewed as "un-feminist." Why do these events, and similar events to this, empower the women instead of degrading them as they would in a more "traditional" society?
ReplyDeleteThroughout the novel, Morrison contradicts a lot of the traditional norms of society. Being called “pig meat” by other men gives both Sula and Nel power over men because they know that they are desired by them. It gives them the confidence that they need in order to get what they want. In Sula’s case, she takes advantage of her beauty and the power it gives her, and ends up taking whatever (or whoever) she wants. Although being sexually active with multiple partners usually generates a negative view on that person, it is evident with Hannah’s case that that is not so. Instead of being ridiculed by the entire town for her actions, she was actually admired and praised throughout the society. Even though Sula did end up getting despised by the town for her actions, Sula always knew that she still held enough power to obtain anything she desired.
Although death has been a very common event in the book so far, one could argue that Morrison was still able to present a different perspective about the specific aspect of life in the chapter, 1941. Death seemed to be especially prominent in the second to last chapter, mainly because it was so sudden and so ubiquitous. In reference to Shadrack’s most prevalent march, Morrison simply writes, “A lot of them died there”(Morrison 162), oddly giving the death an objectively detached tone. It is almost as if Morrison is sympathizing with the reader, marking the desensitized view towards death that many feel by the end of Sula. At the same time, however, one cannot help but wonder at the ironic impact of the mass death. The cave-in, while so full of chaos, imparts a profound feeling of some sad and twisted glory, most likely an effect of the last sentence in the chapter. 1941 ends with a depiction of Shadrack as he unthinkingly, “just stood there high up on the bank ringing, ringing his bell”(Morrison 162), thus compounding the tragedy with a sense of disbelief. Astoundingly, the cave-in actually complied with the mainstream concept of death, that it is a great and terrible condition of life, and something that can be traumatic, and not just a common part of life in the Bottom. The difference most likely lies in the cast that was killed; many of the notable characters and those closely associated to them expire in the accident. So saying, one really is left with nothing. There is no more story to tell without those worthy of being told of. In conclusion, in killing off the bulk of the remaining main cast, Morrison effectively creates the well-known finality of death that transcends any perspective one might take.
ReplyDeleteResponse to the question from Ysabel: Why does labeling Sula as ‘evil’ create a stronger sense of community among the residents of the Bottom? Do you think they exaggerate her evil qualities in order to improve their own lives?
ReplyDeleteI have to say, you bring up a very interesting point in that targeting one victim solidifies the community's bond. We can connect this to so many things, but one I'd like to point out quickly is an example from outside the novel. In general, when the US finds a country to hate and fight, as a result American citizens in the US start cultivating a sense of nationalism not necessarily for the US, but against the opposing country. I think this is very similar; they all want something in common, even if it is to hate someone. We know for sure that people felt extremely resentful towards Sula, considering her death was the, "best news folks had," (Morrison 150), and for a long period of time at that. This only further proves that her downfall equated to the upbringing of their society.
In relation to exaggerating her evil qualities, I'm not sure. The actions of Sula truly contradict societal views, so perhaps that alone is enough to shock the town into branding her as evil. I'm not totally sure what her "evil qualities" would be, potentially they could be sleeping with many men or being very insensitive towards death. Still, I have to say I have found no point where there has been exaggeration, but I would like to peruse more to perhaps correct myself here. That is not to say that they don't use Sula to make their lives seem better; it's a simple case of good by comparison.
I'm thinking of a potential theme along the lines of:
Evil exists in all societies and exists to unite the people against a specific target, therefore strengthening their community bond.
Response to Ellis’s question: Should Sula's act of having sex with Jude be considered evil, or is Sula just acting by different social standards? Was it more of Jude's responsibility or Sula's to not betray Nel?
ReplyDeleteAlthough Sula never felt obligated to anyone besides her own fancy, it was more of her responsibility to not betray Nel. This is because while Jude was Nel's husband, the marriage was more for convenience on both sides that it was for any real feelings. Nel herself realizes at the end that, "' All that time, all that time I thought I was missing Jude"(Morrison 174), revealing that Sula was more important to her than her marriage with Jude. One could also argue that because they were such close friends and because Sula had a talent for getting what she wanted, that Sula could have just as easily brought Nel along with her, as opposed to leaving her behind for ten years. In conclusion, Sula in fact was more responsible for Nel than Jude ever was because of the her shortcomings as a friend to Nel later on in life.
