Wednesday, April 4, 2012

Tobias Wolff: "Hunters in the Snow"

Tobias Wolff

13 comments:

  1. Throughout this whole story I was uncomfortable. I wasn’t the least bit sure how I was supposed to feel, how I was supposed to read these character. At first I thought, okay I should sympathize with Tubs, and these other two characters are jerks. But I couldn’t figure out why these guys were such assholes. I kept feeling like something bad was going to happen. Maybe I had read this story before or had heard about it but couldn’t quite remember what happened, but I had this feeling that someone was going to die. Anyway, so I kept thinking “why is Tubs hanging out with these two, what does he get out of this relationship and is anyone really that much of a jackass to their friend?” I started feeling like the story was unbelievable, I was getting frustrated. I guess it was because I couldn’t really identify with any of the characters, even Tubs. So by the time we got to the big conflict with Kenny (I think his name was Kenny, I don’t have the book in front me since I share it with someone) shooting the dog I just lost all hope of ever liking these characters and therefore liking the story. So Tubs shoots Kenny and I’m like, “what is going on.” And then they sort of just act like it’s nothing--they’re driving around and making lots of stops and taking their time and now Tubs is a jerk too and I’m supposed to feel sympathy for Kenny? Tubs and the other guy (sorry, again, don’t have the book here) talk and work out their problems, share their secrets, but by this point I hate them, I’m just really worried about Kenny dying and I’m like, “fuck your dumbass mistress and fuck your weight, you guys SUCK.”

    I’m still really unsure of how I’m supposed to react, who I’m supposed to identify with. It all seemed completely unbelievable and unrelatable. I mean, could two people seriously let someone die and act like that towards him, even if he was a jerk earlier? Am I missing something? I know in this melodrama essay Baxter wrote about how it’s okay to have devil characters that are just completely evil, but who am I rooting for in this story? How am I supposed to care about what happens to anyone when they all seem inhuman?

    ReplyDelete
  2. My over-generalized opinion about “Hunters in the Snow”: I loved it. Wolff had me in this story 100%, and by the time I got to the second story, I was actually in a better mood than I was when I started reading. I felt, through most of it, like I was right there, hanging out with these three characters. Admittedly, a lot of my attraction has to do with the humor, whether it be the literal knee-slapping, the jokes about Tub’s diet being “the first diet I ever heard of where you gained weight,” or the deer poop being described as walnuts on icing,” Wolff had me laughing out loud and reading lines out to my roommate.

    (I agree when Kim says Kenny and Frank are complete assholes, but I have to say that's what makes them so likable. They're comfortable enough around each other to make these jokes. They're brutal, and I enjoy every minute of it.)

    The humor does more than just pull me into the story—it removes/ dulls the melodrama of the story. Or, maybe it distracts me from how melodramatic the story actually is, (I don’t know, Baxter was messing with my head the whole time I was reading). My point here is that Wolff throws out these absurd scenarios that are almost blatantly melodramatic (the swerving truck in the beginning, the dog “peeing a little as he went,” Tub full-out shooting Kenny in the stomach, etc.). But, any feeling of “what the hell just happened, you can’t throw these things out there like this” was immediately numbed by the characters’ shoulder-shrugging reactions. Kenny and Frank almost hit Tub with the truck, and any drama is removed by them telling Tub “If you want to piss and moan all day you might as well go home and bitch at your kids.” The dog pees as it walks away, and Kenny starts talking about “hippie bullshit.” Tub and Frank bring Kenny to the house after Tub shot him and the owner says, nonchalantly “Shoot your friend did you?”

