One thing that I found really interesting in the next section of reading was the "Getting Paid" chapter. I really liked how he was able to explain his personal growth from the experience. Just from the way he was raised, when he met up with his mother after eating the stolen candy, he felt an enormous amount of guilt for what he had done. He was able to tell her the truth, not so much by his own choice, but for lack of another option. Because he was raised this way and told her what had happened, the mother respected him but thought he ought to learn from it. She forced him to take responsibility at the store. Knowing it was wrong, he felt ashamed for what he had to do. Not wanting to be put in that situation again, he would not be stealing again in the future.
For his punishment, Dalton had to perform household chores in order to make up for the cost of the stolen items. "This paid off eight dollars, and I was forgiven the difference. Strangely enough, I was thrilled to have earned my own money, and I asked my parents if I could work for money all the time (99)." Had this event not occurred, he would not have known the shame of apologizing for his wrongdoing. By working for the money, he learned what great satisfaction came from earning one's own income. I think this is one of the better events that probably happened in his life.
In his passing as a white middle class student he becomes privileged among members of his community but he looses the privilege that he had at the school back home. “Being a honky may have made me twitch back at the Mini School, but it also gave me a certain freedom to act however I wanted, since people’s reactions never reflected anything about me in particular but could always be brushed off as a racial thing” (Conley 71). In his old school he could act any way he wanted without being judged but now everything he does counts at his new school.
On the other hand I think that everyone can take advantage of silence despite his or her class. Respectable figures who can be silent and be heard when they speak exist in every community (rich or not). I think that silence is definitely something that can prevent misunderstandings and can keep people safe from certain things. Class is not really an issue because silence can be a powerful tool to anyone. Sometimes being unnoticed gives people more power than being noticed does.
One thing that really struck me while reading this section was the part where Dalton was hesitant to bring Michael home for a sleepover. It's easy to understand how he could be embarrassed considering he lived in the projects and his friend lived in Greenwich Village. but I thought it was very refreshing to see that Michael could really care less about the location of Dalton's house, and in fact seemed to like it more because of the left over electronic parts they stumbled across. Also, I saw the whole issue of this not dealing so much with class as it perhaps does with Dalton's own gender comfortability.
On page 85 he states, "Everyone at home would snapp all over him; they'd take one look at his long hair and call us gay. I simply couldn't be seen with him." Then after Michael easily makes friends with the neighborhood crowd, Dalton continued, "I strained muscles in my face that I didn't know I had in order to hold back my tears. Michael had outdone me in my own neighborhood," (89).
Sure there are numerous factors that could have contributed to Dalton's feeling this way at this moment, but I also do not think it was so much a gender issue as it also was the fact that blaming differences in race and class were no longer the scapegoats for his feelings of inadequacy: Maybe it was just his own inability to be social.
So in this last section of Honky, one thing that was really strong for me was how his mother would pay him to not do things. The moment when he said if he wasn't allowed to do what he wanted he would kill himself seemed like a simple child thing to say. She was very aggressive in her reaction. She covered his mouth so that he would not be able to breathe easily and he would be able to feel the discomfort of suffocation. I thought this was somewhat drastic. I feel as though my mother would change her voice to sound more serious and comment on my statement to help me understand. I thought, although it seemed effective, it was a little bit rough. What do you guys think?
This is just going to be all my comments and questions in no particular order.
Just to piggyback what I was saying in class about WHere is childhood in this narration? Why does a ten year year old sign contracts with his mother?
Also in the DIsco Sucks section- What exactly did they loose by finding out that the Queens were white and "faggots"?
After a certain point, I feel its just a story about youth. The ideas of joint-purchasing, stealing, forging signature, drinking, video game addiction its just what young people do. It seems like he implies that the fire that he and raphael were responsible fom was ok because Raphael was the right class and he was he right race. I dont see how that even relates to anything in the fire.
There are certain quotes that come from his mother that I ratehr enjoyed : "Words are meaning words are truth" and "We moved here because of you (196)"- What does that mean?
The parents also seem so different and like they are never on the same page. His father encouraging him wih the "Fuck you" art thing as well as giggling and repeating "nigger" again and again. His mother on the other hand never excuses those kind of things especially not the" n-word"?
She becomes really angry about it.
