Nobel Lecture
zjohnson2692 on October 2nd 2008, 11:53 amI thought it was an interesting metaphor, and I think I got it, though it might've been a bit of a leap. Morrison is talking about language, and how it is necessary to have different kinds of language, because language is a reflection of culture, and if, say, a nation bans a language, it's like banning an entire culture. She also emphasizes the importance of knowing how much you need language, and what you need it for. I guess that some parts of the speech were confusing, and there were perhaps some references I didn't get, but if it's possible to look at the speech as a whole, without getting caught up on certain, more bewildering and detatched, sections, one can begin to really see what she's saying about the necessity of preserving language.
Zoe Johnson
Zoe Johnson
and William Keller posted this:
Re: Lecture: Toni Morrison, Nobel
WKeller on October 2nd 2008, 11:55 amMorrison's use of the bird being comparedto language is similar to Shordinger's cat. The Bird can be though of as alive and dead at the same time. The same can be said for language. There are the writers who can't kill language, they only sap engery from it, weakening the power of it. It is times like these when spoken and written word become less powerful than one's actions. You can't always take someone's word for something, because it has no meaning anymore.
However, there are the writers who have such a powerful command over language they begin to revive it. In periods such as the Enlightenment, people began to believe what was spoken, what was written, because it gained meaning, it had power.
Langauge is like the cat in the box. We don't know if its alive. We don't know if its dead. The only way to tell is open the box. These writers, who are thinking outside of the box keep literature alive, those who think inside drain it. At the same time language is both alive and dead. It depends on where in the spectrum you're standing.
The bird is used as a symbol. The bird means life, when at the same time it means death. If the bird is alive, then it is alive, but it can still be killed, just like Schrodinger's cat. If the bird is dead, then it was either found that way, or it was killed.
However, there are the writers who have such a powerful command over language they begin to revive it. In periods such as the Enlightenment, people began to believe what was spoken, what was written, because it gained meaning, it had power.
Langauge is like the cat in the box. We don't know if its alive. We don't know if its dead. The only way to tell is open the box. These writers, who are thinking outside of the box keep literature alive, those who think inside drain it. At the same time language is both alive and dead. It depends on where in the spectrum you're standing.
The bird is used as a symbol. The bird means life, when at the same time it means death. If the bird is alive, then it is alive, but it can still be killed, just like Schrodinger's cat. If the bird is dead, then it was either found that way, or it was killed.
Would you agree? What parallels are there to American literary language and the place in it for African-Americans?
I pretty much agree with both Willie and Zoe. I think that, although I wasn't really crystal clear on some of what Morrison wrote, her underlying, main meaning was conveyed very clearly. Through the convoluted message of the bird, Morrison wanted to show how despite blindness, or poverty, or any other ailment that one may be afflicted with, the power of language is all encompassing, and that it can resound clearly to all when handled properly. Morrison is proving, in her speech, her mastery of language, and how she has been able to create beautiful literature based on the fact that she understands language, words; she reveres them.
ReplyDelete