    Any tension is negated—or maybe it’s the melodrama that’s being negated. Either way, the humor, jokes, and indifference of the characters make me wonder about the drama of those bigger scenes. Is Wolff allowed to do this? Obviously the answer is “yes,” because he does, and in doing so, he toys with (and possibly breaks) our ideas of melodrama and what is allowed.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I read this story three years ago and the main part of the plot that I remembered was the old dog. I remember physically flinching away from the text at “Kenny got down on all fours and snarled and barked back at him, and the dog slunk away into the barn, looking over his shoulder and peeing a little as he went.” That was the part of the story that stuck so clearly in my head even years later. I thought it was ironic that I had forgotten that Kenny was actually asked to shoot the dog by the property owner of the land on which the men were illegally hunting. Since my first reading of this story, I have since read Of Mice and Men, and the detail about who should have the right or strength to kill a dog reminds me greatly of that overall theme within the novel.
    My perceptions about the relationship between the three men have not really changed since my initial reading. I could relate them very easily to mean teenagers, a sort of power struggle. Tub could easily be viewed as the weakling, Frank is the easily-manipulated side-kick, and Kenny is the leader of the pack. Neither Tub nor Frank particularly enjoy Kenny’s company or constant insults, but yet they tolerate him. Once he is, for lack of a better word, eliminated from the equation, they can relax and be themselves. Tub and Frank were free to bond all over again, learn something personal about the other, and be friends without the fear of being judged or harassed by Kenny. I think it’s pretty obvious that these two men had no real intention of ever delivering Kenny to the hospital and he probably realizes that as well.

    ReplyDelete
  4. When I finished reading “Hunters in the Snow,” I said to my roommate, “this story is so strange. No one would actually do this!” I had a similar reaction to the story that Kim did, minus most of the frustration. I was simply, utterly confused at first and then just out-and-out horrified in train crash sort of way. I couldn’t understand why Frank and Tub so blatantly disregarded Kenny, who was essentially dying in the truck bed. Okay, Kenny was an asshole, but I’m just so taken aback by the inhumanity exhibited by Frank and Tub when they ignore Kenny that I can’t come to terms with the story quite yet. Kenny might have been an asshole, but ultimately Frank and Tub let him die. What Amy said about “the two men had no real intention of delivering Kenny to the hospital” stuck me. I haven’t really paused for thought, but I think that’s the same conclusion I would have come to, as well and, god, isn’t that awful? I know Baxter said something about the story coming to a deciding moment that clearly outlines the villain. Well, I can’t help but see all the characters in here as villains.

    So, now, I scrabble for meaning, looking to Baxter to be my savior. The problem: I had a similar reaction to Alex with Baxter. By the end of it, I couldn’t determine if melodrama was good, bad, or a product to be used with caution. The biggest trouble I had with Baxter was the lack of a clear-cut definition of what he was describing and debating, especially when he started in on the fact that people misuse the term melodrama when they mean kitsch or schlock. I felt like I needed a map for this essay. But, I did understand it in chunks and pieces. I tried relating Wolff’s method of writing melodrama with Chekhov’s and I don’t think Wolff possesses the kind of subtlety that Baxter waxed lyrical about. So, I have to disagree with Alex here: I don’t think the humor dulled the melodrama at all. I think it eased the tension of it, yes, but I don’t think it was “dulled” by any means. For me, the humor provided a stark contrast, making the melodrama all the more glaring to me. I was just appalled all the way through by the actions of the characters, so appalled that I couldn’t properly enjoy the humor of the piece.

    That doesn’t mean I don’t like “Hunters in the Snow.” There were sections that I thought were grotesquely beautiful, odd as it sounds, like in the restaurant scene with Frank and Tub. There’s something disturbing and striking about the way Frank makes Tub gorge himself until he’s full and then calls it “beautiful.” Horrifyingly, this is how Frank and Tub start to bond with each other. It reminded me of how Baxter was saying we’re afraid of looking at something and calling it what it is. (At least, I think he said that, because for as much as Baxter enlightens me, he also confuses me.) The same thing sort of happened with me during Frank’s rebuttal about categorizing people to justify his love for a fifteen year old. At this point, though, I’m starting to see this story as one that details the Seven Deadly Sins—or, at least, some of them. We’ve definitely got wrath, gluttony, and perhaps lust. It’s a weak reading of the story, I think, but I picked up those three themes right away. Regardless, I’m still not any clearer on the issue of melodrama and “Hunters in the Snow” drives me to hysterical confusion.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree with Kim and Kayla - "Hunters in the Snow" often made me uncomfortable and I was really sure how to emotionally connect to such odd, mild reactions to potentially melodramatic circumstances. It came to feel somewhat like a gimmick to me in the later pages, the way Frank and Tub remained so disconnected from Kenny, the way their conversations contained humor as we knew that Kenny was outside, dying, forgotten by them. I expected them to find Kenny dead and be perplexed, react mildly to that, too, so I like the writing of the actual ending, although "They had taken a different turn a long way back" felt almost too expository and final and "meaningful". Still, once Kenny was in the truck, I was waiting and waiting for him to die, and so I'm still not sure how to feel about the ending - it felt too set-up but still didn't do exactly what I predicted.

