Works Cited

"Characteristics of Canadian Literature." Canadian Literature. 2005. Spiritus-Temporis, Web. 10 Nov 2009.

"Findley, Timothy (Vol. 102) - Introduction." Contemporary Literary Criticism. Ed. Deborah A. Schmitt. Vol. 102. Gale Cengage, 1998. eNotes.com. 2006. 15 Nov, 2009 http://www.enotes.com/contemporary-literary-criticism/%0bfindley-timothy

"Timothy Findley (1930-2002)." Northwest Passages. 2009. Northwest Passages, Web. 2 Nov 2009.

Duffy, Dennis . "Findley, Timothy." The Canadian Encyclopedia. 2009. Web.

Findley, Timothy. The Last of the Crazy People. Toronto, ON: Penguin Group, 1967. 3-282. Print.

O’Malley , Martin, and Randy Potash. "Timothy Findley: ‘The world of Tiffiness’." CBC News. CBC News, Web. 2 Nov 2009.

Personal reflection

Reading “The Last of the Crazy People” by Timothy Findley, has opened my eyes in the variety of Canadian fiction novels. This novel provided new vocabulary and writing styles for me to learn and become more comfortable with. I feel that reading this novel strengthened me as a writer because Findley used proper sentence structure consistently. One of my weaknesses while I write is using proper and strong sentence structure. The more I read, the easier I will learn how to write properly and more sophisticatedly. This novel provided plenty of examples which I could learn from. My understanding of Canadian identity has been altered because of reading this novel along with a select few. This novel was written just like any American author would write. I was also not aware of many Canadian authors, but I realize we write just as well as an American or British author. When you read a Canadian novel and you are familiar with land marks, territory, etc., it is easier to connect with the story because you can picture it in your mind. I find that in the novels I have read by Canadian authors they usually always describe the setting similar to how I pictured it for the region the story is taking place in. The novels by Canadians are just as creative in setting, character development, writing style etc. Novels written by both American and Canadian authors can be both enjoyable and dreadful.

This novel that Findley wrote is a series of events that could literally happen. Everyone lives in a family with some sort of dysfunctional behaviour. Many children become fed up with their parents and guardians but don’t necessarily kill them. A reader that is struggling with family scenarios could really sympathize with Hooker and understand to an extend, why he killed them. This novel taught me what humans are really capable of when driven to the point of madness especially by the people you love. I learned that I enjoy a novel more, when the author makes one of the characters are very vulnerable and the reader can see inside of them. Understanding the character’s thoughts and feelings allows me to feel sympathy for them. I can see and feel their pain and want to continue reading to see how they will handle the situations. I wait to see if the outcome is the same as I predicted. This novel did not conclude the way I anticipated! As I finished the chapter I found the ending odd, somewhat of a cliffhanger, but I could have been satisfied if that is how Timothy Findley chose to end the story. The epilogue changed the entire story. Saying the ending was unexpected would be an understatement. I believe it changed the entire story because the way Hooker was portrayed through out the novel allowed the reader to feel sympathetic. This was all preparation for the epilogue because once that is read, I still felt sorry for Hooker and understood why he did that. I found it a tad wordy at the beginning, not really holding my interest but once I was well onto half the book I enjoyed every single page tilt h e very end. I quite enjoyed this ISU because I read another wonderful book but a fellow Canadian, and I also learned much about Canadian literacy and the author through my research.

Apologia

Anyone can name a novel or a section of novels that they enjoy. Many people can name authors and other authors they have been suggested to read or also enjoyed themselves. Within that list, ask them how many are Canadian and chances are they won't know. In fact many people, including Canadians can't name a few. This author and his works are significant contributions to Canadian literature because of all his great successes.

