Senior#2: Pablo Escobar

1.   Who is the protagonist in the novel?  What makes the protagonist sympathetic or unsympathetic? Explain.

A protagonist is the lead character in a book, movie or play. It is the person who is of higher importance in the story than anyone else. Well it’s pretty obvious who the protagonist of this story is. Pablo Escobar was a man who In my eyes and im sure in the eyes of millions of other people was just indescribable as a person due to his inhuman actions against humanity. Pablo without a doubt is unsympathetic in many ways. Not only did he not have sympathy for all those innocent people he murdered but also for himself and for his family. I believe everyone Is born a good person but based on what you build inside and what you are exposed to at a young age is what  determines who you become in the future. Sadly this man chose to be evil and plaint out just a monster to society.

“Sometimes the fate of an entire nation can hinge on the integrity of one man.”(56)

Pablo Escobar had once told his mom that he wanted to become someone big and powerful in the country. It every kids dream to become someone strong and important in the future but who would have that Pablo would have grown up to be the world’s greatest outlaw. To me Pablo’s action reflected his true side. Not loving and caring how he was around his family this man had to sympathy whatsoever towards the people of his country.  The fate of Colombia at some point fell in the hand of Pablo. He was so rich of Power and money that he failed to realize the one thing that all great leaders must have to succeed and that’s a soul. If Pablo would have had a soul would he have murdered and destroyed the people of his own country then way he did?Our decisons decide who we become in the future and sometimes what we desire the most is what brings and end to us as it did Pablo Emilio Escobar Gaviria.

 

Bowden, Mark. Killing Pablo: The Hunt for the World’s Greatest Outlaw. New York: Atlantic Monthly, 2001. Print.

Senior#2: The Real Colombia

What is the setting of the story?  How does this setting create a mood or atmosphere for the story?  Describe the mood, using evidence from the text to support your answer.

The setting of the story takes place in Colombia but at different parts of the book the story transitions to Miami, Florida. Now Miami played a key role in the business of Pablo Escobar since most of the cocaine he was exporting, passed through Florida first. Once the gringos had a taste of the cocaine, more and more came rushing in and Pablo’s business began to grow rapidly with such great demand. The setting of the book creates a certain mood for the story in the way that Colombia is visualized through the authors writing as a place of richness and breathtaking scenery. While Colombia was rich of natural beauty it was also said to be full of “beasts”. Colombians considered themselves grateful to be awarded by  god with the most beautiful country of them all. Unfortunately that beauty was being taken away with the surge of violence all around the country. Thousands of innocent people were in the mist of La Violencia and their was no escape from it because Colombia was overflowing with rapists, murders, drug lords, etc.. Early off in the story the author writes about the type of people Colombia had in its country. Not only were there rapists and, murders but also tons of corruption within its own government. The author writes,

Male victims had their genitals stuffed in their mouths , women had their breasts cut off and their wombs stretched over their heads. Children were killed not y accident but slowly, with pleasure. Severed heads were left on pikes along public roadways . Colombian killers perfected signature cuts, and distinctive ways of mutilating victims.(Killing Pablo 14)

Colombia was a place of enormous suffering and thousands of innocent people had to pay the price. The author I believe chooses to start of the story with such gruesome details of the way Colombians murdered each other savagely in their country to give of the vibe of how Colombia really was. Colombia was a place where life wasn’t easy be lived if you were given the opportunity to live it. This chaos was already in place before Pablo Escobar came into play . It wasn’t until 1945 that Colombia’s biggest outlaw (Pablo Escobar) was born and from that day on , Colombia was never the same.

Bowden, Mark. Killing Pablo: The Hunt for the World’s Greatest Outlaw. New York: Atlantic Monthly, 2001. Print.

Senior#2: The Escobar Era

What is the significance of the title of your book?  What does the title mean? Does it mean more than one thing?  How do you understand your book better because of the title?