In the end of the book it is interesting to note the significance of Shadrack's name and put it in relation to his actions in the book. His name is take from one of the men who went into the fire with Daniel and came out unscathed as well as acquiring some sort of enlightenment. One can view the fire as World War 1 and his unique view on death his form of enlightenment. Now it is hard to draw parallels between the biblical and Morrison's Shadrack since the biblical Shadrack is rarely mentioned after the incident with the fire, but it is safe to assume that the biblical Shadrack began to spread his faith to others, which would make him an outcast. Morrison's Shadrack however spreads the idea of National Suicide Day, a day in which everyone has the chance to deal with the notion of death to put it out of the way and have a free year. This can be related to one of the themes of the book, which puts into question what is freedom, because it deals with the idea of relieving one's self of a certain burden in order to be free, like how Sula refuses to burden herself with the societal expectation of her getting married to a man, since in the book marriage is related to death, when Eva recalls that, "weddings always meant death" (78), through her habit of her choose who she has sex with.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Farrah's Question:" What seems like a social flaw, turns out to a "peace" maker in a messed up neighborhood.In what ways does Sula, now being labeled as "evil", change the community positively, what does this prove about her character and her significance within the community, use Teapot's mother as an example to show the positive impact Sula has made and draw a connection to Toni Morrison's theme of evil."
ReplyDeleteSula can be seen as a scapegoat for the community's problems. When seen this way one can infer that one of Morrison's theme could be that an external evil is the greatest uniting factor in a community. Meaning that in this situation Sula's adulterous and other "evil" acts are literally a necessary evil in order to for the community to improve themselves. Her need can be seen after her death, one example of this can be seen in Teapot's mother in which she, "beat him as she had not done since Sula knocked him down the steps" (153). This shows that Sula's role n the community is simply the uniting factor, a common enemy for the community to protect against. So with out such a threat the community would fall apart, emphasizing her important role in the town.
At the end of the book, Nel has a conversation with Eva where Eva accuses Nel of drowning Chicken Little. Nel tries to convince Eva (and herself) that it was Sula that did it. Nel begins to discover the evil that was inside her all along. How are Nel and Sula more similar than originally thought, and how does Nel's realization of evil connect to the other evils throughout the book?
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Ellis: Throughout Sula, Morrison has altered certain ideas to become the opposite of their perceived roles in society. Women and men, fire and water, good and evil, top and bottom, etc. all behave or fill roles stereotypically. How does the altering of common ideas to add meaning to the book? Use examples of the opposing forces within the book to come up with a theme.
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Kylan: In the original Biblical tale, Shadrack was led into a furnace because he worshiped a god that was forbidden, but he didn't burn because of his devotion to his god. The Shadrack in Sula, long after his experience with the furnace, led a large number of people into a tunnel that they had been forbidden from working on. The tunnel collapsed and they all died. What themes about devotion to gods (or the lack thereof) or the proverbial furnace can be drawn from this and how do they relate to the original tale? (Other themes are possible too.)
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Angela: In Sula the manipulation of gender roles is present throughout the whole novel. One of the themes of the novel that I see is that when people are let out of their traditional gender roles, they can accomplish so much more than what they were allowed to accomplish before. Do you agree with this? Why or why not? Is there another theme you see about gender roles?
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Robin: Explain the symbolism of National Suicide Day. What important theme does Shadrack represent?
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Johann: If the community of the Bottom needed Sula's unconventional way of living to balance out their orderly lives, what might Morrison be trying to say about the two lifestyles? What is the significance of using women to portray these two different beliefs?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Alex Tam: Sula was always denounced and ridiculed as a witch that brought nothing but disaster and misfortune wherever she went, but when she finally died, the people of the Bottom rejoiced at her death for being the sign of a good omen. However, her death was ensued by a devastating wave of frost that split the Bottom into parts and eventually, the community itself was also split into isolation as a result of many things. In real life, your town won’t be cursed after the death of an outcast, but Morrison did include this for some sort of significance. So my question is: “Using Sula as an example, what can one learn from another person’s mishaps and misfortunes in life and society’s cruel response to that person’s offbeat but harmless actions.” Please answer this in the form of a theme.
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Taylor: Race is an important theme in Sula, even when it sits out of the spotlight during some other extreme events. The blacks in Medallion suffer greatly due to the social and economic conditions blacks are thrust into in the white dominated South. In what ways are the evil habits of Sula inevitable, destined to be her behavior from the environment she grows up in? How can these publicly denounced habits illustrate Morrison’s idea that when humans suffer, they will label people within their own community as the sources of widespread pain and despair, even when the true causes are far outside any of the community’s inhabitants control?
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Jane: How does this book potray the theme that people crave the feeling of being loved by someone else?
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Kayla: It seemed to me that race is brought up much more in the final chapter of Sula than in the book in its entirety. What overall themes can be made for Sula in regards to race? Keep in mind how the whites eventually moved up into the Bottom, and how whites were the ones who dealt with burying Sula and attending her funeral white the blacks stayed back.
ReplyDeleteQuestion from Kyle: Even though I have read the book in its entirety, I am still very unsure about how Shadrack's interactions with Sula and how he treats her differently affect the theme of the book. Not only that but Shadrack's National Suicide day and the tunnel incident seem very important, but their how they contribute to the theme of the book to me seems muddled under the importance of Sula's and Nel's contribution to the theme.
ReplyDelete