Basic characteristics of Canadian literature are “(1) nature, (2) frontier life, (3) Canada’s position in the world” (Characteristics of Canadian Literature, 2005.). In “The Last of the Crazy People” did not focus too much on these characteristics, but there are parts in which nature is important. Hooker’s private sanctuary was in a dark thick green forest. There were sections which Findley described the forest deeply, but remained focused and only described scenery when it was necessary. Findley contributed many wonderful pieces of Canadian literacy and “[was] recognized as one of Canada’s preeminent literary figures” (eNotes, 2006). It is noted that in Findley’s works “he frequently [made] reference to historical events, figures, and other works of literature, and his writings” (eNotes, 2006). Findley has contributed many successful books such as “The Wars”, “Telling of Lies”, “The Piano Man’s Daughter”, “Spadework”, and more. After his first two novels (that were not published in Canada) he became more well known and by the time he published his third book, “The Wars”, he was known over Canada, the United States, and England. Even though his first two novels were rejected by Canadian publishers this proves how his work is significant because when he kept writing he eventually was recognized and honoured by Canada. Canada recognized all his contributions to Canadian literacy and acknowledged this by being a recipient of numerous rewards such as “the Governor General’s award and numerous other prizes, he has received the Canada Council Senior Arts Award, an ANIK award for the documentary Dieppe: 1942 (1979) and an Association of Canadian Television and Radio Artists award for The National Dream (1974), a series of scripts about the development of the Canadian railway system” (eNotes, 2006). Timothy Findley did not only write a collection of novels and plays, but also wrote short stories which “share thematic similarities with many of his novels and have been collected in Dinner along the Amazon (1984) and Stones (1988)” (eNotes, 2006). Timothy Findley wrote many novels, plays, short stories, etc. including pieces that are significant to Stratford, Ontario residents. Timothy Findley “joined the original ensemble of the Stratford Festival in 1953” (O’Malley, 2009). He offered many wonderful works for everyone, especially Canadians to enjoy either reading or watching.

It is very important to understand who Timothy Findley was and all his contributions to this country. I moved to Stratford two years before Findley died, and I never knew who he was or his accomplishments until I completed this project. He wrote many plays, directed, and casted in that were performed at the Stratford Festival Theatre. In 2000, “his most successful play [Elizabeth Rex], premiered at the Stratford Festival”(" Northwest Passages, 2009). This play also “won him another Governor General’s Award”(Duffy, 2009). Canadians should recognize Findley along with other Canadian artists. Findley follows many of the ideal characteristics of Canadian literature. It is important to recognize that it has been said about Timonthy Findley that his "'international reputation [is] second only to that of Margaret Atwood.'" (eNotes, 2006). Being compared to Margaret Atwood is a great honour because she is very renoun to not only Canadians but people all over the world. Candians especailly, should feel encoruaged to read Timothy Findley's novels and other works, and know that they are reading something beautiful and creative they many critics have praised.

Explication

Explication of the loss of loved ones, in "The Last of the Crazy People" by Timothy Findley. Along with the loss of a loved one, two other dramatic situations that suited this novel were crime pursued by vengeance and vengeance taken for kin upon kin. I felt the most predominant of Polti's thirty-six dramatic situations was the loss of a loved one because this incident occurred the most. All were equally important and significant to the development of this novel, however this one in particular had many different aspects.

The initial thought when I think of the loss of loved one, means the death of a very close person in your life, such as a family member or very close friend. This novel used this dramatic situation in its ideal sense, also in a sort of twisted way. The loss of a loved one can mean much more then the physical aspect (death of a close human in your life) but also losing the connection and love you share with someone, losing something or someone who isn’t human, and losing something you never had but always wanted.

Through out “The Last of the Crazy People” Hooker’s mother, Jessica, was not an active character. She isolated herself from her family almost completely, including her innocent son Hooker. Jessica felt that it was best because “she knew she could not bear not to be known to [Hooker]. It was best that she thought of him as dead” (281). Once having a mother who showed you plenty of affection then she wanted to think of you as dead is very confusing. This is the first loss of love Hooker experienced. The woman who brought him into this world and is part of who he is, loved him so much was forced to make a difficult decision. Jessica could not bare the thought of losing her son, so if she thought of him as dead, it would ease her own confusion and pain. This was a loss of a loved one for Jessica but she was old enough to understand the situation. Hooker was still a young boy who did not understand why his mother acted like she wanted nothing to do with him. They both experienced losing their love for each other which destroyed them in the end.

Hooker’s beloved Clementine was one that he loved and lost. Hooker lost not only his cat but her unborn miracles that were ready to enter the world in a matter of days. Hooker grieved the death of Clementine as he “rocked her, just for a moment, and held her close against his skin… ‘Good little girl’… He thought of her kittens. He did not even know how many there would have been” (164). Even though Clementine was a pet, it was still an item Hooker cherished and adored. She did not need to be a human to be loved by Hooker; he could still grieve over the loss of her. Hooker’s cats were the only friends he had, and this close friend was one he loved very much, resulting in an example of the loss of a loved one.

