This narrative essay covers the story of my experience reading, analyzing, and writing about the book JPod.
Disclaimer: -This essay is in first person as the story it is "narrating" is my personal experience.
-Due to formatting restrictions, some sections may be improperly formatted.
-Due to formatting restrictions, some sections may be improperly formatted.
Ethan Crane-Vaillancourt Crane-Vaillancourt 1
Mrs. Haines
ENG4U
11 August 2016
Analyzing JPod Using Literary Theory
So this is supposed to be a narrative essay, and what do narrative essays do? They tell a story. This
story is going to be about my experience reading Douglas Coupland's novel, JPod. While reading this
novel, I came across many things. Some things left me scratching my head, like the 41 pages of the
digits of pi. Some left me laughing, such as the humorous banter between the members of Jpod(Such as
on page 133, when Ethan swaps out Kaitlin's keyboard for a a confusing Belgian keyboard.).
Throughout the story I found my self constantly looking back to one particular literary theory, and that theory was the archetypal
literary theory. While the feminist literary theory and reader response theory both present their own insight to the story, the
superior of the three was archetypal.
The archetypal literary theory was the superior of the three as I found myself revisiting its ideas time and time again while reading
JPod. As I read through the second out of three sections I was on careful lookout for these archetypes as well, because I had an
assignment based off them. However, even in the parts where I wasn't looking out for archetypes, they still appeared. I noticed that
the story was beginning to sound like something I heard before, and the characters were starting to resemble ones of other works. I
started realizing that the story was that of a lone main character, who gets thrown into a jumbled mess of mayhem. He goes from
being a lone, sarcastic character to being a welcoming character who learns to take things seriously. This was evident when Ethan
received his furniture early in the book and complained, stating “It's just not, me” and then on page 220, when questioned about
his new roommate, states, “Actually, not too badly. I'm surprised. Best roommate I ever had.” I saw in this archetype the character
growing as a person. I began seeing this in other characters too, Ethan's quiet
Mrs. Haines
ENG4U
11 August 2016
Analyzing JPod Using Literary Theory
So this is supposed to be a narrative essay, and what do narrative essays do? They tell a story. This
story is going to be about my experience reading Douglas Coupland's novel, JPod. While reading this
novel, I came across many things. Some things left me scratching my head, like the 41 pages of the
digits of pi. Some left me laughing, such as the humorous banter between the members of Jpod(Such as
on page 133, when Ethan swaps out Kaitlin's keyboard for a a confusing Belgian keyboard.).
Throughout the story I found my self constantly looking back to one particular literary theory, and that theory was the archetypal
literary theory. While the feminist literary theory and reader response theory both present their own insight to the story, the
superior of the three was archetypal.
The archetypal literary theory was the superior of the three as I found myself revisiting its ideas time and time again while reading
JPod. As I read through the second out of three sections I was on careful lookout for these archetypes as well, because I had an
assignment based off them. However, even in the parts where I wasn't looking out for archetypes, they still appeared. I noticed that
the story was beginning to sound like something I heard before, and the characters were starting to resemble ones of other works. I
started realizing that the story was that of a lone main character, who gets thrown into a jumbled mess of mayhem. He goes from
being a lone, sarcastic character to being a welcoming character who learns to take things seriously. This was evident when Ethan
received his furniture early in the book and complained, stating “It's just not, me” and then on page 220, when questioned about
his new roommate, states, “Actually, not too badly. I'm surprised. Best roommate I ever had.” I saw in this archetype the character
growing as a person. I began seeing this in other characters too, Ethan's quiet
Crane-Vaillancourt 2
yet deadly mother, the overly peppy and dumb executive(Steve), the condescending know-it-all older brother(Greg), and the can-do
spirited helper(Kam Fong). These character definitions have been shown time and time again. These characters all interacted
together and formed the story together, yet the story still remained the classic “ascension story” where the main character suffers
through troubling times to become someone better that what he used to be.
The reader response theory and feminist theory were discussed as well, but didn't hold nearly as much insight into the story as
archetypal. When I was reading JPod, I considered the feminist theory. I noticed there were direct and indirect statements being
made in the book. The more direct statements were that of the John Doe's radical feminist mother. She constantly fought to
empower women and ran a cult that was centered around empowering and developing women. This was evident on page 434 when
Ethan's mother states, “I just think it is really important at this point to explore my she-power.” However, the more indirect
message hidden beneath that was that those women weren't all that powerless to begin with. Most people felt very nervous or
rolled their eyes at the idea of the women's cult, and believed their ideas were way too radicalized to do them any good. This was
shown when John Doe says on page 432, “Ethan, once my mother strikes, she becomes an irresistible force. Your mother is
powerless. Oh dear, oh dear. The book did a good job of balancing the male and female characters, and each gender seemed to be
equal in power to the other. This is why the feminist literary theory did not give as much insight into the book as the archetypal
literary theory. When I tried to further develop my points on feminism and gender equality/power I was constantly drawing a blank
or running out of points to make. In the end, the feminist literary theory just couldn't offer everything the archetypal literary theory
could, so I cut it from the list.
yet deadly mother, the overly peppy and dumb executive(Steve), the condescending know-it-all older brother(Greg), and the can-do
spirited helper(Kam Fong). These character definitions have been shown time and time again. These characters all interacted
together and formed the story together, yet the story still remained the classic “ascension story” where the main character suffers
through troubling times to become someone better that what he used to be.
