In October 1996 my English II class with third year students at Trondheim Cathedral School handed in essays on Willa Cather's  "A Wagner Matinée". One of the essay questions was:"Write Georgiana's letter to her husband after the concert."

Ole Andreas Bjerkeset, 3A  1996/97 wrote:

Dear Howard,

Please forgive me for what I am about to do. You know I love you, and I do not wish to inflict upon you any emotional distress, but I feel it is inevitable. Being here in Boston again has brought back so many memories and a feeling of being alive which has eluded me for God knows ho long. It is so wonderful exuberating here that I can barely contain myself : The people, the culture, the ever spinning wheel of commerce, everything!

Today Clark took me to a concert, a Wagner concert. It has been so long since I have heard something so beautiful. It was divine, sheer delight, perhaps even life itself. Right here and then I knew that this is the only life for me. I cannot be anywhere else, but here. Boston is my home. I know that this is not exactly what you want to hear, but as I see it, there is no other alternative. Continuing life in Nebraska, I will slowly wither away. I will die emotionally. At the time we eloped everything appeared so perfect. We were going to build life for ourselves, we were going to build a home. Everything was eventually going to fall into place. As time passed by, however, we learned that our vision demanded a greater portion of arduous work than we had expected. But that was not the worst part, at least not for me. It was the excruciating monotony, the tediousness of everyday life.

Sad as it is, Howard, I can no longer exist under such conditions. I have to breathe city air, I have to feel that the planet is alive. Hence, Boston is the answer for me. I am sorry to say so, but I have no intention of returning to Nebraska, and if you want to see me,  you will be forced to come here. I still love you, Howard, but I cannot continue my life in Nebraska.

Love Georgiana

Back to the top

For the mock exam before Christmas 1996 my students answered the test questions sent out by the ministry. The background question was on the presidency of the US focusing on the obstacles a new president meets when he assumes office. The literary test question was based on an analysis of William Boyd's short story: "Not yet, Jayette" dealing with the American youth culture.

Martin Bratt, 3A 1996/97, e-mail address: martinb@venstre.no, at present a student at the university of Oslo, wrote the following answers:

Question 1 on the Presidency:

Although it is often said that the President of the United States holds the most powerful office in the world, this does not mean that he is able to decide very much for himself. The American Constitution, which was adapted in 1789, clearly states the Separation of Powers. Thus, the president makes up only one third of the government, namely the executive branch. He is also controlled by a complex system of checks and balances, which makes sure that he (or any of the other branches, for that matter) does not become too powerful. We will now have a look at the different problems which may be facing a recently elected president, and then discuss to what extent his powers are important.

The first and foremost problem is that the president does not necessarily have a majority in Congress behind him. As the American system of government is non-parliamentary, the president is elected by the people, not by Congress, Thus there may very well be, as there is at the moment, a Democrat as president, with a Republican majority in Congress. The president will then have to do a lot of negotiation and adaptation, to be able to get new laws through Congress. He will not be able to follow the politics entirely of his own liking.

But even if the president is supported by a majority in Congress, this does not mean that everything is necessarily fine. Since there are only two important parties in the USA, the representatives from each group make up a far from homogenous mass. Conservative Democrats may very well support the Republicans in many cases, and liberal Republicans may support the Democrats. President Clinton experienced the trouble connected to this in the years 1993-94, when he faced a Democrat, but nevertheless reluctant Congress. In fact, many people claimed that he co-operated better with the Republican Congress 1995-96, than with the people of his own party.

Congress is of course often the most serious problem to a new president. It is after all the legislative branch of government, and passes both ordinary and tax bills. Another important element worth mentioning here, is the huge amount of lobbying which goes on in America. Private associations and companies, that officially do not have any power, gain a lot of influence through the "persuasion" of congressmen(and women) or/and senators. One example is the National Rifle Association (NRA), which has so far succeeded in destroying any attempt to introduce gun control in America. Another one is how the powerful insurance companies helped to kill President Clinton's welfare reform a couple of years ago.

In the US system of checks and balances, the Supreme Court is also very powerful. They are able to create a lot of trouble for the president if they want to, as they have the so-called power of judicial review. This means that they can declare any law or presidential act unconstitutional. The Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life, and the president has therefore no means of controlling them, unless they resign voluntarily or die. The balance between liberal and conservative justices here, is therefore of course subject to a lot of interest, and the president has good reasons in maintaining a harmonious relation to the Supreme Court.

