Choose wisely (I TRIED TO POST THIS YESTERDAY IT DIDN'T WORK, HAD TO POST LATE! SORRY..)

***When I signed on yesterday, I wasn't able to post on the website. This had happened to me before, and usually with time it works again. Thats why I'm posting late!

The butterfly effect was a really disturbing movie, because not only was it kind of tragic, but it brought up the idea of multiple lifelines that we have. Each decision that we make brings a different outcome, in some cases a huge outcome that can change almost anything. Small decisions that we make in reality can lead to huge outcomes, and so one has to think, what really is the right decision? I seemed like the narrator could never get it right in the movie, Donny was a crazy freak, Lenny was super disturbed, or he had no arms. What is the right outcome, and is it Ashton Kutcher’s place to play god? I almost find it worse that after 8 years, when they pass each other on the street; Ashton freezes up, and knows he’ll never actually be with the person he loves. Overall this movie just really made me start considering the small choices I make, the little lies I do or do not tell. Putting aside the fact that time travel is real, the movies message was clear, choose wisely. Also, it made me think about all the "crazy" people in institutions; what if, just what if things like this actually happen? maybe all those crazy people aren't so crazy.

On a note about the endings, I really disliked the directors cut, just because I'm a sucker for a happy (or in this case a happier) ending. The fact that her miracle baby dies is so depressing. The fact that he makes sure he's never born is so depressing, I like the "we stay alive" ending.

Brilliant movie, crappy endingS

I watched The Butterfly Effect for the first time soon after it came out to rent. I had wanted to see it in theatres, but had been barred for my age.
Until today I'd never seen the theatrical ending. I find that neither ending is really satisfactory in bringing the story to a close.

The directors cut ending makes a gruesome sense in that it explains why Evan has no life line. According to that he was never born in the first place. However this leaves Kayleigh, Lenny and Tommy completely hanging in a netherworld of speculation.

The theatrical ending better wraps up the characters, but doesn't explain the reason that Evan has no life line. Perhaps it was a fluke? Perhaps the gypsy palm reader was a liar and a fraud? Either ending is completely unsatisfactory.

The movie itself however is brilliant. How many people wish that they could go back in time and fix the things that had gone wrong in their lives? or fix what had gone wrong in the lives that theirs touched? I know I would, but at the same time I wouldn't. What if things continued to go wrong, like with Evan, or what if the outcomes didn't really change?
The story reminds me of The Time Machine. No matter how many times the inventor goes back, his lady love still dies. Some things are just destined to be. In Evan's case things changed, but usually for the worse. He kept going back to fix things and ended up with the same crappy outcome.

Let's all refrain from messing with destiny.

Back to the Future Part II

After watching The Butterfly Effect, again, I could not help but recall the classic film trilogy Back to the Future. For this film, in particular, I related it to the sequel, which like The Butterfly Effect, dealt with alternate realities. This in turn, also reminded me of Man in the High Castle, which in itself was an alternate reality.

I’ve always been amused by alternate realities, the term alone is a bit of a conundrum. For cannot there only be one true reality? Is reality relative? Or is reality absolute? The first time I ran into an alternate reality was at a very young age, back when Doc and Marty returned to 1985, from their brief trip to 2015. What at first seemed like home and normalcy and Hill Valley, quickly proved to be something sinister and disgusting and Hell Valley. Circumstance had made Biff Tannen rich, powerful, and corrupt, and to everyone in the world, this was reality, but to the Doc and Marty this was not reality. So they return to 1955, so that they may set things back to the way they knew them.

There is an element of selfishness in this. They sacrifice Biff’s happiness for their own well being. Albeit Biff was an evil character, he has the right as much as anyone else to the pursuit of happiness. This reminded me of one of Evan’s final travels. He is in college, his friends are all happy, but he has no arms, and his mother is dying. He could have very well sacrificed his own happiness for others, but he did not do this. I suppose he was a flawed character.

But then again, perhaps no one really is flawed. Maybe it is reality that is continually flawed. It’s all a matter of perspective.

I had never seen The Butterfly Effect before we watched it in class, and I have to say; it scared the living shit out of me. It was twisted and weird, and it reminded me in a lot of ways of Memento. It kind of had the same underlying question: "If you couldn't remember the horrible things you did and/or witnessed, would you want to know what happened?"

In both movies, the main character had memory problems and spent the movie trying to put things together using the notes they left for themselves. They had different purposes though. Leonard wanted revenge, while Evan wanted to fix everything and was willing to sacrifice himself in the process.

Another thing I thought this movie seemed to bring up was the idea of nature vs. nurture. I remember learning in psychology the idea of whether people were born evil or if the way they were raised had an effect on their personalities. This movie clearly said that it was nurture that decided it, the most obvious example being with Tommy (my dad's name is Thomas Miller so it was super creepy seeing his headstone). In all the different situations, Tommy was either completely evil or a Jesus freak. Complete polar opposites, just so we are sure to notice the differences. If he was raised by his dad (who was really hard on him) he turned evil, but with his kind and loving mom he was religious and saintly.

Same with Kayleigh. Depending on how she was raised, she ended up being either a sorority girl (who obviously made it to college) vs. a waitress or crack-whore. If she was intelligent enough to get into college, then that shouldn't have changed unless her dad's version of raising her was really that horrible.

"Decisions to decisions are made and not bought, but I thought this wouldn't hurt a lot -- I guess not."