 Killing Pablo. This title is clear but at the same time very deep in meaning. Now you must think that of course the story is just about the hunt for Pablo Emilio Escobar Gaviria, (yeah a very long name right) and the efforts to  bring an end to his reign of terror. But in the end did Pablo and what he stood for actually die alongside him? The title doesn’t just refer to killing Pablo but also to killing all that made him who he was. His money, his empire, his business, and most important of all his legacy is what was intended to be exterminated alongside of him. Pablo’s time came to an end and his power over Columbia was no more. This didn’t mean Columbia was at peace and everything would surely get better with time but instead it was the opposite. Mark Bowden the author of Killing Pablo writes,

 “A half century later, La Violencia bred a new colorful menagerie of outlaws, men who went by names like Tarzan, Desquite (Revenge), Tirofijo (Sureshot), Sangrenegra (Blackblood), and Chispas (Sparks). They roamed the countryside, robbing, pillaging, raping, and killing, but because they were allied with none of the major factions, their crimes were seen by many common people as blows struck against power.”

Those who were on the hunt for Pablo all those years believed that if Pablo was dead Colombia would be freed of the corrupt and mass-marketing of cocaine. Little did they know that with the downfall of Pablo more would rise to the occasion. Since Pablo had 80% of the cocaine exportation in the world, his downfall meant there was business now open for  drug exporters on a smaller scale. Not only was cocaine beginning to surge but also crime. These group operated on a smaller scale so people didn’t take much notice of them. Killing Pablo in my opinion didn’t help Colombia all that much since new cartels began to form. The title of the book like I said before meant more than what it says. It goes into the question of “Did killing Pablo save the country of Colombia or did it condemn it even more ?”

Bowden, Mark. Killing Pablo: The Hunt for the World’s Greatest Outlaw. New York: Atlantic Monthly, 2001. Print.

Senior#2: The Devil Himself

What is a “conflict” in literature?  What is the main conflict in your book?  Which type of conflict is it: character vs. character, character vs. nature, character vs. society, character vs. self, or character vs. technology?  Explain.

Conflict in literature can be defined as opposition between two sides which are usually the antagonist and the protagonist. The main conflict in the novel  was that Pablo Escobar was in many ways destroying the country he said he had love for.  He was destroying Colombia as his narco business thrived. Pablo’s desire for more money costed the lives of  thousands of innocent people. Pablo fell in love with money and was never content with the amount he had despite that he made the Forbes list for the most richest men on earth. As Pablo’s reign continued many tried but only came to what appeared close to catching him and ending what he had, for the best of the hurting country and the rest of the world. In my opinion Pablo was the most heartless and pathetic person I’ve ever heard of. He believed he was helping Colombia become a better place by giving back to the poor neighborhoods where he grew up. He handed out money in the streets as if it were candy. Pablo wasn’t giving money to the people to help them but instead to buy their silence and loyalty because Escobar truly didn’t care for those people. He was selfish and only cared about what would benefit him, his family, and his corrupt business. This story contains a Character vs. Society type of conflict. Pablo was in war against his own people because he had turned against those who believed he could bring change to the country. Pablo instead brought more chaos and hurt to Colombia.

“General Maza, the survivor of two grotesque assassination attempts, put it bluntly: ‘This country won’t be put right as long as Escobar is alive.”(117)

Pablo Escobar wasn’t only fighting against the government of Colombia and The United States but also against his own people. While there was people who were very loyal to Escobar, there were however many Colombians who tried helping government officials with taking him down but there was just one issue with that. Since Pablo was always one step ahead of everyone else he know who had sold him out and you better belive Pablo was going to make sure those people were out of bis way for sure. Pablo was determined to eliminating anyone who stood in the way of him and his business. If Colombia were to have a shot at restoring the country and crooked government system this meant that Pablo and his associates needed to be eliminated no matter what it took to do so. 