In addition to the different branches of government, there is another aspect of the American Constitution which often will give the president trouble. Federal government has only limited powers, the so-called reserved powers ensure that each state may have very different laws and policies on such areas as education, crime and health care. If the president wants to achieve something in these areas (President Bush namely wanted to reform the educational system), he has very restricted possibilities, and is often left to encouraging the states to co-operate.
As we have seen, many elements of the US government have the possibility to create trouble for the president. They often seize this opportunity, and this is what makes the job as President of the US so hard. As John Steinbeck put it: "The power of the President (sic)is great if he can use it; but it is a moral power, a power activated by persuasion and discussion." The president will always have to co-operate in order to achieve something. If conflicts arise between him and Congress, for example, trouble is in the horizon. This happened in 1995, when President Clinton refused to sign the national budget proposed by Congress. The entire government came to a stand still for a couple of weeks, and then Congress had to back off. They were not strong enough to override Clinton's veto (they would have needed a 2/3 majority). And of course, as already mentioned, the president exercises an immense influence on political life. Therefore, despite all the elements which may pester his existence, the president could rightly be called the most powerful man of the US, and thus, in today's situation, of the world.
Back to the top

In the short story "Not Yet, Jayette" by William Boyd, Charlie, the narrator and main character, describes a day in his life, and tries to understand, what is going on with him, and where and when his life took a turn towards misery. He states: "It seems to me that everybody in their life is at least two people. Once when you're a child, and once when you're an adult. It's the saddest thing." We will now try to see how this statement relates to his life, and whether or not this phenomenon can be said to be symptomatic for our culture.

Charlie, the main character of the short story, spends his life in Los Angeles, mostly looking for famous people. He used to be a star himself, when he was a child, but this came to an end as soon as he reached puberty. Now he is trying to recover the glamour of his childhood, but it is infinitely lost to him. This leads him to the reflection mentioned above.

I would argue, however, that he himself is not really changed. As a character, he appears never to have fully grown up. What has changed, is the attitude of the world towards him. His society, Hollywood, in the middle of the California of the American Dream, estimates youth above all, and maintains a "childish" attitude towards things. He himself, however, is excluded from the people he dreams of being with. He lives in a world of disillusionment, the wrong side of Hollywood, together with all those who have never succeeded. But he has somehow conserved a certain hopeful candour, which makes us pity him, as we know he should have no hope. This has however prevented him from sinking into the total despair of e.g. Vanessa, the woman he calls "aunt" . He keeps on dreaming about being famous, rich and young, and he views his own existence as a kid as something close to Paradise.

As I have already mentioned, he does not cope with existence like an adult. He is not able to keep his work, his family has been broken to pieces, and yet, all he does is looking for the rich and famous, and dreaming about the return of his career. He is secretly proud that Jayette, the woman in the coffee-shop, has noticed him. All this makes me judge his way of living as rather immature.

Unfortunately, such attitudes seem to have become the ideal of modern American and Western culture. Youth, happiness and carelessness are the new virtues, responsibility, stability and maturity is definitely "out". The American poet Robert Bly has vividly criticised this tendency in his book "The Sibling Society". Bly claims that nobody wants to take the responsibility of being a parent anymore. People want to be the siblings of their own children. They want to play and amuse themselves, setting limits and imposing rules is becoming rare. This results in moral unconsciousness for the children, and thus a depravation of society. I find this to be an interesting parallel to "Not Yet, Jayette". Charlie is clearly afraid of being a grown-up, and he is also visibly incapable of assuming responsibility.

When the teenager culture first erupted in the 1950's, it was a sub-culture, criticised and despised by the adult society. Young people revolted, they felt they were entitled to a little fun. Nowadays, the hunt for endless pleasure is common for all ages, and the result is that not being happy, successful, rich and beautiful, has become something terrible, something we dread above all. The modern American culture is a culture for kids, for people who do not need to worry, who do not want to worry, and who above all do not want to be responsible.

