A Brief Summary
Monster follows the story of Steve Harmon, an African American young man growing up in Harlem, New York. When the book opens, Steve has been charged as an accessory to armed robbery and for the murder of a local convenience store owner. Of course, he proclaims his innocence throughout the story, but it is never maid clear whether or not he was involved in the crimes being committed. Instead, the reader is left to listen to the account of the story, which is split into two very different styles, and come to their own conclusions. Often they must compare Steve to several other characters that are from his neighborhood, two of which are on trial for the same incident and seem much more likely for having committed the crime. While Steve is definitely not like the others, his guilt or innocence is never made to be a clear thing. The main draw of the book is that it not only puts the reader in the shoes of a young man of color, who is fighting for his life in a courtroom where the odds are stacked against him, but also because the reader is given the sense that they are a member of the jury and are responsible for deciding his innocence or guilt.
The book is split into two sections, the first being a screenplay-style account of the trial and the second being Steve's personal journal in which he explains what is going on while he is outside of the courtroom. The story weaves between the more personal journal entries and the matter-of-fact court proceedings as the story unfolds, with the reader put into a position of a fly on the wall. The reader is never just the impartial juror nor the young man on trial, but instead forced to inhabit both worlds. It clouds the issue and demands further thought, rather than blindly following either the facts as presented or the emotional appeals of the book's protagonist. This means that the reader has been put into an odd place, where emotion and reason war with one another.
Thematic Elements
Monster focuses heavily on the way in which people are biased even when they are told not to be, such as the jury on the case. Often there is a feeling of despair, that Steve has no hope of winning his case because of the people he is said to associate with and because of his race and where he lives. Further, there is the feeling of not knowing what the truth is and having to make the best guess. As likeable as Steve is as a character, as much as we sympathize with his struggle and his situation, there really is not a lot of evidence to prove his innocence or his guilt.
Analysis
The book itself is not really a difficult read, though it does take a little time to get used to the shifts in tone and font that the two styles use. Readers in eighth grade should have little trouble with reading the book, but even students in high school would still be challenged by the ambiguity of the events. There is a lot that can be done to focus readers on the prejudices at work in the story, the morality of what is going on in- and outside the courtroom, and about whether it matters that Steve is innocent or guilty with the way the evidence is presented. Whether focusing on a unit that has more to do with law or more to do with race, this is an excellent book for teachers to use in their classrooms.
A Little Something More
To help make the most of this book in class, teachers should construct and activity that puts their students into the shoes of Steve Harmon. Selecting three students, preferable two that are known for being a bit mischievous in class and a third who is quieter that the others, the three should be presented as having committed some sort of violation of school rules. One of the mischievous students is clearly presented as having been the ringleader of whatever happened, the second such student should be strongly associated with the first, and the third should be tenuously linked with the other two by circumstantial evidence. All three are to argue that they did not commit the crime and, in face, blame it the others. The class is to listen as they present their cases, with the teacher providing evidence that implicates all three of them but to varying degrees, and finally make a judgment who is really guilty.
The point of the exercise should not be whether or not a student is truly innocent of the crime that they are charged with, but in the way that the student is viewed by his or her classmates during the course of the trial. After the class has made their decision, they should not be given any sort of resolution as to “who dun it” and instead be asked to consider their feelings on the proceedings and how it mirrored the story. What is important here is the emotional resonance, especially with the students who were forced to defend themselves and blame their fellows. The class is to hear what each of their classmates were feeling while on trial or while deciding who was guilty. Have them explain why it was difficult or easy to come to their conclusions. Invite the students to explore why it was that it was not easy (or was!) to convict a student who was looking at severe punishment for their supposed actions. To add an extra layer of intensity, don't let the class know what is going on (except for the three who are on trial) and make it seem like the stakes are very very real.
No comments:
Post a Comment