200-400 words.
In Jamie McCulloch’s “Creating the Rogue Hero: Literary Devices
in the Picaresque Novels of Martin Amis, Richard Russo, Michael Chabon,
Jonathan Safran Foer, and Steve Tesich” (International
Fiction Review, Vol. 34, No. 1, 2007), McCulloch writes:
It's
not just because picaresque heroes are more fun than other characters that I
love them. It's not just the dissolute behavior that I find so appealing. And
it's not just the dubious company they keep or the adventures they embark upon
that I find so satisfying. All of these things make for a pretty good story.
But what makes them really worthwhile is the romantic sense of sadness and
futility that haunts them all—their honest recognition of their own
shortcomings that gives them emotional weight and makes them resonate.
Disappointingly, like young Hal in Henry IV, Part I, who eventually
deserts Falstaff, all rogue heroes must grow up and assume a certain amount of
responsibility. Often they settle down, give up their aimless wandering, and
find a home. Unfortunately, settling down can mean letting go of "the
impossible dream." We wish their peregrinations would never end, and so by
nature the picaresque novel, whose trappings are ribald excess, is also fraught
with a deep sense of loss and sorrow. We must not forget, however, that what
makes the picaresque so much fun are the comic possibilities of an errant hero
in pursuit of something impossible. He is at once noble and pathetic, a delight
to spend time with and to laugh at, and heroic in his blindness to the humbling
reality that confronts him wherever he goes.
[…]
A
more scholarly approach to balancing the serious and the humorous in the
picaresque is to mock the early romances just as Cervantes set out to do. The
romance tradition is ripe for parody as are those who pursue "the
impossible dream." In Russo's Straight
Man, Hank has a not-so-subtle Cervantes-esque dream: "In my dream I am
the star of the donkey basketball game. I have never been more light and
graceful, never less encumbered by gravity or age. My shots, every one of them,
leave my fingertips with perfect backspin and arc toward the hoop with a
precision that is pure poetry, its refrain the sweet ripping of twine. And
remember: I'm doing all this on a donkey" (364). Metaphorically shooting
from his ass, Devereaux is weightless, ageless. The image is steeped in the
mock heroic, an English professor as warrior is comic enough in itself—a man
like the man of La Mancha riding a donkey while competing in a sports event is
wonderfully absurd. At the same time, the dream is sadly romantic in the same
sense that Don Quixote is a sadly romantic man—a man who sees the world as he
chooses, not as it is.
Analyze Hank as a Picaresque
(lovable rogue) character. Does Russo present Hank as a man in quest, a man
whose quest is stalled, or is something else at work here? Could the mid-life
crisis Hank and many of his colleagues are undergoing be a postmodern quest in
and of itself? Is Hank Quixotic, and if so, what are the windmills he’s chasing?
If there’s no quest, is it Picaresque (side note: I really did not intend for
that to sound like a Johnny Cochrane courtroom rhyme, but here we are…)? Have I
asked too many questions? Why are you still reading? Out of a morbid curiosity
to see how this prompt ends? Something else?
To me, Hank does not seem to have a main “quest” in his life at the current time. There is much comparison between Hank and Not Sidney, for both individuals do not appear to have a main goal they wish to achieve, they simply go where the wind blows them, pulled where the tides push them, etc. I personally do not see Hank as quixotic; however his most quixotic moment so far would be the infamous threat of demonstrating the demolishing of a duck every day until his budget is met. This is quixotic due to the fact Hank knows the department can only be momentarily embarrassed, and will not negotiate to such an odd hostage situation such as this. However, this spectacle did land Hank his five minutes of fame on the Good Morning America show, so perhaps that in itself was ideal. Hank’s mid-life crisis can be debated as a quest in his own. He is constantly telling the reader of his urination problem, his inability to do the things he once was able to do, and how the youth take the privilege to pee for granted. But there is no doubt that Russo defines him in great detail to be this lovable rouge character. Hank is presented with situations that would usually crush a man’s [or woman’s (thanks Orshee)] spirit, but he is able to bounce back from these scenarios with some sort of joke, be it fake glasses and nose or handing a man a dripping peach instead of shaking his hand had me, personally, laughing a little too loud at the situations he either escapes from or enters himself into. His main goal in this novel seems to be simply survive, and continue his modern life.
ReplyDeleteRita Inamdar
ReplyDeleteHank is a lovable rogue character. For example, some may think that strangling a duck a day is a weird way to bring attention to an unrelated topic. He uses humor to make light of bad situations. He is constantly making rude yet humorous remarks about his colleagues. For this reason, Hank is a character that readers love to hate, and therefore is a lovable rouge character. I also believe that Hank is in a stalled quest. His marriage to wife Lilly is not ending, but is not exciting either. At the same time Hank himself is neither happy nor depressed throughout the novel. Hanks career isn’t exactly satisfying or great, but he is a college professor with a prestigious title. It seems his mid-life crisis has brought him to the cross roads of his life. Now that he is realizing that his life is half over, he is seeing all these things that are making him unhappy in his life and can either decide to change them and go along with his quest, or continue to live his mediocre life. Hank can be considered quixotic, and his windmills are his need to:
1) be better than his father
2) have romance in his life with only his wife Lilly
3) be more satisfied in his work life.
