Hope everyone enjoyed their long weekend. Be sure to check out the First Year Resources section of this blog for information on buying your textbooks and links to information on orientation.
Last week Professor Toni Serafini looked at The Glass Castle through a Sexuality, Marriage and Family Studies lens. Another subject taught here at SJU is English. This week’s post comes to us from Professor Chad Wriglesworth in the SJU English dept. In your comments this week let us know what you think of Professor Wriglesworth’s glass house / maze analogy or the other points of his blog. Secondly, is there anything we can take from this and apply to first year? Here is Professor Wriglesworth,
Hello everyone! I teach courses in twentieth-century American literature and criticism in the English Department at SJU. I have a particular interest in relationships between contemporary American literature, environmental studies, and religious thought. I look forward to meeting many of you during orientation week and throughout the academic year.
As I was reading this section of The Glass Castle, I started thinking about Jeannette Walls as both writer and narrator of the memoir. When it comes to matters of genre, non-fiction tends to get equated with truth or fact . . . which is fine. But keep in mind that each time we open The Glass Castle, we are also stepping into a glass house of sorts, a narrative maze where things can appear clear, only to quickly become opaque, mirage-like, and disorienting. As author and narrator, Walls guides us through snapshots of her life with a certain degree of authority. However, just remember that she is also calling the artistic shots. She wants us to see and believe particular things, even as she uses language to keep certain memories and people in states of ambiguity. Even the structure of the book keeps us in the glass house. We are tossed from event to event, following Jeannette as she moves from car to car, town to town, home to home, school to school. On the surface, it all seems clear and direct, but like looking through a car window while on the freeway, it is almost impossible to see clearly enough to make reliable judgements about anything or anyone in this story. Have you thought about ways Walls (as writer) is steering your thoughts about certain people, places, or events? I’ll give you an example of what I mean.
When the family pulls into Welch there is a new villain on the scene (named Erma — and I’m sure you will have much to say about her) and we grow increasingly dependent on Jeannette to tell us the truth about what is happening. But does she? I would say, yes and no. Now don’t get me wrong, Erma is an absolutely vile character. She is physically and emotionally abusive, exceedingly selfish, a racist, and apparently a pedophile — not a résumé to gain sympathy from any reader. But the very presence of Erma in the memoir suddenly makes the Walls’ parents seem less threatening — perhaps even dangerously so. While Erma is outspoken and foul, Rex and Rose remain full of idealistic platitudes about right living. But remember . . . we are in the glass castle here. Rose teaches us to respect diversity and creativity in all forms, but she also wants us to “giggle” about living in a car, to show compassion to Hitler because he “loved dogs,” to be “polite” to pedophiles, and to offer quick forgiveness to “sugar addicts” who let their children freeze and starve for a bite of chocolate. As parents, Rex and Rose have taught their children some important lessons about resilience — and Jeannette wants us to see this — but as the writer she is also ambitious to shroud and protect her parents’ dignity. Which is fine . . . they are her parents after all. Still, I suspect this storied game of smoke and mirrors is also part of growing up in the glass castle, where she says, certain things must be “put . . . out of my mind.”
If you take a course in the English Department (and you should), you will discover that your professors have particular preoccupations and research interests. When these topics surface in the readings, they will steer your toward them — like Jeannette Walls — and may even want to “profess” something about the issue. In my case, I have an interest in the role place plays in stories, more specifically, rivers (I know, that might seem odd). So, when the family pulled into Welch and Jeannette “got out of the car to admire the river that ran through the town,” I was hooked. The Tug River, like any river, is far more than setting or backdrop. The Tug tells us a lot about Welch and the lives of the people who live there. We are told by Rex that “the Tug . . . had the highest level of fecal bacteria on any river in North America.” Jeannette then asks, “What’s fecal?” And her father simply responds, “Shit.” Here, I would say, Rex speaks a truth beyond the obvious. For years Welch, the county seat of McDowell County, had more coal mined out of it “than any comparable spot in the world.” Yet, there are no signs of prosperity. Many families, like the Walls, cannot even afford to heat their homes with coal, the local resource that has now made someone else rich. It seems that Welch, like the river running through it, is an out-of-sight-out-of-mind wasteland where resources are extracted, workers are exploited, and the residents are left to cobble together a meager existence in conditions of socio-economic excrement. And let’s not be naïve. There are places like this all over the world — and close by — we just don’t hear about them. That is . . . until someone writes a story . . . and we listen. Well, I better go. I’m starting to sound as crazy as Rex Walls.
Welcome to the SJU community – where unlike Welch — the creek running through campus is clean and the classrooms are heated! Seriously, at some point during your stay be sure to take a course in the English Department. I suggest trying one of the many 100 level courses such as: The Rebel, Poetry, The Superhero, Women in Literature, Introduction to Literary Studies, or Green Reading. I’ve gone on long enough. Enjoy the rest of your summer.