    One scene that really stands out to me is the one in which Frank buys Tub the pancakes and makes him eat them - "No wiping". It was grotesque, and yet something that Tub wanted, and Frank was encouraging of his sickness, and I just didn't know how to feel about it. The same goes for Kenny shooting the dog - it startles us, it disturbs us, and yet he was supposed to - he was asked to.

    Now that I think of it, the moment when Tub shoots Kenny is interesting because, of course, it seems as though Kenny is about to shoot Tub - and we get the opposite. Because something else was being set-up, it doesn't get to come across as melodramatic. And perhaps that's what happened with the ending.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I have to say that this story did make me feel uncomfortable because Kenny shot the dog. I guess that was the only part that I felt uncomfortable at because I don’t like to read animals getting shot and it was very unexpected. I know that the dog was old and would have died but the way Wolff described its death, was very horrific and made me feel uncomfortable. With that being sad, I thought that Kenny deserved what he got, not to sound very evil. I think he deserved to be injured for what he did to Tub, Frank, and the dog. To me this was like the endings of Flannery O’Connor who for some reason “Hunters in the Snow” reminded me of. I feel like there was a character that (probably some) reader hated and he got his punishment at the end.

    But the thing that bothered me the most besides the dog’s death was how Frank and Tub just fixed their relationship in the tavern. That felt very sudden to me and made me feel even more uncomfortable because there was nothing really that led up to that moment, besides the mention of the babysitter. The way they talked was very casual as if they were just catching up on life and things. It felt very odd to me as well as the man who owned the property that the hunters asked permission from.

    I don’t really know what to think about this story other than it is definitely odd. I do love Tobias Wolff’s writing but like the other pieces I read last semester, there is a degree of uneasiness that are in almost every one of these stories. Yet this story “Hunters in the Snow”, I didn’t feel uncomfortable until Kenny started to shoot things. I guess it is because of the mystery in which we don’t really understand Kenny’s actions in the first place. To me he was some old guy who lost his temper after not being able to hunt anything. But I can’t help but get the feeling that there is something more going on besides the obvious that Kenny was told to shot the dog. I think it is because of the scene between Frank and Tub in which we learn more about the characters and Kenny is sort of kept in the dark.

    I find it interesting that this is the second time Tobias Wolff wrote about snow. He did it with another story that I can’t remember the title of and the snow was like another character to the story. I kind of think it is the same thing in this story as the snow was in a way like another character. It definitely had a great impact on this story as it was the reason why Kenny started to shot and why the hunt was so unsuccessful. It also made Kenny suffer which can be interpreted in many different ways. I think snow represents innocence in a way, which kind of corresponds to this piece. To me this piece is about loss of innocence, which I think Wolff uses the raging snowstorm as. After Kenny, Tub, and Frank end doing things that are the opposite of their character, not that some of them were innocent to begin with. I probably reading too much into this, but I feel like there is something else there.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Initially, as I was reading the first paragraphs of "Hunters in the Snow" I was completely lost like most everyone seems to have felt. It might have been a combination of me expecting the first paragraph to explain everything to me like we have been talking about in class, but it could have also been that I just wasn't prepared for the characters in their truck. I thought it was funny that Tobias Wolff mentioned "juvenile delinquents" throwing a brick through the window of the truck so soon after these guys nearly run over their friend for a joke. It also stuck me as odd that three guys who hunt so often wouldn’t get started until after ten in the morning. I always thought hunting was a get up at first light and be in the forest no later than four in the morning kind of deal.

