Please see some of the previous posts for additional resources on
Let Us Now Praise Famous Men. Describe below any aspect of the opening of the text that you find interesting. Some questions to think about: how would you describe Agee's style? How does it contrast or complement the photographs by Walker Evans? In what ways does this text break with traditional documentary aesthetics? Where does it depart from "realism"? How does Agee bring his own body and subjectivity into the text? How does he represent the poor? What are the power relationships you see in the text?
I think one thing that tremendously separates this from most documentaries is Agee's inclusion of himself and Walker Evans in the text. When I think of documentary (especially a film, but this could apply to a text also), I think of a camera examining a scene carefully, while the camera, director, and camera man are conveniently out of the picture. However, Agee breaks with this stereotype considerable; from the very first sentence the reader is aware that Agee and Evans will play active roles in the story Agee tells. The three "scenes" near the beginning of the book ("Late Sunday Morning," "At the Forks," and "Near a Church", pp 23 -39) also set the stage for observers' role in the text. Each of these scenes is entirely focused on Agee's interactions with the "locals. And it is evident from these scenes that Agee and Evans are outsiders and, as Agee puts it, "spies."
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think it is interesting to point out how self-aware Agee is about the intended readership for his book. In the preface, Agee recommends reading the book continuously, with only a few short pauses. This, of course, is something that only a privileged reader who has plenty of spare time would be able to accomplish.
One thing that interests me so far is the way that Agee is thrust into a power structure that he doesn't endorse, but he's not sure how to get out of it. When the black men are called to come sing for him, he doesn't know how to convey to them that he doesn't see them as people to be bossed around. He says, "I had been sick in the knowledge that they felt they were here at our demand... and that I could communicate nothing otherwise" (28).
ReplyDeleteLater, when he frightens the young couple walking by the church, he feels a similar powerlessness to express himself. He feels that where words wouldn't work, maybe he should throw himself on the ground and kiss their feet, but then decides that that wouldn't work, either (38).
He's caught between wanting to "break into and possess" their church (and their life stories), and wanting to respect every person he meets as a sovereign being. He doesn't know how to show that respect, though, as we see when he tries to respond to the old man on the porch, but just feels stupid (33).
I think that a line on p. 37 is very telling: "I watched aspects of them which are less easily seen... when one's own eyes and face and the eyes and face of another are mutually visible and appraising."
It's a lot easier to judge people (and write about them), when they're not looking back at you, when they're just the Subject of you book. But by putting himself into the text, maybe he's trying to subject himself to the gaze of the readers, instead of remaining on the other side of the "camera." (Okay, that metaphor comes out of nowhere, but see, as I was writing this, I was thinking about Sullivan having a really clear idea of the movie he wanted to make, until the tables were turned and he was no longer behind the camera. Does that make sense?)
I'm still very early in my reading of this text, so I don't know if I can make a very thorough observation. . . here goes.
ReplyDeleteI am struck by the way Agee shows incredible contempt toward his publishers ("a little of your money fall to poor little us"). He almost seems apologetic about his authorship in a way that attempts to absolve him of responsibility. (This is mostly just a feeling I get -- I'll just admit I don't really have textual evidence to back up this claim.) This feels to me like an attempt of Agee to align himself with the poor. He really seems to determined to demonstrate his empathy throughout the early sections of the text.
On the other hand, though, I am suspicious of his empathy. After all of his talk about subject and observer, does he still feel he can convince us of his allegiance to the poor? He is an outsider, and he is clearly on a much more privileged plane of existence than his subjects. Whether or not he is sorry about paying the black sharecroppers for their song, he still aligns himself with the white "masters" to gain access.
Like I said, I'm planning to do quite a bit more reading on this tonight, so I'm not sure how thorough I can really be. . . I'm theorizing on hunches here. :)
So far, what I enjoy most about the text is Agee's descriptions of people and places. He has a way of describing his surroundings that makes me feel as if I'm standing there with him. One example is when Agee explains, "This man, small-built and heavy jointed, and wandering in his motions like a little child, had the thorny beard of a cartoon bolshevik.." (31). There are many other examples I'm sure you all have noticed as well. As long as he continues with these descriptions, I will continue to become enthralled along with him.
ReplyDeleteI also found it interesting how the families were so suspicious of these outsiders, Agee and Evans, at first, yet how they let them into their lives upon hearing what they were assigned to accomplish. Just knowing that these men might be able to help their situation, they open up their private, family life to them and allow their home and children to be photographed. It's a wonderful human interaction that we don't normally get to read about.
