On page 305 of Tom Phillips’ A Humument, Phillips creates the idea of solitude. He does this by placing “toge”, the only person on the image next to a window, which suggests the feeling of loneliness. The words around the image create a melancholy atmosphere; Phillips’ use of simplistic diction makes it easier for the audience to understand the purpose: the lost of a love one may result into isolating one self.
The image clearly indicates that the person in it is waiting for someone. Phillips placed the person next to the window to create the idea of loneliness. The person is also sitting on a chair which demonstrates how he/she spend most of the time waiting, waiting, and waiting. “A Human Document” like Phillips calls his book, demonstrates stages of a human being life. This image, in particular, demonstrates the stage of when you lose that special someone: the stage of isolation. The image also indicates the upcoming of age. Human beings, towards their middle age, began to feel melancholy for the past. Either the lost of someone, the lost of dreams, isolation is what most feel at that certain age. This is what Phillips is trying to convey.
Phillips incorporates words in the image. When reading it, the words create a melancholy atmosphere. With the help of the image, both create what Phillips is trying to convey: isolation. When looking at the image itself, the audience gets a clear understanding of loneliness, and the poem adds up to his purpose. The tone plays an important role in the purpose because it emphasizes melancholy. Melancholy for those who did not make it to your future; Melancholy for the things you lost; Melancholy for being alone. The connection between the image and the poem create the effect of solitude.
The simplistic diction use in the poem work effectively for the purpose of the image. The audience can easily understand the poet’s purpose. Phillips begins the poem with “only/toge alone”. The word “toge” is being detached from the actual word “together” creating the idea that “toge” is a person who lost his/her partner and now remains “alone”. Further more; Phillips mentions the word “loneliness” along with the word “watch”, suggesting that time passes and loneliness is all that is left for that person. Phillips then adds that there are two things left to the person in the image, “first/ my/ viola/ the other thing/ Your image/ I cannot get rid of it”. With this in mind, the audience can come to the conclusion that the person in the image is talking about the lost of a lover. The role of the “viola” symbolizes slow, romantic music, which contributes to the mood of the poem; melancholy. And the image that the person cannot get rid of, demonstrates a heartbroken waiting for that special one to come back.
In overall, everything continues to link to the placement of the image. Phillips carefully chose everything to fall in together. First, isolating the person next to the window indicates the wait for hope, the key role of the word “toge” being detached from the actual word “together” and placing it next to “alone”, making a synonymous and antonym clashed together. The title also connects everything together, “A Human Document” meaning that is documenting how the life of a human being works, recording every stage of it. The way Phillips chose to place the words in the image. He began with a simple quote on top of the image, following it with the key word “loneliness” which flows back below to where the person states that there are only two things left in life; music and memories. At the end, the atmosphere created by Phillips continues to be melancholy.
On page 305 of A Humument by Tom Phillips, suggest the unfortunate idea of facing solitude. With the help of a simple image, simplistic diction, and a melancholy tone, Phillips effectively delivers his purpose to the audience. The stage of solitude brings back memories, makes a person wanting to live again in the past hoping for the future to bring back what the past once had. Phillips wants the audience to relate to his image because at some point of life, every human being will face solitude.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Slavery in Silhouette -Kara Walker
Walker has a distinct way to portray her artwork; most of the times she cuts off images (known as silhouettes) in only two colors, black and white, and pastes them in different backgrounds. Walker is inspired by gender, race, sexuality, and ethnicity. She tends to use her African background as an important tool in her art. In this piece, Walker is exploring gender, race, and social status. This image is quite simple but it carries a well-elaborated meaning.
For starters, two colors pop out right away; white and black. The black is being represented by a woman who is carrying white, another woman. The black and white may symbolize various things, for example: ethnicity. The blacks or African-Americans have always been known as "slaves" of those white wealthy people. In this image, that stereotype is being portrayed: a black woman, who is probably working for a wealthy white family. It is known that the slaves had to put up with any type of requirements that came from their bosses; Walker is definitely demonstrating this fact by creating an image where the black woman is lifting the white woman with her own two hands.
Gender plays another important role is this image. The period of time that Walker is trying to portray in this image separates men and women. Around 1600's, wealthy women just dedicated themselves to stay home, chat with their girlfriends, and attend important events with their husbands. Most of them, had power over Africans slaves. In this image, that relationship between the woman boss and her slave is being shown. The black women slave had a more laid back function than the men slave. Women tended to accompany their bosses, helping them with their clothing, cleaning, cooking, and among other chores that women tend to be in charge of. This image represents that relationship: black woman slave serving her wealthy woman boss.
