Christina Bonvicin
May 19, 2009
The Soloist, Part III
What I realized, as I continue to read through The Soloist, is that I'm really starting to not be able to stand the book. I don't what about it is starting to to get to me, but something is. All I know is that I'm finding it harder and harder to pick up the book and read when I know I have to, harder to read more than a chapter in a sitting. The early enjoyment I had when first reading the book seemed to have slipped away with my personality these past two weeks, lost in the desert island that is my senioritis-ed mind. I don't know why it happened, but it did. And I can't seem to get it back.
The questions from last week, of if mental ill people should be forced to take medicine, come to mind. Why? My grandfather refused to take his medication. No, he's not mentally ill. At least, he's not diagnosed as such. He just... wanted to give up. He was in pain, we could all see it. In and out of depressed. So he refused to take his meds. There has to be something wrong, I think, truly wrong if he doesn't want to live any more.
But Nathaniel was living. Abeit a little... unconventionally, yes, but he was doing something he loved. Not my grandfather, who was stuck in a nursing home for over a year. My grandfather needed an escape. Nathaniel doesn't seem to need an escape, but who am I to judge? A mere eleventh grade pediatrician wannabe, someone who knows very little about medicine, let alone mental illness. But, if he's doing something that makes him happy, if maybe not safe, who is anyone to force him to do anything he doesn't want to do?
But, what is happiness? What defines happiness? I've been trying to define it for myself for the past six months, and I am nowhere near close to anything. Is it a state of mind, or a state of being? Physical, emotional, or psychological? Or, merely an illusion of the mind to get you comfortable with yourself then trap you in misery for days or weeks or months on end. How can anyone define happiness? Why does playing music make Nathaniel happy? Why doesn't playing football or baseball or some other sport? Why music? Why not reading, or actually living in a building? Why does Nathaniel find it fun to live on the streets?
I don't understand a lot about Nathaniel but the main thing I don't understand is why he doesn't want to live in an apartment. He and his precious instruments would be safe from the elements and the cigeratte bud throwning people of the streets. He'd be able to wash up and wash his clothes and have a comfortable bed to sleep on, not the cold, hard cement floor of downtown LA. But, then again, the mind is a fickle thing. Some people may like the safety of a warm home, but maybe Nathaniel doesn't. It may possibly remind him of his time when he first had his breakdown, all the medication he was on. Maybe, maybe not.
Focus on...
- grammar
- style/flow
- my ideas vs. your own
May 16, 2009
May 8, 2009
Life's Little Purpose
Christina Bonvicin
May 8, 2009
The Soloist Part II
During this week's discussion, a few questions stuck out to me about The Soloist. We had a very lively discussion on Wednesday, contributing ideas for the class about Steve Lopez's writing style and the topics he writes about. To me it seems that Lopez writes about the things that no one else really knows about, like the basketball player from Compton or the censored radio station Pacifica.
Nathaniel is someone no one really knows about... That is, until a twist of fate brings him right into the hands of Lopez, who just happens to be a writer for the LA Times. Sure, the people on Skid Row know about Nathaniel. They know he's homeless like all the rest of them. But they don't know that he's a Juilliard alum, a prodigy that has to transpose the pieces of music he's learned from the double bass onto a violin with two strings. They don't know him like that. Lopez wouldn't have known if he hadn't stumbled across Nathaniel. Lopez wouldn't have known much about Nathaniel if he hadn't cared about Nathaniel the way he does. It's great that Lopez does care. He learns much about the prodigy that is Nathaniel Ayers.
One series of questions that arose during the discussion on Wednesday was a question that was prompted by Jamal's talk of people with mental illness, on whether or not they should be forced to take medication or if they could make choices by themselves. Well, does having a mental illness take away from one's freedom to choose for themselves? At what time do you force someone to do something, because you can't tell if they are completely there? Is it right either way?
These were the questions formed in my mind during that discussion. Personally, I don't think that having a mental illness takes away one's right to be able to make there own discussions. The only way that should happen is if the person has multiple personalities, where one or more of the personalities wants to do wrong by their 'host' body, or if the mental illness has reached such a stage that the person has no idea what to do for themselves anymore. These are the situations, I believe, that are the only times that people can take away one's right to choose. If someone takes away another person's right when they are fully capable of of making their own decisions.
In all, the discussion on Wednesday prompted those questions, because in the book Lopez wonders on whether or not he should get Nathaniel help. I think it's better for the both of them if he just let's Nathaniel be, for now, since Nathaniel seems happy and content living on the streets. That's really all that matters in life, right? Happiness?
Focus on...
--- ramble/flow of piece
--- any grammar mistakes
--- my ideas vs. ideas in the book vs. your ideas
May 8, 2009
The Soloist Part II
During this week's discussion, a few questions stuck out to me about The Soloist. We had a very lively discussion on Wednesday, contributing ideas for the class about Steve Lopez's writing style and the topics he writes about. To me it seems that Lopez writes about the things that no one else really knows about, like the basketball player from Compton or the censored radio station Pacifica.
Nathaniel is someone no one really knows about... That is, until a twist of fate brings him right into the hands of Lopez, who just happens to be a writer for the LA Times. Sure, the people on Skid Row know about Nathaniel. They know he's homeless like all the rest of them. But they don't know that he's a Juilliard alum, a prodigy that has to transpose the pieces of music he's learned from the double bass onto a violin with two strings. They don't know him like that. Lopez wouldn't have known if he hadn't stumbled across Nathaniel. Lopez wouldn't have known much about Nathaniel if he hadn't cared about Nathaniel the way he does. It's great that Lopez does care. He learns much about the prodigy that is Nathaniel Ayers.