Brittany Evans
I like this work so far. I loved the pictures and felt as though they set a predisposed personality for the story before the text even begins.
ReplyDeleteTo me this book feels deeply Southern, more so than any of the previous readings we have done. Race also seems to be much more prevalent and "in your face" in this piece. I noticed several slang terms used quite frequently.
I've also found it interesting that Agee repeatedly compares these people to animals, and describes them through vulgarity. I've cringed more than once reading the descriptions that he places before us. I was somewhat surprised to see him speak of a man adjusting his genitals and referring to masturbation. I'm beginning to feel more and more sympathetic towards the people whose lives Agee is intruding. I feel almost ashamed reading this while knowing that they are intimidated by this stranger who shows up to capture an outsiders glimpse of their life for the public to read, interpret, or judge however they deem fit. Although the people in this text perhaps are not be the most personable or admirable characters, it's as though by reading this I'm adding to their hardships and embarrassment.
One thing that really struck me in the beginning of the book is how Agree is determined to relate the truth through his book. He wants to present things as real as he can. Like in class, we discussed how he wanted to imitate a picture or things that you can actually feel and see. However, I cant help that notice that the mere presence of Agree among the people he is trying to describe affects them, therefore, how do we know if it truly is realism? On page 46, Agree states that " I feel that if i can by utter quietness succeed in not disturbing the silence ...I can tell you anything within the realm of God, whatsoever it may be, and that what so ever it may be, you will not be able to help but understand it". I understand the need for Agree to appear unbiased and have no affect on his surroundings, but the problem is that he DOES have an affect on his environment. When trying to get directions, the people were acting cold toward Agree because of the lack of trust. The same lack of trust is seen with the black couple who are frightened by Agree following them in order to ask them a question. So, even at the beginning of the book, I recognize the problem between Agree trying to represent realism through his documentation and the actual way and style of the people he is representing.
ReplyDeleteI thought I had posted last night but I think I forgot to put in the security code and closed the window. So this may sound repetitive...
ReplyDeleteI really agree with the previous post that no matter how unbiased Agee wanted to be, he greatly affects how people act in this book. Just look at Emma who both Agee and Walker apparently had a thing for.
Along with this I have a real issue with Agee's style. I do agree with the idea that his style does give a sort of dignity and broader voice to people who maybe have a limited word set. I don't like how abstract Agee becomes and that he goes on long colon tangents where I soon forget what he was talking about in the first place. I like how he describes places and people but I wish he would have given the people more of a voice. I wanted to hear more dialogue from the people he is observing; their actual diction, not Agee inhabiting their body with high modernism.
He did well on some portrayals; I liked the scene where everyone says goodnight to one another. That showed their family bond as we said in class. Also it reminded me of Eliot's _The Waste Land_ where everyone is leaving the bar, saying good night then it slips into a reference to Ophelia. I don't know if Agee meant for that comparison if I'm making too much out of it.
But for the most part I do like his descriptions and shall soldier through some more of the book!
I think Agee's passion for what he's trying to accomplish through this work is indicated both in the interaction he has with the families and the way he tries to relate his text to the photographs by Evans.
ReplyDeleteIn most documentaries and documentary texts, an attempt is made by the journalist to remove themself from the situation; objectivism is a key aspect of journalistic integrity (or something like that). Agee doesn't even try to do that here. He's clearly invested so much of himself into the project that it's impossible for him to leave himself out of the text. I think that's effective for this work because it shows more human interaction for the poor families.
This is also evident in the way Agee uses descriptive wording to correlate the text with the photographs. He states in the preface that this text is meant to reflect the photographs, and he attempts to do this by going into extremely heavy description about his surroundings. Whether or not this is effective is debatable, but it's clear that Agee cares very intensely for this documentary and the families in it (or does he? Hmmmm....)