The reader response theory and feminist theory were discussed as well, but didn't hold nearly as much insight into the story as
archetypal. When I was reading JPod, I considered the feminist theory. I noticed there were direct and indirect statements being
made in the book. The more direct statements were that of the John Doe's radical feminist mother. She constantly fought to
empower women and ran a cult that was centered around empowering and developing women. This was evident on page 434 when
Ethan's mother states, “I just think it is really important at this point to explore my she-power.” However, the more indirect
message hidden beneath that was that those women weren't all that powerless to begin with. Most people felt very nervous or
rolled their eyes at the idea of the women's cult, and believed their ideas were way too radicalized to do them any good. This was
shown when John Doe says on page 432, “Ethan, once my mother strikes, she becomes an irresistible force. Your mother is
powerless. Oh dear, oh dear. The book did a good job of balancing the male and female characters, and each gender seemed to be
equal in power to the other. This is why the feminist literary theory did not give as much insight into the book as the archetypal
literary theory. When I tried to further develop my points on feminism and gender equality/power I was constantly drawing a blank
or running out of points to make. In the end, the feminist literary theory just couldn't offer everything the archetypal literary theory
could, so I cut it from the list.
Crane-Vaillancourt 3
The next theory I looked at was the reader response literary theory. This theory centralizes around the idea that a book is defined by
its reader. The problem with this theory is that it too vague. Since the text is left up to the reader's interpretation, many different
conclusions can be made. When I myself read JPod, I made my own connections to the characters. I could relate to Ethan in the
sense that we both tend to look at the world with a sense of sarcasm. When reading the book, I also felt a sense of emptiness. As in
there was something missing from the story. The gloomy setting combined with the drama-less characters made every pressing
issue seem like no big deal. Ethan would fly all the way to china to rescue Steve from a slavery and during the entire trip he mostly
fiddled around at markets and kept a cool complexion. The events were lacking urgency, and this made for a more calming
environment. Perhaps the reasoning for the lacking sense of urgency was the fact that most of the character's thoughts were left
out of the text. Most of our information is communicated to us via character dialogue, and only fragments of Ethan's thought
process are revealed to us. Also, the lack of exclamation points in text makes things appear to be less dramatic than they really
are, people most often perceive urgency, panic, or raised volume when they read a text with exclamation points.
In summary, this is why the reader response literary theory could not be used to make a centralized thesis or topic when
discussing the deeper meanings behind the book. There are too many variables and personal opinions or statements can cause
disagreement or claims that the point is not backed up with real evidence. Everyone interprets the book a different way, and
making claims based of my interpretation leaves out the possibility for input and other ideas from other people.
These are the reasons why the archetypal literary theory is the most effective at providing insight into this book. The reader
response literary theory can be thrown askew by trying to interpret meanings from the pages of random text found in some parts
of the book, or become biased based on the reader's personal beliefs. The feminist literary theory provides some sound points, but
focuses primarily on one
The next theory I looked at was the reader response literary theory. This theory centralizes around the idea that a book is defined by
its reader. The problem with this theory is that it too vague. Since the text is left up to the reader's interpretation, many different
conclusions can be made. When I myself read JPod, I made my own connections to the characters. I could relate to Ethan in the
sense that we both tend to look at the world with a sense of sarcasm. When reading the book, I also felt a sense of emptiness. As in
there was something missing from the story. The gloomy setting combined with the drama-less characters made every pressing
issue seem like no big deal. Ethan would fly all the way to china to rescue Steve from a slavery and during the entire trip he mostly
fiddled around at markets and kept a cool complexion. The events were lacking urgency, and this made for a more calming
environment. Perhaps the reasoning for the lacking sense of urgency was the fact that most of the character's thoughts were left
out of the text. Most of our information is communicated to us via character dialogue, and only fragments of Ethan's thought
process are revealed to us. Also, the lack of exclamation points in text makes things appear to be less dramatic than they really
are, people most often perceive urgency, panic, or raised volume when they read a text with exclamation points.
In summary, this is why the reader response literary theory could not be used to make a centralized thesis or topic when
discussing the deeper meanings behind the book. There are too many variables and personal opinions or statements can cause
disagreement or claims that the point is not backed up with real evidence. Everyone interprets the book a different way, and
making claims based of my interpretation leaves out the possibility for input and other ideas from other people.
These are the reasons why the archetypal literary theory is the most effective at providing insight into this book. The reader
response literary theory can be thrown askew by trying to interpret meanings from the pages of random text found in some parts
of the book, or become biased based on the reader's personal beliefs. The feminist literary theory provides some sound points, but
focuses primarily on one
Crane-Vaillancourt 4
character demographic: female characters. This literary theory doesn't provide much insight into the male characters (Which are
featured as much in the book as the female characters) and it takes the focus from the plot and puts it on the female characters.
This is why I couldn't write about this literary theory, it was too specific in its demographic. This is why the archetypal literary
theory was left as the best option for gaining more insight into JPod. It focuses on the entire story, including all characters and
events, and it is more centralized, with its patterns and ideas being well known and featured in most media works today. It allows
us to gain full, unbiased knowledge of the deeper meaning of JPod.
character demographic: female characters. This literary theory doesn't provide much insight into the male characters (Which are
featured as much in the book as the female characters) and it takes the focus from the plot and puts it on the female characters.
This is why I couldn't write about this literary theory, it was too specific in its demographic. This is why the archetypal literary
theory was left as the best option for gaining more insight into JPod. It focuses on the entire story, including all characters and
events, and it is more centralized, with its patterns and ideas being well known and featured in most media works today. It allows
us to gain full, unbiased knowledge of the deeper meaning of JPod.