One series of questions that arose during the discussion on Wednesday was a question that was prompted by Jamal's talk of people with mental illness, on whether or not they should be forced to take medication or if they could make choices by themselves. Well, does having a mental illness take away from one's freedom to choose for themselves? At what time do you force someone to do something, because you can't tell if they are completely there? Is it right either way?
These were the questions formed in my mind during that discussion. Personally, I don't think that having a mental illness takes away one's right to be able to make there own discussions. The only way that should happen is if the person has multiple personalities, where one or more of the personalities wants to do wrong by their 'host' body, or if the mental illness has reached such a stage that the person has no idea what to do for themselves anymore. These are the situations, I believe, that are the only times that people can take away one's right to choose. If someone takes away another person's right when they are fully capable of of making their own decisions.
In all, the discussion on Wednesday prompted those questions, because in the book Lopez wonders on whether or not he should get Nathaniel help. I think it's better for the both of them if he just let's Nathaniel be, for now, since Nathaniel seems happy and content living on the streets. That's really all that matters in life, right? Happiness?
Focus on...
--- ramble/flow of piece
--- any grammar mistakes
--- my ideas vs. ideas in the book vs. your ideas
May 3, 2009
Chasing the Pavements of Music
Christina Bonvicin
May 3, 2009
The Soloist
As I read through some of the posts of my classmates this weekend, I was surprised to see that a few couldn’t get into the book. I, as picky with my books as I am with my dresses, read the first few pages of the book and I was hooked. I don’t know what it is about the book. It’s much easier to read, that’s for sure. The font is small, but large enough that my eyes aren’t killing me after the first couple of pages. And there’s enough space in between each line that I’m not squinting trying to follow the print.
Not only on the physical side of the writing, but the writing itself is very easy to read. Unlike J. D. Salinger, Steve Lopez doesn’t go over board on the thoughts of his mind. The first person narration for my own personal stories is written such that the character’s thoughts aren’t going into extremely explicit detail, which gets very boring very fast.
No, Steve Lopez caught and held my attention with his vivid but short descriptions and easy to understand vocabulary. The story of Nathaniel Ayers itself is a sad story so far, but the inspiration of all those Lopez was trying to get to help him is so uplifting in a world where so much wrong and seemingly nothing right. Of course, it’s sad that Nathaniel had to battle this illness for so long without anyone to help him. Not that he wanted anyone’s help to begin with. If he did want anyone’s help, he wouldn’t have been living on the streets playing a two-stringed violin, transposing Bach and Beethoven from bass to violin. Something never easy, especially not living on the street.
The care that Lopez shows of Nathaniel is genuine, something not easily found in many people anymore. Lopez only talked to Nathaniel for a short amount of time, but after that Lopez worried about Nathaniel’s well being. This was particularly apparent after Lopez writes about the findings of a Juilliard alum living on the streets of LA playing a two-stringed violin, when all the letters came pouring in saying that violins were being air-mailed to Lopez’s office for him to pass onto Nathaniel. Lopez didn’t want to give Nathaniel the new violins and cello, fearing what the thieves on the streets would do to the man.
That kind of care and compassion is something that draws me into a book. I like something where, if it’s in the first person point-of-view, the narrator actually has feelings and isn’t this uncaring being who can’t stand anything or anyone (cough Holden Caulfield). Overall I find Nathaniel’s story interesting and the way Lopez tells it extremely fascinating. I can’t wait to continue to read the book, hoping it gets better as I get deeper into the book.
Focus on...
--- grammar.
--- my thoughts and ideas vs. your own.
--- flow / ramble of the piece.
May 3, 2009
The Soloist
As I read through some of the posts of my classmates this weekend, I was surprised to see that a few couldn’t get into the book. I, as picky with my books as I am with my dresses, read the first few pages of the book and I was hooked. I don’t know what it is about the book. It’s much easier to read, that’s for sure. The font is small, but large enough that my eyes aren’t killing me after the first couple of pages. And there’s enough space in between each line that I’m not squinting trying to follow the print.
Not only on the physical side of the writing, but the writing itself is very easy to read. Unlike J. D. Salinger, Steve Lopez doesn’t go over board on the thoughts of his mind. The first person narration for my own personal stories is written such that the character’s thoughts aren’t going into extremely explicit detail, which gets very boring very fast.
No, Steve Lopez caught and held my attention with his vivid but short descriptions and easy to understand vocabulary. The story of Nathaniel Ayers itself is a sad story so far, but the inspiration of all those Lopez was trying to get to help him is so uplifting in a world where so much wrong and seemingly nothing right. Of course, it’s sad that Nathaniel had to battle this illness for so long without anyone to help him. Not that he wanted anyone’s help to begin with. If he did want anyone’s help, he wouldn’t have been living on the streets playing a two-stringed violin, transposing Bach and Beethoven from bass to violin. Something never easy, especially not living on the street.
The care that Lopez shows of Nathaniel is genuine, something not easily found in many people anymore. Lopez only talked to Nathaniel for a short amount of time, but after that Lopez worried about Nathaniel’s well being. This was particularly apparent after Lopez writes about the findings of a Juilliard alum living on the streets of LA playing a two-stringed violin, when all the letters came pouring in saying that violins were being air-mailed to Lopez’s office for him to pass onto Nathaniel. Lopez didn’t want to give Nathaniel the new violins and cello, fearing what the thieves on the streets would do to the man.
That kind of care and compassion is something that draws me into a book. I like something where, if it’s in the first person point-of-view, the narrator actually has feelings and isn’t this uncaring being who can’t stand anything or anyone (cough Holden Caulfield). Overall I find Nathaniel’s story interesting and the way Lopez tells it extremely fascinating. I can’t wait to continue to read the book, hoping it gets better as I get deeper into the book.
Focus on...
--- grammar.
--- my thoughts and ideas vs. your own.
--- flow / ramble of the piece.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