I also feel a little bad for Conley, having known from personal experience wha its like to have the label "socially awkward". I can't blame him. However, I can blame him for this quote that shocked and angered me " It was almost as if I had a certain spot in my life for a black f riend which could be filled by one individual at a time" ( p.137)
I agree with the pilogue when he says that his life is just a sample of one. In fact in my opinion for a white kid growing up in a black neighborhood he escaped relatively unscatched. I know people who grew up white "in da hood" who either have criminal records or were beat up every day of elementary school simply because they were white and learned to hate black people. I really don't know why he felt compelled to tell his story. Is it really that big of a deal? Is it even about ethnicity really?
The main things that really caught my attention in this third of the book are as follows:
1.) On page 181 Conely writes:
Not only does the government deprive low-income familiesof the opportunity to take care of their own kids and their own mistakes, it actively goes after them in the form of drug raids, weapons sweeps, and other such policy initiatives. I learned this a few years later, when one of my neighbors from Masaryk was busted in a drug raid. ...Marc, the son of a piratas coach, is still in prison to this day, his life ticking away slowly, another type of vicitm of the war on drugs...
I really disagree with Conley's whole point of view on this matter. He is only judging the situation from the information he knows about it, and not so much first hand experience. And what I mean by first hand experience is coming to know Marc as a grown up and not just characterizing him from their childhood baseball memories. People change, times change, and for him to naively judge the situation when he really knows nothing about the people and motives behind it, it is just a waste of breath.
2.) On page 192, he describes the situation where the group of kids from his new neighborhood are talking about him, unaware of his presence (supposedly), and he is described as being socially akward. The main curiosity I had with this, was wondering whether this description was the result of Conley's association with the "non-white" kids, and not these kids of his new neighborhood?
I am so sorry about all the posts. I was in Kimmel when I made that post and it kept going and my relationship with Mac computers are strained so I was confused on how to stop it. I didn't even know if it worked so I posted it again with additional comments just now. So Sorry.
I am so sorry about all the posts. I was in Kimmel when I made that post and it kept going and my relationship with Mac computers are strained so I was confused on how to stop it. I didn't even know if it worked so I posted it again with additional comments just now. So Sorry.
Hi Sarah,
I went in and tried to clean up the duplicates. I hope I deleted just ones that were identical but if I zapped any that had further thoughts, feel free to repost, and sorry!
So in this last section of Honky, one thing that was really strong for me was how his mother would pay him to not do things. The moment when he said if he wasn't allowed to do what he wanted he would kill himself seemed like a simple child thing to say. She was very aggressive in her reaction. She covered his mouth so that he would not be able to breathe easily and he would be able to feel the discomfort of suffocation. I thought this was somewhat drastic. I feel as though my mother would change her voice to sound more serious and comment on my statement to help me understand. I thought, although it seemed effective, it was a little bit rough. What do you guys think?
It surprised me somewhat too. It did remind me of the scene during the drive to Pennsylvania, which we talked about last time, when Dalton's mother explodes and calls him an ass. It seems that she's usually under control, and even very creative in her responses to the things her children do wrong, but occasionally she has these triggers. Anyway, it seems like bribes ought to be effective, considering Dalton's need for pocket money for Reggie Bars, video games, etc., but if he doesn't even really know what he's promising ("It was easy money, since suicide was a concept that was then well beyond my grasp, let alone my desire" [140]), then is it genuinely fair and effective?
Overall, I find her fascinating as a disciplinarian. What do you think of the way she handles Dalton's truancy on pp 156-159?
I also feel a little bad for Conley, having known from personal experience wha its like to have the label "socially awkward". I can't blame him. However, I can blame him for this quote that shocked and angered me " It was almost as if I had a certain spot in my life for a black f riend which could be filled by one individual at a time" ( p.137)
I'd like to know more about what's specifically shocking/angering to you about the quote. To me, the context is important -- he continues by saying "although I hope this was not the case, that it was merely a coincidence" (137). What's so unusual about the statement for me is that he's able to back up far enough to try to recognize some kind of pattern and to admit to the possibility that he might have some kind of (then-)unacknowledged racism. The fact that he's able to think about it and be honest about it (and, of course, that he's aware it's a negative judgment on himself) strikes me as healthy, compared to the kind of unacknowledged racism that often goes on in the world.