Hank’s academic success consists of one novel and twenty years of teaching at a small college that does not demand much of professors. He has troublesome interactions with his co-workers, mainly because he is unable to stop a train wreck when he sees it, or he just does not care. He does not take big issue with the budget because he thinks it will blow over like it always does, and he mocks his co-workers who are concerned. The only interest he shows in the budget is through a joke about killing ducks that is aired on the news, but this is not genuine. Hank uses his sense of humor as a way for him to avoid realities, but through the narrative, the reader can see that hank does care, even if he has no way of changing things. He expresses disappointment that his daughter is not successful or educated, and he constantly envisions his wife having an affair with other men because he knows his marriage is not great. Whatever quest Hank might have been on following his book is stagnant now. Hank is stuck in his world of normalcy and complacency while everyone else is looking for a way out. His wife goes out of town to look for a job, as well as a few other professors. What I find interesting is that Hank desperately wants action, but he wants it to stay with his realm. He does not want to go and get a new, better job, or move to a more exciting place, he want to stir up the place he exists. When his car slips down the hill and lands safely, he is disappointed because he wanted something more. This is why he gets hit in the face by Gracie and why he does not bite his tongue when he should. He finds excitement in the little things, ticking everyone off in the process. James Raff
ReplyDeleteThis analysis from John Hedemen is quite an analysis to say the least. In his analysis he points out that there is a staggering difference from the "way things were back then and now"; it admits that there truly are variations of how people, such as professors and students, were once viewed from the 1960s to the 1980s. It’s interesting to know that there is a "shift" at all because it seems as though we shouldn’t want to accept that things could change so drastically over the course of 20 years, and what a shame that there should be a shift. However, I do agree with this assessment stating that campus novels once portrayed professors as respectable beings rather than, now, as empty-minded flukes. Clearly the way our world works, how instant communication works, how every body is in everybody's business has a lot to do with this "shift". Maybe there's a shift from positive to negative depictions because people now a days talk about things that couldn’t be talked about then. We are human and I’m sure these depictions were sought of back then, but were not expressed. Now or as late as the 1980s, it is so acceptable or even encouraged to state your opinion, good or bad, about someone. So in these campus novels, portrayed in present time, we are hearing the truth of what is going on in college campuses, rather than a sugarcoated version of what we think is going on. Surely back then they had these same thoughts of the unhappy, empty-minded professors, surely these professors back then were as pretentious as they are now (ha-ha) and surely these authors were as funny as they are now, but it just wasn’t acceptable to tell the public of this truth. Perhaps it was not “okay” to tell the public that their professor was sleeping around or getting “drunk” every night. I don't know for certain, but that is my guess. I think these depictions are realistic fictions, satiric send-ups and something else at work. Today we have all these comedic peoples that say so much bullcrap. We’ve got a whole show (Comedy Central) dedicated to poking fun at people of all kinds. It only makes sense that novels written during this present time would do the same, would state the obvious. It never mentions that these people are unintelligent; it only conveys the real characteristic of these people, for what they really are and how they really feel, the same goes for the students.
ReplyDeleteOh shot! ... this was suppose to go on the other "blog" prompt.. sorry...
Deleteshoot*****
DeleteIn Russo’s novel it does not directly say what the quest Hank is on. We know he is a fifty year old man who still acts somewhat like a boy. In this sense he uses his humor to ask serious questions and have serious confrontations. His wife Lily even points out that Hank can’t really take a serious matter seriously. This is what draws the reader to Hank. We know that he has wrote his one and only book a while back and since has been appointed chair of the English department because no one expected him to do anything. This speaks loudly for what Hank’s colleagues think of him. It’s quite possible that Hanks “midlife crisis” is his journey. His relationships with his daughters, his friends, his wife, and his parents all shape Hank to become that character that he is. I believe Hank is happy where he is in his life but he seeks some sort of excitement. This is shown through his flirting with some of his coworkers, his bickering with Gracie, and his descriptions of sexual innuendos with his wife. He seems to always have a way of taking the seriousness out of these scenarios by making a joke. This makes the reader believe that Hank really isn’t looking for anything else and only wishes to stay right where he is, like he tells Jacob (the dean) at lunch.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I like hank. He’s a man of intelligence and a man of quest. He's a simple middle-aged man, very much like those around him, except different because he'd rather take life with a grain of salt then dwell, he's what we call a wise guy. Russo definitely presents Hank as a picaresque (lovable rogue) character so that the readers can have someone to relate to. From reading thus far in the book it is easy to say that Hank is a very applicable character. His recognition of his own shortcomings and his sense of sadness make it easy for the readers to relate to him, we all have shortcomings and sadness. Perhaps we are all picaresque beings.
