"Ocean At The End Of The Lane" and "The Garbage King:" Comparitive essay

"Everybody wants to ride with you in the limo, but what you want is someone who will take the bus with you when the limo breaks down” Oprah Winfrey once said. In the books “The Garbage King” by Elizabeth Laird and “The Ocean At The End Of The Lane” by Neil Gaiman, a similar universal truth is explored, relating to the quote above. One of the themes both books explore is pertaining to the effect of money on relationships. That it is not the money that affects you negatively or positively, but rather how you let yourself get affected by money.

In “The Ocean At The End Of The Lane,” we spectate a fight between a husband and a wife over money. The husband accuses the wife of doing illegal things when he sees her purse stashed with money. “She says she doesn’t know where they [the shrilling notes] came from, and he doesn’t believe her. He doesn’t know what to believe.” This particular scene shows how money can affect your relationships negatively and shatter existing trust. Here, the money was the catalyst for their fight, but the couple could have taken it forward another way instead of fighting, even though some may think otherwise.

In “The garbage King,” by Elizabeth Laird, we notice how the two main characters, Dani and Mamo, bond over time because of the lack of money. “He was completely dependent on Mamo, for food and water and everything. If Mamo deserted him, he’d either have to go back outside and get picked up by the police or stay, a prisoner, right here in this cemetery until he starved to death.” In this particular example from the garbage King, we understand how reliant Dani is. After living a life filled with money and material, he realizes the true meaning behind friendship because of Mamo, which just becomes stronger everyday because the lack of money.

Even though these two scenarios are very different, we can find similarities between them. In both the books, it is up to the characters whether they will use the stick or not after the author gives them the carrot. For instance, in the garbage King, Mamo and Dani’s relationship could have ended [the stick] the moment Dani gave Mamo money [the carrot] to buy some food for both of them. Inspire of finally being able to hold a 10 birr note, Mamo was true to his word and came back to help Dani. After this, both boys trusted each other with their lives, instead of letting the money ruin their relationship.

Some may counter this by saying that it is not the people who chose to be affected by money. They may say that instead of the money being the one affecting you, it is the situation you deal with. While both of these might be valid, many situations in life are challenging. The authors chose to show money as a greater threat, even standing on it’s own, instead of just being a mere factor in a situation where someone's relationship is affected.

In conclusion, both “The Ocean At The End Of The Lane” and “The Garbage King” explore the theme of money and it’s important in our lives. Without money, we wouldn’t be able to do much. Readers might conclude that ultimately, it is up to us to chose how we are affected by money. Like in everything in life, there is a reaction. It is up to us whether we chose for that reaction to become a positive or a negative factor in our lives.

By Ananya

'The Catcher in The Rye' & 'The Perks of Being a Wallflower': Comparative Essay

Selma Lagerlof once said “Nothing can make up for the loss of one who has loved you,” Growing up and discovering oneself is hard enough, without the added trauma of losing someone close to you. J.D Salinger’s “The Catcher In The Rye” and Stephen Chbosky’s “The Perks of Being a Wallflower” both revolved around confused teenage boys who have lost a lot and are therefore unsure about who they are and what they feel. These two “coming-of-age” novels explore the individuality of pain, and the different ways people must deal with it.

Both books are narrated in first person, creating an intimacy between the characters and the reader. This intimacy creates a connection that makes the audience truly care about the outcome of the characters, no matter how hopeless it may seem. This is especially effective in the audience understanding the motivations of the characters based on their distressing pasts. Holden, from J.D Salinger’s “The Catcher In The Rye,” and Charlie, from Stephen Chbosky’s “The Perks of Being a Wallflower,” both go through very similar traumatic experiences, ranging from witnessing forms of date rape to the loss of a treasured love one. These experiences, though similar, result in two boys with completely different personalities, both going through the same sorrow. Taking their similar experiences in the death of a loved one for example, Holden losing his brother Allie caused him to become angrier and more cynical in his outlook on life. This is portrayed by Salinger’s use of Holden’s harsh commentary, that remained true to the characters, on those around him, constantly using words like “ugly” and “phony”. Meanwhile, Charlie losing his Aunt Helen and best friend resulted in a desperate need for companionship, making Charlie more trusting and forgiving of others. At one point in Salinger’s narrative, Holden states “Everytime you mention a guy that’s strictly a bastard [...] She’ll mention how he has an inferiority complex. Maybe he has, but that still doesn’t keep him from being a bastard,” revealing that he holds people accountable for their actions no matter the reasoning behind them doing so. Charlie, however, has to be taught this lesson by his father, and still continues to be more forgiving than most people would be.

