Introduction
Before this class, I was not convinced that you have to be a great reader in order to be a great writer. Writing is pouring your own thoughts onto a page, and reading is reviewing those of another. “Where is the correlation?” I thought to myself when first hearing the name of this course. I have learned that you have to be able to fully thrust your undivided attention into a book, and read the ink spilled into words by another writer to be able to write your own. After delving into complex topics with my fellow reading partners, I have learned that reading is much more than a time-killer, rather an essential cobblestone in the pathway to becoming a great writer.
Following We Have Always Lived in the Castle and The Haunting of Hill House, we were already in the right mindset for reading a horror novel. Tequila Mockingbird was prepared to come in hot with our preconceived thoughts and suspicions regarding this book, and ready to trust NOBODY. Even with preparing ourselves, we were not ready for the dark and twisty events that engulfed the town of Wind Gap to come in Sharp Objects by Gillian Flynn. By all contributing a different reading method (Reading For, Form and Genre, Intertextual Codes, and Rhetoric of Narrative) within each blog for this book, we were able to dissect it to the best of our ability and understand the mind of Camille Preaker, the main character, a little better.
Part 1: Reading For
This psychological thriller was Tequila Mockingbird’s second reading group book. It is a book about a journalist named Camille who returned to her hometown, Wind Gap, to investigate murders and while doing so, finds out that her family is responsible for the current murders and previous murder of her sister. This causes Camille to have a break down and pushes her to her breaking point, which leads to a self-realization that she needs to go back home in Chicago and never return back to Wind Gap.
According to Mckee in “Structure in Meaning,” “The controlling idea shapes the writer’s strategic choices.” The controlling idea in Sharp Objects weaves itself back and forth with the counter idea throughout the entire novel, but in one particular spot it presents itself the most. The controlling idea we came up with for this novel is “Self realization leads to the acknowledgement of flaws and recognizing the need to seek happiness,” and is most prevalent in the novel towards the end after Camille has her breakdown. Throughout the story, Camille talks about the last spot on her body that has not been tainted by her cutting—the back of her neck. Once things unfold during the climax of the story and the murderers are revealed to be her own mother and sister, Camille comes to terms with the evil infested in her home town. She takes a glass shard and stabs the last clean spot on her body with it. After this breakdown, she realises that she needs help and actively searches for it, instead of constantly punishing herself like before. Along with this idea, the reason she reached her breaking point is because she struggled with trying to present a perfect facade while deteriorating mentally. This would explain why our counter idea is “The pressure to present perfection leads to debilitating mental/physical health.”
While reading this book, our reading for prompted us on how we read this book, and what already preconceived ideas of the text that we brought with us. A big part of the reason we all decided on Sharp Objects was because of the author, Gillian Flynn. Flynn is noted as the successful author who wrote the New York Times Best Seller, Gone Girl. We all are big fans of her work, and might have brought our projections to this story based off of Gone Girl. The two novels are similar in the sense that they both contain twisted, psychological occurrences, which we were already expecting to run into while reading Sharp Objects. In a sense, this reading for prompted us for the twist to come at the end since we were already expecting it. Gone Girl ends with a twist that has a psychological impact on its readers, just as Sharp Objects does. This may have been a downfall since we knew a twist was coming. We did not pay much attention to the current text, and instead tried jumping the gun and figure out the twist before it even had a chance to surprise us. Although it can be argued that this does take away the shock value, it could also be said that this previously acquired piece of knowledge of how Flynn ends her novels could also confuse the reader because they are expecting something and are constantly “on edge” while reading. This could lead to the reader overlooking key details that will actually unravel towards the end, and instead focusing more on their predictions and theories. Flynn is probably aware that the reader with even a slight amount of background information on her cannot trust her, so she uses that to her advantage in toying with them. She knows that the reader knows they cannot trust her, so she tries to throw them off with a plot they think to be the surprise, but then at the end does something completely different. At one point in the story, Flynn adds a strange comment about Camille’s mother. She adds that Camille’s mother had bitten the cheek of a baby and Camille had seen, which is a strange detail that makes the reader believe the killer will be Camille’s mother.
