Thursday, October 10, 2019
Literary Analysis: Hotel on the Corner of Bitter and Sweet as a Historical Fiction Essay
In Jamie Fordââ¬â¢s historical fiction Hotel on the Corner of Bitter and Sweet, this split narrative focuses on two eras: 1942 and 1986. Within these eraââ¬â¢s, Fordââ¬â¢s novel focuses on a Chinese boy, Henry Lee, and what it was like to grow up in the international district with prejudice everywhere, especially in his own family being a first generation American. His novel tells the story of Henry, as well as a Japanese girl by the name of Keiko. The novel tells the story of these two young friends and the hardships faced when the government sends Keiko and her family away to the Japanese internment camps in the Northwest in the 1940ââ¬â¢s. His novel displays the effects of the prejudice held against the Japanese during the 1940ââ¬â¢s wartime, and the effects it had on the lives of not only those Japanese, but also all Americans, Chinese and other nationalities. We use Anne Scott MacLeodââ¬â¢s essay ââ¬Å"Rewriting Historyâ⬠as a framework while reading Fordââ¬â¢s Hotel on the Corner of Bitter and Sweet. ââ¬Å"Rewriting Historyâ⬠is a persuasive essay giving criteria of a ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠Historical Fiction vs. ââ¬Å"badâ⬠Historical Fiction. This essay focuses on three of MacLeodââ¬â¢s criteria for a ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠Historical Fiction: not rewarding rebellion, not appealing to ââ¬Å"modern sensibilitiesâ⬠, and not overcoming social mores easily. Fordââ¬â¢s novel Hotel on the Corner of Biter and Sweet successfully meets MacLeodââ¬â¢s requirements for a ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠historical fiction in many ways, although, there are some flaws in a couple of his historical facts, nevertheless, the ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠historical facts and information in Hotel on the Corner of Bitter and Sweet out ways the few historical flaws. First of all, Ford makes sure to give Henry consequences to his rebellious acts; something MacLeod says many ââ¬Å"badâ⬠historical fictions do not do, they only reward with happy endings. Secondly, Ford uses racial discriminations that would have been used back in the 1940ââ¬â¢s; another thing MacLeod says that ââ¬Å"badâ⬠historical fiction accommodates to, making it non-offensive and politically correct for the readers. In addition, Henry does not easily overcome the social mores of 1942; again something MacLeod says that ââ¬Å"badâ⬠historical fiction makes it seem easy to overcome the social mores of the era. First of all, meeting MacLeodââ¬â¢s criteria for a ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠historical fictionâ⬠, Fordââ¬â¢s novel does not ââ¬Å"make overt rebellion seem nearly painless and nearly always successfulâ⬠. Ford displays this when Keiko is taken away Henry keeps some of her belongings safe under his dresser, as well as when Henry sneaks into two different Japanese internment camps searching for Keiko. Though this rebellion seems rewarded at first, as we continue reading we see how, by going to the internment camps and keeping Keikoââ¬â¢s belongings, Henry unknowingly starts a chain of events leading to one, giant consequence. Because Henry keeps Keikoââ¬â¢s belonging, and later writes her letters, his mother finds out and tells Henryââ¬â¢s father. Henry comes home one day and finds his parents at the kitchen table waiting for him with all of Keikoââ¬â¢s pictures spread all over the table. Because of this, Henryââ¬â¢s father gives him a choice: walk out the door and no longer be part of the family or stay and forget about Keiko. In the end Henry chooses to follow his heart and leaves his family (182-185). This forever affects the relationship between Henry and his father, even on his fatherââ¬â¢s deathbed. Secondly, according to MacLeodââ¬â¢s standard, Fordââ¬â¢s novel is a ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠historical fiction by not appealing to ââ¬Å"modern sensibilities, so that protagonists experience their own societies as though they were time-travelers, noting