Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close versus Death of a Salesman

When I was reading Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, the book that popped into my head was The Catcher in the Rye; however, another person already chose to compare these two novels. After thinking it over some more, I decided to compare Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close to Death of a Salesman. Both of these novels take place in New York, although it is during different time periods. Even though these novels take place about 50 years apart from each other they have other similarities besides their location.

This novel and play are both written in throw multiple perspectives; they also both jump from the present to the past. In Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, the time period changes when there is a change of narrator. By switching the narrator, the reader is slowly able to start putting the piece together of how the present situation came to be. The past events that are described help to illustrate the connection between past and present, the cause and effect of certain actions. In Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, the grandfather writes about how much he loved Anna and in turn that is the reason why he was not able to love the grandmother resulting in him leaving. By leaving it creating a situation where a boy grew up without a father and that boy’s son grew up without a grandfather. This kind of situation would help shape a person into who they are, Oskar has this great attachment to his father and grandmother, but things might have been different if the grandfather did not decide to leave. A situation like this is found in Death of a Salesman because within the play there are many flashbacks. Through these flashbacks, it reveals how the characters came to be in the situation they are in, but it also reveals many things about the characters themselves. Willy and his son, Biff, often argue within the play but it is revealed later on this that his could have been as a result of Biff finding his father having an affair. However, it was not just the affair it was the fact that his father was lying to him; thereby, shattering the image he had of his father causing their relationship to turn sour.

In both of these pieces of literature, the setting is in New York and flashbacks are used to show that the way a person is raised greatly affects how they will develop. Past events greatly influence the choice that people make in the present and future. There are other similarities between these two pieces of literature such as the connection between father and son. In Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, the bond that Oskar had with his father was very strong and this is highlighted when it is being compared to the relationship between Oskar and his mother. Oskar even remarks how he wishes it was his mother that died instead of her father. The relationship between father and son the Death of a Salesman is also important because Willy proved to be a great influence on Biff's personality. Willy has an enormous sense of pride and he focused a lot of his attention on Biff resulting in Biff following his father's example. Even though in the present setting of the novel, the relationship between Biff and his father is very fragile, that strong connection is still present through the amount of influence that Willy had on Biff. 

At first, this play did not seem to be very similar to Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, but after thinking about it, I was kind of amazed how similar they are even though they are on completely different topics and are set in different time periods. I hope everything I wrote about for Death of a Salesman is correct since I have not read the play in over 2 years.

Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close and Reign Over Me

While reading Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, I was reminded of a movie I watched recently titled Reign Over Me. Both the novel and the movie are focused around 9/11 tragedies, and thus share several thematic similarities.

            Reign Over Me tells the story of a middle-aged man named Charlie Fineman who has lost his wife and three daughters in the 9/11 attack. The plot revolves around the reunion of Charlie with his former roommate, Alan Johnson, and how Alan helps Charlie cope with his grief. Alan went to dental school with Charlie, and is now an established dentist living with his wife and two daughters. Charlie, on the other hand, has discontinued his practice since the incident and now plays in a local band.  Charlie initially treats Alan as an acquaintance because he doesn't remember him, but as old memories are re-surfaced, they both become close friends again. Alan realizes, however, that Charlie has intentionally repressed his memories about the loss because he becomes infuriated if anyone tries to remind him of his family. Therefore, Alan convinces Charlie to seek help from one of his colleagues, Dr. Angela Oakhurst, who is a psychiatrist in the same building where Alan works. Although Charlie reluctantly visits Dr. Oakhurst, he does not talk to her about the tragedy; instead, he decides to open up to Alan. After reiterating the tragedy, Charlie goes back home and tries to commit suicide by cop. As a result, he is apprehended and forced to undergo three days of intense psychological evaluation, after which it is recommended that he should be committed to a psychiatric facility. During the court trial, however, the Judge realizes the complexity of the case, and thus he assigns Charlie’s in-laws the responsibility of deciding whether or not he should be committed. They decide to allow Charlie to continue leading his life normally, and the movie ends with Charlie moving into a new apartment.