She pressed her lips hard against the baby’s apple slice of a cheek. Then she opened her mouth just slightly, took a little bit of flesh between her teeth, and gave it a little bite (Flynn 154).
But, by the end of the book, it is revealed that Amma, Camille’s sister, is the real killer of the young girls. It is possible Flynn knew the reader would be looking for a twist, which is why she tried to throw in subtle hints of it being Camille’s mom, then at the end tried to completely throw them off of the trail.
Part 2: Form and Genre
Camille’s sister is responsible for the killings of little girls in Wind Gap. Not only does she kill them, but she kills them and then proceeds to pull their teeth out. She takes their teeth, and creates a tile in the floor of her doll house out of them. The reader was expecting a twist at the end of the book, and it is fair to say Amma being revealed as the killer is that twist. But, with that being said, Flynn includes hints throughout the story. According to Kenneth Burke’s Lexicon Rhetoricae, “Syllogistic progression is the form of a perfectly conducted argument, advancing step by step. It is the form of a mystery story, where everything falls together, as in a story of ratiocination by Poe” (Burke 124). In other words, the syllogistic progressive form acts as an argument that justifies the conclusion as logical, and even inevitable.
The occurances unfold in way that that makes sense with the evidence pulled from the plot supporting it, which is why Burke’s syllogistic form works. Amma being found as the killer unravels, just as Adora killing her daughter does, but the actions of these characters and backstory of them seem to coincide with that idea, and almost propel it. The events of Amma and her tempertatrums, cocky remarks and backstory of her abusive mother all slowly but surely pile up, and appear to the reader in plain sight as a series of events leading up to her being revealed as the killer. This all reveals itself through Burke’s syllogistic form, and unfolds right in front of the reader’s eyes.
“It’s all I want,” Amma yelped, and smashed the table on the floor, where it cracked into five shards. She hit it until it was in pieces, then buried her face in the sofa cushion and wailed. “Well,” my mother said. “Looks like we’ll have to get a new one now” (Flynn 103).
Amma throws a tantrum because her custom made table is not exactly how she wants it to be, so she reacts in an unpleasant way that resembles that of a 3 year old girl having a temper tantrum when her favorite toy has been taken away. The cultural code of how normal teenage girls react does not involve violent temper tantrums. A teenager would most likely give attitude, or stomp up to their room, not smash objects on the floor. Her temper tantrum was a surprising detail that caught my eye, as it is definitely out of the norm. Not only was Burke’s “Lexicon Rhetoricae,” used to relate to this story, but the conventional form also played a part. Since Flynn kept including small examples of Amma acting out or differing from the norm, it became obvious towards the end of the novel that she was the killer, which was the impending “twist.” As a reader, although Camille’s mother would have been the most obvious killer, Amma was a close second. With her raging tantrums, moody outbursts and snarky character, Amma fits the mold of this killer. The conventional form reveals to us the recurring events throughout the story that point to Amma being guilty.
Although Amma is guilty, it does toy with the reader’s mind a bit. Amma herself is also a victim to her mother, Adora. She has become submissive over the years to Adora’s monstrous behavior, and Camille can see that as soon as she meets Amma. After getting to know her, Camille sees a side of Amma she did not before, perhaps one that would have fully engulfed her personality if it was not for Adora tainting her existence. Deep, deep down inside, she was a lost, little girl. But, it was too late for Camille to give Amma a normal life, as Adora had already made her way to Amma’s roots, and shaped her to behave exactly like Adora herself. Adora had trained Amma to accept the cruel pain she inflected, such as giving her baths with rubbing alcohol that stung her wounds, inflected by Adora. Even once Camille tried to take care of Amma properly towards the end, Amma still longed for Adora’s psychotic behavior that had been engraved in her brain as “good.”
She got into the bathtub and pulled her legs to her chin. “You need to rub alcohol on me,” she whimpered. “No Amma, just relax.” Amma’s face turned pink and she began crying. “That’s how she does it,” She whispered. The tears turned to sobs, and then a mournful howl. “We’re not going to do it like she does anymore,” I said (Flynn 383).
Part 3: Intertextual Codes
When first reading this novel, the reader may initially be caught off guard with the remarks that Camille makes about her skin as if it is alive.
