Murieta

While I did want to see an ending with more of a clash between the forces of Murieta and those pursuing him I thought the book was quite cool. It was interesting to see Murieta devolve to the point where all his noble intentions and chivalrous attitude were a thing of the past. The scene towards the end where he waits until Three Finger Jack has killed all the Chinamen before he says "That's enough" was to me the final piece to his completely leaving behind any semblance of the man that was there in the beginning. He at this point had given himself over completely to a life of crime and violence.

This story brought up some very interesting ideas for me. Murieta was walking a dangerous road by always blaming others for the situation he was in. I think doing this slowly eroded away all aspects of his humanity and left him with nothing. All of his actions became about himself, about profit, about his grand plan that he had in the works. To me, continuing to focus only on blaming others for his plight left him stepping further and further into darkness with each violent action. He became consumed with the idea of doing nothing more than getting back at those who had harmed him.

I wonder how this story could have been different if he had become more of a Robin Hood type character? Take from the rich and give to the poor. The potential was there in the beginning but ended up being lost. If Murieta had possessed an ideal of that nature to keep him focused I think this story would have been much better and would have fulfilled the mythical aspect of his character that was introduced in the beginning. This would have allowed him to become more of a iconic figure that just the common criminal he seemed to become in the end.

MASC

I loved class today! Having worked for Half Price Books for three years at the Redmond store before coming to Pullman I've spent many hours around books exactly like I saw today. I love books in general but there is something about really old books that are just cool. The cover design, the bindings, type of paper used, etc are to me a very cool portal to the past. It's interesting to see the ones that aren't classics, that for whatever reason haven't been produced in a plethora of editions. Sometimes I think these are the more interesting books to read as I really get a reading experience that hasn't been flooded with information beforehand about the author, subject matter, or impact of the novel.

I had no idea the MASC was even there. I'm excited to use it. It has a ton of great information from the time period of the books we are reading that can be helpful in forming a better picture of the society that these novels emerged from.

Behind a Mask

So far my favorite book we've read. I really liked the pace and the style of writing. I was really intrigued by the character of Jean also both personally and as a symbol for new ideas. There were numerous things she did which I completely disagree with but at the same time I admired her spirit, focus, and dedication to going after what she wanted. I thought she was incredibly smart along with being quite cunning and devious.

Looking at her character and thinking back to the beginning of the story, I see now that she did the only thing she could do in that situation to get the financial security that she wanted. Being a woman of lower class in addition to an actress did not afford her very many opportunities during this time period. Without doing the things that she did what are the chances she would have become Lady Coventry? I think they would be absolutely zero. While I know a happy cheery ending would have been more appealing, I guess I liked the idea of someone looking around, taking stock of what they have and what's available to them, and then changing their life. In the end she didn't kill anyone so all that was really damaged were the feelings and egos of a few people. Plus I mean hey, she did the exact opposite for the vanity and ego of Sir John!

This story raised many questions and thoughts for me that I'm still mulling over. Probably can't answer them all here right now but I wanted to throw them out there.

One, I wonder how much of my not completely embracing this story and Jean has to do with the fact I've been raised on stories that place the emphasis of a marriage and relationships on love, specifically romantic soul mate kind of stuff. Would I have liked this more if this had been part of the story? If she had done the exact same things for the sake of love instead of money would I have been completely won over? I almost think I would be. Would the inclusion of love have led to that redemption of character as the attainment of money and position did not? I almost think it would have. I can't quite wrap my finger around this but just as I get the feeling that a story involving an atheist who lives a good life and dies a happy person will never be a sure fire hit in this country and neither will a story of a convenient marriage. I consider it that because Jean got what she wanted and I think Sir John was pretty pleased with the outcome also. Now if she had plotted to kill him for his money after marrying him that would be different but I didn't get that impression that she would do something like that.

Another thing it brought up that was also alluded to in Blithedale was the perception of the artist in society. The idea that being an artist was not a respectful profession. (we have writer and actress represented, I wonder what the view was of say a painter or sculptor...or composer?)
The Artist against society seems to be a common theme. Or rather against the idea that their chosen profession is not on the same scale of importance as say a doctor or banker. I did not realize that this was such a large idea back then.