Having never seen The Butterfly Effect before this class, I was unsure of how well it was going to fit in with the course. I had heard plenty of the story, with the majority of the reviews being pretty negative. Yet after watching it myself, the movie isn't necessarily pleasant to watch, but is perfectly fitting for the course in the sense that it made me question reality. It made me look at things I never think about, and observe it from different possibilities.
The movie put forth different courses, paths, and possibilities one life could have, and it left me sitting in my seat, freaking out over which one would finally be the truth. Every decision Evan made had a long-lasting effect on his life. The movie wrapped me up in each possibility, leaving a little lost and confused as to which path in life was the right one -- the truth.
It made me think about all the choices made in my life, and how different life would be for not only me, but everyone in my life. I don't necessarily believe the decision between Dr. Pepper and Coke at dinner last night would have too much of a different outcome had I picked Coke, but at the same time, I'll never know. I've come to realize though, that the choices I make are not to be messed with. I have heard quite a few people throughout my life say they wish they could go back in time and change a choice they made. After watching The Butterfly Effect, I've decided I'm not going to think twice about my decision between Dr. Pepper and Coke, because God knows what would have happened had I chosen Coke.

Time travel at its best.

When I first watched The Butterfly Effect, I couldn't help but sit there thinking, "What the hell is going on here?" I was confused, but knew that I would forever love this movie. Watching it again, but considering the point of this class, I quickly gained a new sense of time travel, and how it can affect people. Upon witnessing Evan's blackouts, I assumed they all actually happened and were just a part of his life. What I learned was that Evan could change the events of his life by going back through his memories and doing thing differently. To me, this is what time travel is supposed to be about. Why anyone want to travel back in time without changing anything, or doing somethings differently? When I think about other works that involve time travel like Kindred, or Slaughterhouse Five, I am always disappointed that these novels introduce the idea of time travel, but not how it can change the past. The Butterfly Effect actually emphasizes that time travel can alter the course of someone's life. To me, this is the main concept of time traveling. I guess this is the why I like this movie so much. It shows me that I'm not the only one in this world who wishes they could go back in time and change the outcome of things.

Everything Matters- I FINALLY FIGURED OUT WHY IT WOULDNT POST! yay!

Just as a small raindrop falling into a gigantic ocean sends ripples throughout, the ripple of a small action can have a gigantic effect throughout one’s life. In The Butterfly Effect Evan, the main character, was able to return to his past and change key events. As inviting as this seems Evan discovers that every time he transforms his past, there are unintended consequences occur. The changes Evan makes have ripple effects. As Evan continues to “correct” his past, he realizes his actions hold unplanned significance- hurting he people he loves. By viewing Evans life with and without the “corrections” in Evans past the movie gives the viewer a unique prospective as to t he consequences of our actions.
Because Evan was willing to sacrifice for those he loved I to felt for the characters and became emotionally attached to them. The Butterfly Effect provides an interesting contrast between Memento and Aura. I hate movies that don’t have emotionally favorable endings—I become overly concerned with the characters. I get upset if everyone is hurt in the end. I hated Memento because it ended with confusion and violence. I enjoyed Aura, and was ok with its unique ending because it answered my questions. However, I was not emotionally vested in the characters, so I did not care if they were ok. Conversely, I loved The Butterfly Effect, even though it ended sadly and I was emotionally vested in the characters. I liked The Butterfly Effect regardless of the sad ending, because the ending brimmed with morality. Ultimately, everyone (except Evan) lead better lives. A fortuneteller in The Butterfly Effect tells Evan, “you have no lifeline, you were never meant to live.” Even though this quote may sound silly, in context it holds significance. Evan was never meant to be, no matter how he lived he hurt the people most important to him. In the end, Evan had no choice but to kill himself at birth, so those he loved could be happy.

Human Nature

If you ask me the Butterfly Effect does a great job of showing human nature at it's rawest. It's Human Nature to want to change the past in order to try and make the future better. Everyone wants something more right? Evan acts on these urges and indulges himself in a little bit of time travel. Little did he know that he would completely alter how his life plays out by changing the past. Over time Evan begins to realize his power and realizes that he is able to change other peoples lives. Yet this power comes at a cost. It seems as though when Evan changes the past, something is always worse in the future. The first few times Evan does his little "trick" he does it in order to make other people's lives better. Eventually Evan started to use his power for his own greed.

Greed is another characteristic of human nature that is found in this movie. When he is in prison, he uses his ability to get out because he doesn't want to deal with the hardships and because he has ruined his relationship with Kayleigh. He wants to turn to a new reality to escape the one he was in. He uses his power for greed a second time in the life where he has no arms. Even though he had made Timmy a much better person, saved Lenny, and had helped many people he was unhappy because of the loss of his arms.

Yet he also used his power for other people. It's human nature to want to help others and change your past and future - as I said before. When he sees that his mom has lung cancer from smoking, he realized it was his fault. So yet again our heroine journey's back in time to change his mothers outcome.

If you ask me this entire movie is one giant journal on human nature and emotion.

Off topic - the ending of the movie was kinda cool- the fact that he wasn't supposed to be alive in the first place. Anyways gives a whole new meaning to the expression "better off dead."

>Insert Catchy Title<

The Butterfly Effect is a movie that I have seen many, many times (more times than I can count on both hands combined)- but this movie never ceases to confuse and sometimes anger me. In the real world, people don't have the choice to go back in time and change things, so movies like The Butterfly Effect can easily draw in an audience. In the movie, Evan's time travel is mysterious and exciting because we never know what detail he is going to change and how that detail will change the rest of his life. This aspect of the movie I enjoyed.

The aspect of this movie that I don't enjoy is the way we are left to figure out what part of Evan's life we are seeing and what happened in his past to get him here. The excessive amount of time traveling confuses me immensely because I can't place together where we are in the timeline of Evan's life.

What makes me so angry in watching this movie is the fact that Evan doesn't really know what has happened in his life. With every time travel he changes his future, and when he wakes up from this time travel, he is left to place together the pieces of this recreated past. With every time travel, part of Evan's life is lost and he has to rely on his friends and family to tell him what exactly happened. This makes me mad because Evan's sole purpose in time travelling is to make things better in his future life, and even though he does change his life drastically each time, he also loses his past- and that doesn't seem very fair.

Because it makes me angry that Evan, in changing his future, loses everything about his past, the alternate ending to the movie is a much better ending. Evan never exists which means he never really has a past and never really has a future. This ending works out better for everyone involved, especially Evan.