— Thanks Professor Wriglesworth! Read p. 181-231 for next week 🙂
SJU Reads 
I find this post by Professor Wriglesworth to be very interesting. I am registered for two courses in the English department for my first semester and the things that Professor Wriglesworth stated just increases my excitement level for the courses. I find the analogy to be very true and I love how the Professor explains how the reader is only seeing what the author wishes. This is something I have always found to be true while reading any well written novel. I believe that the purpose of Erma being portrayed as a villain was to indeed make the parents seem less harmful at a time when their true characteristics had started to show and were going to begin to be completely revealed. I also enjoy how Professor Wriglesworth included the section about the resources of a community being used up by outsiders and only outsiders benefitting from them, while the rest of the community continues to suffer. This I find to be extremely true, and although this may offend some, can be related to the gravel pit that was attempted to be put in around the Shelburne and Honeywood area. The analogy by Professor Wriglesworth is very intriguing to me.
It is intriguing to see how everyone identifies with the novel in a different way. The previous Professor’s post was about the family dynamic of the Walls and how they are so unique from the average family. Professor Wriglesworth’s perspective is from Jeanette and how her narration style governed the reader’s opinion about her family and their day-to-day life. Professor Wriglesworth’s perspective enlightened me to see his view as the Glass Castle as a symbol of hope in which Jeanette put her faith. Time and time again Jeanette’s parents appear irresponsible and selfish, though as the professor mentioned, once Erma was introduced to the reader, Jeanette gave us hope for her parents even regardless of all the hardships they put their children through.
I totally agree with this analogy of Professor Wriglesworth. I too have thought about Jeannette’s perspective of the story and, as storyteller, the conditions to present the story she wished to convey. While reading, I try to consider what events and topics may be stressed or lessened, and I bet there are many more problems within the family that are not discussed as they may be to personal or horrifying to retell.
As the professor had led on to, Erma is portrayed as downright terrible, and the parents’ sympathy and compassion towards her is shown by Jeannette’s retelling of events. Jeannette also highlights the discussion ensuing Brian’s molestation. The Walls children discuss how their father had acted strange upon hearing the event and even questioned if Erma had treated him the same way. Jeannette stresses this sympathetic note to potentially justify her father’s ill-behaviour and sway the reader to empathize with Rex.
Another way Jeannette, as author, attempts to protect her relationship with her parents is by simply reciting much of the conflict directly related with her parents, rather than explaining how she felt about these instances of bad parenting and neglect. This way, Jeannette takes a backseat in her story and lets the reader make the assumptions or develop their own opinions.
I personally believe that this protection of family dignity is expected and Jeannette’s story is already especially personal and difficult to discuss. I have always understood this and thus personally try to step back and understand one’s perspective in telling a story or discussion, to decipher the “narrative maze” of storytelling.
I found Professor Wriglesworth’s points very interesting, and a good reminder – sometimes I forget about the bias that comes in storytelling..
I’ve been wondering all week about how ‘glass house’ is used here to describe a ‘maze of sorts’, since one would expect a glass house to be easy to navigate. Also, the title of this week’s post is ‘sticks and glass houses’, and yet sticks aren’t mentioned at all. Is this perhaps a reference to some idioms such as ‘sticks and stones may break my bones…’ or ‘those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones’? Because Professor Wriglesworth specifically refers to it as a house often instead of a castle. I’ve thought about it a lot, but can’t think of a good explanation. If any of you have ideas, please let me know 🙂
But the points he makes definitely apply to living at university, or anywhere really. The world is a huge maze that people create to steer us towards certain opinions, choices, and behaviours. We’ve been told so much about what to expect at SJU, which courses we should take, which clubs we should join, etc.
And everyone has a bias. I think it’s really important for me, especially with so much new information in first year, to take everything with a grain of salt and take the time to really experience things for myself and figure out what I need and want to do to make my university experience most enjoyable.
Of course, the resources that we have are amazing and I am so grateful for all that I’ve already discovered about SJU and my opportunities for next year. However, I’m looking forward to stepping into the maze of information and opportunities and finding my own path.
Hey! Bit of a late reply, I realize. Busy last few weeks, as I am sure is the case for everyone!
It’s funny that this is the topic for this part of the book, as I had just been thinking about bias in the book. Whenever I have read any sort of memoir or retelling of an event, I have always wondered about the conversations. Jeanette often describes these conversations in detail with quotes and full sentences, etc., but in reality, I wonder how much she actually remembers of what was really said. How often do we remember word for word what was said, even about breakfast this morning, or about tonight’s homework.
This in itself presents an interesting bias, as it means the author can alter the apparent personality of a person and their reactions which will in turn give the reader a different view on the book. Something else to consider though, is whether or not bias is a bad thing. A person retells their own experiences concerning those surrounding them, and this is due in large part to how that person had an effect on them. This means that in a certain way, the bias is a lack of bias (if that makes sense). How someone interprets another’s actions will give insight into both the interpreted person as well as the subject. There is certainly a lot of room for thought when discussing bias!