“I was not ready to speak with my mother. My skin hummed” (Flynn 40).
“I am a cutter, you see. Also a snipper, a slicer, a carver, a jabber. I am a very special case. I have a purpose. My skin, you see, screams” (Flynn 94).
“I could feel her name glowing hotly under my shirtsleeve” (Flynn 44).
To say the least, she has a very complicated relationship with her scarred skin, due to her cutting words into every last inch. She personifies it in a way, like her skin is not just another part of her, but the “real” villain in the story that symbolizes Camille’s inner demons. Towards the end of the novel, Camille begins to question how alike Adora she really is. After all, they share the same DNA. Camille obviously has her own demons, as they visibly rest upon the surface of her skin, but her demons are not like the ones Adora has. Camille is abusive towards herself, while Adora is abusive towards others. This being said, Camille’s scars on her skin are symbolic, and could symbolize the scars internally that she has acquired from her mother. According to Kaja Silverman in “Re-writing the Classic Text,” “Barthes constantly links the symbolic code to the formulation of antithesis, especially that variety which admits of no mediation between its terms. In other words, he associates it with the articulation of binary oppositions, with the setting of certain elements ‘ritually face to face like two fully armed warriors.’” Camille’s internal and external well being could be considered “opposites,” but her outward appearance reflects that of her internal due to the way she decides to deal with her internal pain. As the story goes on, the reader gets used to Camille “yelling” at her skin. It starts to become clear that it is symbolizing for what she has internalized, but just as Matthew stated in a comment on the blog An Itch You Can’t Scratch, without the symbolic code, it is extremely unsettling to think about what Camille has done to her skin. We are able to seperate that thought while reading and realizing it is symbolism, but with the metaphorical symbolism curtains pushed aside, all that creeps through is pure despair.
Following this idea, the cultural code comes into play in this novel. According to Silverman, “He suggests that the cultural codes function not only to organize but to naturalize that field–to make it seem timeless and inevitable.” Camille is constantly making sure her scars are not seen by others. She even goes to the extent of constantly wearing long sleeves, long skirts and turtlenecks to hide every inch of skin. But why? Camille does this because the cultural code tells her to. Not all, but the opinion of a vast majority of society states that anything that manifests from an illness of the mind is enough to cause for shame. But what about someone that has a physical impairment? How come when somebody breaks their leg they do not attempt to hide the cast, or when someone has the flu they are quick to announce it and call out sick to their employer? Either of these call for a reaction along the lines of “I hope you feel better!” But, when someone sees Camille’s scars, they flinch and just try not to stare too long. Even though her actions could be explained by a simple mental impairment, it would still be considered taboo. It caters to the idea that she is weak because society said so.
Part 4: Rhetoric of Narrative
When it comes to ideal audiences, usually a good one would be somebody who relates to the story in a way, somebody who really gets the main character. According to Peter J. Rabinowitz’s article “Truth in Fiction: A Reexamination of Audiences”, “An ideal narrative audience can be described as “[an audience that] believes the narrator, accepts his judgments, sympathizes with his plight, laughs at his jokes even when they are bad” (Rabinowitz 134). That way, they are easily able to step inside that person’s shoes and fully take on the role of the ideal audience, or the person who the author address the story to. This is someone who takes on the role the author is asking them to play without any questions asked. It is the person that the author intended on writing their work for, and will not question what the author is saying, but rather embrace it. But, with Sharp Objects, there are not many people who can specifically relate to the heinous actions caused by Camille’s family. There is still an ideal audience, though, and that of which would be somebody who is at least trustworthy. The ideal audience of this story is somebody who would be willing to put their full trust into Camille being a reliable narrator, even though she has had a history of mental illness and alcoholism.
An example of an ideal audience member for this novel would be somebody like Chief Vickery. He is the chief in this novel who is trying to solve the girls’ murders. Chief Vickery would be an ideal audience member because he takes things face value, exactly how they look. Once he believes something, he does not question it, just as he did not question that somebody inside the small town of Wind Gap could be the culprit for the gruesome murders. He had fully convinced himself that it had to be an “out-of-towner.” That is the story he stuck with because it would not involve any questioning or digging deeper. Silverman states, “The semic code represents the major device for thematizing persons, objects, or places. It operates by grouping a number of signifiers around either a proper name, or another signifier which functions temporarily as if it were a proper name…” According to the semic code, Chief Vickery’s repeatedness when stating his opinion on the murders each time he is asked would lead us to believe Vickery is a man who does not want to delve into hard topics, but rather stick with the easy answer. He is not willing to let Camille report on the murders because it would disrupt such logic. This repetitive behavior is exactly what brands Chief Vickery as someone who would be apart of the ideal audience.