This same culture is based on a cynical exploitation of resources, and is at the very origin of today's environmental problems. It entails greed, selfishness, and ultimately, grief. The latter, because in an egoistic society, people do not really care about anything but themselves, not even about one another. This is what has happened to Charlie in William Boyd's story. There is no real human contact in his life. He has not fully understood everything yet, but at the end of the short story, one senses that he is about to perceive something new, something that might ultimately lead him as well into disillusion.

Back to the top

For the mock exam before Christmas 1997 my 3rd year students tried an exam question set by the National Examination Board  from May 1997:
"Roselily -A short story by Alice Walker"

written by Ragnhild Nyhagen , 3A 1997/98e-mail: ranh@stud.ahs.hist.no

In the short story «Roselily», Alice Walker tells two stories in one. The most obvious story is the one about the Black American woman Roselily, who stands before the alter, just about to marry a muslim, while she thinks about her past, wonders about the future and is questioning whether she is making the right choice. The other, hidden story is the story about Black American women in general, their history and their ongoing search for something better.

The way I understand the short story, Roselily`s story is, as it is presented to the reader through Roselily’s thoughts as she is in the middle of her wedding, a reflection of Black Americans` (and women`s in particular) situation around the 1960s. At this time, Blacks are free Americans with the equal rights as other Americans, in theory. Roselily is an independent woman of her time, but being a single mother of four children, working long hours for most likely lousy wages in a sewing plant, she is far from free. The Blacks are no longer slaves in the cotton fields, they are now paid slaves in the refinement industry.

Roselily is most aware of her situation, and she is willing to leave her past and start a new life with a new man. She has probably been searching for a better life for quite some time, by being with different men, who all could give her a child, but not a new life. I am sensing an urge in Roselily, to move on, symbolized by all the cars described in the short story: They are constantly moving from one place to another, they give you mobility, prevent you from being stuck somewhere you do not want to be.

Roselily knows that she does not want to stay in the sewing plant, she knows that she wants to move on to something better, but she does not know what better is, and she certainly doubts if what she has chosen will be better than what she had. Her divided personality is like the different groups of Blacks in the civil rights movements. Some Blacks wanted segregation, some wanted their own nation, some wanted to be more African, some wanted to live like the White Americans, some were Muslims and some were Christians. They all agreed that their current situation was not acceptable, but they did not know how to improve it.

At the same time as Roselily wants to start a new life, she is afraid of losing her roots. She pictures her children «exalted on a pedestal, a stalk that has no roots», and «She wonders how to make new roots». Alice Walker here describes Black Americans and probably also her own search for identity. Which heritage is the right one; the one from their Black American ancestors, or the one from the African ancestors?

As Roselily is about to marry, about to go to Chicago and start a new life with her husband, she is starting to regret her decision and faces the truth: Just like Black Americans went from the slavery in the cotton fields to paid slavery in the sewing plants, she is now moving to the slavery of Islam. She thinks of his religion and sees «ropes, chains, handcuffs». She thinks of Chicago, her new home, and realizes that «all she knows about the place (is) Lincoln, the president». President Lincoln abolished the slavery, but that did not free the Black Americans.

See also my article on "Everyday Use" by Alice Walker
Back to the top

by Gro Mette Moen, 3E 1998/99, e-mail: groomi@online.no

"Mending Wall" is a poem written by the American poet Robert Frost. The poem describes two neighbours who repair a fence between their estates. It is, however, obvious that this situation is a metaphor for the relationship between two people. The wall is the manifestation of the emotional barricade that separates them. In this situation the "I" voice wants to tear down this barricade while his "neighbour" wants to keep it.

"Neighbour" is here a metaphor for two people who are emotionally close to each other. "Good fences make good neighbours", is a line the author emphasises by using it two times. The "neighbour" says the line while the main character does not agree with it. He can not see that there is something between them they need to be "walling in or walling out".

The "I"-voice sees himself as a good spirited person. He is obviously worried because a person he cares about is shutting him out. He thinks that his "neighbour" is of a dark disposition. "He is all pine and I am apple orchard", the poem says. Pine is a dark tree while apple trees have white flowers.

In "Mending Wall" the main character finds gaps in the fence. I believe the emotions between the characters make these gaps. He informs the neighbour and together they repair the fence with boulders. When they meet they argue or have communication problems. This is why they manage to repair the barricade between them. However, I would say that their emotions, especially the main character’s, try to get the boulders off balance so the wall can be levelled with the ground. The balancing of boulders is a symbol of their meetings; "We have to use a spell to make them balance". "We wear our fingers rough", the author writes about the handling of the boulders. One may interpret this to signify that the meetings between these two "neighbours" are very hard on them.

