“The Semplica Girl Diaries” by George Saunders is one of the most interesting stories we’ve read this semester, as well as one of the most boring. Its omission of many words like “I” and “are” gave it a new level. In the beginning, the narrator writes that he is keeping this diary for future generations. Perhaps this story is meant to be read as a future generation’s imperfect translation of the original diary, and that is why there are grammatical errors. If so, I think it could also be a commentary on how we look at historical wrongdoings. We look back to slavery and discrimination and wonder how it was ever a social normality to behave that way towards other human beings. With this story, I imagine the future generations wondering how it was ever considered even slightly okay, much less fashionable and cool, to string up women in your yard as decoration.
I realized how boring this story is when I noticed just how similar it is to real life. It isn’t new news that we do plenty of unacceptable things without thinking about whether or not we should be doing them. Additionally, none of the characters had unexpected personalities. Saunders seems to have based his characters on popular stereotypes. There is the typical father of a struggling-but-still-swimming family who loves his wife and kids and worries about others’ perceptions of him and the size of his wallet. There is the kind-hearted little girl who is too naive to know that these horrors aren’t actually horrors but good, acceptable parts of society. There is also the rich family, the bastard father-in-law, the racist guy named Jerry. They added to the political commentary of the story, but also made it into the type of story everyone already knows.
I did find the idea of Semplica Girls to be very new and unique. It’s an odd enough concept to be unrealistic but it is presented in a way that makes it seem as if, one day, with the right technology, upper class individuals might really start hanging girls up in their yards. If we could convince ourselves that we’re doing the Semplica Girls a favor, as the characters in the story do, then just how unlikely would it be? It lets wealthy individuals play into their white savior roles so they can commit human rights violations under the guise of helping those in need.
It’s fascinating that the rights of these women aren’t really brought up. The narrator doesn’t stop to consider that to hang in a yard for months and years on end would be detrimental to one’s mental abilities. Those girls are missing out on their educations, social lives, personal connections, physical exercise, and so much more. I can’t imagine they could ever function properly, physically or mentally, after spending so much of their formative years just hanging like Christmas ornaments. Where do they go when it’s storming, when it’s snowing, when the sun is blazing? All of this is just glossed over, clearly unimportant to the narrator, who is more concerned with appearing to have more money than he does. What injustices do we contribute to that we gloss over because they are normalized? Will future generations look upon us with the same disgust we look upon our ancestors with? More importantly, what can we do to right our wrongs?
Jess: I found this a fascinating post, particularly in regard to your suggestion that Saunders makes use of stereotypes in his depiction of the characters. I was also interested in this observation: “We look back to slavery and discrimination and wonder how it was ever a social normality to behave that way towards other human beings. With this story, I imagine the future generations wondering how it was ever considered even slightly okay, much less fashionable and cool, to string up women in your yard as decoration.” Of course, the important difference here is that slavery actually existed, while stringing up girls as decorations in one’s yard in simply an imagined circumstance. Is our moral outrage at the narrator’s obliviousness the most compelling aspect of the story? And what’s the place of humor (and absurdity) in our response?
Your theory about the reason the story is written the way it is, grammatically speaking, is an interesting one. I assumed that is was just the way the narrator wrote, omitting certain pronouns and filler words in order to write faster. I also thought it was chosen by the author for a comedic effect, to display the gap between the narrator’s inner perception of things and how serious these things actually are.
Jess I completely agree with the idea that the narrator does not see the potential harm these young women are experiencing while being strung up, because he is focused on how his role in society functions. He simply states that their needs are meet, but we are never told what those needs were, because to the narrator these are unimportant compared to his want to look the part of a well-off family.