A way to differ social classes is by their clothing. The wealthy women tended to wear large gowns, big hear-dos, and expensive jewelry. As for the low-class women would wear dull dresses, mostly of depressing colors such as brown and gray, and their hair will remain tied up, away from their faces for better performance at their intensive jobs. In this image, the two women are representing what I explained above. The black slave is wearing a black deflated dress, barefoot, and her hair tied up. As for the wealthy woman, she is wearing a large white gown, with big hair-do, leaning back and facing up in the sky as to look like she is in power.
Social status is the main theme of this image. A way to understand what Walker is trying to convey, is by classifying the two women in the image by social status. The two colors, black and white, are self-explanatory and the way they are place in the image (white above black) show the readers to which social status each woman belong to. Starting with the color on top, white, the woman is known to belong to the upper class. By the way she is dressed and her posture. The color below, black, the woman belongs to the low class. Walking bare feet, lifting the “white” woman, and her clothing, are characteristics of a working class woman.
Walker’s intention to convey gender and social status effectively works. Her simple cut-off and paste-in images tell a story with a lot of background history. Walker’s African background influenced her art work; it inspires her to tell others about her culture, the struggles they have and still face. She uses art to narrate a story and introduce others into a world full with culture and knowledge.
Walker always uses the same colors in the art work, black and white. When presenting her art in an art show, she may add colorful images from a projector to add more intensity in her art. This image for example, if Walker would have added more to it, it would lose its meaning and value. Simplicity defines Walker.
Black, white, upper class, lower class. White, black, lower class, upper class. Slavery, African Americans, wealth, rich, money. Power, respect, money. Gender, mistreatment. These are words that are being emphasized by this image. Taking a quick glance at the image, most of these words pop-out. It is a simple and easy image to analyze, historical knowledge must be applied in order to have a better understanding of what Walker is trying to convey.
The images create sad emotions: sad to see how hard slaves had to work, how much they had to take from their owners. It demonstrates how strong Africans were and still are. But to expand this idea a lot more, it demonstrates how WOMEN are warriors. Personally, when I look at this image, it gives me strength. Strength to overcome anything, if these women were capable to lift, to keep up, and to serve their owners, I believe women now are capable of more. This image makes the viewers look back in the past and understand how much women have improved over time. From being slaves to educated professional women. I believe nobody would have been able to achieve this meaning with such of simplicity. Walker has a gift to narrate a meaningful story with less and less objects. As mentioned above, her art defines simplicity. Her lack of colors contributes to her unique style.
In overall, Walker creates a piece of art with a hidden message: a message that provokes and explores gender, race and social status. Starting from the time of slavery up to the time that now women are independent. As a woman, Walker demonstrates to be a strong and self-determinate. As an artist, she is simple and straightforward. Some may believe that this form of art is quite easy but the difficult task here is to create a meaningful piece that will stay in the viewers mind. Walker owns this skill.
For starters, two colors pop out right away; white and black. The black is being represented by a woman who is carrying white, another woman. The black and white may symbolize various things, for example: ethnicity. The blacks or African-Americans have always been known as "slaves" of those white wealthy people. In this image, that stereotype is being portrayed: a black woman, who is probably working for a wealthy white family. It is known that the slaves had to put up with any type of requirements that came from their bosses; Walker is definitely demonstrating this fact by creating an image where the black woman is lifting the white woman with her own two hands.
Gender plays another important role is this image. The period of time that Walker is trying to portray in this image separates men and women. Around 1600's, wealthy women just dedicated themselves to stay home, chat with their girlfriends, and attend important events with their husbands. Most of them, had power over Africans slaves. In this image, that relationship between the woman boss and her slave is being shown. The black women slave had a more laid back function than the men slave. Women tended to accompany their bosses, helping them with their clothing, cleaning, cooking, and among other chores that women tend to be in charge of. This image represents that relationship: black woman slave serving her wealthy woman boss.
A way to differ social classes is by their clothing. The wealthy women tended to wear large gowns, big hear-dos, and expensive jewelry. As for the low-class women would wear dull dresses, mostly of depressing colors such as brown and gray, and their hair will remain tied up, away from their faces for better performance at their intensive jobs. In this image, the two women are representing what I explained above. The black slave is wearing a black deflated dress, barefoot, and her hair tied up. As for the wealthy woman, she is wearing a large white gown, with big hair-do, leaning back and facing up in the sky as to look like she is in power.