This is a long one-stanza narrative poem. All the lines have five stresses and are written in iambic pentameter or blank verse, which was also Shakespeare's chosen meter in his plays. There is one  exception:  the two lines where the one man says;  "good fences make good neighbours". These lines therefore stand out, containing  an important message, unreflected the first time, ironic the second.

"Mending wall" is a  symbolic poem. If you do not look out, the poem might seem as a poem about repairing fences. If you take the time to read it twice, the theme of the poem is easily understood and very moving.

Back to the top

by Pia Andersen, 3D 1998/99e-mail: perander@c2i.net

The short-story "The Drover's Wife" is written by Henry Lawson, Australia's most famous short-story writer and poet. "The Drover's Wife" is probably Lawson's best-known work, and was first published in the collection entitled "While the Billy Boils" in 1892. Lawson was deeply interested in the effects of the harsh Australian outback on people's lives, having himself spent 18 months in the bush. This was expressed in a number of so-called "bush ballads" and stories, "The Drover's Wife" being one of them.

This short-story has the Australian bush or outback as its setting. This is revealed in the two first paragraphs, where the author makes a short and precise description of the little house and the surrounding landscape. To tell the time of the story is, however, more difficult. The text gives us only a few clues to when it might have happened. The most obvious one is, "The drought of 18 - ruined him". First I thought that 18 meant 1918, but considering that the short story was written in 1892, this must be wrong. The year referred to is most probably 1818.

The main conflict in "The Drover's Wife" is perhaps not so evident as we may think. At first it is quite easy to imagine that there is a conflict between the bush woman and the snake. The reason for that is that the snake is a threat to the woman. If she does not kill it, the snake can bite one of the children, which will be a disaster since if is nineteen miles to the nearest sign of civilisation. The child would be dead before they could get help.

However, this conflict is only a consequence of the main conflict, which is mentioned in a sentence early in the text, "The drover, an ex-squatter, is away with sheep. His wife and children are left here alone." The main problem is that the wife is left alone to deal with the hardships of life in the Australian bush. In my opinion Lawson uses the incident with the snake to uncover the bush woman's struggles against the outback.

The point of view used in "The Drover's Wife" is the Third person Limited voice. Lawson has told the story form the bush woman's perspective. That allows us to see into her thoughts and feelings. Since the woman is the main character as well, we are given a complete and realistic portrait of a woman's life in the bush.

Throughout the short story we get a very good characterisation of the woman, mainly via retrospective thoughts. We learn that she is a gaunt and sun browned woman, and that her life in the bush started when she married a squatter at the age of 18. As a girl-wife she had hated the lonely life in the outback, but as time passed by, she grew used to it. When the drought forced her husband to go droving, she had been left alone with the children and the problems a life in the bush would bring. Her struggles have been many. Once she had to fight a bush fire threatening to burn down her house. Another time a mad bullock had besieged the house for a day. Then there was a flood which had ruined a very important dam. In addition to this she regularly must defend herself against dishonest sundown's and swagmen passing by her house.

Every time her husband returns, the woman is very happy. However, she does not gush or make a fuss about it. She usually gets him something good to eat, and tidies up the children. The bush woman loves her children above all, but has no time to show it. The children have a very harsh impression of her. Still, in the last sentence we see proof of her love for them, "And she hugs him to her worn-out breast and kisses him; and they sit thus together while the sickly daylight breaks over the bush."

Even though the bush puts the woman on daily trials, she has not lost her keen sense of the ridiculous. Once she sat down in order to "have a good cry," she saw the cat rubbing itself against her dress, "crying too". That gave her a good laugh. The harsh life in the outback has made her tough and very strong. It gives her few pleasures and has fulfilled none of her day-dreams. But nevertheless, the bush woman seems quite content with her lot.

It seems to me that Henry Lawson did not have a very deep and underlying intention when writing "The Drover's Wife. I think he only wants to tell us how small and defenceless people, and especially women, become in their encounter with the hardship of the Australian outback.