    What really interested me was the dynamic between Tub and Frank and Kenny. It seemed to me, especially as I was first getting to know the characters, that Tub was acting less manly then his friends. He has been complaining since they started the trip about things that seem very reasonable like wanting the guys to stick to a schedule and not leave him standing in the snow and frightening poor truckers who mistake him for a hitchhiker (god forbid) and not run him over. But Frank and Kenny have a way of turning all these things into "bitching" and generally ruining their man time. But then, it's mocking him and talking about his diet that brings them so much joy after two hours of hunting and turning up nothing. It was odd to see the sudden switch. I think though it was still a matter of getting to know the characters, and there were plenty of cracks about babysitters and such to break up the more girlish qualities of their afternoon together.

    I think it was sort of a culmination of all these details in their relationship that let me look past the melodrama everyone talked about. More than just being assholes (thank you Kim) these guys are idiots, which is a dangerous combination. The humor that Alex mentions comes out of this really close friendship that seem to rise out of these guys trying to get away and just have a good time with each other. It’s not about the deer. It’s about the hunting. I guess I was like Alex then, in that Wolff also had me immersed in his story. Or at least in his characters. And while I wasn’t able to fully understand what to do with this story when it was over, and often times in the middle of reading any line, I was willing to go along with it. I guess that’s a big accomplishment for a story that is so full of these outrageous or just plain out-of-place scenes.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I’ve read this story a few times and I really like it. I agree with some of the posts that say the ending seems a little strange and completely non-realistic. Yeah, it is. I still like it. I’m definitely not sure what he was trying to say, other than Kenny always dies, in ‘South Park’ and in short stories. It is unbelievable but it works for some reason in this story. For one thing you feel ok with Kenny being shot because he pretty much deserves it for being awful. The thing I worry about when I read this is Tub getting in trouble because he is a beautifully sympathetic character. This writing is obviously miles better than mine but I like writing a somewhat likable loser who gets some satisfaction and I get that feeling with Tub. Of course, he accidentally shots his “friend”, he’s that kind of guy. And Kenny is such an asshole that you really don’t feel bad for him bleeding to death in the back of a truck. That’s the beauty of this story; you care for the characters to the point where the insanity of the story itself becomes secondary. Tub deserves to have a quiet drink with his real friend and Kenny deserves to freeze/bleed to death and I felt that way after around 2 pages. How does Wolff make such relatable characters so fast? He is better than me.