            One of the first similarities I noticed between the novel and the movie was that they both have protagonists who have been personally affected by the 9/11 tragedy - Oskar lost his father to the attack, while Charlie lost his entire family. Although Charlie appears to be in his mid-30s, the trauma has caused him to mentally regress back to a young child. Therefore, his behavior and thinking in the movie are very similar to that of Oskar’s in the novel. Essentially, both these protagonists live in their own little world, driven by memories of their lost ones. For example, Oskar tries to hold onto memories of his Dad by embarking on a journey to unravel the mystery behind the key. Similarly, Charlie tries to keep his family’s memories fresh by remodeling the kitchen over and over again. The viewer learns towards the end of the film that Charlie does so because in the last conversation he had with his wife, they argued over a future kitchen remodeling project. Additionally, both characters choose to talk to a friend about their problems as opposed to their therapist. Also, both Charlie and Oskar resort to music as a distraction mechanism – Oskar carries his tambourine with him and Charlie resorts to his iPod anytime he feels distressed. Amongst other things, the biggest difference I saw between the two characters (apart from age) was that Oskar is comfortable talking about his Dad’s death whereas Charlie refuses to discuss any details of the tragedy or his life before 9/11.

            Along with having similar protagonists, the movie and the novel are also thematically related because they both are focused around the idea of coping with loss and grief. Losing a loved at any age is extremely difficult, but as is evidenced by Oskar and Charlie, each person deals with loss in his or her own unique way. Oskar continually strives to keep his Dad’s memories fresh in his mind by recollecting the moments/games they shared, and by going on an adventure to uncover the truth behind one of his father’s possessions (the key). Charlie, on the other hand, contently roams the streets of New York in his motorized scooter, and tries his very best to suppress any memories of his family. It’s not that Charlie does not want to remember his family; rather, it appears to be a coping mechanism that he has employed in order to alleviate some of the pain. Another common theme between the two narratives is the absence of communication. In the novel, Oskar’s grandparents have difficulty communicating with each other, and even Oskar himself cannot seem to communicate properly with his mother. This idea is also portrayed in the film because Alan and his wife, Janeane, have subtle marital tensions due to the lack of communication, and Charlie refuses to communicate with anyone (except Alan) about the tragedy. Thus, both works go to show that effective communication is not only crucial for one's interpersonal relationships, but it also helps a person cope with difficult times.

            Lastly, Grandma’s comment in the novel about how “it’s always necessary” (314) strongly reminded of the movie’s ending scene where Janeane Johnson tells her husband, Alan, “…I probably don’t tell you this enough, but I love you.” This comment further portrays how vital communication is and it also stresses the importance of effectively relaying one’s emotions to others (before it's too late). Overall, as both works demonstrate, it does not matter how one chooses to deal with grief as long as the person is able to achieve some sense of closure in the end.  

Trailer for Reign Over Me:

Thank you for reading!  

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close and The Catcher in the Rye

            One of the books that came to mind as I was reading Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by Jonathan Safran Foer was The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger. Both stories are told in stream of consciousness (Just in case you do not know, stream of consciousness refers to a series of thoughts or images that help the reader connect to the character by allowing the reader into the character’s inner thoughts.). The protagonists of Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close and The Catcher in the Rye, Oskar Schell and Holden Caulfield, respectively, are actually pretty similar and both novels are told in their points of view (except for some of the chapters in Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close in which they are narrated by either Oskar’s grandfather or grandmother).

            In Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, the novel begins with the readers finding out that Oskar’s father, Thomas Schell, has died in the World Trade Center as a result of the September 11 terrorist attacks. Because Oskar has an incredibly close relationship with his father, he suffers a traumatizing experience from the death of his father and loses his best friend. From then on, he has trouble making friends his own age, especially in school, and is self-abusive. For a nine year old, he is actually pretty smart and intuitive, from knowing about the science behind the bombing of Hiroshima to being an amateur inventor. After finding a key in an envelope that he finds in the remains of a vase he shatters in his father’s closet, he embarks on an adventure around New York to try to find the missing lock, hoping that it will unveil something that his father left for him. Throughout his journey, he meets a bunch of people who share their stories with him; unfortunately, many of them do not even know of his father and provide little help.

            In The Catcher in the Rye, we are introduced to Holden Caulfield, who is at that moment hospitalized, as he reflects back on his time at Pencey Prep and his eventual trip back home to New York. Because of some emotional trauma such as the death of his brother and the suicide of a friend, Holden, like Oskar, is also troubled. He has a cynical view of the world, often making comments about things that are so absurd that it becomes funny to the reader. He also meets many people around New York, but ends up thinking that everyone is just phony and fake because they’re all just liars. Ironically, they are not the only ones that lie; he has a habit of lying too. Holden has difficulty with the transition from childhood to adulthood and wants to save children from growing up and becoming all the phonies that he has met in New York.

