The Bluest Eye

Question 3: In his introduction of Morrison to the Swedish Academy (when she was receiving the Nobel Prize for Literature), Professor Sture Allen argues that "in great minds, gravity and humor are close neighbors." Certainly, The Bluest Eye is filled with gravity. But in this text, is it a close neighbor to humor?

The Bluest Eye is a dark, macabre, and shocking story about an eleven year old girl, Pecola, who is not only raped by her father and becomes pregnant with his child, but becomes a poster child for the shame of her town. Morrison's novel is certainly filled with gravity, but I'd have to argue with Allen that it is, in the case of The Bluest Eye, is not a close neighbor to humor. 

Pecola’s character is intended to be pitiful and saddening. She is described as ugly throughout the book by all whom she interacts with- even by her friends Claudia and Frieda. Pecola is bullied, harassed, blamed, and looked down upon in all respects. Even without considering she was raped and pregnant with her father’s child, her life is heavy and full of sorrow. Nothing surrounding our protagonist, nor her backstory and experiences leading up to her being raped, are humorous or can be considered in the sense a “close neighbor” to the gravity of her story.

Putting aside Pecola, even the buildup of Claudia and Frieda’s characters shows no humor to accompany the gravity of their own lives. Frieda is molested by her families tenant Henry, they are constantly on their toes regarding their mothers mood and whether or not they will be punished and to what extent, and are destined to live under the shadows of the Maureen Peels of the world. The only semi-humorous thing surrounding the sisters was Celia’s vendetta with Shirley Temple, and the nicknames she creates for Maureen in order to pick out her flaws when others saw her as flawless. Even these lighter, childish seeming moments are surrounded by an underlying current of darkness, as they reveal that the two girls are oppressed by the ideals of beauty and physical appearance which are simply out of their reach: light hair, light eyes, light skin, and fancier clothes.

With respect to Professor Sture Allen's argument, I do not believe at all, in the case of The Bluest Eye, that "in great minds, gravity and humor are close neighbors." Morrison, our great mind, does not seem to be using any humor whatsoever to accompany her dark and twisted story, leading me to believe that in the case of this particular novel, gravity and humor are far from being close neighbors. I'd venture to say that in The Bluest Eye, they don't even live in the same town. 

Ad Analysis: Moms Demand Action

This striking, provocative, and, at first-glance, disturbing ad was created by the nonprofit organization Moms Demand Action, which works to promote gun control. The group formed the day after the Sandy Hook shooting in 2012, and started as an online Facebook campaign, quickly gaining in size and recognition. In the short year that they have been in existence, Moms Demand Action has grown to boast over 130,000 members who represent all 50 states. Although I was unable to find out where the ads, like the one I chose, were distributed, I would guess that they were seen online. 

Everything about this image is compelling, but undoubtedly the eye goes first to the young girl holding the machine gun. What is she doing with the weapon? Why does she have the weapon in the first place? And why, which is the second focal point, is there another young girl sitting next to her, positioned side-by-side in the middle of the picture, with the same expression, posture, and seemingly importance holding a picture book? This is what Moms does ingeniously. You cannot look away from the ad without reading further into it to find the answers to these questions. You then discover their equally ingenious argument through the accompanying text that if Little Red Riding Hood is banned, then why haven't we banned assault weapons already? So we've "protected" children from the dangers of wine, but we have yet to do the same for assault weapons. How is this possible? Well, this is what Moms Demand Action wants you to advocate with them for. 

And how could you not? The image and text work hand in hand to overload the viewer with pathos. Automatically, the girl with the assault weapon alone evokes shock and, to a certain degree, horror within the viewer, while she sits criss-cross-apple-sauce-ed in a library as if she is waiting for story time. No more than 8 years old, you can't help but want to protect her from the danger of the weapon. Even if you are opposed to gun control, after observing the image, you cant help but be swayed in opinion, or at least considerably consider the argument for it. 

The text, white against the drab background of shades of brown, places its significance at the same level as that of the picture itself. The irony of the tone is designed to evoke anger in the presented misdirection of action in which we are protecting American children, both in fact (that Little Red is banned but assault weapons are not), and in it's call to "guess which one". 

"Moms Demand Action" certainly took a risk with this specific campaign. Although you cant argue with their facts, their images of young children, specifically in this ad young girls, seen holding machine guns may seem outrageous to many and are certainly shocking to all. But its effectiveness is unquestionable. Even if it doesn't convince the firmest of viewers in their opinion on gun control, it does make all who view it at least question what we value as "protecting" our children. 

"Moms Demand Action" Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moms_Demand_Action