    On a related note, in real life, if you shoot a friend by accident-do not leave them in the back of a truck while you grab a drink. They will never forgive you for this. You could even buy there lunch for like, 3 months, and they’ll still bring it up at dinner parties and stuff. It’s like they’ve never made a mistake in their goddamn life. Well, I said I’m sorry Steve, time to move on. You barely limp anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I think I’ll use this story as an opportunity to talk about tone. Reading Adam Johnson’s introduction to Tobias Wolff prepared me for what he calls “a wry, dark humor reminiscent of Flannery O’Connor.” With this in mind, I want to draw everyone’s attention to the funny aspects of “Hunters in the Snow,” a story that I did not expect so much humor from. Personally, I found the first few pages of the story somewhat lacking—good writing to be seen, of course, but nothing that I was particularly interested in. To give Wolff some credit, I have respect for the opening line: “Tub had been waiting for an hour in the falling snow.” There, that comes out of necessity, introduces our main character, and establishes something about the mood and the environment thanks to the snow. Then, in my opinion, the most interesting thing to happen in the next three pages is a brief, mysterious mention of a babysitter, but that promise won’t be delivered upon until much later. The next point in the story that I really liked is when Wolff compares the barking dog to a “cannon recoiling,” followed by the really weird action of Kenny getting down on all fours and barking back at the dog. What an odd image, one that not only amuses us but prepares us for the realization that Kenny might be a little out of his mind, or at least unpredictable. But the story really picks up, not surprisingly, when the gunshots start flying. When I read the line, “I hate that dog,” I thought here we have a textbook example of the rule of threes—first that sign, then the tree, all escalating to the killing of this poor dog. Of course, I was partially wrong, and I was really surprised when Kenny said, “I hate you,” then doubly surprised when Tub shoots Kenny instead of vice versa. After that, it was a little difficult for me to pin down the tone of the story. The language detailing Kenny’s pained movements brings us into serious territory, as does this: “Tub was weeping from the eyes and nostrils” (although even that, now that I read it again, is sort of funny). I started to see Wolff’s dark humor when Kenny tells Frank, who vomits, that there’s aspirin in the truck. Soon after, we arrive at the home of the farmer, who talks like this: “Shoot your friend, did you?” I won’t go as far as to say that I laughed out loud, but that is decidedly funny. And from then on, I recognized plenty to laugh at in this story, my favorite of which is Frank’s explanation of the mysterious “babysitter” comments. I love when Frank calls her “this so-called babysitter, this so-called fifteen-year-old.” And then, of course, on the penultimate page, we get the arrival of the pancakes, which, as we all learned in our first workshop, is the funniest thing you can possibly put in a short story. I provide these examples (and there are more I haven’t covered) because I want to convey that Wolff’s sense of humor is what I liked best about “Hunters in the Snow,” and I hope to take some lessons from it, because I, too, would like to write stories that make people laugh without creating strictly comedy pieces.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I’m glad that I’m not the only person who was displeased and rubbed the wrong way by this piece. Perhaps it’s just the feminist in me, but I felt like the behavior of these characters puts a spotlight on the stereotypical hyper masculine, desensitized, deer-hunting, flannel wearing American man. The way that Frank and Kenny act so callously towards Tub, and then once Kenny is shot their lack of urgency just makes me wonder how they can act so indifferent. Perhaps this story isn’t meant to be taken in a completely concrete sense. I’ve read “Bullet in the Brain” before and that story seems to veer ever so slightly off the path of realism. I don’t know about you but if someone had a gun to my head I wouldn’t giggle at their threats. Perhaps that’s just Wolff’s conventions to have completely realistic scenarios and tweak the personalities of the characters ever so much that the reader cannot accept it as a piece of realistic fiction.
    There are a few places where visual details really stuck out to me. Like just after Kenny gest shot: “His hands were covered with blood. In the dusk his blood was more blue than red. It seemed to below to the shadows. It didn't seem out of place.” It’s a very eerie description but considering the circumstances it’s not out of place or too somber for the occasion. I think that in a way that section is trying to add a melodramatic quality to Kenny’s reaction of being shot. Actually to me Kenny’s reaction seemed quite appropriate even though Frank was only concerned whether or not it had hit his appendix.
    But returning to various details, I think the layering of colors through the use of the snow was especially gorgeous. There’s a paragraph on the last page that toys with this very idea. “The fresh snow on the road and the trees sparkled under the beam of the headlight. Squares of light from farmhouse windows fell onto the blue snow in the fields.” I could picture it perfectly. Little details like that always stick out to me and I appreciate them.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I gained a lot of information from Adam Johnson’s introduction to the stories. I was particularly interested in how Tobias Wolff constructs his characters. Johnson said that Wolff’s characters are decent people who have made a wrong decision or two but refuse to acknowledge it. He makes his characters complicated, putting them in “situations of self-confrontation.” This really stood out to me, because as writers, we’re always thinking about what piece of the story to start with. Many writers say characters, but I’ve always started with a situation. Not a plot—I hardly ever know what’s going to happen over the course of the stories I write. I give each of my characters a backstory and a current situation, and then they have to work through it. The line that stuck out to me in this introduction is “Each person comes on stage with a long shadow.” Wolff carefully crafts the backstory of each character, making sure it adds up to who they are in the story. This is something I try to do in my own writing.