“You think someone from Wind Gap is doing this?” “No comment” (Flynn 70).
“What do you care? They’re not your kids, they’re Wind Gap kids. I bet I’m pretty safe to say Chicago never cared about Wind Gap kids before” (Flynn 14).
The cultural code advises us not to believe Camille since society would deem her as unstable and untrustworthy. She is a raging alcoholic with a history of mental illness. Why should we believe her? For all the reader knows, Camille could have been in a mental hospital throughout the whole story and made all of it up. She is unable to hold consistency throughout the story. It felt strange when she was speaking to Curry, and referred to Adora as “mom,” since she was a born and raised southern belle.
“Mom. Stepdad. A half-sister born when I was in college, her existence so unreal to me” (Flynn 4).
Throughout the story, whenever Camille is speaking about Adora, she only uses “mom” or “mother” to descibre her. But, when Camille is speaking directly to Adora, she only addresses her as “momma”
“Hi, Momma. It’s Camille.” I tired to keep my voice even. “Camille.” She opened the door and stood in the doorway, didn’t seem surprised, and didn’t offer a hug at all, not even the limp one I’d expected. “Is something the matter?” “No Momma, not at all.” (Flynn 36).
This may be a small detail that someone in the ideal audience position would most likely gloss over and label it as a tedious and unessential detail to the novel. But, someone in the seat of the narrative audience, or the audience who is able to question what the author is stating and does not take everything at face value, may notice this as a key component. Camille acts a certain way towards one person, and a completely different way towards another. Can she be trusted when it is evident she puts up so many faucades and false illusions of who she is as a person? This may not be a completely fair argument towards Camille, as “momma” may also just be a defensive mechanism to keep her abusive mother happy. Either way, there is no denying that there is a significant change in the way Camille presents herself, and it is enough for anyone in the narrative audience position to question if Camille is always 100% truthful.
Conclusion
Sharp Objects is a work of literature that exemplifies the struggles of a journalist trying to prove to herself and those around her that she is worthy of success, and the unraveling of a murder case or two….or three. It is gritty, disturbing, and down right appalling at times. Camille Preaker is not much of a relatable narrator, and the book does not present itself in a way that leaves the reader feeling particularly satisfied toward the end, even with its 2-paged attempt to leave off on a positive note. That being said, riddled within the text were key ideas and literary concepts, such as controlling/counter ideas, symbolism and much more, that allowed us as writers to dissect each one and splash our own opinions onto the pages. Intertwined within the words of this novel written by Gillian Flynn was the story of a writer who lost herself for a little while, and I think anyone who spills their own words onto a page can relate to that in one way or another. Not only have we here at Tequila Mockingbird learned how to write our own blogs and reflections as writers, but we have learned how to read as one, too.
Reflection
Throughout my time in the course, “How Writers Read,” taught by Professor Kopp, I feel as though I have exhibited a full understanding of the Writing Arts core value 1. “Writing Arts students will demonstrate understanding of a variety of genre conventions and exhibit rhetorical adaptability in applying those conventions.” It really helped to be placed in a group with other people trying to understand the same things I was. Because of this set up of groups, we were able to discuss, ask each other questions, and each provide our own perspective or input on a subject that allowed us to piece together our best understanding of a subject. Without this set up, I feel as though the class would be a bit more intimidating because everyone may feel as if they are the only one struggling to understand a concept, while in a group of peers you are able to discuss it and break down the meaning. In my first blog, I was very intimidated when trying to apply genre conventions. I have learned throughout the lectures and time spent on my own trying to critically think and understand the key concepts how to apply them in a rhetorically sound way. I have learned how to approach Burke’s forms when including them in my writing and citing examples, from reading his Lexicon Rhetoricae. Burke stats, “Form in literature is an arousing and fulfillment of desires.” He has five aspects of form: conventional, syllogistic progressive form, qualitative progressive form, repetitive form and minor or incidental form. In my second blog, Cup of Stars, I establish a meaning for one of the character’s eerie repetitive phrases with Burke’s repetitive form.