            One of the main things that stood out to me was that Oskar Schell and Holden Caulfield are both minors roaming around New York. They both seem to have some issues: Holden with his pessimistic and judgmental opinions of the world around him and Oskar and his troubles with befriending people of his own age. Both of the characters’ resulting personalities originate from the trauma of a family member’s death: Oskar with the death of his father and Holden with the death of his brother. They also do a fair amount of swearing (or almost swearing in Oskar’s case—Shittake) and lying (though not for the same reasons). Oskar and Holden also end up having psychiatric help to deal with their emotional trauma.

            Both characters embark on a journey in search of closure and reconciliation for the loss of a loved one. Oskar roams around New York looking for the mysterious lock to his key and parallel to his narration are the grandparents’ narrations of their lives through their letters. He is looking for closure from his father, trying to understand how his father died and why his father never said “I love you,” but in the end, he never really finds the truth but only closure when he digs up the grave. When Holden leaves Pencey Prep, we as the readers find that he’s actually a pretty angry guy, suffering from the death of his friend and brother. It makes him angry that he does not quite understand everything and blames it on the phoniness of the adults. At the end of the novel, he finally begins to feel a little happier after seeing his little sister Phoebe on the carousel and decides to approach life more optimistically and go back to school.

            I think that one of the big lessons that both novels try to teach us is that life is unexpected and to expect the unexpected. Events such as deaths are bound to happen at some point, but the exact time is unknown. When it does, we cannot allow it to eat us up on the inside but rather to accept it and make the best out of the situation.

Hot Fuzz and Scream

One movie I find similar to Hot Fuzz, directed by Edgar Wright, is Scream, directed by Wes Craven. They both have killers who wear black robes with hoods, multiple killers when you originally think there is only one, points where you think the characters are dead and then they come back to life, reference other movies, and make fun of other movies in their category.

In Scream, there is a series of murders in a small town. The murders are committed by a killer in a black robe with a ghost face mask. Usually before the victim is killed, they receive a call from the killer, who disguises his voice. The killer plays games with the victims, asking them questions such as “What’s your favorite scary movie?” He then reveals that he can somehow see what they are doing. Sidney Prescott receives one of these calls and is attacked by the killer but escapes. During a party she and numerous other high school students attend, multiple people die throughout the night and the main suspect, Billy Loomis, Sidney’s boyfriend, appears to be innocent when he is attacked. Later, we figure out that he is not innocent and there are two killers, Billy and Stu, who are working together. They are going to try to frame the murders on Sidney’s Dad, Neil Prescott, but they are interrupted by a reporter, Gail Weathers, who was investigating the murders. Billy ends up getting the gun from her and Sidney escapes. She hides in a closet until Billy opens it and she stabs him with an umbrella. Stu then chases her around and she ends up killing him by dropping a TV on his head. Billy is not actually dead and comes at her again, but this time Gail actually shoots him.

In Hot Fuzz, Sergeant Nicholas Angel is transferred from the police force in London, to the small town of Sandford. The night before his first day working, he ends up arresting multiple people in the town. While he is on the job, most of the calls he gets are about little things that he would never have had to deal with while in London, such as finding an escaped swan. He also notices that there are a lot of mysterious and freak accidents in Sandford, such as a car accident with no skid marks and a house explosion. He seems to be the only one who thinks there is someone who is murdering all of these people and staging it to look like accidents. In the end you find out that there are multiple killers who are all part of the NWA, or Neighbourhood Watch Alliance, that are killing people who they think are bad for the town’s image. Sergeant Angel and his partner Danny end up taking all of the NWA down, most of them in a comical way. Nick and Danny are promoted and continue to keep the peace in Sandford together.

Throughout both movies, there are numerous references to other movies. In Hot Fuzz, there are many references to action movies such as Bad Boys II and Point Break. Danny constantly asks Sergeant Angel questions about his past police work, and wants to partake in things from the movies such as car chases and shoot outs. At one point, Danny plays out one scene from Point Break, where he fires his gun into the air and screams rather than shoot his father. In Scream, there are many references to scary movies, such as Halloween, Friday the 13th, and Psycho.There are many times where people comment how, If this was a scary movie________ would happen. Usually a few seconds or minutes later, whatever they had said would actually happen. They also talk about who would play them if a movie was made about the murders and how they wanted to be in the sequel when they were saying they wanted to live.

