|
|
Post by jarelyrebollar on Jun 15, 2024 15:23:40 GMT
Lannie is similar to Mike. Like him, she's rootless, cut off from her past by the cloudiness of her mind. Like Mike, she recounts visions in which fantasy is often confused with memories; however, unlike him, she finds it unnecessary to distinguish between the two and is willing to live in her world rather than attempt to connect it with reality.
Her loyalties within the boarding house take an antithetical position to Mike's. While Mike has rejected the sexuality of Guinevere, she embraces it; moreover, when Mike grows to disdain Hollingsworth and respect McLeod, she aids Hollingsworth in persecuting McLeod.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Nemmers on Jun 16, 2024 16:56:25 GMT
Good, Jarely! I think these two characters are certainly caught in the middle between Hollingsworth and MacLeod; and we can see them moving between and trying to determine where their allegiances are. And, the deeper we read the more we see Hollingsworth as the embodiment of true-blue USA, and McLeod as some sort of non-American/ un-American presence that espouses socialist/ communist ideologies.
Which way will Mike and Lannie wind up going? I suppose we could put Guinevere in this group as well?
To some extent this is a battle of wills in an allegorical struggle...
|
|
|
|
Post by dianarmartinez on Jun 16, 2024 23:17:33 GMT
I agree with the similarities between these two characters. I found it interesting that the writer decided to add a different perspective. I wonder why the writer wanted to add a character like this. I also think her not really making the effort to connect reality and her memories is just a way of numbing yourself from going crazy. If one doesn't really know what is real and what is not real, it can make one go insane. I think this goes back to how people often say that we are living in someone's world rather than ours.
|
|
|
|
Post by jarelyrebollar on Jun 18, 2024 14:19:59 GMT
Good, Jarely! I think these two characters are certainly caught in the middle between Hollingsworth and MacLeod; and we can see them moving between and trying to determine where their allegiances are. And, the deeper we read the more we see Hollingsworth as the embodiment of true-blue USA, and McLeod as some sort of non-American/ un-American presence that espouses socialist/ communist ideologies. Which way will Mike and Lannie wind up going? I suppose we could put Guinevere in this group as well? To some extent this is a battle of wills in an allegorical struggle... Guinevere’s potential inclusion in this group adds another layer of complexity. Her actions and decisions also reflect the broader societal and ideological conflicts, contributing to the symbolic struggle you mentioned. As the characters grapple with their positions, their choices are a microcosm of the larger existential and political themes Norman Mailer explores. Ultimately, the fate of Mike, Lannie, and Guinevere hinges on their perceptions of freedom, loyalty, and morality on this ideological battleground. Mailer uses their internal and external conflicts to examine the broader existential questions facing America during the post-war era. As a result, Barbary Shore's allegorical struggle is a profound commentary on the quest for identity and purpose in a world that's rapidly changing. |
|
|
|
Post by meagangcurrie on Jun 20, 2024 0:36:20 GMT
They are similar but contrasting all at once I suppose. To be honest I do not understand Lannie still. Her character is still a mystery me. She was aloof and Lovett more connected to reality as you said. What point was the author trying to make with her character? Was it to show that contrast between living in reality rather than fantasy? It’s complex.
|
|