Not only having an absent mother, his father showed little to no interest in his son. Hooker wanted his dad to give him answers, or just feed him some sort of information he could trust Hooker with about the family. His father was too caught up in his work and small club/hall business; along with the stress of his wife who wanted nothing to do with the family or her husband. His father didn’t have the energy to be a father, and he really didn’t know how to be a father. He was caught up in the stress of his wife and never bothered sharing how he felt about the family. Hooker discovered this while they were talking and his father said to him “‘when you grow up, and you have a child of your own’… ‘When you realize the things you have to face – when you see your children growing away from life, when nothing you say means anything to anyone anymore, and you are crying out “help” or “beware” or “caution,” and no one pays attention then… then… then, it will be different, Hooker’”(268). Hooker’s father had a hard time dealing with losing a love one, his wife, to her illness, and Hooker lost his father to his grief.

Most difficult of all was that Hooker lost his previous older brother to an act of suicide. Findley wrote, “the Jaguar sat on its taillights, propped up against an oak tree, two thirds of the distance to the road. Gilbert, on fire… his arms spread out in a hopeless gesture, his head to one side” (230). This was the most devastating event for Hooker because any small bit of encouragement and acceptance came from Gilbert. Gilbert also explained some things to Hooker no one else would, with the exception of the dysfunctional scene with their mother. Hooker continued to seek answers and when he didn’t get them he asked Gilbert “‘What is it I’ll need to know,’ [Hooker] said, ‘that everyone keeps talking about?’ … Gil looked .. at him. ‘Much there is that surpasses understanding, kid’ [Gilbert] said” (201). Gilbert had a very tough time dealing with the loss of a loved one, his mother and her ‘illness’. Hooker once again experienced the loss of a loved one, but in a much more horrifying way; a way that could never be fixed and renewed.

This expanded my understanding of the loss of a loved one, and how we lose people more often then we realize. We can lose them slowly or dramatically, and sometimes we cannot change the outcome. It is important we try to make the best of what we have and not be afraid to show affection and love towards anything/anyone that you treasure.

Section 4 - the last of the crazy people...

The way the author decided to conclude the book was interesting and effective. It was surprising beyond belief, and in a way allows you to sympathize with Hooker. Through out the entire novel Hooker had to face ridicule and hurtful joke about his "crazy family". This not only hurt Hooker but it also confused him. The family believed that keeping Hooker in the dark protected him and was the best thing for him, when it turned out not to be. He didn't fully understand why his family was always made fun of because no one told him anything. Hooker felt insignificant and not important, and couldn't understand why he was the only one who wasn't privileged to know things.

On top of Hooker not feeling important and having parents there only physically and not emotionally or psychologically he is forced to deal with one of the most unbearable tragedies anyone could deal with. Having no friends and no family is hard enough, and having only a small connection with your brother meant the world to Hooker. So how is it fair after everything he had gone through and was still going to go through that he lost his brother. Gilbert especially knew how much Hooker was hurting and how he felt lonely and had no one; so why did Gilbert make such a selfish decision and figure that killing himself would help? It helped no one but himself, possibly. He gave no warning sign, just felts then was the right time? Did he not understand how messed up and ‘crazy’ everyone already was, and that this would only make things worse. When someone commits suicide everyone has their own way of dealing with the pain and often find someone to blame. The night Rosetta came into Hooker’s room and shared her story about her father dying and how she was forced to deal with it and never forgave until that night she was talking to Hooker. I feel Hooker felt she was making a mockery over how he was feeling about Gilbert’s death. Her father did not commit suicide; the comparison was a poor one. I think Rosetta’s attempt to comfort Hooker only made him angrier and resent and blame Rosetta even more.

His entire life he was left in the dark, and no one cared to share. His mother believed it was better if she treated Hooker like he was dead so she didn’t have to love him. All Hooker wanted was to be loved by his family, yes Iris did the best that she could but children want to feel wanted by their family. Gilbert made the decision the best way to escape from the pain of “the crazy people” was to kill himself and never have to worry about them again. Hooker did not feel exactly the same. If he killed himself that meant that they won. All the agony Gilbert and Hooker endured would mean absolutely nothing. The time spent crying, hurting, and trying to over come the obstacles, all the hard work would go to waste. No, Hooker had a better idea. The only way to allow the family to not hurt him and make him feel unwanted was to eliminate the crazy people. This way they did not win, they could not hurt him, they could not bring him down, and they could not make him feel crazy any longer. So here is to the “End of The Crazy People”, the people who were lost within their sorrow to the point of madness.