-Liz Hall Forgot To Sign In
As we’ve discussed in class, Agee is not presenting an easy to follow description of the daily lives of sharecroppers. He wanders off into these abstract thoughts that are difficult to follow but often profoundly insightful. Agee makes it clear that he is trying to present an objective (as possible) view and claims that “this is not a work of art or entertainment, nor will I assume the obligations of the artist or entertainer” (98). Yet, this book is obviously very artistic. (When the editors of Fortune magazine sent Agee off to document the lives of sharecroppers, I doubt this was the finished product they expected.) Agee addresses this tension between objective, scientific explanation and artistic expression in his chapter “On the Porch.” His thoughts in this chapter really helped me to understand what he is trying to do. He says, “Isn’t every human being both a scientist and an artist; and in writing human experience, isn’t there a good deal to be said for recognizing that fact and for using both methods” (213). I think the way in which Agee mixes science and art is a bit disorientating. At the beginning of the book I wanted to sit Agee down and ask him if he was really trying to write an accurate documentation of these families. Is this journalism or art, Agee? But, I’ve come to realize that it is both, and that is what makes it so brilliant.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Brittany about the detail in which Agee describes things. I was reminded of this in the current reading on page 197-198. The way he describes Walker and himself trying to fall asleep on the car seat and thin pallet really pulls you into the scene. "...your cheek was red and plush with the friction of warmed plush" he says. You can -feel- the scratchy uncomfortableness of their bedding. I found it funny that he describes them constantly trading beds, but that there was no one bed more comfortable than the other, both were equally uncomfortable.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with "lrporter" in the sometimes gratuitous use of sexual language when describing even mundane things (in the section I spoke about above, he even describes his effort to lay comfortably on his bed as "intercourse"). I can certainly see how one of these families, who had had these men living intimately in their homes, could find the book perverse or disturbing (or "creepy" as has been said in class). This would be especially true of people with a lesser grasp of artistic metaphor, and I think if I were in one of these family's shoes, I would probably feel somewhat violated by the work.
What I enjoy about Agee's work is that he is trying to somewhat get onto the minds of his subjects and tel there stories without seeming biased at all.. Well at least he tries! He gives specific detail to certain families and you can tell that he can feel more of a connection with them.
ReplyDeleteI praise what he was trying to do, but I would personally feel that my life had been violated if he just came into my life and told intimate details about my children and family. Although his depictions of the famlies I feel are somewhat accurate, but again I feel as though he has played favoritism.
I think his reason's for the "sexual language" that everyone is describing is because it was desires of these people, so that is what he equivilates with desire is sexuality.
A lot of people seem to feel that Agee’s blatant subjectivity lends a certain tender aesthetic to the representation of these poor families. However, so far in my reading, I am struck by the lack of empathy that translates onto the page. Perhaps I am way off, but Agee repeatedly describes members of the families in animalistic terms. He seems much more concerned with his own desires in relation to Emma, and while the prose is beautiful, it carries constant hints at a feeling of superiority. On a different note, I am enjoying the modernistic aspects of the book, although they are sometimes overwhelming. Agee employs episodic fragments and ghost voices, along with several other modernist devices to create passionate, yet sometimes confusing sections, often reminiscent of Faulknerian technique.
ReplyDeleteI'd like to discuss the recurring theme that we went over in class. The lofty language is nearly blinding at times. Someone mentioned in class that he seems to be trapped in his own language and I'd like to build on that. It seems like he is so impressed with photography that he strives so hard to tell this story, the lives of these people, with picturesque language. Perhaps it is not only that he trapped in the language, but that he cannot end or begin it, it can only be added to. This might help explain the bajillion colons.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I can't even begin to unravel what he means by some of this language, but I really enjoyed the philosophical insights on page 203. He tells us about truth, and without hesitation he punctuates it normally. He also talks about symmetry in the next paragraph in which a period can be found. He seems to be certain about some things, such as truth and symmetry, and is able to express his thoughts clearly. By being able to recognize these differences throughout the text, it may help us to see when he is adding himself and his thoughts into what he is writing as compared to just trying to get a description or point across.
As I read this novel, I keep going back to the photos at the beginning and trying to connect them to what Agee is saying. I've found that both the photos and the passages where no people appear to be present make me very uncomfortable. I first had that feeling with the photographs... there are several in a row where the main focus is a building or street rather than people.
ReplyDeleteThese buildings, as shown in the photographs, and in Agee's descriptions, are more clearly works of man, built things, than most houses today. Looking at and reading about them make me think of the process of building, clearing the land, chopping wood, sanding boards, nailing them together.
But these passages and pictures of buildings, without the people that built them, fill me with a sense of doom, like some social Armageddon wiped all the people away, and these buildings are their tombstones.
This illustrates most clearly for me the sense of lack that keeps coming up throughout the novel. It's not just that they can't buy the things they need... it's almost like they don't own themselves. They certainly don't have complete control of themselves, their lives, or their labour.
Without agency, people disappear.