racism, sexism, religious bigotry, and outmoded beliefs as outsiders, not as people of and in their cultures. â⬠Ford uses dialect in his novel consisting of racial slurs and comments that would have been used back in the 1940ââ¬â¢s. Ford doesnââ¬â¢t accommodate to readers by making the book non-offensive or politically correct. Ford makes the book historically correct as possible. Thirdly, by MacLeodââ¬â¢s criteria, Fordââ¬â¢s novel is a ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠historical fiction by not ââ¬Å"set[ing] aside the social mores of the past as though they were minor afflictions, small obstacles, easyââ¬âand painlessââ¬âfor an independent mind to overcomeâ⬠. This is displayed near the beginning of the book after Chaz, the bully, snatches Henryââ¬â¢s ââ¬Å"I am Chineseâ⬠pin off of his shirt. While walking away Keiko tries to grab Henryââ¬â¢s hand for comfort, but he pushes it away thinking, ââ¬Å"My father would fall over deadâ⬠¦ And in town, someone would see usâ⬠(23). Ford made the transition of Henry opening up to Keiko take time; they didnââ¬â¢t become immediate friends. Ford makes sure to make the relationship between Keiko and Henry plausible. They both are ââ¬Ëscholarshippingââ¬â¢ at an all-white school and met working in the school kitchen, as payment for scholarshipping. Their connection is somewhat immediate, yet their relationship progresses slowly. Fourthly, according to MacLeodââ¬â¢s standard, Fordââ¬â¢s novel is a ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠historical fiction by not omitting ââ¬Å"the less attractive pieces of the past to make . . . arratives meet current social and political preferencesâ⬠. The 1940ââ¬â¢s for the Japanese-Americans were dark times; Hotel on the Corner of Bitter and Sweet does anything but omit these facts. From the harsh realities of the hatred between the Chinese and the Japanese displayed between Henryââ¬â¢s father, Henry, and Keiko, to the removal of the Japanese, Fordââ¬â¢s novel spares no ââ¬Å"less attractive piece of the pastâ⬠to make this novel appealing to the average human in this generation. Ford makes sure to put historical fact ahead of the appealing storyââ¬â¢s fiction. Lastly, Fordââ¬â¢s novel is a ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠historical fiction, by MacLeodââ¬â¢s criteria, because It does not imply that ââ¬Å"people of another time either understood or should have understood the world as we do now. â⬠Though Henry and Keiko had an unusual relationship that most Chinese and Japanese children in the 1940ââ¬â¢s wouldnââ¬â¢t have had, it isnââ¬â¢t entirely implausible. Think of it like thisâ⬠¦ The world is always changing, so how does it change? Someone has to be the one to make those changes happen. We donââ¬â¢t have the same view of the Japanese, or any race for that matter, that we did in past generations. So again, what changed? Obviously Fordââ¬â¢s novel is under the category of ââ¬Ëfictionââ¬â¢ and the actions of Henry didnââ¬â¢t have this amazing effect of the 1940ââ¬â¢s that changed history foreverâ⬠¦ However, someoneââ¬â¢s actions, somewhere in the 1940ââ¬â¢s, affected history. This fact makes the relationship between Henry and Keiko, as well as Fordââ¬â¢s novel as a whole, historically plausible. In conclusion Fordââ¬â¢s novel has an overwhelming amount of evidence backing up the hypothesis that his novel is a ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠work of historical fiction by MacLeodââ¬â¢s standard. Though the end of the novel rewards you with a cheesy, sappy love story ending, something slightly implausible, Ford does his best he can to keep the history in this ââ¬Ëhistorical fictionââ¬â¢ factual and true. Over all this novel is a highly plausible, and by MacLeodââ¬â¢s criteria, a ââ¬Å"goodâ⬠work of Historical Fiction. Fordââ¬â¢s novel is also a reminder of the injustice against the Japanese-Americans during the wartime of the 1940ââ¬â¢s and cautions us to never let ourselves as a people treat anyone we see as ââ¬Ëdifferentââ¬â¢ with the prejudice we so easily treated the Japanese with.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment