Obviously this is an angry piece. Who is she mad at?
The “brother” is what is called a composite characterization. What does that mean and how is that true in the final paragraphs
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Followers
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(10)
-
▼
October
(10)
- “Between the sexes: The Great Divide” 254
- “Letter to President Pierce” 611
- “What is a Homosexual” 256
- “Looking at Women,” 244
- “College Pressures” 442
- “Mommy, what does Nigger mean?” 485
- “Thinking as a Hobby,” 217
- “Who Shot Johnny?” 383
- “Beauty: When the Other Dancer is the Self” 68
- “The Mystery of Zen” 1191
-
▼
October
(10)
While reading this piece I saw scattered moments of anger, but it didn't really come through for me until the last few paragraphs when Dickerson described the "brother". The feeling that I got through other parts of the piece were both despair and hope. Despair came across when she described the shooting and she talked about Johnny's progress at the pediatric rehab ward, which makes me believe that there is a sense of hope there.
ReplyDeleteI think that Dickerson is not specifically mad at the man who shot Johnny, but a majority of her anger is toward the people in society that are just like the man, who she refers to as "brothers". She said, "Oddly, we feel little curiosity or specific anger toward the man who shot him." I'm sure she has some anger toward the man, but she is saying that she places most of the blame on the "root of the problem", a society in which men like the man who shot Johnny roam the streets, often without consequence.
When Dickerson uses "brother" she is placing the shooter into a category. In this case the "brother" is someone who is a "non-job having, middle-of-the-day malt-liquor-drinking, crotch-clutching, loud-talking" person with "many neglected children born of many forgotten women". She goes on to paint an extremely negative picture of the "brother" and her anger is finally revealed. She doesn't actually come out and say that Johnny's shooter is this "brother" that she describes, but she makes the connection in the last two paragraphs.
I was shocked during this piece when I read "he is black America". I didn't fully understand what she meant by this, but I think that she was using a "stereotype" that people often place on black males, those that she calls "brothers". She even put the "is" in italics, so she wanted emphasis placed on that statement.
I thought that this was a very powerful piece and I like the last paragraph because it is a release of Dickerson's feelings, which shows that this piece comes from the heart.
Dickerson is mad at the "brother" she describes in the piece. The black man that negates progress made by other African Americans. She has seen this type of man many times in her life- calling to her when she would walk down the street, knocking up her sister and walking out...and now shooting her nephew. It was the last straw for Dickerson. This "brother" has made such a negative impact on her and the black community in general. Now one had shot her nephew, and he is paralyzed for life.
ReplyDeleteThere is a lot of sadness and helplessness in this piece aside from the anger. The author keeps thinking how Johnny must've felt laying there, unable to move- why would someone have done this? When she visits him in the hospital she feels pity for him. He was such a friendly and energetic young man, it seems as though his happiness was taken away with his mobility.
She seems to understand the pain he is going though... Although she doesn't like the obscene lyrics, she lets it go, hoping that will take him away from reality for a moment.
This "brother" she speaks of gives all blacks a bad name and can't seem to do anything right in her book. This message comes across very clear when she refers to what the shooter said to Johnny. He says "Betch'ou won't be doin' nomo' wavin', motha'fucker."
She mentally replies with a "Fuck you, asshole. He's fine from the waist up."
This came across very clear as an angry piece. It wasnt covered up in any way. She is mad at the person who shot Johnny, and not only that but the people who are just like that man. More specifically I think that she is upset at the "brothers" or all the black people that have done these things. It has put a negative stereotype on black males because they are known as common people who do these kinds of things. "brother" is a composite characterization because of how it is not just one person but characterizing all the black males like the shooter. She describes "brother" as "A non-job having, middle-of-the-day malt-liquor-drinking, crotch-clutching, loud-talking brother with many neglected children born of many forgotten women." It is especially true in the final two paragraphs because she basically sums up the way the brothers are and the way she feels toward them. I liked this piece because it was very easy to understand, and it was short too. I liked the last two paragraphs because I think it shows exactly how she feels toward these people and it is very powerful.
ReplyDeleteI didn't see the anger in this piece until the last few paragraphs of this essay when she referred to the brother. This piece was a very sad piece though I thought at first this piece was going to be an investigation on who shot johnny. I think that the writer in this piece had a lot of hope for her nephew that got shot. She tried to see the good in the boys life even though he was paralized and dealing with an extreme amount of pain from the gun shot wound. I think that she is mad at the brother but more importantly the society and town she lives in . After johnny was shot the town in which she lived in would never be the same. This person that she views as the brother is a person who doesn't value his life and blames people for the way his life is, and wants to hurt as many people as he can and doesn't care about who he hurts. This person doesn't care about anything and is unemployed, drunk. That in many sterotypical people may be referred to as a druggie or a homeless person who has no one to live for and who is a very troubled person. I call this person a welfare recipient who either uses the government to get things, who doesn't deserve a thing. who steals from other people who in very nice terms is a scum bag loser. Sorry If I am mean but everyone should work and be a working person and contribute to society and all it offers. I shouln't have to pay for other people just because they know how to use the system and use it in a negative way . They shouldn't have other people paying them for things just because those people are to lazy to get up off their asses and earn their own money. Man this is one of my pet peeves and it really bothers me how people can do this to other people, its inhumane though it is done everyday and will be continued to be done unless someone does something about it. I felt really sorry for johnny all he did was wave and give a friendly hello and what does he get for this, he gets shot. This killer the brothe r will never be caught and be brought to justice because he will become a file in a police station that is put to the very bottom and to never be spoken about again. This man the brother will continue to hurt people, use the system and he will not feel anything . He will not realize that he altered a kids life forever and that his life will never be the same because he shot him and paralyzed him for life. He will be able to wave a friendly hello but he will know in the back of his mind that this one friendly gesture almost got him killed on July 27th, 1995. I really liked this piece it really told a lot about how some people in society can be and how they can alter someones life without even giving a care in the world.
