Crane and London

I loved loved loved these readings. They both captured, in the span of a day, the brunt of survival and everything that might go through a human's mind in such circumstances.

Both readings also carried a lot of obvious symbolism, which as we know, I like. For example, the fire represents man. It is born as a weak flame, with so much potential to grow and to help or hurt. However the fire is still very fragile, like man. And of course all fires will go out.

Both pieces were realist and naturalist in nature; very Man vs. Nature. In theater, the rule is that a play is never about moments in time that are ordinary and I think that rule goes for books too and these readings were definately about extrodinary instances in time and how the characters respond to their environments. (If only Dreiser had followed it. Carrie's opening moments=ordinary to the point of dull.)

In Crane's piece, I also observed that it appeared as though the characters were going through stages of grief.

Denial:
There's a house of refuge just north of the Mosquito Inlet Light, and as soon as they see us, they'll come off in their boat and pick us up.

Anger:
I'd like to catch the chump who waved the coat. I feel like socking him one, just for luck.

Bargaining:
It is, perhaps, plausible that a man in this situation, impressed with the unconcern of the universe, should see the innumerable flaws of his life and have them taste wickedly in his mind and wish for another chance.

Depression:
If I am going to be drowned, why, in the name of the seven mad gods who rule the sea, was I allowed to come this far and contemplate sand and trees?

Acceptance:
It's merely occur to him that if he should drown it would be a shame.