Section 3

Hooker decides he will be quiet no longer, and now demands answers. He is tired of being left in the dark and no one explaining his family situation to him. Him and Gilbert spend some over due quality time with one another. Hooker now makes reference to 'crazy people'. Hearing people in the town refer to his family as 'crazy' is both confusing and heartbreaking. Hooker can see his family fall apart; everyone losing themselves. Why is his family 'crazy'? What makes them 'Crazy'? Hooker asks "do only crazy people get forgiven?" What does he mean by this? I feel he is starting to believe that his mom is crazy, and the way his family behaves is crazy as well. So what do the crazy people need to be forgiven of? His mother not wanting to be a mother? His mother not wanting to be intimate with her husband because she doesn't want more children? His brother's alcohol abuse? Gilbert and Janice? His father giving Jessica a night gown? His father also paying little to no attention to his children? Hooker running away?
I think Hooker feels as if his mother's behaviour is being over looked. What she does and her anti-social behaviour is very 'hush-hush' when Hooker begins to inquire. The family caters to his mother's needs and I think to Hooker, it appears to him that they are approving of her decisions to isolate herself. Because she is 'crazy', does what she do get brushed aside and not matter? People can make a choice to recognise what she is doing or not doing, and decide if she should be forgiven because she is 'ill'. However what she does and doesn't do effects others around her. So if everyone in Hooker's family is crazy, does that make him crazy too?

Gilbert makes reference to wanting to keep Hooker's innocence as long as possible. So it appears that Gilbert believes that 'ignorance is bliss' is the best remedy for Hooker. I believe Gilbert thinks the only way he can protect Hooker, is keeping him in the dark, so to speak, and hide as much as possible to avoid Hooker hurting. Older siblings generally have an instinct to protect the younger ones, even if it means making sacrifices. Gilbert knows how sensitive Hooker is, and it is beautiful. The more he discovers about his family it will eat him and destroy him like it is doing to Gilbert. Everything Gilbert could have been and could have done, he doesn't want to see go to waste, so he is willing to put everything into protecting Hooker and giving his beauty everlasting life.

Section 2

As the novel develops more of the story unfolds and keeps my attention for a longer period of time. This section was rather eventful, and the characters were developed and I was able to learn more about them and why they behave the way they do. Early on Gilbert is introduced as a drunk. The town, along with his family look at him as an embarrassment. But no one questions why this young man has a drinking problem. Or do they and just not bother to talk about it because they are embarrassed about the circumstances? For me, and many readers I'm sure, know Gilbert uses alcohol excessively to numb himself to his environment. Gilbert is screaming for help, screaming for attention good or bad. He wants someone to shake him silly and show that they care what he is doing to himself, and they do not want to see him self destruct. He has decided, like many people do today, that living in a haze and making a choice to not deal with reality makes everything a little better. But the problems are still there when Gilbert sobers up, so he is left to continue to drink, and drink, and drink. Continuing to hurt his family who are all living in turmoil, especially hurting Hooker.

Thus far, Hooker's innocence continues to be blunt and it allows him to enter a safe haven. Hooker is very naive regarding his mother, brother and father's behaviour. This protects him and it also breaks him. This left me with the question is ignorance bliss? I have often wondered this when something comes into my life that I find difficult to deal with. Hooks attempts to talk to his mother and goes into her room and cannot comprehend why his mother wants nothing to do with her family. This affects his 'love map', growing up with a mother, well, growing up with a women who gave birth to you, but is not an active part of your life. He is kind hearted and fragile in every sort of way. He created a dark, peaceful, solemn, place to hold a 'funeral' for the deceased creatures. But thinking back makes me wonder.... When the squirrel was close to death, and Gilbert told him to put it out of it's misery, Hooker wouldn't. At first I thought because he is a meek and gentle lad, he did not have it in him to finish the squirrel off. But then a second thought came to mind; if he is so kind, wouldn't he want the squirrel to not be in pain? Wouldn't killing the squirrel actually mean saving it quicker, rather than watching it suffer in the grave. Watching it twitch, and lay in the freshly dug grave gasping for it's last few breaths, then resting forever. Why does Hooker let it suffer? Is it symbolism for how he feels? He is slowly dying, and people are all around who can help him, but no one will relieve the agony. This does not necessarily mean die, but his father does not talk to him. Or even ask him how he is coping and feeling with all the dysfunctional behaviour at home. Iris is his sanctuary, protector, and parent. But she cannot fill the role of a once active mother.

Jessica (the mother) hides in her room literally all the time. Hooker can see the window when he is outside by the barn with his cats. He wonders how much she really sees. She can watch her boy everyday grow, and she still chooses to miss out on time she could have been spending with him. What is going on in her head that she wants absolutely nothing to do with her family, acting as if they do not exist. Do they look like crazy people to her? Does she feel she is the only sane one remaining?