Nonetheless, to write a bush story from a woman's perspective was quite unusual for Australian writing of the period. Lawson also claimed that the central character in "The Drover's Wife" was modelled on his aunt. This makes me think that he maybe wanted to start a discussion on the bush women's cruel situation. However, I do not support this idea. I think Henry Lawson simply wanted to write a wonderful story, portraying the hardship of life in the Australian outback from a woman's point of view.

Back to the top

by Thomas and Magnus Nordmark, 3D 1998/99

Richard Rive was born in District Six in Cape Town. " The Bench" is taken from his short story collection, "Advance, Retreat " influenced by events during the Defiance of Unjust Laws Campaign from 1952 to 1953.

The story starts with an excerpt from a speech that is held in Cape Town, South Africa. It is clearly part of a demonstration against the apartheid system. A large black man with a rolling voice says," It is up to everyone of us to challenge the right of any law which willfully condemns any person to an inferior position."

The lecture is held outdoors, most of the crowd being coloured. The main character in the story, Karlie, a black man, follows every word the speaker says. He doesn't quite understand the full meaning of them, but realises that they are true words. The speaker tells Karlie that he has certain rights. The picture of himself living like a white man frightens him, but at the same time fascinates him. All he has ever been taught is that God made the white man white, the coloured man brown and the black man black and that they must know their place.

The people on the platform behave as if there were no difference in colour. It makes sense, but still only in a vague way. All the time Karlie is comparing what is happening on the platform to his own situation back home. There, people of different colour could never offer each other a cigarette as a white woman does to a black man, up on the stage. The idea makes him laugh, getting him noticed by a couple of people. This shows that Karlie is not completely comfortable or at ease with all this new information. His upbringing is strongly embedded in him. Playing with the thought of being as good as any other man he remembers black opposers of apartheid going to prison, smiling. It confuses him. As a white woman speaker says, " One must challenge all discriminatory laws," Karlie grows more confident, fear and passivity are replaced with determination to act for equality.A white woman jeopardising all her advantages to say what she believes in. Never had he seen anything like this in his home town. A determination starts creeping over his vagueness. Now he wants to challenge, whatever the consequences. He wants to be in the newspaper smiling. This is a turning point in his life.

After the meeting, on the way to the station, Karlie is on the receiving end of a nasty, racialist comment from an approaching car. " Karlie stared dazed, momentarily too stunned to speak." By reacting at all, it shows that he now questions this kind of treatment. To " challenge" like the white woman speaker said, he sits on a "whites only" bench at the railway station. Although this story spans over a limited time, Karlie has gone through an extreme change in his life. He is now determined to fight for his own freedom as a human being. He rebels against his former upbringing imprinted in him and wants to find a new place in society for himself.

This short story was written during the apartheid system. The bench at the railway station symbolises South African society at that time. Karlie refuses to move from the " whites only " bench and is therefore pulled away by the police. Under apartheid even mixed marriages were not allowed. Schools, restaurants and hotels were segregated. " Bantu education" was enforced for black people in South Africa in 1953. The blacks were taught that they were less intelligent than other races. Karlie`s initial confusion while listening to the speech, can be linked to this form of brain washing. Many were opposed to this oppressive system. Karlie is of course alone in disobeying the police, but he represents all the black opponents of apartheid and racial discrimination. " Karlie turned to resist, to cling to the bench, to his bench." Karlie is not only holding on to a bench, but also to his own existence as an equal citizen of South Africa. " It was senseless fighting any longer. Now it was his turn to smile." Although Karlie looses his grip, he is not defeated. He smiles as he`s taken away. Karlie wins the battle with himself and is proud of showing his victory.

Back to the top

by Andreas Nordstrand Espetvedt, 3D 2000/2001

Ken Saro-Wiwa's short story "Robert and the Dog" tells about a steward and his master and mistress, the main character is the steward: Robert.

To understand the character Robert, one must look a bit at his background. Ken Saro-Wiwa has left several clues in the text that can tell us a lot about this. Before Robert was employed by the young medical doctor, he had worked for several different households. It is indicated in the text that these had not been as pleasant a workplace as with the young doctor. It seems that Robert had been used to his employers' shouting and losing their tempers. And never calling him by his first name. Also the gratitude Robert feels towards his new employer, for his mere politeness, indicates that Robert is not accustomed to gestures of this sort. All this shows how Robert probably has been degraded and suppressed throughout his whole life.

