The Old Man and the Sea

I read The Old Man and the Sea in the terminal and on the plane last Thursday morning. While the tale was somewhat sad there seemed to be some just consolation for the old man upon his return trip as onlookers seemed to realize what an incredible catch he had and how hard he must have fought out at sea. I believe he wanted their respect and was saddened by having been mocked and judged as being unlucky.

I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. I was impressed with the depth of the relationship that existed between him and the boy. I found that to be remarkable especially for the time in which this was written.

The baseball references were also poignant. I wondered if Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan carry the kind of legendary status that DiMaggio carried in his heydey. I thought that they probably do not because sports today are everywhere 24-7 and we've lost the sense of purity that American baseball used to evoke. I liked the style of writing Hemingway used in which teams were spoken of as the White Sox of Chicago or the Yankees of New York. I wondered if people ever used to refer to teams in that manner?

Finally, the epic battle with the fish and the mind games that he played with himself were riveting. He showed respect for the sea and its inhabitants and marveled at their beauty and personality. This I found refreshing and yet sad. In this you could see the depth of his loneliness and his craving for companionship. Perhaps, this is why he and the boy were so close, as the boy didn't appear to have much of a relationship with his father. It seemed that this loneliness was something that Hemingway understood on a deep level and it really shows forth in his writing.

The Old Man and the Sea to me epitomizes much of what one experiences in a lifetime: memories, pain, regret, hope, fear, and resiliency, and companionship. I can see why this story won the big prize for literature as it is a true classic. I hope to read it with my children one day.

Into the Wild Movie Release

Eight or so years back, a friend recommended that I read Into the Wild, a non-fiction story written by Jon Krakauer, based on the life of one, Christopher McCandless. I was immediately drawn into the story, in part because it was about the life and death of a local guy who like me was a high school cross country runner. McCandless, who was somewhat of a loner wandered off in April of 1992 into the wilderness of Alaska, carrying minimal supplies (not including a map or a compass) for what would be an arduous journey. After becoming trapped in by water McCandless was able to survive until August before he died probably of starvation.

Sean Penn released a film of this story just a couple of weeks back. Some friends and I at work were discussing going to see the film. We also were talking about the story in general. Was McCandless noble or was he a fool? I think that one could make the argument for both. McCandless, was noble in that like most ascetics and thinkers before him he was trying to find his place in the world. He refused to allow being born into a life of privilege dictate to him the meaning of life. He, perhaps was foolish in that he completely disrespected nature by not being properly prepared for the particularly harsh climate of Alaska.

But, isn't his struggle the same struggle we all deal with on a regular basis, balancing our idealistic side and our pragmatic side. The idealistic side of me says, stand up for yourself, stand up for others that are being exploited, don't be a coward. Recently, I saw a co-worker take a stand on something that he felt very passionate about at a meeting. He was met with strong resistance by opponents who felt that he was out of line and they treated him as a radical nut. I felt for him because I've been there, the lone voice crying in the wilderness. Usually that is the only place the idealist can go, as they have been muzzled and run out of the public square, so to speak. The pragmatic side of me says, Be responsible, take care of your family, don't try to be the arrogant savior of all mankind. After all, do you really want to go through life experiencing the emotional highs and lows of the idealist? Do you want to lead a life that is continually prone to depression, prone to having no peace, after all your health is at stake here. The idealistic side argues, fine go with the flow, never swim upstream, be an ordinary everyday Joe that minds your own business because it's the easy way out. Who am I to judge McCandless, and even if I were to do so, on what basis do I judge? I am McCandless. Do I want to be judged? Absolutely not. So, what then am I to do. I guess the answer is to embrace the struggle and be glad that there is one. For once, the struggle ceases to exist the pulse needs to be checked. I guess I should try to walk the tight rope to the best of my ability and hope that the two sides of me come out when they need to. I'm looking forward to seeing Penn's portrayal of McCandless's struggle. I am looking forward to seeing my struggle and hope that the film helps me to embrace it tighter, even if that embracing is against my will.