Both movies also make fun of other movies in their categories. Hot Fuzz makes fun of traditional action movies by making the chase scenes unrealistic and funny, such as when Sergeant Angel is hopping over the fences doing flips, making it look easy, and when they stop to pick up the swan in the middle of the car chase. Scream makes fun of traditional scary movies by making comments about other movies. When Sidney is talking to the killer on the phone, she says she doesn't like scary movies because the girl is always stupid and runs up the stairs instead of out the door, even though she does the same thing five minutes later when the killer is after her. There is also another scene when the character, Randy, played by Jamie Kennedy, is watching Jamie Lee Curtis in a scary movie on TV and yells many times “Jamie! Look behind you!” The killer is actually standing right behind him and the viewers are also supposed to be yelling “Jamie! Look behind you!”

Hot Fuzz and Scream also end in huge fight scenes that are somewhat comical; although in Hot Fuzz, none of the bad guys really die, except probably the guy who gets blown up by the sea mine, and in Scream both the killers die.

Hot Fuzz versus A Modest Proposal

The (almost) first thing that comes to mind when I think of Hot Fuzz is Jonathan Swift’s satire “A Modest Proposal.” Both the movie and the essay have the major theme of “the greater good.” Both are also incredibly twisted in their ways of going about it. The NWA in Hot Fuzz has the goal of winning the “Village of the Year” award, again, and thus murders anyone who disrupts the small town-ness of Sandford. Disruption in this case could mean having an ugly house, being an appalling actor, having an annoying laugh, moving away, or ruining a newspaper with “tabloid journalism” and bad spelling. In “A Modest Proposal,” Swift illustrates an idea for solving the hunger crisis in Ireland. People starve to death on a daily basis, women and children beg on the streets, and no one knows what to do about it. Swift, after a long lead-up, suggests that children be eaten. He argues that it would solve the problem of starvation, that the poor would have a source of income, and that it would induce marriage and stop husbands from hurting their wives for fear of a miscarriage. Though both are technically for the “greater good,” they are warped. The achievement of goals is gone about in an improper way. The Neighborhood Watch Alliance is serious in its intent, while Swift is merely putting forth a ludicrous proposal in order to make people do something about a crisis. The NWA has a grave goal, while Swift is simply aiming for the shock factor.

Both Hot Fuzz and “A Modest Proposal” have a sudden turn of events that changes the story immediately. In the movie, Nicolas Angel is a prime cop that makes his coworkers look bad, so he is sent to a small town. A series of accidents happens, which he suspects are murders. In his investigation, he finds connections that could easily lead to murder, and is instead told, at the confrontation of the NWA, that people are merely being killed because they upset the village’s image.  While Swift’s version of a sudden plot twist is not so action-filled, it still suits the definition. As you read through the essay, he leads up to his idea with the problem at hand: babies are frequently aborted, that a child is of no use until working age (just money deposits), and that past the age of one, a child can no longer solely survive upon the milk of his or her mother and must instead be fed. Swift insists that an American friend of his said that infant flesh is tender and nourishing. Infant meat should therefore be used to feed the millions, to bring money to their parents. Cannibalism is therefore normal and necessary. Both have the theme of if you can’t think of anything else to do, kill off the problem people!

While an essay cannot have much of a genre, it still (hopefully) gives the reader a feeling of horror or shock. In this way, it can be considered a thriller or a horror movie.  If the proposal was carried out, a psychological thriller would indeed ensue. The movie, unlike the essay, has many genres. Action was obvious, as, toward the end, gun fights and car chases riddled the screen, and a man was even caught in a bear trap. Comedy was also obvious, with the two opposite partners clashing over a swan, and the huge, funny twist near the conclusion. There is a sense of romance, though “bromance” should probably be used instead. In one scene, “let’s make love” music plays steadily louder in the background as the buddy cops talk about their feelings and bond over action movies. There is a definite air of mystery: people keep having accidents and dying. Connections can be made to a land ownership scandal and to people who know too much. An air of drama is also present, as the partners struggle to become friends, while Nicolas is unable to separate his work from his personal life, and ruins his relationships. Horror and thrills also accompany this, with blood scattered generously throughout. The viewer tends to not know what to think, as so many genres are mushed together. Therefore, both essay and movie have trouble in the categorizing department.

So, while “A Modest Proposal” and Hot Fuzz have nothing whatsoever in common, they actually have some things that can be connected. The unexpected and genre peculiarity are common occurrences in these, and in other literature and movies.