Later in the story Saro-Wiwa tells that Robert never misses a chance to exercise the power he has over his family. This type of pathological behaviour is common among people with an inferiority complex, something Robert is very likely to have attained, due to the treatment he has received. Later when the dog is introduced to the story, Robert has enlightenment and reveals to us and to himself his place in the hierarchy. He had always thought himself above them, but now discovers he is down with the dogs. This shattering blow to his self-image makes him aware of his own feelings and features. When his master throws him a treat or a kind word, he "wags his tail" and feels indefinite gratitude, just like a dog. He does his master's bidding with a heartfelt glee, just like a dog. And he loves his master above all else, just like Bingo, the dog. The revelation causes hatred to swell his servant mind, at length resulting in Robert taking a step up the hierarchical ladder, and the tragic premature death of Bingo, the dog.

Ken Saro-Wiwa's short story about Robert and the dog Bingo also portrays a culture clash that not everybody thinks about, the view of the pets. In our rich western world pets are not uncommon. A lot of people have them, and among the most popular are dogs. Pets or "house animals" are nothing new, man has for the last 15 000 years kept animals as companions. The difference from now and earlier ages are that animals have always had a purpose, they have been a tool to serve man. Even today there are people who use animals as tool, this can be blind people needing a guide dog or a hunter using the dog to track down his prey. But the vast majority of people keep them as a luxury commodity, as a cuddle bear.

Dogs have also been the ones to eat the scraps. Even the dog food we buy expensively in shops today are not something ordinary people would eat, it is still scraps, or dog food. The thing one must remember is that the term "scrap" is relative. What we consider scrap, might be edible nourishment for other not so picky groups of people. So if one imports a custom from a rich to a poor country, there is bound to be a clash. The local residents will have difficulties understanding the foreign behaviour. Just imagine, how would you feel if someone fed you dry bread and beans, then started to feed his garbage disposal with lobster and caviar?

Back to the top

Annette Hoff, 2C 1997/98, e-mail address: klompegl@online.no, looked at the similarities between the loons andPiquette Tonnerre in  an essay on

"The Loons" by Margaret Laurence

In the short story "The Loons", Margaret Laurence writes the story of Piquette Tonnerre. A half-Indian girl who grows up under harsh circumstances in a society that suppresses half-breeds. The story is told through another girl, Vanessa, who comes in contact with Piquette through her father. As the title suggests the story also includes a special type of birds, the loons, and we can see an obvious comparison between the loons and Piquette. The loons are very special creatures; they are man-shy and can only be heard at night when they start their cry-like calling. It is said that one that has heard the loons cry, will not ever forget it.

One of the main parts, or maybe the main part of the story, takes place by a lake that is the habitat of a group of these birds, and one could say that the whole story evolves around these beings. The human destroying of the loons' natural habitat symbolizes the invasion the white people made on the Indians territory. This is Piquette's background, and as the birds she suffers from this. The loons show no interest in humans and Piquette also as it seems has stopped caring about other people. She acts indifferently to her surroundings, and nowhere in the story can we see her showing any heartfelt feelings. As the birds become familiar to a new environment near their invaders, and have the chance to adapt to this "nearer to civilian life", Piquette marries a white man and has the chance to make a new life. Both the birds' chance and Piquette's attempt fail. Now they are forced to find another way of living. Their old way has been destroyed by the newcomers, and they have not succeeded in adapting to the white people's unyielding life style.

Quote: "Perhaps they had gone away to some far place of belonging. Perhaps they had been unable to find such a place, and had simply died out, having ceased to care any longer whether they lived or not." End of quote.

This is a strange way to describe a group of birds, and in this case I think the meaning is directed towards Piquette entirely. The far place of belonging being the old way of the Indian's, which she has been "unable to find" because of the European invaders. In the end she ceases to care if she lives or not, we understand this trough her heavy drinking and her indifference to her own wellbeing, and at last she "dies out" because of this.

The only one who heard the crying of the loons, according to the last line of the story, was Piquette. After all, even if she never had heard their actual mournful singing, she herself had experienced the very same as the birds.

The loons also have a symbolic value in Vanessa's own life. She connects the crying of the loons with idyllic memories from her childhood. Along with all the other changes that have been made around her old summer paradise, the disappearance of the loons ascertains that her childhood is long gone.