The experiences of these two characters shaped their personalities, but also led to their isolation while they attempted to understand the pain these situations inflicted upon them. “‘Well are you dancing at these dances?”he asked. ‘I’m not a very good dancer.’” Charlie’s desperation for companionship, after the death of his Aunt and his friend, keeps him from participating in fear of looking stupid and repelling anyone who might previously have wished to interact with him. This lack of participation keeps Charlie from interacting with other people, and leaving him stranded on his island of isolation. Though Salinger explores the same idea of isolation, the main character in his book, Holden, is isolated for a very different reason. The audience of this narrative can assume that the loss of his brother changed him. “I know he’s dead! Don’t you think I know that? [...] Especially if [he] was about a thousand times nicer than the people [I] know that are alive and all!” After his brother’s death, Holden began to compare everyone to his brother, in order to fill that gap in his life. When someone doesn’t live up to Allie, his brother, Holden pushes them away, furthering his isolation.

As these books progress, the authors implicitly hint at a gateway out of isolation for the two characters. Salinger makes it obvious that Phoebe is the one person Holden trusts and wants to be around. Slowly the reader can also infer that Holden seeks stability and a constant in his life. From constantly changing boarding houses, he wants familiarity and comfort while he processes and moves on from Allie’s death, something he still hasn’t fully done. He wants “certain things [to] stay where they are.” He wants things to not change while he copes and moves past the tragedy he has faced. By the end of this narrative, Holden is able to recognise this and takes steps to cope and eventually, move on. Chbosky hints at Charlie having a way to cope as well, however it is vastly different from Holden’s. While Holden needed stability and comfort to understand his feelings, Charlie required change to stop mulling over his and seal that once raw pain for good. His “participation” is a distraction, and the friends he makes along the way assist him in learning to live outside his head, and giving his trust to only a selected few. All of this helps him to transition into a new portion of his life, as he has already processed his loss and now needs to move past it, as he begins to do.

Charlie and Holden both struggle with either understanding, or moving past their emotions, proving that grief is handled in many different ways and is not a step by step process. Trying to understand who you are while also dealing with the loss of someone you love is not easy, but as these characters have proven, is possible. The process is messy and long and the progress jumps back and forth, being great at a moment, and as if you just lost them in the next moment. All of this leaves a question to be asked - Is there a “most efficient” way to cope with death? And if there is, why aren’t more people aware of it?

By Akanksha

Divergent and The Maze Runner Comparative Essay: Decision Making~People and Instinct

              Decisions have tremendous impact. One good decision can save your life; however, just one bad one can also destroy your life. It is made by everyone in their everyday life. How people are making decisions though are very interesting. It had attracted the attention of researchers, scientists, and mostly authors. Two authors, Veronica Roth (author of “Divergent”) and James Dashner (author of “The Maze Runner”), are both interested in the topic but have rather different perspective of the process of decisions making.

              In the beginning of “The Maze Runner”, Dasher illustrated how people make decisions by their instinct. Thomas, the protagonist who lived in the dystopian world of the maze, instinctively ran outside the gate at sunset to help Minho and Alby from the danger that is outside even knowing that he too would be trapped outside in the maze and face the same danger. (The gate closes at sunset and at night in the maze there are the mechanical beast called “The Griever” that can”stung” you to death.) Even while being trapped in the maze, Thomas didn't panic because his instinct told him not to and he even saved Alby’s life by tying him to the ivy leaves on the wall of the maze. He himself also escaped the danger by instinctively working with his momentum and the Grievers’ momentum to escape them, if he just run without deciding to do anything because his rational mind told him that if he failed his own momentum he would tripped and then the Griever would kill him, he would've been killed.