    I liked how the characters’ histories and personalities were revealed piece by piece in the story, so we as readers could make up our own minds. Tub has been teased for much of his life, and not just by strangers, but his friends as well. He feels a little abandoned because his friends (particularly Frank) don’t stand up for him. In my eyes, he is a very sympathetic character, so I was completely on his side the entire time. When he shot Kenny, I sort of just shrugged and figured Kenny deserved it. I thought the story would go in a different direction after that. I thought Kenny was going to die and Tub would get in trouble, so the series of events the story took was refreshing. I didn’t want a realistic ending, where Kenny died in the snow and Tub got arrested. I like Tub too much. I really enjoyed all the humor; some of the lines made me laugh out loud, especially the conversation with the man whose land Kenny was shot on. “Shoot your friend, did you? I suppose you want to use the phone.” Everyone is so calm, not overly concerned about Kenny, which fit with my reading of the story. I really didn’t care too much about Kenny. My attitude was sort of like, “Sorry, man, that sucks you got shot.” When Tub and Frank went into the bar to get a drink and just left Kenny in the back of the truck, I laughed. They’re having this intense heart-to-heart while their friend is bleeding to death, no sympathy from them at all.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Well, I agree with the others on feeling disturbed by this piece. There's just little details I was confused about – like how does an out-of-shaped obese person have the energy to go hunting to begin with?

    Honestly the most interesting thing in this story was Frank's interest in this 15 year old girl. I would have like to see more of that not all this random stuff about the dog being shot and them just making this urgent race to the hospital into a roadtrip.

    I think Tobias Wolff is disturbing us, challenging us. We don't like to think (most of the time) of the depths of human cruelty and this just shows it in a 'everyday' 'realistic' scenario. I guess it is possible for people to to 'be friends' and be this cruel to one another, not even caring if your friend is bleeding to death in the back of a truck while you get something to eat. But it's definitely the most effective way to end a friendship (if the person survives, anyway)

    Maybe it's because I read it quickly but i didn't really pick up on many visual details. But when the dog was shot - that stuck out and then 'Oh, the farmer asked Kenny to kill the dog' When was this? Did I miss something?

    Yes, most likely.

    I guess this story was not my taste because I was a lot more interested in the throw -away subplot of the 15 year old girl (I forget her name) and Frank's love for her.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I liked Tobias Wolff when I read his stuff last semester, and I still think he is quirky and creative. Here's a little something that was inspired by his writing.


    Randy, Tyler and Fluff were getting together as part of a college reunion. These three men were best of friends with each other. Randy and Tyler frequently made fun of Fluff because he was chubby, bad at sports, and said stupid things from time to time; all of the jokes were made in good nature though.
    “Yo Fluff, what’s up my man?” Randy ran over to his old friend and gave him a big hug. Randy was tall, had a deep voice, messy black hair and a five o’clock shadow.
    “Randy! I’ve been good, and yourself?” Fluff replied.
    “Good, the wife is good, the kid is good, hey!” he blurted, “Here comes Tyler!” They both turned their heads.
    “Randy, Fluff! So good to see you, It’ll be just like old times, the three of us hooligans hangin’ out again. I see you haven’t stopped eating cheeseburgers, Fluff,” Tyler keeled over laughing. He had prematurely grey hair with a clean-shaven baby face.
    “Yea, you’re tummy’s grown to be twice the size since college,” chimed Randy, “Bahahaha,” he, too began laughing hysterically.
    “Ha ha, very funny, guys. Aren’t we past the whole ‘make fun of the fat kid’ thing?” Asked Fluff.
    “You know why we always called him fluff, right Tyler?” asked Randy.
    “It’s cause his tummy is so fluffy, like a mound of marshmallow,” replied Tyler as the two began laughing once more. Tyler even fell to the ground, he was laughing so hard.
    “Geez Fluff,” started Randy, “You sure do know how to make a guy laugh.”
    “ Heh Hah,” Tyler was catching his breath, “I haven’t laughed that hard since college.”
    “You guys are still idiots,” replied Fluff.

    ReplyDelete