Social status is the main theme of this image. A way to understand what Walker is trying to convey, is by classifying the two women in the image by social status. The two colors, black and white, are self-explanatory and the way they are place in the image (white above black) show the readers to which social status each woman belong to. Starting with the color on top, white, the woman is known to belong to the upper class. By the way she is dressed and her posture. The color below, black, the woman belongs to the low class. Walking bare feet, lifting the “white” woman, and her clothing, are characteristics of a working class woman.
Walker’s intention to convey gender and social status effectively works. Her simple cut-off and paste-in images tell a story with a lot of background history. Walker’s African background influenced her art work; it inspires her to tell others about her culture, the struggles they have and still face. She uses art to narrate a story and introduce others into a world full with culture and knowledge.
Walker always uses the same colors in the art work, black and white. When presenting her art in an art show, she may add colorful images from a projector to add more intensity in her art. This image for example, if Walker would have added more to it, it would lose its meaning and value. Simplicity defines Walker.
Black, white, upper class, lower class. White, black, lower class, upper class. Slavery, African Americans, wealth, rich, money. Power, respect, money. Gender, mistreatment. These are words that are being emphasized by this image. Taking a quick glance at the image, most of these words pop-out. It is a simple and easy image to analyze, historical knowledge must be applied in order to have a better understanding of what Walker is trying to convey.
The images create sad emotions: sad to see how hard slaves had to work, how much they had to take from their owners. It demonstrates how strong Africans were and still are. But to expand this idea a lot more, it demonstrates how WOMEN are warriors. Personally, when I look at this image, it gives me strength. Strength to overcome anything, if these women were capable to lift, to keep up, and to serve their owners, I believe women now are capable of more. This image makes the viewers look back in the past and understand how much women have improved over time. From being slaves to educated professional women. I believe nobody would have been able to achieve this meaning with such of simplicity. Walker has a gift to narrate a meaningful story with less and less objects. As mentioned above, her art defines simplicity. Her lack of colors contributes to her unique style.
In overall, Walker creates a piece of art with a hidden message: a message that provokes and explores gender, race and social status. Starting from the time of slavery up to the time that now women are independent. As a woman, Walker demonstrates to be a strong and self-determinate. As an artist, she is simple and straightforward. Some may believe that this form of art is quite easy but the difficult task here is to create a meaningful piece that will stay in the viewers mind. Walker owns this skill.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Video Branagh: Blog 2
The three videos from Branagh’s Hamlet Act 2 Scene 2, helps the readers get a better interpretation of the scene. One video in particular, establishes Hamlet’s state of mind more well than the others. The video between where Polonius and Hamlet are having a conversation (Shakespeare 66-67) demonstrate different aspects of Hamlet’s personality; such as his incoherencies, his insulting sarcasm, and his serious and determined side.
Starting from the bottom up, the first video, I believe did not cover much of Hamlet’s personality. It instead focus more on the First Player’s acting than showing off Hamlet. In this video, the First Player is showing Hamlet his acting skills (Shakespeare 75-77) and spends most of the time reciting this long speech (with various images appearing as he speaks). Hamlet barely gets time in the video to speak and show the audience his "distinct" personality. Even though in this particular video Hamlet does not play the main role, the whole idea of creating a play and auditioning the players demonstrate a part of Hamlet’s personality; it shows that he takes time to analyze and choose correctly his moves in order to operate his revenge.
Following this video, the next one is between Hamlet and his two closest friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. In this video, Hamlet appears more than in the last video. But it still does not gives the audience a well-understanding of Hamlet’s state of mind. Both Rosencrantz and Guildenstern came to visit Hamlet because of the Queen’s request. She believes that Hamlet is acting quite different and is afraid of what he might be able to do. Therefore, she decided to bring his two closest friends so they can get Hamlet to be back to his normal self. Hamlet spends most of the time in this part of the scene trying to get his friends to confess that they were both sent for; "what more dear a better proposer can charge you withal,/ be even and direct with me, whether you were sent for or/ no!"(Shakespeare 201-203). With the arrival of his two friends, Hamlet still manages to act in such a different manner that his friends noticed right from the beginning. Both Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tried to act as if they didn’t know that Hamlet was talking about and kept repeating "To visit you, my lord, no other occasion" (Shakespeare 266), "What should we say, my lord" (Shakespeare 272), and "To what end, my lord" (Shakespeare 277). They are trying to hide the fact that they know there is something wrong with Hamlet, but their attempt failed. This video is a proof to what Shakespeare’s play indicates about Hamlet’s personality; he is "crazy in craft". Even when his two friends came to help, Hamlet maintain a delusional status and did not even tried to hide the personality he has been showing to the rest of Denmark’s inhabitants.