Mrs. Dudley turned aside to let Eleanor come in, and spoke apparently to the wall. ‘I set dinner on the dining-room sideboard at six sharp,’ she said. ‘You can serve yourselves. I clear up in the morning. I have breakfast ready for you at nine. That’s the way I agreed to do. I can’t keep the rooms up the way you’d like, but there’s no one else you could get that would help me. I don’t wait on people. What I agreed to, it doesn’t mean I wait on people. I don’t stay after I set out dinner,’ Mrs. Dudley went on. ‘Not after it begins to get dark. I leave before dark comes (Jackson 27).’
Mrs. Dudley repeating the same eerie phrases so many times goes along with Burke’s repetitive form. According to Burke, “Repetitive form is the consistent maintaining of a principle under new guises. It is a reinstatement of the same thing in different ways” (Burke 125). Because of her repetitiveness, Ms. Dudley acquires a certain connotation surrounding her name. When the reader thinks of her, they think of an eerie old woman. With Burke’s logic, her repeating phrases are not a mere side detail, but an important detail of the story with truth and meaning held behind them. They could possibly be a warning, or even a sign that it is already too late to escape Hill House.
The second core value is “Writing Arts students will understand theories of writing and reading and be able to apply them to their own writing.” In this course, we dealt with having to read many professional and academic articles. The word usage throughout those can sometimes be challenging, especially at first before we became accustomed on how to read more practically and efficiently with the techniques Professor Kopp provided us. The main aspect of this core value is to be able to digest and fully understand the theories of others, and then be able to appropriately relay them in your own writing. This being side, I think that the forms and intertextual codes and are all pieces that when executed correctly, would fall under the second core values meaning. Previously stated, I have shown in what context I was able to discuss the form of Burke, and how I applied it in one of my blogs. When it comes to the codes, I was able to apply the proairetic code to one of my blogs, She Just Felt Like Running. This code deals with the cause and effect narrative sequence of events that play out in a story, and the Juxtaposition between them. In this blog, I discuss the juxtaposition of events that lead up to another. In this book, the main character, Lilia, was saying how she used to travel and runaway with her father. She discusses using a map and how she always loved tracing her fingers on it. This point in time sparked her love and desire for adventure. Directly after this chapter, we are met in present day time with Eli, Lilia’s boyfriend, who is desperately looking at a map because Lilia had left, once again. Leaving was something she learned to do when she was little from her father, so this juxtaposition of events serves as a cause and effect throughout Lilia’s life on why she does things the way she does, and a map is used as the key idea to connect those two ideas.
The third Writing Arts core value is “Writing Arts students will demonstrate the ability to critically read complex and sophisticated texts in a variety of subjects.” Over the course of time of reading these scholarly and complex texts, we have adapted to close reading and actually understand what the person is trying to convey through their words. It is human nature to want to skim through something just to get it done, but that is not how knowledge is retained. I have learned throughout this course that to obtain knowledge on a certain subject, it is essential to closely read at what an author is saying, and actually take into consideration the word choice and other small details that may depict a broader meaning. Somebody who was not close reading may not be able to see the big picture that is pulled from a text, rather the small portion that their brain decide to smear their own perceptions on to. The first text we read this semester was We Have Always Lived in the Castle. I feel as though my reading as completely changed since then. While reading that book, I will admit that I did not annotate or really think about the big picture of it, until we started discussing it in class. Once I heard other people’s opinions and perspectives on the book who had taken the time to closely read, I decided I wanted to take that approach to the rest of the books we had on our itinerary for the semester. I did my best to apply this method of close reading to our novels, and also to the sophisticated texts we were assigned to read, as well. I began to annotate them and actually attempt to grasp the point the writer was trying to make.
Not only have we here at Tequila Mockingbird learned how to write our own blogs and reflections as writers, but we have learned how to read as one, too.
Tequila Mockingbird 