|
Home
Contact
Schedule
Policies
Advice
Responses
Essays
|
ESSAY
ONE: On Walker Percy
The
assignment
Write an interesting, tightly-built, well-proven argument about Walker
Percy’s "The Loss of the Creature".
Choose from one of the following approaches:
- Attack the essay. Prove that it fails to live up to one of its own standards,
in a surprising or subtle way. Do this by connecting the definition of
this ‘standard’ to a specific passage in the essay that betrays
that standard. Consider how Percy’s tone feeds the hypocrisy you’ve
identified. Conclude by deciding whether this hypocrisy is enough to ruin
Percy’s credibility in the rest of his essay.
- Defend the essay. Prove that what seems like weakness or self-contradiction
is actually a surprising or subtle strength of "The Loss of the Creature".
Do this by showing how a specific passage in the essay that seems unconvincing
actually supports an idea articulated elsewhere in the essay. Consider
how Percy risks seeming like a bad writer in order to advance his agenda.
End by thinking about why Percy might want to test his reader.
- Build your own argument. Feel free to draw on any work that you’ve
already done in the three responses—as long as it serves to feed
a clearly articulated thesis that is proven, in a step-by-step fashion,
over the course of five pages.
Sample
Paper: "Percy's Challenge"
In the essay,
The Loss of Creature, Walker Percy attacks the human perspective of life.
Percy claims that "a certain value"(565) for life has become
lacking and that humanity is reluctant to find it again. Throughout the
essay he shows and criticizes many attempts to capture existence. Be it
at a national park or listening to Beethoven, Percy analyzes the situation
and then tries to give us ways in which we can go about recovering this
loss. However, what may emerge from the text to be a carefully drawn-out
diagram is in fact a tactic that Percy uses to scare and challenge his
reader to think differently. With this, he suggests going further than
just "leaving the beaten track", making a track of our very
own.
It would seem that Percy is giving us some sort of blue print in which
to follow. The title, The Loss of Creature, suggests that something has
been lacking. Percy implies that "a certain value"(565) has
been forfeited, this value being the power to take things for what they
are. All is not lost though; Percy has equipped us with tools to fight
this mighty foe through his blue prints. He offers many ways to go about
retrieving the loss that strikes us so violently. These retrievals or
"recoveries", as Percy would put it, are placed before us throughout
the text. As a mater a fact, Percy uses the word "recovery"
or variations of it at least a dozen times, allowing for ample light to
be thrown upon the darkened streets of our clouded minds. For instance:
Percy recommends recovery through "national disaster" or "a
break down of symbolic machinery"(567). Through a national disaster
we are given more symbolism, something that used to be no longer exists.
That which has stood through the years, steadfast and secure, yet over
looked and taken for granted becomes more powerful when destroyed. When
there is a breakdown of symbolic machinery, an unchanged world full of
planned exercises and guided tours is abruptly interrupted. We start afresh
without a guide or railing to lead us. Percy, using these recoveries and
many others in his blue prints, gives us hope that there is yet a brighter
day, all is not irreclaimable, and we can look forward to new beginnings.
In reality these recoveries offer no help to us at all, they are merely
biased answers to judgmental accusations Percy makes about human nature.
The biggest example of these allegations is Percy's portrait of the American
couple traveling to Mexico. This depiction of travelers is one of the
largest examples used in the essay, taking up more than one-fifth of the
text. Here Percy's fictitious incident charges travelers with the inability
to experience an "authentic"(568) situation. "It"(569),
as Percy refers, is what the couple falls short of. Their present experience
will always be measured by a prototype: a "picture post card, geographic
book, (or) tourist folder"(566). Here, according to Percy, the "preformulation"
occurs and "the source of the sightseer's pleasure under goes a shift."(566).
But this is just an assumption, there is no factual proof that tourists,
especially these tourists, feel or think in this way. Percy's judgments
are based on mere guesses and assumptions that this is how humanity performs
under these circumstances. Now as for his recovery of this portrayal,
it stands "ambiguous". All that we know is that they need the
thoughts of their ethnologist friend. According to Percy, "all they
want is his approval" to "certify their experience as genuine"(570).
But, here we find no truth. There is no means of recovery, no blue print
to follow. No ways of getting out of this frame of mind are listed and
there is no way to step into a "new beginning". All this does
is give us the idea that the couple does not have a mind of their own.