ReplyDeleteI think Hank is a man that is on a quest for something, but for what? We don't know yet. He doesn't seem to be a very serious guy that would eat fire ants just to achieve his goal, but he does seem to have goals. For instance, his constant insulting of the other people around his makes it seem that he can do better than them or that he would want to achieve more than them. He is portrayed as someone who has gone through incidences in his life, just like everyone else, unfortunately he's 50 years old and he's now realizing maybe some of the things in his past could have been done differently, hence the mid-life crisis. It seems he's terribly agitated by his daughter and he’s unsettled with his thoughts of being with other women. His mid-life crisis could be a postmodern quest in and of itself or it could just be a mid-life crisis. As for thinking Hank is a quixotic character, no, hank is not anymore "quixotic" than you or I. He doesn’t seem to be very expressive and creative in his ideas to make him very quixotic.
By definition, a picaresque character is a roguish hero of low social class who lives by his wits in a corrupt society. In the novel Straight Man, protagonist Hank is the lovable and charming chair of a comically dysfunctional English department at a small, little-known Pennsylvania college. That said, Hank is not a picaresque character. While his antics are endearing, this is more the story of an academic realizing his lost potential and lamenting his uneventful life. He is an amused, detached kind of guy, irritating most of the characters to a greater or lesser degree, including his fellow colleagues, his wife Lily, and his daughters. Like Not Sidney’s struggles in the novel I Am Not Sidney Poitier, Hank does not truly fit in anywhere and sees no reason too. Instead he wanders aimlessly throughout the novel until inevitable change forces him to react.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe Hank is on a quest either. He has come to the realization that his life had hit climax years ago and since plateaued. Instead, his story is much like Not Sidney’s. Both Hank and Not Sidney’s stories are simply narratives on humorous events in their lives. Both characters fall into their predicaments without any serious premeditation, rather going with the flow.
Hank has a lot of shortcomings and unfulfilled desires which lead him to be the person he is. The only thing he has really accomplished is writing one book twenty years ago, and that was only done with the help of his literary superstar of a father. Since then, he hasn't written anything, besides a few op-eds to the local newspaper, and is pretty much okay with this. Hank is stuck in a rut now. He has a good job and tenure, however he is not challenged by his colleagues, students or the environment to try and be a better writer and professor. In his personal life, Hank loves his wife, but can't stop think of her and him both involved with other people. Hank is definitely going through a mid-life crises, but I don't know if you could say his quest is stalled because he doesn't seem like he ever really had a quest. It isn't as if he has continually tried or failed at writing again or getting out of Railton. He wrote his book and got his job and hasn't done much else sense then. I believe Hank to be a picaresque character, but unlike some of the others we have read about, Hank has very little that just happens to him. On the other hand, he seems to put himself in terrible situations, knowing they are going to end badly, just to mess with people.
ReplyDeleteOlivia Broderick
Hank is a man in search of ‘the impossible dream.” His dream, not so subtly, is to make life as simple as possible. He is constantly giving credit to William of Occam (the idea with the least assumptions is most often the correct one) throughout the entirety of the story, mainly while discussing his logic and reasoning. This quest has cost him the love of his wife, the admiration of his daughter, the approval of his mother, the friendship of his colleagues, and so on. He is unable to approach the complexity that is human emotion with such a simple approach to the world. His reduction of his neighbor’s actions and opinions into a joke leaves them rightfully offended. Hank sees the world as he chooses, humorously, dodging the serious issues of life. As is mother so elegantly put, “Humor is a poor substitute for accuracy and a poorer proxy for truth.” This avoidance is his great tragedy, his heroic flaw, which I think he is in full awareness of. He either cannot change his disposition, or he chooses not to. This makes Hank a picaresque character, a hopeless romantic. And, to conclude, I have no idea why I continued to read the prop, but I couldn’t help myself. I have a unquenchable compulsion to finish props
ReplyDeleteI do think that Russo portrays Hank as a lovable rogue character. He does not take the current problem in his life seriously, even though they very well are. Being a professor with his job in jeopardy due to budget cuts would normally put a person on edge, but Hank simply mocks the whole scenario, and treats it more as a meaningless rumor that happens every April. I think all his problems and the way he handles problems makes him very relatable to the reader, because everyone at some point has been unhappy with a part of their lives, and many have avoided serious problems by thinking of it as a joke and unimportant. In the novel, Hank is having to deal with the problems of his current life and those of his past, which is proving very overwhelming for him. I think that with all of this coming about at once, he slips into a sort of “mid-life crisis” where he finally starts to realize that there are things he could have done differently in his past and that, to his surprise, he is not very happy with the path he has chosen in life. I think Hank is on a stalled quest in this novel and it is to overcome his mid-life crisis and face the problems he so longed to avoid. I believe it is stalled because Hanks is unhappy about his current life, but he is also the only one who is completely unaware of this. Realizing he is unhappy and working to fix this problem is Hank’s unsaid quest.
ReplyDelete