Friday, July 10, 2009

Response to Skunk Dreams

I thought that Skunk Dreams was a lot different from Talk of the Town. Talk of the Town was more of an opinion piece, whereas Skunk Dreams was more of a story or collection of events. I liked the part about the skunk, though I’m not sure if she was telling something that truly happened or if the skunk was symbolic for something else. Actually, I have that question for the entire piece. Is it factual or figurative? It could be that different parts of it are each, or maybe the whole thing is both. In any case, this essay really gave me something to think about.

I found Louise Erdrich’s voice to be contemplative, although extremely negative at times. When she talks about the West and how it isn’t wild anymore, she is cynical at best. Personally, I’d rather read something a bit more positive, but she does make some good points about how America has changed and isn’t like it was. We do use lots of pesticides and yes, occasionally unmowed ditches are treated like environmental areas. I’m not saying these are good things, but they are true at times. Still, I think that it would’ve been better for her to either make her criticism constructive, or not criticize at all.

A better part of her voice was that she was very descriptive. I loved the passage, “Rock walls ran everywhere, grown through and tumbled, as if the dead still had claims they imposed.” It seemed like everything she said placed a picture in my mind. It made her essay easier to follow and it was easier to remember what had already happened.

I liked her musings about dreams. Are they real? Can you be in another’s mind? I believe the first is true, at least in your mind, but I don’t really believe the latter. On the other hand, it is strange that she had a dream and then found the place she had dreamt about. I love the way she told how she found the fence from her dream. I was hit first by confusion, then realization dawned.

That brings me to my next point, about the fenced in animals. Erdrich made a very insightful observation when she said, “Animals, much like most humans, don’t charge through fences unless they have sound reasons.” I enjoyed that part and agree with it. Most people just want to get along and not make a big deal about something small. Still, when they have solid grounds, they’re quite willing to charge through that fence.

I also agreed with something else about the animals. She said, “Shooting animals inside fences, no matter how big the area they have to hide in, seems abominable and silly.” I completely agree. It’s cruel to import animals and keep them enclosed, only to have people come in and shoot them. I don’t know much about hunting and I understand that it’s necessary in some cases, but I don’t really care for it at all. I especially don’t like it when the animals have a limited area to run and the people are hunting just because they think it’s fun. Killing animals should not be fun. I know it is to some people but it’s not to me.

I think Louise Erdrich’s essay was mostly very well written, even if I didn’t like parts of it so much. She had plenty of good ideas and a lot of good insights, although occasionally they weren’t presented in the best light.

2 comments:

  1. Just to share my opinion on your first thoughts about whether this piece was factual or figurative, I think that it was both like you suggested. The way it was written makes me believe that those events really did happen, but I also think that Erdrich has a deep mind and worked some symbolism into the piece.

    ReplyDelete
  2. In regards to the fact vs. figure, I too agree that it is both.
    Unfortunately, I feel like she did a poor job of playing up either side enough to draw anything from it. It seems like the skunk and the other parts are completely seperate from each other. There are common themes among them but they don't relate very well.

    ReplyDelete