An Excercise in Futility: Don't Time Travel

Usually, I hate movies like The Butterfly Effect. They scare me, plus I can't stand movies where things blow up and people die. But this time I almost enjoyed it--at least, it was definitely worth watching. The film doesn't just cover truth and lies, it covers reality and reality reworked.

The Butterfly Effect dives deeper into the realm of science fiction than Butler's novel Kindred, which deals with time travel in a more abstract and frightening way than the systematic journal entries in the film. While Dana is trapped in the eternal time paradox of "since it already happened, I can't change it," Evan can change the past, thereby affecting his future. Every time Evan goes into his past, he changes his reality, and damages his own brain. One could argue that this is all just in his mind and he's still in the hospital, except for the fact that he commits suicide in his mother's womb and the movie ends.

Evan probably should have just dealt with Kayleigh's suicide and not screwed everything up, but he did. Dana faces a similar problem, except that her stopping point was much later. After Hagar was born, Dana could have just let Rufus die, because her family was assured a future. But she kept getting dragged back, until she had to kill him and lose her arm in the process. Both Dana and Evan try increasingly hard to save someone (or several someones) but their quests get more and more futile, until Dana chooses to save herself over Rufus, and Evan saves everyone else over himself.

Time Gets the Better of People (Or Not)

*I'm going out on a limb with this. I hope you like it.

Time travel is a major theme in both Kindred and The Butterfly Effect. However, the effects of time travel are vastly different in each of the stories, as they each display a different theory of time travel. In Kindred, the supernatural force takes on a predestined aspect, forming a “loop” in time. No matter how Dana reacts to a situation, it has an unalterable effect on the future. Since she acts to save Rufus from drowning, getting beaten, etc, she inevitably ensures her survival. These acts guarantee her birth so that she can travel back in time to perform them again. Thus, an unending, circular pattern emerges, a loop that is impossible to break. Ultimately, the time travel controls Dana, forcing her to adhere to the ante-bellum South with no hope of changing it.
The theory presented in The Butterfly Effect is vastly different and far more complicated. Unlike Dana, Evan has the power to manipulate time and thereby reality. With each trip to the past, he changes one detail, which causes a landslide of events divergent from the original timeline. This completely distorts reality for both Evan and the audience, as each journey adds another reality to the larger reality of his time travels. The result is a large collection of multiple realities, including the original in which Kayleigh commits suicide. However, one question remains: do the original timelines continue, even after Evan makes a change? Evan’s blackouts provide some insight on the matter. Each time he blackouts, his future self returns to make a drastic change. Yet, at the end of young Evan’s blackout, history continues as though uninterrupted. But since Evan never returns to any of the other realities he creates, no one can ever know for sure.
Despite the differences in each theory, one thing holds true in both accounts. No one has complete control over reality. Dana hopes to influence Rufus’s moral development by her good example, even though the time loop never creates the illusion that she has this power. Evan’s ability to change reality creates the false sense that he has dominion over reality, yet his efforts lead to severe brain damage and ultimately death. Thus, these two stories teach that reality is a force beyond human comprehension.

Time Travel is Uncomfortable!

So after watching the Butterfly Effect, I realized for some reason I was much more comfortable with it's "sci-fi" ways than Kindred. Please do not misunderstand me, this movie is very heavy and intense for the first time viewer. However, when it comes to the method of time-travel I seem to be able to relate to it much better. I believe this is because the main character is not ensuring the survival of his ancestors like Dana, but ensuring the survival of those in his present life. It seems to me like the question of him exsisting or not is not there, so the idea of him going back into his own past is a little more understandable. This class has made me realize how uncomfortable I am with the idea of being lied to by authors, but I believe some ease me into it better than others. It is true that when an author kind of upsets you the story sticks, but I find if I can relate to a story I can find a deeper meaning.

P.S. This movie also made me reflect on the idea of fate. The quote in the beginning of the way saying that a butterfly's wings could create a tsunami really gave me that sense that history should not be messed with. Maybe if Dana knew that she would have two arms!

A Network of Choices

So, remember in my last post how I said I hated time-travel? Yeah, that still applies. I mean, really? He goes back in time to change stuff? I guess The Butterfly Effect makes more sense than in Kindred how she has to go back in time to make sure she lives, but I still don't like it. 

Ranting about time travel out of the way, I do believe that most decisions will affect the course of something, be it a day or a lifetime. No matter what, you can chose the direction you want go in, and so life could turn out in any way. I guess what was most interesting about the film was how when  Evan went back in time to make those decisions, he had a little more foresight into how things would turn out. Actually, he had an idea of how the future could be if he was to leave things the way they were with the option to press his luck and see how they would turn out if he was to change a decision made in his past. 

Invariably, each time he pressed his luck, things would turn out to be worse. To me, I guess the movie gave the message that you shouldn't regret anything. To trace a bad day or week or even a full rough spell back to one pivotal decision is a bad idea, because you never know what else would have or wouldn't have happened had you went down a different path. 

"You can't play God son."

The Butterfly Effect is disturbing, thought provoking, and horrifically captivating. I find it ironic that hours before we watched this film for our literature class I was sitting in my Introduction to World Religions class talking about a very similar topic. Our teacher was telling us about an old saying that, "A butterfly flying in the Philippines has an effect on a butterfly flying the the Unites States." Although this concept made sense to me at the time while I was in class, I had not put two and two together about the film we were watching, its title, and the saying I had learned hours earlier until the film was sitting on a big screen right in front of me.

I had walked in on this film accidently when it was out in theaters and remember running out as soon as I saw the screen. My reaction since that day has not changed much over the years. There were numerous times last night that I felt physically ill (particularly the part where Tommy burnt the dog alive), wanting nothing more than to walk out of the room and never finish the film, but I did not do that. Partially I did not do this because it was required for our class, but also in some odd way I wanted to know how the film turned out.