The last two videos explained above, only indicate one thing about Hamlet’s personality: his will for revenge. No other aspect of his personality is being shown in the past videos. I believe the last (or first) video show Hamlet’s real state of mind. In this next video, Polonius runs up the stairs in search of Hamlet. A strange and mysterious skeleton mask appears right in front of Polonius’ face, this be Hamlet being the "mysterious" man he has been after he met his dead father’s ghost. In the first 10 seconds of the video, the audience gets to see a different part of Hamlet. Besides being the mysterious man the readers have imagine of, they now see this strange and unusual man. Following this, Polonius asks "Do you know me, my lord", "Excellent well, you are a fishmonger" Hamlet responds with a ease tone, somehow pretending to be polite. To prove it, the next lines carries an angry tone, as if Hamlet was getting annoyed by Polonius; "Then I would you were so honest a man" (Shakespeare 176). In the play by Shakespeare, the tone seems to be the same, an ease tone. But Branagh delivers the lines differently, making it easy for the audience to see the changes in Hamlet’s personality. To follow with his insulting sarcasm, besides pretending to be polite, Hamlet also uses the book he was reading before Polonius arrived to insult Polonius in an intellectual way. Hamlet starts off by saying that the book says "that old/ men have grey beards, that their faces are wrinkled, their/ eyes purging thick amber and plum-tree gum, and that they/ have a plentiful lack of wit" (Shakespeare 195-198). In the video, as he says these lines, Hamlet makes various silly faces, twisting his mouth, and using a sarcastic tone.
Another new aspect of Hamlet’s personality appears in this video, the incoherencies that comes out of his mouth most of the time. For example, when Hamlet randomly asks Polonius "-Have you a daughter" (Shakespeare 182) even after he knew and has met his daughter Ophelia. Then he follows "Let her not walk i’th’sun. Conception is a blessing," (Shakespeare 184) with a horrifying look and a frightening tone. The faces Hamlet makes, the way he delivers his lines, his high to low tones, make him look somehow fearful in the eyes of the audience. And his incoherencies contribute to his craziness in craft.
Hamlet also develops a serious and determined side. Towards the end of the video, Polonius states in a threaten tone "My lord, I will take my leave of you", provoking Hamlet to change from being this sarcastic man into a serious one. "You cannot take from me any thing…- except my life, except my life,/except my life" (Shakespeare 212-214). And then from serious to angry, "These tedious old fools!" (Shakespeare 216). Being able to watch Branagh’s version, the way Hamlet delivers these last lines, demonstrate his ability to change his personality depending on the situation.
The last (or first) video of Act 2 Scene 2, Branagh effectively captures Hamlet’s state of mind. I was able to distinct each of Hamlet’s aspects of his personality with no difficulty. The last video, even though it was a short conversation, it contained important information for the reader to understand the crazy in craft idea. Hamlet demonstrates to be in control of the situation by always showing others his confidence. He always manages to leave questions in other people’s head with his incoherencies and his sarcasm.
Starting from the bottom up, the first video, I believe did not cover much of Hamlet’s personality. It instead focus more on the First Player’s acting than showing off Hamlet. In this video, the First Player is showing Hamlet his acting skills (Shakespeare 75-77) and spends most of the time reciting this long speech (with various images appearing as he speaks). Hamlet barely gets time in the video to speak and show the audience his "distinct" personality. Even though in this particular video Hamlet does not play the main role, the whole idea of creating a play and auditioning the players demonstrate a part of Hamlet’s personality; it shows that he takes time to analyze and choose correctly his moves in order to operate his revenge.
Following this video, the next one is between Hamlet and his two closest friends, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. In this video, Hamlet appears more than in the last video. But it still does not gives the audience a well-understanding of Hamlet’s state of mind. Both Rosencrantz and Guildenstern came to visit Hamlet because of the Queen’s request. She believes that Hamlet is acting quite different and is afraid of what he might be able to do. Therefore, she decided to bring his two closest friends so they can get Hamlet to be back to his normal self. Hamlet spends most of the time in this part of the scene trying to get his friends to confess that they were both sent for; "what more dear a better proposer can charge you withal,/ be even and direct with me, whether you were sent for or/ no!"(Shakespeare 201-203). With the arrival of his two friends, Hamlet still manages to act in such a different manner that his friends noticed right from the beginning. Both Rosencrantz and Guildenstern tried to act as if they didn’t know that Hamlet was talking about and kept repeating "To visit you, my lord, no other occasion" (Shakespeare 266), "What should we say, my lord" (Shakespeare 272), and "To what end, my lord" (Shakespeare 277). They are trying to hide the fact that they know there is something wrong with Hamlet, but their attempt failed. This video is a proof to what Shakespeare’s play indicates about Hamlet’s personality; he is "crazy in craft". Even when his two friends came to help, Hamlet maintain a delusional status and did not even tried to hide the personality he has been showing to the rest of Denmark’s inhabitants.