To me it also contrasts with Michael's reaction to Dalton's neighborhood in the chapter "The Hawk." He doesn't seem to recognize what his surroundings are like. But to what extent is that a good thing and to what extent is it a problem? It's nice that he doesn't look down on Dalton and his neighbors. But at the same time, what if he were to recognize the class difference between himself and the others, which does exist, and to be aware of his own privilege, in a way that could work toward change? That seems to be what whiteness studies is all about. (Then again, it also may be a lot to expect of a 10-year-old.)
I found his mother’s reaction on pp 156-159 quite reasonable because it is not about the particular incident anymore. The fact that she is stressing how important it is no tell the truth is quite important. I remember my parents always saying the same thing: always tell us the truth, regardless of how bad it is. Dalton’s mother does the same thing: “I don’t care if you fail out of school…I don’t care if you never graduate from wood shop…I don’t care if you never go to school again…but you must tell the truth” (158). Even though I think she’s doing a good job here, I don’t thing she did a good job in giving Dalton money to prevent him from doing things. The only thing that this causes is a vicious cycle in which he would always tell his mother he was going to do things that were wrong, so that she would pay him not to do them. Paying him is only a short-term solution that is not going to do him any good in the future. Also by paying him she is giving him the idea that money solves everything and this is definitely something that you don’t want to teach your children.
Something that caught my attention was Dalton’s realization of the meaning of quality when he bought the new sweatshop:
“I felt defeated in my efforts to catch up with the village kids. If I saved all of my money to make up lost financial ground, I had to forsake quality in my life. But if I chose to recognize these subtle differences, to cultivate this taste for the good life, which the Village kids took for granted, then I would never better my financial lot. Though I cursed my predicament, I also was thankful for the opportunity to appreciate something new and better—something like the sweatshirt. I reveled in the notion of upward mobility, joyed by the idea that the present and the future generally made for a favorable contrast to the past” (150-151).
I feel like it is the first time that he accepts his position and learns to appreciate it. He had always been trying to reach someplace or be somebody else but here he appreciates his position.
To supplement the role of silence, I found these two incident significant:
"My father always said more with his silences, his pauses, and the movement of his fingers to his face than he did with his words. He communicated the mystery and uncertainty of life in a way that my mother never could" (62).
"As far as I could remember, it was the first time that everyone in the projects was silent at the same time. No one moved as the bird flapped its long wings for balance, wrestling the turkey out of the bag" (88).
There is a special quality about the role of silence. I think that in many ways, it has a mysterious power of transparency where you can see through a person's silence and understand them better. This can be effective rather than using the power of speech in such cases as Dalton's father. I can't really describe it, but silence can be so powerful in its right context and evoke more meaning than using speech.
Also, when everyone in the project was silent in response to the hawk descending into the housing complex, it was something unfamiliar to Dalton. Being that it was the projects of NYC where noise is constant for him, this moment of silence was interesting.
These moments reminded me of Maxine Hong's "The Woman Warrior" and the use of silence against her aunt. I think silence holds an invisible grip because without saying anything, it has the ability to make the aunt disappear and be non-existent. And with Maxine breaking the silence and writing about her, in an instant, it brings the aunt back to life.
In response to the gender difference of coping with race and class issue, I don't think you can determine who carries more weight in terms of struggle. From the book's perspective we see it through Dalton's experience and it seems as if Alexandra doesn't face as many adversities but if we read a book that Alexandra wrote, we would see that she may possibly gone through just as much struggle.
As for the contract signing from mother to son, I found it amusing but understandable because of personal experience. I did have an incident where my dad made me sign a contract about something I don't remember but I had to sign it and remember it being a frightful experience. Because I had signed it (Though i rebelled and signed it, but not in my own name) I felt that it was legal and was physical proof of my agreement. I knew that contracts were equated with the law and such and felt that if i broke the contract, I would be in trouble. I think it's just methods that parents use that seem peculiar which makes signing contract look absurb. But in some families, people can't comprehend physical discipline whereas others resort to that to teach their child. For example, one vivid experience I had was watching a mother hit her son in the train station who was probably younger than 10 years old. Something like that may not be encouraged and recognized, but to the mother, it was acceptable.
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