I've been drawn to a particularly interesting passage found on pgs 208-209 that I have sort-of fallen in love with. The text talks about the human imagination versus reality, as well as compares the difference between how the camera captures something and how the writers uses words to capture that same thing. Agee says that words are “the most inevitably inaccurate of all mediums of record and communication,” while the “ease becomes the greatest use against the good use of the camera.” However, Agee continues on to say that he believes words “could be made to do or to tell anything within human conceit.” Agee explains that the problem with language isn’t the words themselves but the ever-changing interpretation of the words by people. Whereas a picture is a solid image that stays the same, words mean something different to individuals, and their meanings constantly shift. He points out that “the breakdown of the identification of word and object, is very important.” The problem with words arises between the word and the idea that that word is meant to represent. Agee ends that passage extremely poetically in my opinion saying, “Human beings may be more and more aware of being awake, by they are still incapable of not dreaming; and a fish forswears water for air at his own peril.” Consequently, a couple of the problems Agee is facing while writing this are the fact people choose what their imaginations dream up over what is real and the fact that words do not always specifically represent an object universally the same. Agee must attempt to overcome these things in order to present a description of these tenant farmers that literarily honest.
ReplyDeleteOn page 282, Agee writes of the families' "arduous physical work, to which a consciousness beyond that of the simplest child would be only a useless and painful encumbrance." This line got me thinking, because in the past couple of years, I've started getting annoyed by our idea of physical labor as being beneath human dignity. I happen to think that physical labor is an important part of the human experience, and that it is no more degrading than our bodily functions, or any other part of life. In fact, labor can be really gratifying and maybe even ennobling, because you can use the strength of your own body to get what you need (food, shelter, etc.). So when I read this line, I wondered about the difference between the kind of labor that dehumanizes and degrades someone, and the kind of labor that is just a part of life. I think Agee might say that the difference is in choice, and in reaping (or not) the benefits of your labor.
ReplyDeleteWhat makes tenant farming so degrading is that these families do not own themselves, cannot choose whether or not to work, and do not keep the rewards of their labor. I like Agee's description of their labor: "nothing is attainable."
Despite this distinction between "good work" and "bad work," however, I still think that there is a problem with how Agee describes their labor. There's just such a fine line between the desire to alleviate the suffering that comes from too much labor, and participation in a pitying, condescending process, whereby the laborers are pitied to the point that they are treated as less than fully human. Does their work dehumanize them to the point that Agee is correct in comparing them to animals? Surely not, and yet I don't really have a better idea of how to represent them. I think that Agee does a remarkably good job of showing the humanness of his subjects, but the problem is, they're still subjects. I think Agee gets this, and is uncomfortable with it, but as readers, it's still our responsibility to point out when he has crossed that fine line into pitying, dehumanizing condescension. And I think he crosses that line in this "work" chapter.
I think it is interesting to note how aware Agee is that he is not documenting truly and accurately what these people's lives are like. He has 3 sections of his book called "On the Porch." This seems to be playing on the idea that he is literally on their front porch and he is also metaphorically only "on the porch" of experiencing their lives. That is, he only has a superficial relationship with these people - he describes their clothing, education, work, homes, etc, but he can never put into words who they really are. His self-awareness of this problem is evident on pages 210 and 211, especially with this single quote: "'Description' is a word to suspect" (p 210). Agee is completely aware that his description is only that, and it can never fully embody the people he is attempting to portray.
ReplyDeleteI wanted to revisit the "Overalls." section (around 230-233ish). More specifically, I was reminded of the film Modern Times with Charlie Chaplin (great film!!!) and how the men working in industry become the machines, much like these tenant farmers become their clothes and vice versa. Their clothes define them and classify them much more than they do today. Seeing a man in overalls, worn shoes/boots/barefeet, and a toothpick hanging out of his mouth could be a college student as much as a farmer.
ReplyDeleteClothes, particularly the overalls, are incredibly penetrating signifiers of the men they are describing. They're almost romanticized and certainly sexualized. The farmers almost becomes machines via Agee's very structural/architectural language, as Molly pointed out last class.
The clothes become the man, and the man becomes the clothes, just like man and machine in Modern Times. I think Agee desperately wanted to understand this kind of synthesis, and the only way he knew how was via sensuousness.
I think the sections of the book I enjoyed the most are areas of text where Agee gives us a deep, concrete look into how he experienced these families. I was completely sucked into his descriptions of how layered and rich the smells of these houses were (particularly on p. 135-6). I also loved his intimate, intricate descriptions of their clothing and each room in their homes. By acting as a 'spy' and going 'undercover' he is able to show us small objects that we would normally never gotten to witness, such as the clothes in their closet or objects in drawers. I was fascinated by his ability to make us feel as if we're there without the use of a photograph. Considering how difficult it must have been to capture the essence of these hard times and with how young he was at the time, Agee succeeded in giving us a glimpse of these tenants in my eyes.
ReplyDelete