              On the other hand, in “Divergent”, Roth demonstrated that different people make different decisions. She is doing that by categorising the people in the city. The Erudite make decisions based on logic, consequences and the big picture. The Candor make decisions based on the truth and only the truth. The Amity considered kindness, forgiveness, the truth and most of all peace before making a decision. The Dauntless make decisions based on justice, benefit, and reward, even it’s risky they'll take it. The Abnegation don’t think about themselves while making a decision, they think about other people and if the decisions that they are making will benefit people as a whole. The aptitude test also tells the reader that what you are define what you’ll do during the test. In the attack dog part of the test, Amity will pick chess as their weapon because they don’t believe in fighting with the dog, Dauntless will pick the knife because they want to take the risk and will fight for it if it’s justice; however, the Erudite won’t chose because they are curious about why do they need to choose one of the object and when the dog came they would lie down because they know the characteristic of the dog. Also when the dog attack the little girl Dauntless and Abnegation would sacrifice themselves and jump in front of her to save her while other factions would just stand there. One more part of the aptitude test is the bus. There is a man in the bus asking the tester if they know the wanted man that would kill the man on the bus, the tester will feel like they know the man in the picture. The Candor will tell the truth in that situation no matter what and the Abnegation would tell the truth too because that mean they can save the man’s life; however, other factions wouldn’t tell the truth.

Throughout the book “The Maze Runner”, Dashner uses third person narration to elaborate further that everybody trust their instinct. “He knew he should run into the Maze and help, but the rule about not leaving the Glade was seared into his mind.” (Excerpt From: James Dashner. “The Maze Runner.” iBooks.) This line worked very well because it clearly shown instinct is telling Thomas what to do if it’s in first person, it would be like “I should run into the Maze and help but the rule about not leaving the Glade is seared into my mind. However, in “Divergent” Roth uses first person narration because it signified that people are different and so are the decisions they are making. “I am not Abnegation. I am not Dauntless. I am Divergent.”(Excerpt From: Veronica Roth. “Divergent.” iBooks.) this moment of realization clearly had done the job well because If she uses third person narration, it would be: She is not Abnegation. She is not Dauntless. She is Divergent. It wouldn’t have sound as strong as the first person narration.

Some people might argue that in “The Maze Runner” Dashner want to illustrate how people act on their rational instead of instinct because at the end of the book Dashner demonstrated how a group of people act on their instinct and produce disastrous result and if they had just use their rational mind they would’ve figured out that they are not scientist and they can’t solve the problem and they can’t restore the world condition. However, their instinct may also told them that if they rescue the kids they can just let the kids live on with their life and there will be a generation with the immunity to the disease; therefore, solve the problem instead of putting the kids live in danger and watching how they react every seconds. In “Divergent” some people might also argue that people in “Divergent” make those decisions not because they are different type of people, they make those decisions because they are under peer pressure. For instance, when each family want their child to choose the same faction as theirs because they want their child to stay with them and when Caleb told Beatrice “We should think of our family.” “But. But we must also think of ourselves.”(Excerpt From: Veronica Roth. “Divergent.” iBooks.) Maybe Beatrice pick Dauntless because those words that Caleb said push her not to take Abnegation. However, this line “My mother told me to save them. Because of that, and because I am Dauntless”(Excerpt From: Veronica Roth. “Divergent.” iBooks.) clearly stated that she picked Dauntless because she is Dauntless not because of Caleb’s word or anybody’s.

In life, decision is an important aspect. Choosing your job, your school subjects… just because people around you or your friends pick History doesn’t mean you have to pick History. Everybody is different, you make your own decisions, they make theirs. Don’t fall to the peer pressure, be like Dauntless and fight it, be like Abnegation and help other around you to make decisions that they want to make, be like Amity and forgive your friends and be kind to them, be like Candor and never lie to your friends, and most of all be like Erudite, be smart and live your life but don’t ever forget about your instinct.

By Sewen