I have always wondered throughout my life about the effects that each decision we make has on the course of not only our own lives, but also on the lives of others. Sometimes when I look back on my life and think about the main events that helped define the person I am and the person I will become, I wonder what might have happened if I had chosen the other option. I always think about what would have never happened if my parents would not have gotten a divorce. I would not have moved so many times, I would not know my stepdad or my stepmom, I would not have my stepsister or my half sisters (who are triplets and the loves of my life). What if things had turned out differently? None of that would have happened, I probably would not be at this school. I would not be as adaptable to different situations or changes in my life. I also would not be as good at packing in a hurry.

I have been going to a religiously affiliated school for my entire life and have been learning about God and faith for most of those years. I have always been taught to have faith in God and even though I would not affiliate myself with one particular religion I have always kept that with me throughout my life. I have always believed that everything happens for a reason. Even the small, insignificant details of our everyday lives matter in one way for another to effect our ultimate outcome. I think that is part of the reason why I could not walk out on the movie last night. I love the idea that by changing one detail, although most of those details in the movie were not small ones, Evan managed to completely alter the outcome of reality. I think if this movie teaches us anything it is exactly what we already know and what Evan's Dad, Jason, tells him when he comes to visit him, "You can't play God son...You can't change who people are without destroying who they were." Because in the end, things will always end up the way they were supposed to be and there is no one in the world that can change that.

An Act of Self Sacrifice

Since I was not able to go to the showing of The Butterfly Effect last night, I had the lovely honor of watching the whole movie on YouTube because (of course) Blockbuster did not have a copy. I was always hesitant on watching this before, because many of my friends said it was “lame” and rotten tomatoes only gave it a 33%. But, I’m glad this class required me to watch it; and even though I had to watch the movie on the computer screen, it was still a good movie in my opinion.

Knowing that the class had to watch the Director’s Cut edition, I had to watch both endings that were posted online because I was not sure which one was the one that everyone else saw. In the version that yall watched last night, the movie ends with Evan watching a home video of his mother in labor, returning to his mother’s womb to strangle himself before being born. In the theatrical version, Evan returns to a video of the day that he first met Kayleigh, and tells her that he never wants her to come by him because he hates her. After seeing both, though, I am curious which one (had either been possible in real life) would have been the worse.

Now, I know that many are looking at this saying “Are you serious? In one version he doesn’t exist….duh,” but think about it. Both instances require Evan to perform an act of self-sacrifice. In the theatrical version, since he is forced to prevent his friendship with Kayleigh, he has to live in the present from that moment on knowing that he lost his love, and it had to be done. That, I feel, is a huge burden to have to live the rest of your life with. However, in the director’s cut version, although he has to go and kill himself in the womb, he does not have to live in the present with the agony of the other scenario.

As sadistic as it might sound, I think that the theatrical version is the worse of the two because he has to live with guilt, agony, etc. But I know that I don’t have the only opinion. So what you yall think? Which is worse, in your opinion?

Is It Really A Butterfly Effect?

According to the director's cut, Evan was never supposed to exist, and in the end didn't exist at all. So what was the point of showing us his "fake" life story if the changed he made didn't matter at all in the end. The only change that mattered was the last one he made; but all the other ones are essentially irrelevant to what Evan ultimately wanted to do. Even though the other realities made him realize what he had to do to spare the suffering of his loved ones, they really didn't serve any other purpose. This analysis is going off of the director's cut. But if you see the original version, it ends with Evan still being alive. And the fact that he's still alive gives meaning to the changes that he made to his different realities. But switching back to the director's cut --- and connecting this movie with the class --- I would say that this movie fits nicely because the "truth" is constantly changing.

Jason: "You can't play God son."

The Butterfly Effect is horrific, gut-churning, movie. I came in expecting something similar to Momento ,but it was something that definitely crossed the line of my comfort zone ,but not the line of truth and lies. I remember leaving the class feeling depressed, angry, and sad. Who knew that by changing one aspect of an individual's life could lead to such a catastrophic imbalance in the realm of reality of everyone in that individual's karass. Everyone in Evan's karass end up suffering as he tries to improve one person's life for the better and torturing everyone else by saving this one person's life.

The actual reality for Evan are his journals. As, he goes back in time to revisit his past through reading his journal entries he sees all the pain and agony the people around him suffer in his childhood. Tommy, Kayleigh, Ms. Trebone, and Lenny are the major characters that make up his karass. Throughout the movie Evan constantly tries to save these people and make their lives better as if he was God, which he is not and that is the lie which is the truth to him. For example, he rewinds his memory and tries prevent Lenny from suffering a mental breakdown as he witnesses the explosion of the blockbuster that killed a woman and a baby. By just changing that detail in the past, he ends up losing both of his arms, Lenny is now with Kayleigh, Tommy is a Christan preacher, and his mother is dying from lung cancer. With just that change in the present gives him the urge to commit suicide. Seeing his mother suffering from lung cancer all because he lost his arms makes him realize his that by saving one another suffers, but his drive of saving his loved ones does not simmer down. All Evan can say to his mother is "I'll save you."

That idea of saving people is what makes him think he is God. He tries again to save someone else again. This time he tries to save Kayleigh who is being sexually abused by her pedophile father. He ends up saving Kayleigh and in the future she goes to college, a member of sorority, and in a passionate relationship with Evan. Everything seems perfect but not so perfect for Tommy. Since he was left behind he ends up being sexually abused and is even a worse sociopath. In the end Evan loses his temper while trying to defend himself and ends up killing Tommy. Now, Kayleigh's heart is broken due to the loss of her brother.

