Materialities Draft: S.
Materialities Draft: S.

Materialities Draft: S.

Elvis Thach
March 1, 2023
ENG 410
Professor Andie Silva

S. written by JJ Abrams and Doug Dorst is unlike any book I have ever seen. It does not follow the traditional format of a book, such that it doesn’t tell one story by one author or narrator in a linear fashion, rather it is presented as a story within another story. Foundationally, it is composed of a novel called Ship of Thesus (the first storyline) written by the fictional author V. M. Straka, and notations written on the margins of the book which serves as a secret dialogue between two college students and is the second storyline in of itself. The book also contains various supplementary materials (such as postcards, handwritten letters, maps, photocopied articles, etc.) tucked in between pages for the purpose of adding context to the second storyline and further contributes to the illusion of a “real” story within a story. This paper will discuss the paratextual element of notations that were written on the book’s margins and how that element contributes to S.’s overall goals.

Before I discuss the marginalia and how it serves the book’s overall objectives, this paper will first summarize the Ship of Thesus storyline which tells a tale of an amnesiac man who goes on a journey to remember himself. The novel begins with him (who is only referred to as S.) walking down the streets of a city called the Old Quarter. Although S. doesn’t remember anything about himself, “he has only three connections to [his] earlier life. One is in his coat pocket: a sludge of ink-stained paper on which he believes something important was once written, though all he could make out clearly is an ornate S-shaped symbol. Another is in his trouser pocket: a tiny black orb that might be a pebble, or perhaps a piece of ancient and petrified fruit. The third runs through every cell in his body: a vague but terrifying sense-memory of falling from a great height.” (Abrams & Dorst 6) As S. passes by the various occurrences in the city, such as: the woman who offers rooms trying to straighten out the sign outside of her building; the owner of a barrel organ storefront and the organ-grinder shaking hands to hide their mutual distrust for each other; the three boys chucking pieces of bricks at the city’s brand new streetlights; and the harbormaster feeling displeased after greeting S. with a nod and not getting a response in return, S. finally comes across a tavern with the same ornate S symbol as the one in the paper. He enters in hopes that it will jog his memory or that someone there will recognize him, but to no avail. In the midst of drunk patrons talking, shouting, laughing, and cursing together, S. talks to a woman sitting alone and quietly with a large book in hand. As he tries to conversate with her, hoping that she can help him remember, he suddenly gets blindsided and abducted. S. wakes up ill on board a dank and deplorable ship. He opens up the hatch of his cabin to see a crew of 19 men, all of them filled with cuts, scars, and stitches sewn into their mouths. For the next several days at sea, S. would try to explore and learn more about the ship or the crew but either no one would talk to him (as they were quietly focused on working the ship) or he would get thrown back into his cabin. Eventually, S. sees in the distance a little two-master ship and tries to signal them, hoping to get off this damned ship. Two crewmen silenced his efforts, pinning him down and into the cabin once more. He gets woken up by Maelstrom (a man with a large beard who, although doesn’t own the ship, seemingly is in charge of whipping the crewmen into work) and witnesses the crew plundering the two-master ship, bringing home a diseased monkey and an unconscious boy. Later, Maestrom uses his spyglass and alerts the crew of land ahead (or at least, that’s what S. could make out). But before they could touch land, the ship gets hit by a sudden waterspout and S. heeds to a inner voice, telling him to swim in the raging waters.

This paper will now summarize the second storyline which takes place in the book’s margins. As established previously in the first paragraph, the notations acts as a secret discussion between two college students – Eric, a disgraced graduate student who dedicated much of his life to studying V. M. Straka and his literary works, and Jen, also a senior and a bookworm who is uncertain about what to do with her life. In this metafictional lore of the second storyline, V. M. Straka was an incredibly private author whose life and death is shrouded in complete mystery, leading to popular conspiracy theories that he was assassinated. Both students use this particular Ship of Thesus book as a medium to exchange notes, without ever meeting each other in person, to talk about themselves, each other, and especially figure out the identity of the elusive and obscure V. M. Straka. The two race against time to solve this mystery before Professor Moody – Eric’s former professor who took his findings and had him expelled – goes public about his study on Straka.

This paper will now discuss the paratextual element of notations that were written on the book’s margins and how that element contributes to S.’s overall goals. The overall goals of S. is to create the illusion that the second storyline is real by superimposing the marginalia over the Ship of Thesus storyline. One way the marginalia contributes to this illusion is to have either character (Eric or Jen) say their first piece (usually located at the top of the page) and then have the other character reply underneath, and thus the conversation starts and continues. For example, Jen initiates the conversation, “I’m asking straight out: who did you think was Straka?” (Abrams & Dorst 22) to which Eric writes underneath, “Summersby. Maybe Summersby + Ekstrom together. You?” (Abrams & Dorst 22) This deceives the reader into thinking that this conversation is seemingly nature and real because Eric and Jen are engaging in a discussion currently unrelated to the Ship of Thesus story. It is worth to note that whenever there wasn’t enough space on the book’s margin for a reply, either character will draw an arrow that leads to the next page and then write down what they have to say. For example, Eric writes, “You know what I mean.” (Abrams & Dorst 4) to which Jen responds with an giant arrow that leads from what Eric said at the bottom of page 4 to the top of page 5 before writing, “I just checked last year’s PSU directory. If you worked with Moody, why are you listed as a grad student in geology??? How can I believe you’re who you say you are?” (Abrams & Dorst 5) On the one hand, while the giant arrow Jen drew might interfere with the reading of the Ship of Thesus storyline and does certainly ruins how the book looks overall, it does help guide the reader (specifically in this metafictional context, Eric) monitor and understand the conversation as it is flowing. Had Jen not been considerate enough to draw the arrow, the reader would have lost track of the conversation, especially in the midst of other notes being written all over the pages (although common sense does tells us to look top right of the next page but Jen could choose not to write there). Another way the the marginalia contributes to the illusion that the second storyline is real is through the different colors and handwriting styles used by Eric and Jen. To further make it seem like, not just the conversation, but also the characters are real and distinct, Jen specifically writes in cursive whereas Eric writes in clear script and all of his words are capitalized. Additionally, Jen writes with a blue pen and Eric writes in black during their first encounter together. It is worth to note that the pencil writing was from Eric when he was first analyzing and annotating the book (prior to contact with Jen). During their second re-reading together on the novel, Jen changed to the color yellow/orangish whereas Eric switched to green while still maintaining their respective handwriting. During their third re-reading, Jen used the color purple and Eric wrote in red. The re-readings proves that one, Eric and Jen continues to never meet each other in person (or at the very least, they prefer this method of communication), and two, the fact that they went back to the beginning of the novel and wrote in different colors shows that their investigation (debunking the mysteries of V. M. Straka) never concluded. Had the re-readings never existed and it was just their first encounter (displayed by Jen’s blue and Eric’s black penmanships) throughout the entire novel, the reader would have been led to believe that there was a happy ending. But since that is not the case, multiple re-readings helps with the illusion that the conversation (and the entire storyline for that matter) is continuous and natural.

