In chapters 1-6 of the soloist you learn a lot about the personalities of Nathaniel Ayers and Steve Lopez.
Lopez becomes fascinated by the fact that a former student of Julliard ended up on the street playing an instrument with two strings. Through reading some of Lopez’s other pieces I’ve realized it’s not just Ayers he was drawn to. Whenever he spots someone with potential he journeys to the end of the earth just to help him or her out. Lopez is an extremely generous and caring person, even though he doesn’t even know Ayers he still wants to protect him. When Lopez publishes his first piece about Nathaniel he receives a lot of feedback. People are offering to send violins & cellos for Ayers and all Lopez can think about is Nathaniel getting robbed/hurt. The first few chapters really show how Nathaniel is starting to grow on Lopez, despite his problems.
In the beginning of the book, Ayers seems sketchy of everyone especially Steve Lopez. When Lopez sees him playing he immediately walks up to talk to Ayers. Ayers jumps back as if he is scared or nervous. The next couple times Lopez goes to see him he isn’t frightened anymore. He becomes comfortable with him and starts to open up to him. When Lopez mentions the instruments to him, instead of getting excited he first says he can’t accept them nor can he afford them. It just shows the kind of person that Nathaniel is. It’s amazing that even though his life consists of nothing but surviving on the streets, he still doesn’t want to take from people. Although his schizophrenia tends to affect his decision-making, his true persona shines through occasionally.
Overall, I enjoyed reading these chapters. I think they really gave me a feel for the characters. I am now able to relate to some of their traits.
I don't have any specific ways for you to grade this post. Just do your thing :)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm interested in the identity work you've attempted to do with this post. It's interesting in the context of this book to think about what Ayer's "true persona" as you call it might be and how we as readers (or fellow humans, in general) might try to understand this identity in light of his disability. I wonder whether the two are even separable (the Ayers who is affected by schizophrenia and the Ayers who seems to come through at other times). It seems to me that there exists no clear line between the two, and I wonder if it devalues Ayers as a person to try to see him without his disability. What I mean here, is that I don't see him as the sum of two halves of a person that can be distinguished from each other, and not that the disease is something that defines him. Does Lopez pose questions like these in his book? From what you've read, does he seem to see Ayers' persona as bipartite?
ReplyDelete