With good intentions he tries to save the people he loves. Soon, he realizes that all his actions that he takes with a good heart ends up harming everyone he loves. He realizes that he isn't God as his father said, "You can't play God son." If all he brings is pain and heartache to everyone he loves then the world is better off without him. He decides to sacrifice himself, by going back in time as a fetus and strangling himself with his umbilical cord, in order to bring happiness to everyone else. As Tommy said, "True happiness can only be achieved through sacrifice...for us to be here today."

seems more like an umbrella effect

This movie is very twisted and out there but very entertaining to watch. The movie has events that Ashton Kutcher's character tries to fix and make the future different. Since he tries all the ways possible that don't work he realizes that he can't change the way things are and can't make them right. Just like the novels we just read nothing is fully correct or that everyone is fully happy. The way things are suppose to be and the way things are being changed aren't the same.
Fixing this he, Kutcher, needs to fix the whole problem. That problem is him. The fact the palm reader says he has no life line and he does not exsit is the point in the movie that things start to come together. I've seen this movie a couple times and this time I finally understood this part is key to Kutcher's character. When he tries and tries to fix things and nothing is working out the way he wants. He knows the only thing to do is to take himself out of the equation.
As we see in the last scene he kills himself to take himself from the equation. In Kindred, Dana needs to keep herself in the story and make sure she is still born. This is complete opposite of the Butterfly Effect. Everything happens for a reason and sometimes that reason isn't clear and Kutcher's character realized that with every time he went back to fix something another thing or person needed to be fixed. But really what needs to be fix was him. He sacrifices himself in a way to make his friends and family ultimately happier.

Maybe only one thing changed after all

When a film is able to make me look past Ashton Kutcher playing a serious role, there is a lot that is probably worth saying about it, but for the sake of the class (and everyone's time) I'll stick to writing about how I see the movie relating to our course.

The Butterfly Effect is a good follow up to Kindred because, at least for some of the film, it deals with the time travel paradox. Evan's "black outs" are actually when he has gone back into one of his memories to make an adjustment.

However, the thing that makes me think about the movie the most, is it's assumption of reality. Essentially, Evan's memories are changing. We are told this in the neurologist's office when the structure of his brain has changed. When we encode a new memory, new neurological synapses are created, re-linked, or strengthened, making our brains physically different with each new experience. Evan's brain completely transforms each time he revisits and changes a memory--this also explains his nosebleeds. Since we are viewing the movie through Evan, it is a possibility that only his brain is changing, not his physical world. It is known in psychology that people can manipulate their memories, or even create entirely new memories. It can be argued that only Evan's PERCEPTION of reality is changing and the viewer is taken along for the ride.

This is an extremely Idealistic view, and I'll admit that it's difficult to make the ending of the director's cut fit into it. However, that ending also unravels the time paradox, which forces the viewer to find a new frame of reference in which to analyze the film.

Thinking about it, The Butterfly Effect ties together many concepts from our reading. There's memory manipulation from Aura, the aforementioned time travel from Kindred, and the need for multiple, wide frames of refrence from The Man in the High Castle.

See? Guys that look like Ashton Kutcher just CAN'T be real!

The Butterfly Effect truly fits nicely in the required pieces for this class. The Butterfly Effect, specifically the Director's Cut, does not display a "true" or "real" reality. We learn from the beginning that Evan was never intended to be born; he has no life line, no soul. He was the fourth pregnancy for his mother, following several unsuccessful ones. However, his existence was beyond a miracle, more like deceitful to mankind. Thus, the life that he lead in life was a total sham.

Each reality Evan created by altering the past was to help someone in his life he cared about. Each "better" reality he creates, though, becomes progressively worse. His father, who ails from the same condition, even warns him against playing God to reality, that changing what is meant to happen results in terrible consequences. The viewers learn that Evan's invovlement in his fate was especially blasphamous as he isn't even real. He is an omniscent character who attempts to actively adjust the situations in his life.

I will admit, The Butterfly Effect is not a movie I would watch for fun over and over again. I can handle the violence, and it isn't the darkest piece that we've encountered throughout the course. I feel that the presentation is difficult to swallow. The film is completely cringeworthy, especially if you've seen it before. I also found the Director's Cut particularly hokey. I giggled when the psychic started freaking out about the soul. (NO LIFELINE?? NOOOOO!) The presentation of that idea seemed like a copout for crap cinema. Regardless of my opinions, The Butterfly Effect is a truly haunting film.

Is there a reason for reason?

When approaching this blog entry, I had the goal, or ambition, to look deeper into the subject of why Dana went back in time in Kindred. However, they led to me sitting on my bed for 15 minutes, unable to reach an answer as to why Dana had her time travels. Maybe it was to save Rufus, however after thorough conversation in class about that idea, it doesn't seem to make sense. Maybe she went back to save herself. Maybe it was just down right crappy luck. All the thoughts and possibilities running through my head left me stressed out over the meaning on the entire book, when I finally came to the thought, that maybe there was no answer.
Octavia Butler must have known she was going to leave her readers questioning. It lead me to the thought that maybe even Butler didn't know why Dana went back in time. Maybe thats the beauty behind this book, even this class. There may not always be a deeper meaning to a story. Questions, thoughts, and frustrations have all hit readers hard with any fictional novel. I believe Butler used her storytelling through science fiction to show that sometimes, literature is meant to spark questions, thoughts, and frustrations with no exact outlet. Does there always have to be an answer or easy solution?
I could sit on my bed for the rest of the night and try to figure out why the hell Dana went back in time and never find the right answer, which is probably exactly what Octavia Butler wanted.

"The sky is neither high nor low. It's over us and under us at the same time" (105).

I have always loved writers who have a distinctly unique style. Ones that make you think outside the box and make you feel absorbed into the story. Carlos Fuentes is definitely one of those authors. Although I have never read any of his other stories, I get the innate feeling that he has a knack for pushing the limits of reality.

In Aura, we, as the reader, are forcibly placed into the position of Felipe Montero, we go through everything he goes through, putting us right in the story line. There is no safe buffer zone between the reader and what is happening. There is no room to pull yourself away from the madness of this story. From the very beginning Fuentes pulls you in by saying, "You're reading the advertisement: an offer like this isn't made everyday. You read it and reread it" (3). I love that there is no place to hide in this story. Just like Felipe Montero is trapped within the Consuela's house, the reader is trapped within the story.