Bowden, Mark. Killing Pablo: The Hunt for the World’s Greatest Outlaw. New York: Atlantic Monthly, 2001. Print.

Senior #1: FEELINGS

What point of view does the author use?  What are the advantages to the author’s chosen point of view?  (What is the author able to do, because they chose to tell the story with that point of view?)  How would the book be different if it employed a different point of view (e.g., 1st person instead of third person, or a different first-person narrator)?  

Th auhtor of the Kite Runner decided to tell the story through a first person poin to of view. With a first perosn point of view the reader become more in syncwith the the auhtor (at least to in my persepcective). The auhor choses to have the story be told through a first perosn poin to fview because it provides more detail. Some advantages of having the sotry be told through this point of view is that the auhtor reveals more then he actualy conceals.  The first perosn pont of view also has its avantegs when it comes to credibilty . Who else better to tell the story than the person who lived thorugh the story events. The point of view though does change a little because in one of the chapters the story is being told through someone else perspective. I mean think about it for a second here. If the story were to be told threough a differen tperspective would we as readers have so much insight son the auhtos life and hardhsips he went thorugh and what exaclty he was thinking when these certain things happened .

“Because the truth of it was , I always felt like Baba hated m a little . And why not? After all , I had killed his beloved wife, his beautiful princess, hadn’t I? The least I could have done was to have had  the decency to have turned out a little more like him” (Kite Runner 19)

 

By having the story have a first person point of view we can get a better understanding of what the reader was feeling while experiencing such tough times lik these. Only the author could be able to express himself to the pont where we knew how he was  and what he was thinking. Throughout the book we see manty instances were the author choses to set the tone of a sad and deprssed main character. Why? Bceuase the auhot was showing us the readers what he was experiencing and his thoughs during those experiences.

Hosseini, Khaled. The Kite Runner. New York: Riverhead, 2004. Print.

Senior #1: BETRAYAL

What is the theme of your book? (How do you know?) Does the theme reinforce or go against what most people think?  (Would most people agree or disagree with this theme?)  Explain.

The theme of the Kite Runner is betrayal. The theme of the book is revealed towards the start of the book when Amir turns his back to Hassan who is assaulted and scared for life that one night in the dark alley . That scene in the bok shows betraal because Amir turns his back on the one  true friedn he has. Amir demonstartes betryal by not standing up for Hassan just how he always did for Amir .

“I had one last chance to make a decision . One final opportunity to decide who I was going to be . I could step into that aley, stand up fro Hassan the way he’d stood up for me alll those times in the past and accpet whatever would happen to me. Or I could run. In the end I ran ” (Kite Runner 77)

Amir ran and didn’t even look back to see what would become of his friend. This not only shows betrayal on so many different levels but also cowardness. How could Amir let this happen to to Hassan who was basically his family. If he cared for him he would have done evrything he could to protect him even if It meant risking his life. I believe the theme of the book does in fact go against what most people beleiev in . I perosnally feel that if I protect and stand up for someone I love and see as family that in return someday they would do the same for me. Betryal is the hardest thing to overcome. Once someone feels they have been betrayed it’s hard to gain back that trust and confidence you once had for them. It also becomes harder to trust others because you have that fear of being betrayed and let down again. OVerall I fel that this story has caused plenty of emotions to spark within me . I some what start to understand the reasoning behind Amir’s betryal and cowardness. Once again I say “somehwat” start to undertsand because it still doesn’t justify what Amir did.

Hosseini, Khaled. The Kite Runner. New York: Riverhead, 2004. Print.

Senior #1: YOU COWARD!

 

• Protagonist: What is a protagonist?  Who is the protagonist in the novel?  What makes the protagonist sympathetic or unsympathetic? Explain.

