Averno

In which time period is Louise Gluck’s Averno set? What is the tone of this book? Describe the narrator(s) and what is of value to them? What kind of relationship does the Persephone narrator have with the earth in Gluck’s work? Cite at least one passage to back up your argument. To what does the final verse on page 16 refer? Cite a passage in the text where the narrator second guesses her own voice by reconsidering the way in which to describe something. Why would an author show such a thing? What are some key differences between Part I and II of the book; how is Persephone the Wander figured differently in each? How do you understand the ancient myth differently after reading Gluck’s interpretation? (DUE Mon, March 5)

Averno seems to be set in the present mind of the narrator, which is to say that it focuses on past memories or past stories. She focuses a lot on her childhood, and her parents obsession with marriage, as well as the Rape of Persephone; all from the past. As the title alludes, she also makes short reference to the Lake of Averno which the Ancient Roman believed was the entrance into the underworld. I would best describe the tone of this book as solemn. She usually focuses on seemingly negative stories, but there are a few short point of fleeting light. We can see this when the farmer whose fields are burnt down is not taking care of his grandchildren instead of his fields. I found that independence is the most valuable theme to the narrator. She despises the days when her parents told her she needed a man, as well as when her sister made her the man as she did all the wife’s deeds herself, such as having babies. Persephone is nature, just as her mother is. This is why she is entitled Persephone the Wanderer. For Example, on page 17 the narrator says, “Is earth “home” to Persephone? Is she at home, conveivably, in the bed of the god? Is she at home nowhere?” I don’t want to be going to far on a limb here, but the final passage on page 16 may deal with Persephone no being a virgin anymore, and therefore “stained with red juice.” On page 31, the Narrator claims that she was the man because she was taller, but further into the book she refutes that she wasn’t even that tall. Gluck uses this contradiction to show her own changing perceptions from her youth to her adulthood. In part one of the book, Gluck focuses on the contrast between dark and light, winter and summer, whereas in part two of the book she focuses on blossoming landscapes. In the first part, Persephone is innocent, but in the second the narrator questions this innocence. She even eliminates the sex in the second part, just to further progress her point. As for changing my perceptions, Gluck has played Devil’s advocate for the Persephone story, but it’s a story all the same. However we analyze or critique it, it’s still just a myth. I apologize for being so concise in my answers, but I am horribly sick with what I think is the flu. I just want to get home, back to bed.