When I first finished reading the story, I sat there thinking over what it is that I had just read. I went back over some of the passages from the book trying to make sense of it all in my head. When I finally came to the conclusion that Aura and Consuela were one in the same and that Felipe Montero had some kind of connection with General Llorente it all came full circle for me. Then, I began to think that maybe the reason Fuentes puts the reader right in the story is more than just his style of writing. Maybe in fact, the reader is a part of this crazy world that Felipe has been caught up in as well. I began to think that maybe in order for the entire story to survive it needs the to reader to be an active part of it. Like Consuela created Aura to survive, so has Fuentes created the reader and Felipe to keep this entire cycle in place. At the very end of the story, Aura changes back into the old woman, but Felipe stays the same. This tells me that unlike Aura who is physically connected with Consuela, Felipe is his own entity, playing a role that needs to be filled in order for this story to survive. But just like Felipe, the reader is always their own separate entity, yet they are still playing just as intricate a role in helping these characters survive within the story.

Reading His Aura

Aura would probably be my favorite book that we have read so far. I like the places it has taken us and the way it took us there. I enjoyed watching him become a puppet of love (sick as that may sound) because whether it's not so obvious, that happens in real life. We become other people's puppets sometimes and we don't notice it. Of course, our girlfriends/boyfriends don't turn into old women/men within a couple of weeks, but nevertheless... it happens. I really liked the relationship between Consuelo and Aura as well as General Llorente and Felipe Montero, and the way Felipe just eased in to becomming a part of the house, just like furniture. Even when he argued about leaving with Consuelo, as soon as he saw Aura, he told her "yes, I'll be staying with you." He was gone to the world now, but he didn't care because he had his "true love". I think this is easy for anyone to relate to because once we find something or someone we care about a lot, we become a part of it and forget about what was there before it: sometimes temporarily, but sometimes forever.

Burning Kitties? No big deal.

*Note: due to technical difficulties, I have posted this for Jill. Enjoy.


When reading, I always look for a moral. If a book or story has no tale of morality, peace, or just a happy ending I am disappointed. However, Aura was different. Aura is a confusingly fantastic novel. With Aura, instead of searching of for morals I searched for answers. When Aura ended, I did not judge it based on its moral themes or a happy ending, but rather on its capacity to make me want to know.

I could not put Aura down because I wanted to understand the relation between Aura and Consuelo, Consuelo and Felipe, and Felipe and Aura. My desire to find morality and justice was overpowered by my desire to understand.

While reading this book things that usually affect me didn’t bother me. For example, while reading The Things They Carried I skipped the chapter about the baby buffalo, because I could not handle reading about its torture. Page 59 of Aura says, “Cats… all twined together, all writhing in flames and giving off a dense smoke that reeks of burnt fur.” If this description was written in The Things They Carried I would have cried, but I wasn’t bothered by the description in Aura. Aura makes immorality seem ok. My curiosity overwhelmed my capacity to feel.

Aura made me think differently while reading because it was created not to make the reader feel for the characters, but rather to make the reader feel creeped out. It leaves no clear answers, blurring reality and imagination - removing the need for morality.

Kindred State of Mind

One of our discussion questions had to do with the race of the characters in Kindred, and I was wondering how the novel would have been different if Dana were white and Kevin were black.  Obviously there would have been differences with the lineage, but barring that, it is an interesting question.  I automatically thought of the issue of her character. Would Dana have stood up for Kevin if Rufus called him a nigger? Does Dana really love Kevin?  She was unwilling to be his scribe for his upcoming literary work. She is unwilling to give an explanation for his injury and lets him be accused of abuse.  It is almost like Kevin is actually Dana's slave in the story, in that she does not treat him well, and does not see him as equal. Perhaps I read into this way to much or completely the wrong way, but that was how I felt. Furthermore, would Dana have protected Kevin like he did for her when they went back in time? We she have put her life on the line by saying Kevin was her slave? I really think that Alice and Dana's loves were similar, sincere yet reserved. Both were in situations were they HAD to put on a facade for their lover. How then is love different when we are cornered into it? Can it end up being the same, or will we always have these unfair reservations?

I say hey, What's going on?

Was anyone else so confused by Aura?  At first I was so confuzzled by the fact the the author kept saying 'you,' and I was thinking, "wait, me?" When he first reads the advertisement, he is intrigued and pictures himself fulfilling the duties. Then the author says 'your name' is missing, in which case i started to get lost. But i would be lying if I knew what was going on after the second chapter. I was under the impression that the niece was turning into a rabbit and then turning into a cat... I realized we talked about this in class and tried to explain it at an iron rectangle, but I'm still so confused. Aura is obviously the catalyst of the story, as all of the characters revolve around her. But when you relate him to Consuelo's late husband, things get iffy.  I did not really understand much of the book at all, therefore do I have much to offer in this blog? Well, I feel as if I do.  I think the fact that many would agree with me in their confusion of this book. HOWEVER, the book offered content that easily ties into the course. First off, we must decipher this idea of the rabbit, mush like we must decipher what is real in books like "Man in the High Castle."  But I feel as if we are past the point of deciding what is real or not, and to the point where we should decided what is important or not. The rabbit, then, would be almost irrelevant as it is in the mind of "YOU."  The fact that the Author uses the word "you" makes it so the reader feels encompassed in the story even though he or she may not know what is going on.  