 

Well a protagonist is the lead character in a book, movie or play. It is the person who is of higher importance in the story than anyone else. In the Kite Runner the protagonist I would say is Amir who also  happens to be the narrator of the story.Here is the twist though, I believe that Amir should not be seen as sympathetic or unsympathetic but instead as plain pathetic. Throughout the story My feelings towards this specific character become stronger and stronger to the point where I feel like becoming part of the story myself and telling the boy who he really is. And questioning  Amir about  the things he has done that prove he is pathetic and overall a coward. But since I must answer to his question completely I’m going to say that Amir is unsympathetic. I believe that Amir is unsympathetic because of the fact he didn’t take a stand for his friend Hassan who was basically his brother. Amir and Hassan grew up together just how their dads had and their bond as friends seemed unbreakable. But all of that changed the night Amir won the Kite Running competition. Amir showed his true colors and demonstrated to us all what a coward he in reality was. The author writes ,

Assef knelt behind Hassan, put his hands on Hassan’s hips and lifted his bare buttocks. He kept one hand on Hassan’s back and undid his own belt buckle with his free hand. He unzipped his jeans. Dropped his underwear. He positioned himself behind Hassan, Hassan didn’t struggle. Didn’t even whimper. He moved his head slightly and I caught a glimpse of his face. Saw the resignation in it. It was a look I had seen before . It was the look of the Lamb.

Amir watched as his friend Hassan in fact his only friend was raped by the boys whom Hassan had stood up against to protect Amir. Amir watched in complete horror as these boys began the destruction of Hassan life. Instead of Hassan standing up and stopping the boys from doing such a thing to his friend Hassan he hid in the alley and did nothing. Here at this moment both Hassan and Amir’s lives changed forever. Hassan had to live with what had happened to him knowing that Amir could have stood up for him but instead fled like the coward he is. Amir had to live with the fact that he could be the one to blame that his friends life was destroyed.

 ” I don’t want to go to another orphanage.” Amir responds ” I wont ever let that happen. I promise you that” I cupped his hand in both of mine “come home with me” His tears were soaking the pillow . He didn’t say anything for a long time . Then his hand squeezed mine back . And he nodded . He nodded”

I feel that toward the end of the story Amir starts to feel sympathetic after he is called from Afghanistan with the news that Hassan is dead and he has left a Son behind. Amir returns to his home country to bring back Hassan’s son who is also suffering through the same things that his father went through.  He believes that by doing this he is basically making up fro the time he didnt stand up fro Hassan that night in the alley before he was raped. But to me that’s something no one will ever forget nor forgive because that is just in my eyes unright.

Hosseini, Khaled. The Kite Runner. New York: Riverhead, 2003. Print.

Senior #1: AFGHANISTAN

1. What is the setting of the story?  Is the setting familiar or unfamiliar to you?  Why?  (It might be familiar if you’ve been to the place where the story is set or it is set in modern-day.  It might be unfamiliar if it is in a time period you haven’t lived during, is set somewhere where you haven’t been to, or is set in a fantasy world.) How did familiarity or unfamiliarity affect your ability to envision the story?

Well the setting of The Kite Runner written by Khaled Hosseini,  at first struck me as unusual. The setting of this book takes place in the Wazir Akbar khan district in Kabul , Afghanistan in the .The author starts his writing by introducing us into this different country and its lifestyles. The story is told in Kabul, Afghanistan from 1963 to 1981. The author then transitions to tell his story from a different country, The United States. The author then returns to telling the story I the setting of Kabul, Afghanistan. I feel that the setting of this book was unfamiliar. Its unfamiliar because I previously didn’t have any knowledge on this country and the traditions and lifestyles of its people. Throughout the book the author gives us insight on the country and traditions.The author at the beginning of the story talks about one of the biggest traditions there was in Afghanistan as a kid. The author writes, 

“Every winter, districts in Kabul held a kite – fighting tournament. And i you were a boy living in Kabul, the day of the tournament was undeniably the highlight of the cold season. The kite- fighting tournament was an old winter tradition in  Afghanistan. It started early in the morning on the day of the contest and didn’t end until only the the winning kite flew in the sky. People gathered on sidewalks and roofs to cheer for their kids.” The Kite Runner 51