Bibliography
Dorst, Doug, and JJ Abrams. S. Mulholland Books, 2013

4 Comments

  1. 1. Argument:

    • Does this paper have a clear, argumentative thesis? Can you identify what kinds of textual evidence will be used to support it?

    This paper does not have a clear, argumentative thesis. I can identify that the main book of S. will be used to support it, but there’s no mention of any outside sources.

    • After you’ve read the whole paper, how does the paper sustain the thesis statement? In other words: does each paragraph support and expand the argument laid out in the thesis?

    I can’t say if the paper is sustained because the thesis is unclear in the introduction.

    • Which paragraph reads the strongest with regards to the central argument, and why?

    With the central argument identified well after the introduction paragraph, I think the fourth paragraph reads the strongest with regards to the central argument because it discusses how the goals of S., which is to highlight the second storyline and convince the reader that it’s real.

    • Which paragraph needs more attention to argumentation and analysis? Provide specific suggestions.

    I think you do a good job of providing a clear argument and analysis, especially in the fourth paragraph.

    2. Textual evidence:

    • Does the paper make appropriate use of direct quotes and paraphrasing from the novel to support its argument? Discuss one place where this is done well and one place where you think evidence needs to be added (or different examples need to be selected)

    This paper does make appropriate use of direct quotes and paraphrasing from the novel to support its argument. One place where this is done well is in the fourth paragraph, where you state: “For example, Jen initiates the conversation, “I’m asking straight out: who did you think was Straka?” (Abrams & Dorst 22) to which Eric writes underneath, “Summersby. Maybe Summersby + Ekstrom together. You?” (Abrams & Dorst 22) This deceives the reader into thinking that this conversation is seemingly nature and real because Eric and Jen are engaging in a discussion currently unrelated to the Ship of Thesus story.”

    3. External sources:

    There are no external sources.

    4. Feedback

    • Provide 2 specific suggestions for revision — these can be about organization, style, clarity, or argument.

    I suggest that you include your thesis in the introduction, since you don’t formally state your thesis until well into your essay.

    I also suggest that you reduce the summary of the stories instead of two paragraphs, and to make it concise. Otherwise, it takes a long while before it feels like the essay truly begins.

  2. The paper presents an argumentative thesis and uses various paratextual devices to provide evidence. The third paragraph is the strongest as it discusses how the marginal notations contribute to the author’s goals. The second paragraph needs more attention and could benefit from mentioning Eric and Jane’s lives to clarify the point.
    Textual evidence
    The paper uses direct quotes and paraphrases the novel to support its argument. One place it is done well is in the fourth paragraph, where students’ notes are analyzed in detail, their book’s narrative contribution is discussed, and the evidence needs to be added in the third paragraph.
    External sources
    There are no external sources referenced in the paper.
    Feedback
    Provide more analysis connecting the ship of Theseus storyline to the marginalia by revising the third paragraph and changing the conclusion to summarize the main points.

  3. Thesis-The paper starts with a lightly strong argument, but the thesis gets confusing reading; it jumps to different areas of focus, although it provides clear examples of what the essay may be about to a certain point, for example. “It does not follow the traditional format of a book, such that it doesn’t tell one story by one author or narrator in a linear fashion, rather it is presented as a story within another story.” It starts pretty strong here, like a guide to the argumentative essay, but then it drifts off. “ The book also contains various supplementary materials (such as postcards, handwritten letters, maps, photocopied articles, etc.) tucked in between pages for the purpose of adding context to the second storyline and further contributes to the illusion of a “real” story within a story.” At this point, the argument becomes confusing because it discusses too many subjects the essay will discuss.

    The second paragraph could use a bit of touching up in the areas of explaining Jen and Eric but also expand on how it corresponds with your argument.

    Using quotes and strong detailed evidence is well-written; a great MLA style format exists. Following up strong from the sections that needed to be re-work.

    There is no external source in this paper. It lacks outside information.

    Feedback

    Add more external citations. Provide more connection to the thesis, but the thesis has to be more precise. I love the conclusion, but it could use a bit more tune-up and be more summarized.

  4. Elvis, as your peers suggest above, you need to think more carefully about what you intend to argue and outline your paper so that the topic sentences clearly advance a specific, analytic thesis. Once you have an argument it will be time to do some research to find what sources best support your ideas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *