To be witness to a collaboration of photography and writing felt somewhat odd to me, as these two forms of expression usually stand alone and accomplish different goals of the photographer or writer, which is seen through Now Let Us Now Praise Famous Men. Agee points out these differences in the introduction in the beginning of the text, in which he describes “honest journalism” (Agee, 7), and the ways in which writing and photography can depict a true version of what actually occurred. 

Agee strikes up a fairly negative tone throughout this introduction as he discusses the limitations of writing (specifically his own) and the lack of respect for the subjects of these photos. He writes that the camera is “the central instrument of our time; and is why in turn I feel such rage at its misuse: which has spread so nearly universal a corruption of sight that I know of less than a dozen alive whose eyes I can trust so much as my own” (Agee, 11). It is through this “corruption of sight” as Agee describes it, that photography, and writing about this photography, presents a depiction rooted in untruth. 

Personally, I took Agee’s claims with a grain of salt, as I believe writing and photography can reveal the truth in some capacity. I believe that these two things together, though, complicate the truth more than they would if they stood alone due to the personal bias of the writer and photographer. To elaborate, photography, especially without captions, presents an objective image that can be interpreted in many different ways by the viewer, while when writing about a photograph, the writer’s perspective is taken to be fact. However, the angle the photo was taken, the subjects chosen or not chosen, as well as the editing of the photograph in photography, as well as the writer’s subjective reaction to the photo can present a reality that is not the truth.

After reading John Keene’s Counternarratives I became particularly interested in the relationship between Carmel and Eugénie. For me, this relationship out of any of the others in the text put into perspective for me the extremely vast differences in the lives between black slaves and white plantation owners. The two girls (I assume) are around the same age and live in the same place but are unable to communicate due to their different native languages. 

What struck me about their relationship the most was how the line between master and slave began to be blurred as the story progressed, at least on Eugénie’s side. When the girls first meet, Eugénie promptly asks Carmel if she can keep secrets, therefore instilling some sort of trust in Carmel. Over time, Eugénie not only becomes dependent on Carmel just for household needs, but also for emotional ones too. Keene writes, “Eugénie had always mistaken Carmel’s dutifulness for devotion. Now she saw her slave as her primary source of emotional support, so she was initially kind and solicitous…” “…and reimposed their longstanding hierarchy” (Keene, 114-15). However, Eugénie was still very aware of her mastery over Carmel, often exercising her power over her when Carmel did not live up to Eugénie’s standards. Carmel, unsurprisingly, did not cherish her relationship with Eugénie except for her access to Eugénie’s books and other intellectual material that Eugénie was given at the convent. 

While a relationship like this was probably not uncommon during the times in which Keene writes about, I thought it was compelling how Keene narrated the story of two girls of the same age with tremendously different experiences and backgrounds and how they both interacted. I appreciated that although the conditions that Carmel were placed under were heinous and completely unjust, she was still able to indulge her appetite for learning.

These are three definitions of homosexuality, homosexualism, and homosexual provided by a Christian website called Christian Reformed Church (https://www.crcna.org/welcome/beliefs/position-statements/homosexuality).  

Their definitions 

Homosexuality: a condition of personal identity in which a person is sexually oriented toward persons of the same sex.

Homosexualism: explicit and overt homosexual practice.

Homosexual: a person who has erotic attractions for members of the same sex and who may or may not actually engage in homosexualism.

My definitions

Homosexuality: an identity assumed by individuals who are sexually and/or romantically attracted to members of the same sex. 

Explanation: The word “condition” implies that homosexuality can be likened to disease or serious impairment. It also implies that homosexuality can be treated or cured. Additionally, one can use the label of homosexual to describe their romantic attraction to the same sex as well as their sexual one. 

Homosexualism: the practice of homosexuality 

Explanation: I believe that this term is just a less useful synonym for homosexuality, but if it is to be used, nothing about the word homosexualism denotes acts that are “explicit” or “overt.” 

Homosexual: a person who is attracted to members of the same sex and/or gender 

Explanation: I feel as though this definition provided by Christian Reform Church is the least problematic of these definitions as it is fairly neutral and recognizes that one can assume a certain identity without participating in certain acts. However, I believe that this part of the definition was not necessary. Also, I believe that the term “erotic” is quite inappopriate here, as it implies that a homosexual person is a highly sexual being. 

Notes: 

While I believe that these definitions from a Christian website defined homosexuals/homsexuality correctly in some capacity, I believe that whomever wrote these definitions completely left out the identity factor of homosexuality and instead focused on the sexual parts. I believe this is because while the Catholic Church does not prohibit homosexual identity, it does restrict any homosexual acts. Therefore, by attaching sex acts as a necessary component of the definitions, sex acts and identity are inevitably being linked, and perpetuating the sin of homosexuality.

I very much enjoyed reading Sabrina. I have not read many graphic novels, so I am not sure exactly how this text compares stylistically to somewhat canonical graphic novels. However, I feel as though the medium of the graphic novel was absolutely pertinent to the multiple narratives that Drnaso introduced throughout the text. Without the illustrations that Drnaso provides, I imagine that it would be quite hard to figure out what was currently happening in the novel as well as who was speaking. This is shown when the main narrative of Teddy and Calvin is at times interjected by Sandra’s response to her sister’s death and Calvin’s experience at work and with his ex wife and daughter. 

Additionally, I believe that the illustrations themselves carry a large portion of the narrative, as they help to demonstrate the characters’ reactions to certain events without any text, even though most of the characters’ expressions are usually quite blank. This is shown specifically with Teddy, as his reaction to Sabrina’s disappearance and later death has caused him to isolate himself and speak as little as possible. Teddy’s character is rather shown through his absence of words until the end of the novel, when he concerned himself with the disappearance of Calvin’s cat. Even though the images Drnaso illustrate are quite simple and the characters expressionless, I believe that he did an amazing job of carrying a compelling and engaging narrative throughout the entire novel. What surprised me the most was the shift in focus of characters in the text. When I first started reading the novel I thought Sabrina was going to be the protagonist, then Teddy, but then it became clear towards the end that Calvin is the main protagonist. I thought this was an interesting choice on Drnaso’s part, as Calvin is the character in the novel with the most distant connection to the tragedy, but it worked. I was still able to witness the grief of those more connected to Sabrina, like Sandra and Teddy. However, Calvin’s heavy involvement in the novel also gave us insight into his life and how he cared for his friend even though he was dealing with his own issues.

Video:”STOP Trying to Make Straight Pride Happen” 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfsC9sJ0js4 

Look, I’m just going to say it right off the bat: I don’t have a problem with the gays. I’m not even sure if it is politically correct to call them “the gays” anymore. It is so hard to keep track nowadays; first “queers” was offensive, and now I’m told that that’s what they want to be called. I got dirty looks from the girls behind be in line at the grocery store for saying “dyke” on the phone to my buddy the other day, but apparently they can call themselves that and it’s fine? I call bullshit. You can’t just call yourself a dyke and then get mad when other people say it. 

They think they’re so powerful now that they have the right to marry. If you ask me, things were better before the government allowed them to do whatever they want. It’s gotten to the point that if you don’t fawn over two dudes practically making out in the street, people think you’re homophobic. I’m not homophobic, like I said, people can do whatever they want, but I don’t want to see that stuff while I’m minding my own business. 

I was at the bar with my buddy a couple weeks ago, and lo and behold, right on the TV was a news story about this year’s gay pride parade. 

We both scoffed. “Why do they need a whole parade for being gay?” I asked, “Haven’t they got what they wanted by being able to get married? The whole thing just seems like a spectacle just to feel special and different.” 

“I don’t know,” he sighed, “Every time I go anywhere there’s pride this, pride that, ‘be proud of who you are’ bullshit. But if I say that I’m proud to be straight, suddenly I’m the bad guy.” 

“You know you’re right. Wouldn’t it be funny if we organized a straight pride parade? Just to show them that they can’t make us feel bad about who we are just because they want to feel special about themselves.” 

He laughed, “Yeah I’m sure they would love that” 

“No, I’m serious. I am so tired of feeling like I shouldn’t be proud of my heterosexuality. I’ve faced problems because of it too, you know! If you ask me, straight people are the oppressed ones nowadays; we have to keep quiet about who we’re into while the queers get to parade around the city with their rainbow flags and fag haircuts, practically humping in the streets. Let’s start our OWN parade.” 

And so we did. We took to the streets the next weekend, holding up signs depicting heterosexual love, with flags outlined in solely black and white, so as not to resemble their rainbow flag. People didn’t take to our parade very kindly, but hey, we’re just exercising our right to free speech right? Maybe by this time next year, we’ll have our own month and more supporters. Through our brave endeavor, the heterosexual voice will be heard again after being silenced for so many years. 

— A PROUD straight white man

Process Notes: This narrative is very ironic, and in some ways a bit too much so. However, heterosexual people organizing a straight pride parade actually did happen last year and for most of the reasons that the narrator mentions in my narrative. I wanted to be able to expose this type of thinking in order to highlight that not only is a straight pride parade not necessary, but it is intrinsically homophobic. Queer people on a daily basis are still fighting for the rights that many straight people take for granted, for example, not being called “fag” and “dyke.”

Thinking about Walter Lipman’s “Journalism and the Higher Law” and Italo Calvino’s “Exactitude” prompted me to consider the extreme importance of word choice in nearly all mediums of expression, as well as my own personal word choice (which I am considering as I write this response). Lipman discusses word choice in relation to truth within journalism and government. Specifically, he explores how institutions may may choose certain words to show themselves in a good light, and in the process, the truth becomes buried. He writes, “the most immoral act [is] the immorality of the government, so the most destructive form of untruth is sophistry and propaganda by those whose profession it is to report the news” (Lipman, 10). 

When Calvino addresses word choice, he defines it more specifically as exactitude. Calvino presents the issue that “language is always being used in a loose, haphazard, careless manner” (Calvino, 68), and instead should “covey as precisely as possible the perceptible aspect of things” (Calvino, 91). I particularly enjoyed how Calvino pointed to the benefits of writing in the beginning of his speech (which I think actually would have been much more effective towards the end). He explains that writing is the most effective medium of conveying exactitude, since a writer can choose their words precisely, while a speaker is merely improvising and may not select the appropriate words on the spot. 

I thought these two authors, especially Calvino, connected very well to our writing assignment this week. As we were tasked to rewrite our pieces with more fitting and apt adjectives and descriptors, I became much more aware at how much specificity, conciseness, and clarity are essential in providing an accurate description of whatever a writer chooses to describe. This exactitude not only favorably demonstrates the writer’s skill, but also resonates better with their readers.