1.) Borges said, "any life is made up of a single moment, the moment in which a man finds out, once and for all, who he is." What is the moment for John Vincent Moon--and who does he find out he is?
2.) To quote Borges again, "time is the substance from which I am made. Time is a river which carries me along. But I am the river; it is a tiger that devours me. But I am the tiger; it is a fire that consumes me, but I am the fire." How does this idea correlate with an assertion Borges makes in "The Shape of the Sword?" What is Borges suggesting about time and how we should utilize it?
3 comments:
NUMBER 2 (sort of)
Okay, I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that Borges, the narrator, and Vincent Moon are one and the same man. As Borges writes, "Whatever one man does, it is as if all men did it." I think that the different characters represent certain aspects of one personality. The comrade who is with Moon (who claims to be the narrator until the end of the story) is the noble, heroic, warrior who does not think much but is not afraid to die for his cause and his country.
On the flip side, Moon is the complete opposite of this: He is clearly afraid, but "in order to show that he was indifferent to being a physical coward, he magnifies his mental arrogance."
Borges is portraying a similar message in his quote, "Time is the substance from which I am made. Time is a river which carries me along. But I am the river; it is a tiger that devours me. But I am the tiger; it is a fire that consumes me, but I am the fire." Not only are the three characters in the story the same, but perhaps we are all the same in that we are all a part of a collective time, a shared history. In the "Shape of The Sword," the narrator points out that all those in Ireland, from Republicans to Catholics, were united by the "bitter and cherished mythology" of their homeland. They are a part of it, and it is a part of them, and forever they shall be inextricably bound by it.
Furthermore, according to Borges, we are all connected by an even greater narrative, the history of mankind. "For that reason it is not unfair that one disobedience in a garden should contaminate all humanity; for that reason it is not unjust that the crucifixion of a single Jew should be sufficient to save it." Clearly this is written in the Judeo-Christian vein, but regardless of beliefs, you can see the point the narrator is driving at: we are all bound by a joint fate, in which our personal decisions affect the outcome of all.
I think that Borges is trying to get us to question what the true definition of history is. He is scornful of traditional, "controversial and uncongenial," history books. He does not say why, but I think it is because a textbook can only record a minor fraction of all that has occurred throughout time. For instance, the episode portrayed in this story would be too minor to be included in a history book. Yet who is to judge what is significant or insignificant? The scar of our narrator will haunt him more than anything he will ever read in a book; indeed, even his name is defined by "the shape of the sword." Yet it is deemed unworthy because, unlike a war or a famine, it has only affected him. Or so one would think.
Borges' point, which goes along with what we discussed yesterday in class, is that we are all scarred in the same way. Perhaps not literally, but certainly on a metaphorical level, for we all process the same basic emotions. There are times when we are the coward, Vincent Moon. Yet there are times we are blinded by pure rage and wish for nothing more than to take a sword to our enemy. Ultimately, this primal emotions coupled with the one world we share ensure that while we may have individual lives, we are all part of one history, of one time.
Question 1.
“any life is made up of a single moment”
My initial reaction to Borges is to call shenanigans. Life is not a single moment, and no man’s has a single unchanging identity. We are all everything and nothing, I am not the same woman I was a moment ago, I am more or less conscious then before and I am somewhat older than the laine who began this sentence. There are moments, singular in their seeming uniqueness in all lives, that do define the individual, they are however bountiful and varied. John Vincent Moon, did not have a single moment of life or a single identity. He changed from one man to everyman within the span of a paragraph, and by the end of a page length he was yet another man. Each of these identities had its moment, if not many.
The men of the story, the ‘English Man’, John Moon, humanity and Borges, shifted lives throughout the text. Three significant moments, “in which a man finds out... who he is” stand out in the shifting ‘life’ of the narrator. Vincent Moon is defined and marked by the scar across his face. There is no denying this characteristic’s defining quality. The crescent moon marks him the sinning, the weakling, the betrayer, and the flawed.
In another moment ‘Moon’ become everyone “whatever one man does it is as if all men did it.” His scar correlates to humanity’s flaws and Eve’s sin, for he is not merely John. He is, in a manner “All men”.
Lastly ‘Moon’ becomes the I of the story, the theoretical story teller and Borges as well. When he declares “I am Vincent Moon. Now despise me” he takes his identity into his own hands and casts away the cowardice which previously defined him. The Vincent Moon who existed before that declaration ceases to exist in that moment, the narrator becomes that brave Irish man, and throws off the garb of the coward.
Man’s life is not one moment, but a succession of moments, minute and grand in a constant, which flow endlessly in a procession of change. Man is defined by so many moments that it appears as though he may not be truly defined for in the instant that it takes to understand, he has already changed.
Post a Comment