Literary Analysis: Hotel on the Corner of Bitter and Sweet as a Historical Fiction Essay

In Jamie Fords diachronic manufacturing Hotel on the Corner of blistery and Sweet, this split narrative focuses on two eras 1942 and 1986. Within these eras, Fords refreshing focuses on a Chinese boy, atomic number 1 Lee, and what it was like to grow up in the internationalistic district with injustice everywhere, especially in his own family being a first generation American. His brisk tells the story of Henry, as well as a Japanese girl by the name of Keiko.The fable tells the story of these two young friends and the hardships faced when the g everywherenment sends Keiko and her family out to the Japanese internment camps in the northwestern in the 1940s. His refreshing displays the effects of the prejudice held against the Japanese during the 1940s wartime, and the effects it had on the lives of not plainly those Japanese, but also all Americans, Chinese and other nationalities. We use Anne Scott MacLeods essay Rewriting accounting as a frame work at while reading F ords Hotel on the Corner of bitterness and Sweet. Rewriting History is a persuasive essay giving criteria of a skillful Historical apologue vs. bad Historical fable.This essay focuses on three of MacLeods criteria for a entire Historical Fiction not rewarding rebellion, not appealing to modern sensibilities, and not overcoming social mores easily. Fords fabrication Hotel on the Corner of Biter and Sweet successfully meets MacLeods requirements for a good historic manufacture in many ways, although, there are some flaws in a couple of his historical facts, nevertheless, the good historical facts and information in Hotel on the Corner of Bitter and Sweet out ways the few historical flaws.First of all, Ford inducts sure to give Henry consequences to his rebellious acts something MacLeod says many bad historical fictions do not do, they only reward with happy endings. Secondly, Ford uses racial discriminations that would name been used back in the 1940s another thing MacLeod say s that bad historical fiction accommodates to, making it non-offensive and politically correct for the readers. In addition, Henry does not easily overcome the social mores of 1942 again something MacLeod says that bad historical fiction makes it await easy to overcome the social mores of the era.First of all, meeting MacLeods criteria for a good historical fiction, Fords novel does not make overt rebellion seem nearly painless and nearly always successful. Ford displays this when Keiko is taken away Henry keeps some of her belongings prophylactic under his dresser, as well as when Henry sneaks into two different Japanese internment camps seek for Keiko. Though this rebellion seems rewarded at first, as we continue reading we see how, by going to the internment camps and keeping Keikos belongings, Henry unknowingly starts a chain of events leading to one, giant consequence.Because Henry keeps Keikos belonging, and later writes her letters, his mother finds out and tells Henrys b ugger off. Henry comes home one day and finds his parents at the kitchen table waiting for him with all of Keikos pictures spread all over the table. Because of this, Henrys father gives him a choice walk out the door and no longer be part of the family or stay and forget about Keiko. In the end Henry chooses to follow his heart and leaves his family (182-185). This forever affects the kind between Henry and his father, even on his fathers deathbed.Secondly, according to MacLeods standard, Fords novel is a good historical fiction by not appealing to modern sensibilities, so that protagonists experience their own societies as though they were time-travelers, noting racism, sexism, religious bigotry, and outmoded beliefs as outsiders, not as passel of and in their cultures. Ford uses dialect in his novel consisting of racial slurs and comments that would have been used back in the 1940s. Ford doesnt accommodate to readers by making the discussion non-offensive or politically corre ct.Ford makes the book historically correct as possible. Thirdly, by MacLeods criteria, Fords novel is a good historical fiction by not seting aside the social mores of the sometime(prenominal) as though they were minor(ip) afflictions, small obstacles, easyand painlessfor an independent mind to overcome. This is displayed near the beginning of the book later on Chaz, the bully, snatches Henrys I am Chinese pin off of his shirt. While walking away Keiko tries to grab Henrys hand for comfort, but he pushes it away thinking, My father would fall over dead And in town, someone would see us (23).Ford made the transition of Henry gap up to Keiko take time they didnt become immediate friends. Ford makes sure to make the affinity between Keiko and Henry plausible. They both are scholarshipping at an all-white school and met working in the school kitchen, as payment for scholarshipping. Their connection is somewhat immediate, yet their relationship progresses slowly.Fourthly, according to MacLeods standard, Fords novel is a good historical fiction by not omitting the less attractive pieces of the past to make . . . arratives meet current social and political preferences. The 1940s for the Japanese-Americans were dark times Hotel on the Corner of Bitter and Sweet does anything but omit these facts. From the harsh realities of the hatred between the Chinese and the Japanese displayed between Henrys father, Henry, and Keiko, to the removal of the Japanese, Fords novel spares no less attractive piece of the past to make this novel appealing to the average human in this generation. Ford makes sure to put historical fact ahead of the appealing storys fiction.Lastly, Fords novel is a good historical fiction, by MacLeods criteria, because It does not imply that people of another time either mum or should have understood the world as we do now. Though Henry and Keiko had an unusual relationship that most Chinese and Japanese children in the 1940s wouldnt have had, it is nt entirely implausible. gauge of it like this The world is always changing, so how does it change? Someone has to be the one to make those changes happen. We siret have the same view of the Japanese, or any race for that matter, that we did in past generations.So again, what changed? Obviously Fords novel is under the category of fiction and the actions of Henry didnt have this amazing effect of the 1940s that changed history forever However, someones actions, somewhere in the 1940s, affect history. This fact makes the relationship between Henry and Keiko, as well as Fords novel as a whole, historically plausible. In conclusion Fords novel has an overwhelming measure of evidence backing up the hypothesis that his novel is a good work of historical fiction by MacLeods standard.Though the end of the novel rewards you with a cheesy, sappy love story ending, something more or less implausible, Ford does his best he can to keep the history in this historical fiction real and true. Over all this novel is a highly plausible, and by MacLeods criteria, a good work of Historical Fiction. Fords novel is also a reminder of the injustice against the Japanese-Americans during the wartime of the 1940s and cautions us to never let ourselves as a people treat anyone we see as different with the prejudice we so easily treated the Japanese with.