 The author tells us about how kite running is of extreme importance to a kid growing up in Afghanistan. We see how the country in which the story takes place is very unfamiliar at least to me and is different to the customs that we have here in The United States. I also classify the setting of this book as unusual because during the time this story takes place, there wasn’t the technology there is today. Now what i would say was the most odd part about his book was the fact that the author chose to change the setting of the story from Afghanistan to the United States and then back to Afghanistan. While the author did so I felt that he was tying to give off a comparison more than anything between the two countries. One one side you had the United States that was in total peace and growing as a nation and on the other side you had Afghanistan who was experiencing drastic changes to it’s government and soon would become a battle zone. Although there were times where I felt i had to go back and read through to make sure I understood what the author was saying about the country he grew up in , I overall enjoyed reading this book and do in deed rank this novel in my top five books ( even though I only have 3 favorite books). 

Hosseini, Khaled. The Kite Runner. New York: Riverhead, 2003. Print.

3. Not All Endings Are Happy

Question: Is the ending happy, unhappy, or indeterminate (just ends, leaves you hanging, the conflict is not clearly resolved). Is the ending the appropriate ending for this book?

The end Eight Days To Live was very satisfying to me because it wasn’t all happy but a little more realistic than having no one being killed there about two people she cared for being killed and her mother being shot. Yes I see how messed up it sounds when you read it but hey, not everyone is allowed to live nor is everyone going to live forever let’s be realistic.

“Eight long, agonizing days that had seemed to go on forever”(397 Eight Days To Live).

Truer words were never spoken this book was long and although the book did drag out parts that seemed to never end it had its moments of greatness. There were parts of the book that kept me guessing on what was gonna happen next so I had to keep reading but like always my little eyes would get tired and I could no longer read and another reason was because it 1 o’clock in the morning and my mom was yelling at me to go to sleep. Nothing was more satisfying than reading the last parts where the main villains of the book were killed off. One of them died by Jane shooting him right in the heart and the other died having a mural of Judas falling on top of him when they demolished the temple where they had the sacrifices, the irony right? But after the climax of the story there was still one question in my mind what happened to the Judas coins? Where they sold because they are worth 8 billion dollars? All jokes aside I do feel as those this was the right step for the final act to unfold because it still leaves us with some questions and coming up with theories on how things panned out after it sometimes better than getting ending it’s fun to imagine what could happen.

Johansen, Iris. Eight Days to Live. New York: St. Martin’s, 2010. Print.

3. People Change

Question: Are any of the characters a developing character, changing over time? If so, is the change a large or small one? Is the change believable for the character in his/her situation?

Jane McGuire is indeed like a realistic person and like real people it develops into a more understanding person through the events that unfold she learns how cruel people could actually be she realizes how many monsters there are  in this cruel world that we live in.

“First they’d torture you to find out if you know where we’re going. Then they’d kill you…. I won’t have you run join the body count”(196 Iris Johansen).

This is when she fully understands that anyone around her is a target because of the cult putting a hit out on her. So this is the part of the book where she finds a translator to interpret a very old tablet they have taken in order to find out who the cult was worshiping. Not only did they bring the cult to the translator but the cult ended up destroying her house. The house she bought after escaping an abusive husband she was forced to married as a teen in Pakistan. Jane had disrupted her life of peace and brought hell down upon it unintentionally. She later finds a way to repay her but she still feels responsible for the destruction of the live the translator had created for herself. The changes Jane makes as a character throughout the events of the book are believable because those events would have an everlasting effect on anyone who went through them. If you think otherwise then go through what she went through which was almost losing everyone she loved to a ridiculous cult while nearly losing her life.

Johansen, Iris. Eight Days to Live. New York: St. Martin’s, 2010. Print.