Kevin's Trials

In the novel Kindred, Dana’s husband Kevin must play the part of a white slave owner, even though he is a forward, modern-thinking man from 1976. Not only does he play this part well, but as Dana is taken from him and he is abandoned in the past, he starts to become a man of the 19th century. When he first arrives, he defends Dana from Rufus, and is disgusted when Rufus tells him that no one would believe Dana is his wife. When he gets back to the present, he has a slight accent, like Rufus and Tom Weylin. He has trouble remembering how modern-day appliances work, and how to drive. He tells Dana how he saw a woman die in childbirth once, and how he helped slaves to escape and was almost caught for it. He’s angry because he can’t understand his own time, and it feels so unreal to him. When Dana comes home again, they talk about the possibility of Carrie being sold along with her children, and he refers to it as breeding. He’s still her husband, still the man Dana married. He doesn’t think of her or any other black person as inferior to him. But he’s used to being obeyed by them, after his five-year stint in pre-Civil War America. He’s different, and it’s unclear whether or not he can reconcile himself to his old life.

Goosebumps in Literature

Aura, the creepy Gothic tale told in Carlos Fuentes’s novel, challenges the modern reader to think outside the box in several ways.
Aura is told in second-person singular, which most of us haven’t seen since the days of Goosebumps-like horror novels. However, lost in the English translation is the imperative clause—i.e. not just “You do,” but “you must do”—further integrating you into the character, Felipe Montero. The fact that Fuentes tells us very little else about Montero besides his profession and his current lack of funds makes it even easier for the reader to become Montero. Then, as Montero later becomes the General, the reader deeply feels his sudden identity crisis.
The story itself falls within the genre of magical realism, which is unfamiliar in itself. The reader goes from this story that begins normally enough, to something very odd, very surreal, and very disturbing. From the General writing about how he finds the Senora torturing and killing a cat erotic and sexually stimulating, to Aura being created from poisonous herbs, this novel requires that the reader suspend their disbelief in such things in order for the telling of the story to happen.

I was once told I had a green aura...

Hopefully, the woman in Jackson's Square who told me that has never read Carlos Fuentes's novella.

I think the best thing about this story is that there is no clear answeras to what happened. The characters know because they occupy a space within the story that the reader can only guess at.Aura is the alter-ego, the self projection of youth from Senora Consuelo and Felipe is the reincarnation of General Llorente.

Consuelo felt as if she had missed out in life because she hadn't been able to have a child--Aura gives her a second chance to experience what she missed. Aura also a way for Consuelo to hold on to her youth and beauty. As her late husband wrote (in French I had to translate on Google) "you're so proud of your beauty, that would not you not to stay forever young" (Fuentes 87).

She sought out and hired Felipe because he gives her the second chance to live with her husband. He finds himself in the photographs of Consuelo and Llorente, which makes it logical that he has a relation to the couple's past.

The ending of the novella confuses me. When Consuelo says "We'll bring her back together" (Fuentes 145), it leads me to think that she is thinking about physically giving birth to Aura and not simply projecting her, but Consuelo is well past child bearing ago. There must be another meaning to this, but I cannot discern it. Perhaps, Felipe will give Consuelo the inspiration and motivation to maintain the projection of Aura.

“What you need to know about the past is that no matter what has happened, it has all worked together to bring you to this very moment"

Being inspired by the two blogs I have just commented on, I have come to the conclusion that the aspect of time travel in the novel Kindred just becomes sort of useless, and may even take away from the novel. I understand that in order to create this story, the author had to come up with some method to get the main character from one point in time to a later point in history in order to save Rufus and insure her exsistence, but thats my problem. SHE ALREADY EXSIST. I used the quote as my title because it shows how the past has obviously already worked out to Dana's favor.

I am not saying time travel is all together a useless aspect, but to the logical reader like myself, things don't add up in Kindred. She is born with two, but leads the past with one? Wouldn't you say somethings missing?

If you change the past it will change the future

In both novels Kindred and Aura as a reader we see that people are placed into the story to save other people. In Kindred Dana goes back in time to save Rufus's life, or as she tells us to save his life. The old lady in Aura uses Felipe to bring back her husband and seems to bring a child to her. For them to not have this opportunity to go back and fix their past then the story cannot go on. We as the reader bring Aura to life.
In Butler's novel Dana needs to go back in time and make sure what is suppose to happen occurs. If this does not happen then she is not born. The movie we are watching is very similar to this novel. The actions that happen effect what is going on in the future or present life. just like in every or many situtations in life what you do in your past will effect your future.
I feel these novels are showing somewhat of a lesson to the reader in that we should see how our actions effect everyday life. In the end of the novel of Aura Conseulo says, "She'll come back, Felipe. We'll bring her back together." To bring back Aura together is for Felipe to stay with the old woman. This is an action that the characters have to choose what they want to do. This will effect their lives til someone changes what occurs.
People in everyday life need to make the choices that will effect their future or events that will lead up to what happens for the rest of their lives. Just like the characters in the novels if they don't do what is suppose to happen it can mean they aren't born or that someone doesn't exsit.

The Complexities of Time Travel

I really really really really really really really really hate it when books and movies use time travel. 

The whole idea of it irritates me so much, that I can’t enjoy a book or movie knowing that time travel is a big part of the plot. Especially when it’s used to secure someone’s existence. I couldn’t even stand it in Harry Potter, and that’s saying something, because I love Harry Potter. 

The core part of the plot that she has to go back in time to keep her existence in check makes so little sense. Obviously if she exists she doesn’t need to go back in time. Time doesn’t keep happening over and over, so she doesn’t need to fix it. If it happens once, you can’t change it. And if she wasn’t born the first time around to save her ancestors then, then there is no way she could have existed in the first place to go back in time and save herself now. 

I understand that in science fiction novels, you have to have some sort of suspended disbelief. Unfortunately, to me at least, sometimes this plot device causes so much confusion that it takes away from the story. 

TRies (true lies)

First, I want to say that I absolutely hate technology because I just wrote a really long blog and there was some stupid error when I tried to publish it and now it's gone.

On page 40, Dana says that "truth and lie had merged." She is referring to her answer to Alice's mom's statement-question, "And now you're going back," referring to going back to her husband. Alice's mom means to New York, but when Dana says "yes," she means to 1976.