It leads us to believe that true happiness can only be experienced by
the reaction of others to the situation.
However, this is not the only time we can see such unhelpful examples
of recovery. The same is evident throughout the essay, which leads one
to think that there is some kind of repetition going on. For instance:
there is the young man going on a trip to France and the native in the
desert of New Mexico. The young man, witnessing a riot, "had almost
left France without seeing 'it' "(571). The native returned the object
that fell from the sky because "the highest role he can play, is
that of the finder and the returner". Both portraits give a sense
that a curtain value is lost or maybe was not there to begin with. Still
there is no way to recover this value, this sense of "it". Where
is the blueprint to follow? How does the boy see with his own eyes? How
can the native appreciate the fallen object? At which point do we find
our instructions, our "recoveries"? Once there was a blueprint,
and now there is none. This lack of information leaves the reader disturbed
and frustrated.
What is more disturbing is that these portraits and the people involved
in them are quite generalized. As a mater of fact, with the exception
to the destination of the traveler, we know nothing personal about them.
There is no description to tell us what these "guinea pigs"
are like. We don't know names or facial descriptions. There is nothing
to tell of their attire or their style, simply: a "young man"(571),
"an American couple"(569), "a student"(573), "the
girl"(575), and "the sightseer"(566). These are just a
few of the generalizations that Percy hands us so abruptly. They represent
a notion that they could be anybody or they could be nobody. The problem
is not just how generalized these people are, that itself does not make
them scary. Generalizations are used all the time, for example: "the
students at USM start school today". The students going to USM could
be anybody. I could be a student at USM; I am a student a USM. This generalization
is not a problem because it is surrounded by fact. What makes Percy's
generalization upsetting is that it is a judgment call on everyone and
anyone. He proves no fact to his argument. The people Percy uses have
a name, and that name could be yours or mine. Think of how many of these
generalizations we fall under: a young man, an American couple, and/or
a student. These notions and assumptions could be made about you or me,
and it could be assumed that we go about reacting in this way. Percy leaves
it so far open that these people could be anybody, they could be us, and
that is what makes it scary. People may actually be like this, its possible
we may be like this.
This "Loss of Creature" leaves us questioning ourselves, our
own thoughts, and how we have perceived even the smallest of encountering.
The idea that "I would never do that", or "That's not the
way I think", instantly comes to mind. Do we really think like the
American couple, always-questioning whether or not we are experiencing
"it"? Is it necessary for a riot to breakout in a café
necessary for us to appreciate France and all it décor. Must we
find an "unspoiled" place to recover what has been lost? We
find ourselves ridiculing Percy for assuming such ideas about individuals,
but we can't help but wonder, where is the truth in what he says? How
did Percy form these strong accusations and what led him to believe this
way? These questions lead us to think that Percy did view some sort of
loss. Be it through his journeys or just in life, he must have seen this
loss with his own eyes. Maybe he even experienced a taste of it. Percy's
intent was not to charm us into seeing life through his ideas, or to ridicule
the nature of humanity. His purpose was to scare us, and to challenge
us to think differently. Not to think like each other or even like him,
but to discover a new way of thinking. Percy asks the question: "Are
they like Fabre, who gaze at the world about him with wonder, letting
it be what it is; or are they like the overanxious mother who sees her
child as one performing, now doing badly, now doing well?"(570).
This is Percy's question to us, how are we viewing the world about us?
Is it through the eyes around us, always questioning the purity, or do
we see with new eyes, with our eyes of our own?
One of Percy's recoveries is "leaving the beaten track". Robert
Frost said it quite nicely: to choose the road less traveled by. Today
we live in a generation that seems like all it wants to do is get off
the beaten trail. In our efforts to be different we have "(the) most
beaten track of all"(567). Percy suggests we go a little further
than just "leaving the beaten track". He asks that we make a
track of our very own, to become an individual, to let go of the status
quo and grab our own direction. Percy's objective was not for us to hail
his essay, but rather to open our minds to the world around you. If there
is blame to be made then Percy is guilty of challenging us to view our
world out of the box, to open the door to the "lost creature"
within. Let us no longer look at life as an experience where we are just
along for the ride. Rather let us look through new eyes at the adventures
we have before us. Seeking out that unpaved path, as it falls upon our
next journey. Where this life take us, is what God will have in store.
Back
to top
|