ReplyDeleteI really don't think that we have read a piece with such raw anger prevelant throughout it. The author doesn's show much hatred for the specific shooter, but instead focuses her anger on everything the shooter represents. The "Siamese twine who has died." She hates the part of the African American community who don't make anything of themselves and are really the threat as a whole. They are the ones whom everyone judges the African American community on. I think that the author really tries to emphasise that even though a lot of African Americans are upstanding members of society like herself, as she shows in the first paragraph, only the worst of them is what is considered as normal. I think that the part "he is black America" shows that other races stereotype them based on this half. I think that the author starts to use the word brother so that the reader gets a clear idea on who she is talking about. She uses their own language to describe them and I think that it makes it all the more powerfull. I think that it is used in a sarcastic tone in order to carry her hatred even more. Especially towards the end of the piece when the volcano of hatred just erupts.
ReplyDeleteI think everyone correctly identified that the author was mad at the "brother" in general, not just this one specific person.
ReplyDeleteIt has to be such a hard thing to go through, watching someone you love suffer so much, due to someone else's hatred. I understand why she would be so angry, this shooting has turned the nephew she knew into another person. And this anger comes out very clear.
To Liz, I don't think that the brothers she talks about "use the government to get things." She just uses specific details to show that they don't have values. "He has a car phone, an $80 monthly cable bill and every possible phone feature but no savings." He steals Social Security numbers from unsuspecting relatives and assumes ttheir identities..." I don't think this means he uses the government, but uses those around him, and doesn't help anyone else.
The statement jash made at the end of his blog sums up the last paragraph perfectly by comparing the author's outburst of anger to a volcano erupting. It's as if the magma had been building up inside of her throughout the piece until she couldn't hold it in any longer.
ReplyDeleteI agree with sam when she says that aside from the anger, this piece also carrys a tone of "sadness and hopelessness" at some points. I think that without this mixture, the piece would just seem like a woman ranting and raving the whole time which would probably "turn off" a lot of readers.
This was obviously and angry piece. the author didnt do anything to try to hide her anger or make things seem better. I believe she is mad at the person who shot Johnny and not just that person but the people that are like the person who shot him. She seems to dislike the african american race for the things that they have done like this and puts that negative stereotype onto black males. She sums up her hatred towards the others in the end of this piece. overall i liked the piece due to its short length and it was very easy to comprehend. Good one to read after "thinking as a hobby" in my opinion,
ReplyDeleteAt the beginning of this essay, the author clearly shows how she stands out as an African American woman in the United States. She gives us impressive insights into herself, saying "I am unrepentant and vocal about having gained admittance to Harvard through affirmative action; I am a feminist, stoic about my marriage chances as a well-educated 36 year old black woman who won't pretend to need help taking care of herself." I initially understood this to be her attempt to show how despite her strength the shooting and resulting paralysis of her young nephew shook her to the core. She showed hints along the way of her cynicism and anger over the event ("We've finally come to appreciate those boxer-baring, over sized pants we used to hate-it would be much more difficult to fit properly sized pants over his diaper"). However, we never understand the capacity of her anger until the middle of page 385 to the end where she clearly showed that all of her African Americans peers are not like her.
ReplyDeleteNear the end of the essay, the author finally let her anger and contempt for the "brothers" of her race flow unto the page. This was not a hatred that was unfounded- this was a composite sketch of the kind of "brother" who shot Johnny. She encountered him throughout her entire life whether he was making demeaning remarks against her on the street or leaving his children and their mothers behind, mothers like her sister who had Johnny when she was only our age. She did a great job of describing the parasites of her community in only a few paragraphs so we could understand her frustration and anger, not only at Johnny's shooter but also at the other men like him. I thought it was ironic to use the term "brothers" to describe these men who wreaked havoc on countless communities since they did not accurately represent the rest of the African Americans in the United States-people who improve their communities instead of destroying them. I know the author wanted this effect and she showed how despite the unity of the African American community, there are still those that they wish to separate from themselves. She not only showed us the hideous nature of the man who shot Johnny but also those who would do the same horrible things without thinking twice. I think it was very fitting for the author to end the essay the way she did-"Fuck you, asshole. He's fine from the waist up. You just can't do anything right can you?" It showed that despite the negative impact the "brothers" had had on her life she was not going to cave to them. She had lost a battle but not the war.
I think that everyone found it obvious that this piece is directed more towards a sector of society rather than the man who shot Johnny himself. The author sees him as only one small part of a bigger problem for the African American community to deal with. Personally, I have encountered both the "brothers" and virtuous African Americans in my life and it's unfortunate that such a distinction is made. It's also unfortunate that the stereotype of what "black america" is can overshadow the black citizens I call my friends. However, I think this concept can crossover to any race or neighborhood. Liz made a point about the "brothers" abusing the system and this can be true at times unfortunately. But this is not done exclusively by the "brothers". There are plenty of whites, hispanics, asians, etc who do horrible things to people of their own race and demolish their communities. So while this essay dealt with the parasites of the African American community, this concept can be understood universally no matter who you are. I am glad the author could write such a powerful and (as Josh said) "raw" piece.
ReplyDeleteI think that just about everyone identified who the author was mad at and did a good job explaining it. Everyone seemed to get the composite sketch of the "brother" being a typical form of a black male that really doesn't apply to all black men but to one particular group. Unfortunately, people as a whole tend to focus on the negatives rather than the positives and the same can be said when looking at the different races of people. The author really made this distinction between herself and the "brothers" with the first paragraph describing herself and with the last couple of paragraphs describing the "brothers."
ReplyDelete