The main literary element that I thought about the most while reading In Country was characterization. The way Mason introduced his characters is totally misleading to their actual personalities throughout the novel. He starts this story with a road trip in which leads the reader to believe that Sam and Emmett have a normal uncle and niece relationship; by describing how Emmett had to drive through the city because Sam was not experienced enough, and teaching her how to keep track of the gas mileage. It seems, just as it should, that Emmett is Sam's protector.
It isn't until a reader gets to the point in the novel where Sam is reflecting on the past when they can really see the true characters and their unusual relationship. The real situation is that Sam is Emmett's protector, and she is very concerned with his well being. Ever since his return from Vietnam, Emmett has had the worst difficulty in readjusting to life after war. He has not taken the ideal role of a parenting figure that is expected from an uncle. Sam rather has taken on a "mother" role on Emmett in her growing concern about her curiosity of the idea that he may have been exposed to Agent Orange. She is confronting anyone and everyone she knows, planning doctors appointments, and never really gives up on the issue.
However, I don't feel like Emmett's scars n his face are what Sam is really concerned about. I think she uses this problem to talk to others about Vietnam and what the war was like. Sam's father died in Vietnam and I think that this bothers her more that her character really reveals until the end of the book. I think she cares about Emmett's face, but she has a hidden agenda within her investigation of how he got these sores.
Emmett is very interesting to me because its almost as if the war has shut him completely out of the outside world other than his few Vietnam friends. He does not like to talk about the war at all and he does not like to be around a lot of people. This directly relates to the soldier who returned home in The Red Convertible. These two reflect each other perfectly, in they ways they were affected by the war.
The way these characters were brought into this story was very misleading, but also gave the story an extra twist and I think that worked very well for Mason.
4 comments:
I think it will be interesting to see how many other people will discuss characterization like we did. I agree that its the element that I thought about most while reading the novel simply because Mason was able to give us complex, dynamic characters that the reader really begins to care about. I can understand how people can talk about setting or maybe some other element but ours is totally the best :).
Emmett and Sam's character were very unique, especially Sam's character. She deals with her situation than most teenagers do without a parent role model. Many teenagers are not mentally capable of handling adult situations by themselves, but Sam seems to be able handle it very easily.
I think that Mason brings about his characters this way so that the “oddness’ of Sam and Emmett’s relationship is more meaningful. Like you said, at the beginning one would think that they have a normal niece/uncle relationship, and then you get further into the book and realize how the roles of these two characters are reversed. I think it is an interesting thought about Sam’s hidden agenda behind her worries about her uncle, this would explain her constant conversations with people about it because it is apparent that she wants to know more about her father.
This is a great analysis of characterization, Megan, but there's no discussion of theme. Analysis of literary elements is always aimed at helping the reader see how the theme is being created through the use of this element...
Also, just as a heads up -- Bobbie Ann Mason is a woman (you've refered to her a couple of times as he or him ;)
Post a Comment