I think the US government did something right for once when they decided to request "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth." Because it is possible to tell the truth but still not say something the way it should be said to "truthfully" answer a question or make a statement. For example, I saw a shirt the other say that said, "Loyola football: undefeated since 1939." It is true that Loyola has never been beaten in football. That is because Loyola has never had a football team. It is a true but misleading statement.

We have spent this class talking about the black and white of truth and lies, but now we see there is a grey area. A very big grey area depending on how clever or decieving you can be. I know I've definitely used this device before.

Back to the Future!

After reading Octavia Butler’s ‘Kindred’ I could not help but be reminded of the classic film trilogy ‘Back to the Future’ which also deals with familial lineage and time travel.

In the first film Marty McFly travels back to 1955 from 1985 and accidently has his teenaged mother fall in love with him. This, in my mind, paralleled the relationship between Rufus and Dana. Throughout the rest of the movie, Marty tries desperately to unite his father and his mother, so that he may secure his fate. Somewhat similar to the task set for Dana as well.

Towards the end of the first film, Marty finds himself sitting in a car with his mother Lorraine. Marty is surprised to see that she drinks, smokes, and actively pursues boys. This is similar to the way that Dana wants to see Rufus as a good human being, even though he repeatedly shows that he isn’t.

When Marty finally returns homes to 1985, at first he feels a sense of displacement and surprise. Everyone in his family has changed, although they have changed for the better. To them he was never gone, yet Marty was a full week older, much like Dana and Kevin’s travels, though less exaggerated.

Much like Dana, Marty too faces hardships through his travels, however not nearly as extreme as antebellum South slavery. Whereas, the extent of Marty’s hardships were facing Biff Tannen and his kin.

I think by the end of the book and the end of the trilogy the main characters took away the same messages. They learned not to take the past for granted, that history holds valuable lessons for everyone, and that it might not always have been the way you heard it. The other lesson, for all intensive purposes was said best by Doctor Emmet Brown: “you’re future hasn’t been written yet. No one’s has. Your future is whatever you make it. So make it a good one.”

Auras youth

I found Aura to be a pretty twisted novel. It really fit into the class theme of finding the truth in literature. Felipe Montero falls in love with Aura, the caretaker, but when it turns out she's just a projection of the old widow, you are really confused. I didn't completely understand the story, but from what I figured, I think Aura was Consuelo when she was younger, and she is obsessed with getting her youth back. This is why she hires Montero to work for her, so that he can take the place of her dead husband. This book really is about people fighting aging I think, especially with the infertility that struck Consuelo, she seemed to want another chance at life. At the end of the book when Aura is hugging Montero, and then it turns into the widow who whispers that the two of them can bring her back, it makes you think she wants another chance at having a child. Overall this book was pretty creepy.

Rufus and Kevin: two typical boys.

In Butler's novel Kindred, the main character travels back in time to live with her ancestors. An idea that was brought up in class caught my mind: why exactly did Dana time travel? At first I thought the answer was obvious; she went back to save Rufus' life. However, as we discussed it further, I began to explore the possibility that she went back in order to save herself. If you think about it, Dana's act of saving Rufus ensures her birth, and therefore "saves herself" from any other fate. Although this can clearly be seen as the reasoning for Dana's time travel, I discovered another possible reason later on in the novel. When Dana kills Rufus, she is giving all of the others who have been hurt by him a chance to live different lives. Personally, I think this is the reason for Dana's "adventures". Without Dana's act of murder, Rufus would have lived a very long, cruel life; he was turning into his father, even though Dana tried her hardest to prevent it.

Something else that surprised me in the novel is the fact that Kevin begins to change his mindset as he spends time at the Weylin house. When Dana and Kevin first visit the past, they are both taken aback by the conditions in which slaves were treated. It seemed that Kevin would not stand for it, considering his beliefs reflected his life in the 1970s. As the novel progresses however, it is obvious that he is being affected by living in the time of slavery. It is a true test of their love that their relationship lasts after their time travel. The disdain that Kevin begins to push towards Dana reminds me of Rufus' treatment of the slaves.

Rufus and Kevin both treat Dana like she is nothing to them; like most boys, they don't see how their actions can affect the lives of others.

Sparking controversy

So, on the first day of talking about Kindred in this class Pr. Schwartz was intrigued about teaching this book for the first time in the south. I’m sorry, but when this was first said I took a real offense to it, because it felt like a stab at the south. Yes, I was born and raised in Louisiana, but just because I am a southern girl does not mean that I look at racism or slavery in any different way that someone from another state. I took the question as an ignorant stereotypical attack on the southern states. (not saying that it WAS, just saying how i FELT)

(Okay, now that my venting is out of the way, let me delve a little more before I have everyone in class attacking me with gosh knows what.)

Even though I didn’t necessarily agree with the question, when retrospectively looking at the text I can (almost) understand the necessity to ask the question. In a section of the novel, Dana tells Rufus that it doesn’t matter if something about history offends you or not, because it happened. Being offensive won’t change the past. And it was that quote that made me realize that even though Pr. Schwartz’s question truly offended me, it needed to be brought up so people (like me) can get hit with the realization that slavery did in fact happen, and left harsh consequences on the areas inflicted.

But it isn’t just this realization that Butler wants her readers to grasp through this novel. Going deeper, she wants us to realize that the social racism that came with slavery, be it in small or large amounts, still exists today. You can take the fact of Dana’s arm staying in the antebellum south as evidence for this – even though she is from 1976, her missing arm shows her ties forever to the slavery endured by African Americans over a century ago.

But I must end with this:

Even though I do see the truth in the statement that slavery/racism/etc. still exists in some forms today, it DEFINITELY isn’t just in the south. And just because African Americans take jobs that might seem degrading (or whatever you want to call it), does NOT mean that their boss is a racist or slave driver. After all, they did have a choice in taking said jobs…