Reading Journal-Assignment 9

Averno, by Louise Gluck
In which time period is Louise Gluck’s Averno set?
For the most part I think that Louise Gluck has set this work in a contemporary time setting. She makes reference to certain things such as trains, Hawthorne, electric chairs, a bus stop, which are things that would propel the setting of the story into a more contemporary time period.

What is the tone of this book?
I think the tone of this book is very contemplative, dark, troubled, inquisitive, and questioning.

Describe the narrator(s) and what is of value to them?
The primary narrator seems to be constantly evaluating her own life, death, and the changes and evolution that occurs while establishing identity within one’s lifetime.

What kind of relationship does the Persephone narrator have with the earth in Gluck’s work? Cite at least one passage to back up your argument.
The one thing that I took away from Gluck’s rendition of Persephone’s story is that Persephone becomes displaced as a result of her abduction. Once she is taken from earth and “ravaged” she is no longer the girl she once was and therefore doesn’t have a place on earth, and she most certainly doesn’t belong in the underworld. She belongs neither on earth nor in hell.

To what does the final verse on page 16 refer?
I actually don’t know what the final verses on page 16 are referring to. Obviously it’s a reference to something that would have happened to one of Nathaniel Hawthorne’s characters, but I’m not sure who and what Gluck is alluding to.

Cite a passage in the text where the narrator second guesses her own voice by reconsidering the way in which to describe something. Why would an author show such a thing?
I actually didn’t feel like there was a place in the text where the narrator has been portrayed by the author as “second-guessing” herself. I saw a couple of inconsistencies in the very first pages where she talks about the beauty in the world and how wonderful it is, only to say a couple pages later that “it is true there is not enough beauty in the world” (13). However, I did not how see this or anything else were a good example of the narrator contradicting or second-guessing herself. I felt like the book was progressive mental discussion/analysis/elaboration on the work’s major themes.

What are some key differences between Part I and II of the book?
Part I of the book seems to focus more on the development and childhood of the female narrator, in my opinion. Part II seems to focus more on the second half of life and the mortal death that we all face. Those are my initial impressions. I think she addresses both of these subject matters in either half of the book, but I felt like it was more pronounced in one half versus the other.

How do you understand the ancient myth differently after reading Gluck’s interpretation?
I actually didn’t like Gluck’s 2nd interpretation at all. I much more enjoyed the 1st interpretation better. I don’t know what it was, a stylist difference or what, but the 2nd interpretation was a total turn off. I don’t think that Gluck’s version are any more helpful to reading the myths. I think they were any interesting compliment to the subject matter of the rest of the book; I actually found myself wondering sometimes if the entire book is a contemporary version of the myth, with Persephone as the contemporary narrator. However, I just took Gluck’s versions to be another rendition, and not an aid to actually understanding the myths better. Maybe that would change if I reread the poems a couple more times.