ecohn's blog

Ellen Cohn

Play in the City

10/31/13

In Zadie Smith’s novel, NW, the reader follows many characters through their lives, and the random events that take place. We follow some characters, like Natalie and Frank, to success. We also see some characters, like Rodney, who are not quite as successful. This leads me to question how education, and differences in education, might lead to different outcomes in terms of socioeconomic status and “success”.

John Goldthorpe used the term “education-based meritocracy” to explain how a higher education system (colleges and universities) that is based on merits rather than socioeconomic background can lead to more social mobility between the classes (Goldthorpe 234). In Natalie and Rodney’s cases, they were able to win scholarships to attend a good school, where they could study hard and network to meet people like Frank De Angelis who, in Natalie’s case, would open a door to a higher class and more opportunities.

Unfortunately, although Rodney worked harder that Frank, Frank was born into a richer class. Because of this, Frank became more successful with much less exerted effort. This shows that, although merit-based education is supposed to increase social mobility, the majority of the time, it only works to reproduce already existing social structures.

For my last paper, I used the lens of structure. I looked at how ZS structured sections differently depending on who they were about, and how that person/character experiences time I also wrote about her authorial voice and inputs into the narration. 

For this newer essay, I want to keep that lens, but elaborate more on where she does and doesn't do this. I also want to look more into the absurdity of the world, as presented through the book. 

Ellen Cohn

Play In The City

10/27/2013

Structured How?

     Zadie Smith, throughout her novel NW, frequently changes her style of writing depending on whose perspective and voice she is speaking through. This is seen many times throughout the book, and is also mentioned by her in an interview with Cressida Leyshon, a writer for The New Yorker. Smith, while writing the novel NW, set up a rule for herself, which she claims structured her writing differently in the various sections. In the interview with Leyshon, she responded to a question about structure by saying that she looked at “how we experience time,” and how it differs depending on whose perspective we look through (Leyshon 1). Smith mentioned Natalie’s chapters, and how they are structured more chronologically because, in Natalie’s mind, “life is a progression toward some ultimate goal…‘success’” (Leyshon 1). The chapters about Natalie seemed to move more linearly, as we followed her to her successful life, and then back through her fall into her old “Keisha” identity. However, did Smith stick with this rule throughout the entire novel?

Zadie Smith’s writing style throughout NW was varied. She seemed to change how she introduced ideas depending on which character in the novel was experiencing them. This made it somewhat more difficult to place a specific voice as the narrator of the book, but I overall liked how she did this. By changing her writing style, she also kept it interesting. 400 pages of any book can easily be turned into an overwhelming mess, but she, with sections like the one titled “some answers” keeps the reader engaged and guessing about significance. 

Scrolling through the Emily Balch seminars was a daunting task: Having to narrow my preferences down to three was overwhelmingly difficult. Each one sparked my interest with a catchy title and a syllabus of interesting material. In the end, I chose the “Play in the City” seminar, mostly because of the professor.

Theater had shaped my high school (and middle school) experience, and although I wasn’t too interested in a theater major, staying involved and working with people who shared my passion seemed like a great idea. I chose “Play in the City” for many reasons, including Mark Lord.

Mark Lord proved to be the stereotypical theater professor, having us walk around the classroom on the first day, observing all we could. We, the students, examined the classroom, seeing as much as possible, and hoping to not say a “wrong” answer. This second day of classes was pretty uncomfortable in Taylor F, awkward silences ran amuck, and Mark’s command that we live with the discomforts and “give each other time to think” was pretty outside of our comfort zones. However, the class soon bonded and developed an ebb and flow of conversation, which includes many different voices bringing up important and diverse points on whatever we may be discussing.

     This trip into Philly was full of change. This helped me “critically play” because it was different from my normal routine. Mary Flanagan, in the introduction to her book Critical Play, defines play as “central to human and animal life; is generally a voluntary act; offers pleasure in its own right (and by its own rides); is mentally or physically challenging; and is separated from reality” (Flanagan 5). Some aspects of this trip that were different from my normal day include the food, the atmosphere, and the transportation. 

     My average day is spent in classes, at a desk studying, or eating the dining halls’ consistent but decent cuisine. The occasional escape from this normalcy is treasured. One very easy way to break this routine is through food.  Although Bryn Mawr’s food is delicious, trying new flavors and textures helps interrupt the monotony of the school year. For dietary exploration, I turned to the city of Philadelphia.

1. Finding nothing that interested me (that wasn't a dead end) in the paper, I went to www.philly.com

2. After browsing through many headlines that didn't catch my imagination, I was caught off guard by the ridiculous headline "George Clooney hopes government shutdown ends soon" 

3. From that absolutely ridiculous article, I looked around the website at other articles pertaining to the recent government shutdown. I found this one "Merchants near Independence Hall worry about shutdown"

4. From there, I started doing some "googling" about the merchants near independence hall, and the whole Historic Philly area. 

5. I read about Pumpkin Fest, http://historicphiladelphia.org/franklin-square/pumpkin-fest-2013/ which sounds super fun! but which is a little more pricey than I'd intended to go. 

6. Continuing my search, I read about Franklin Fountain, which a few people have already recomended to me (this is their website) http://www.franklinfountain.com/

      Mary Flanagan, in the introduction to her book Clinical Play defines play as many different things, finding sources in the works of anthropologist Brian Sutton-Smith, Historian Johan Huizinga, and the general agreement found between most anthropologists and historians.  Some of the general “rules” of play that Flanagan mentions are that play is central to human life, is mentally or physically challenging, is voluntary and pleasurable, and is somehow separated from reality.  In my travels into Philadelphia, I found that what most helped me to play was that the trips were very separated from my everyday reality.

     My daily routine is filled with classes, studying, and Erdman’s consistent but decent cuisine. Escaping the norm and exploring the streets of Philadelphia was definitely a welcome aberration. One specific change that helped me to relax was the food.

     Bryn Mawr’s food is delicious.  A powerful recruiting factor that Bryn Mawr has is their superiority in food production: Bryn Mawr’s dining services are much better than other colleges. However, three meals a day of our unchanging diet leaves students desperate for something more. Reading Terminal Market was the perfect solution.

After reading "Critical Play", I did ten minutes of research on Dada art. I remembered enjoying learning about it in a High School Art History class, and seeing the name again in the reading piqued my interest. I enjoyed reading about how the artistic movement occured as a result to World War I, and the nationalistic tendencies that led to the war. I also learned how Dada artists opposed all norms, including Dadaism itself, and many Dada artists proclaimed "Dada is anti-Dadaism". Dadaism was the rejection of artistic and cultural authority, and consisted mainly of a group of artists asking "what is art?". My favorite Dada artist is Marcel Duchamp, who is famous for many pieces, including "fountain", a sculpture which he created by turning a urinal on its side. Duchamp rejected all painting because he believed it to be made for the eye, rather than the mind. He showed this rejection in his general medium use of sculpture, but also in a piece he made, in which he drew a moustache on a print of Leonardo da'Vinci's "Mona Lisa". He named this piece "L.H.O.O.Q", which, in French, means something along the lines of "she has a hot @$$". This defacement of such a famous artwork shows the "in your face" attitude of the Dada movement.