The last two videos explained above, only indicate one thing about Hamlet’s personality: his will for revenge. No other aspect of his personality is being shown in the past videos. I believe the last (or first) video show Hamlet’s real state of mind. In this next video, Polonius runs up the stairs in search of Hamlet. A strange and mysterious skeleton mask appears right in front of Polonius’ face, this be Hamlet being the "mysterious" man he has been after he met his dead father’s ghost. In the first 10 seconds of the video, the audience gets to see a different part of Hamlet. Besides being the mysterious man the readers have imagine of, they now see this strange and unusual man. Following this, Polonius asks "Do you know me, my lord", "Excellent well, you are a fishmonger" Hamlet responds with a ease tone, somehow pretending to be polite. To prove it, the next lines carries an angry tone, as if Hamlet was getting annoyed by Polonius; "Then I would you were so honest a man" (Shakespeare 176). In the play by Shakespeare, the tone seems to be the same, an ease tone. But Branagh delivers the lines differently, making it easy for the audience to see the changes in Hamlet’s personality. To follow with his insulting sarcasm, besides pretending to be polite, Hamlet also uses the book he was reading before Polonius arrived to insult Polonius in an intellectual way. Hamlet starts off by saying that the book says "that old/ men have grey beards, that their faces are wrinkled, their/ eyes purging thick amber and plum-tree gum, and that they/ have a plentiful lack of wit" (Shakespeare 195-198). In the video, as he says these lines, Hamlet makes various silly faces, twisting his mouth, and using a sarcastic tone.
Another new aspect of Hamlet’s personality appears in this video, the incoherencies that comes out of his mouth most of the time. For example, when Hamlet randomly asks Polonius "-Have you a daughter" (Shakespeare 182) even after he knew and has met his daughter Ophelia. Then he follows "Let her not walk i’th’sun. Conception is a blessing," (Shakespeare 184) with a horrifying look and a frightening tone. The faces Hamlet makes, the way he delivers his lines, his high to low tones, make him look somehow fearful in the eyes of the audience. And his incoherencies contribute to his craziness in craft.
Hamlet also develops a serious and determined side. Towards the end of the video, Polonius states in a threaten tone "My lord, I will take my leave of you", provoking Hamlet to change from being this sarcastic man into a serious one. "You cannot take from me any thing…- except my life, except my life,/except my life" (Shakespeare 212-214). And then from serious to angry, "These tedious old fools!" (Shakespeare 216). Being able to watch Branagh’s version, the way Hamlet delivers these last lines, demonstrate his ability to change his personality depending on the situation.
The last (or first) video of Act 2 Scene 2, Branagh effectively captures Hamlet’s state of mind. I was able to distinct each of Hamlet’s aspects of his personality with no difficulty. The last video, even though it was a short conversation, it contained important information for the reader to understand the crazy in craft idea. Hamlet demonstrates to be in control of the situation by always showing others his confidence. He always manages to leave questions in other people’s head with his incoherencies and his sarcasm.
Olson Essay
The interview between Stephen Colbert and Elizabeth Alexander introduced an intellectual topic in a humorous manner. Colbert interviewed Alexander in a short period of time but he was able to obtained valuable information that the audience may have been wanting to hear.
In the interview Alexander tried to maintain a serious and important topic. A response, in particular, from Alexander, caught my attention; "[poems] should be emotionally true", she then elaborates that there must be "something in the poem that feel is true…that is how you connect to the poem". If Olson would have been present in this interview, he would of agreed with most of Alexander‘s response.
To elaborate more on this response, let’s look at Olson’s essay Projective Verse. At the beginning, Olson discusses about Kinetics and its role in poetry. His firsts thoughts: "A poem is energy transferred from where the poet got it" (Olson). This simple theory relates to Alexander’s response to Colbert’s questions "Poems aren’t true?". Alexander explained that there has to be something behind the poem that must be true, something that made the poet write about, and Olson’s kinetics ("high-energy construct") proves this. Even though Alexander’s response relates to Olson’s ideas, I believe Olson would of answered this questions in a much better manner. He would of elaborate more on it and go deeper into what separates poems between fiction and reality.
Moving forward, another question asked by Colbert; "What’s the difference between a metaphor and a lie?" created a deeper conversation yet comical. Colbert then continues to elaborate on the question by asking Alexander why can’t you just say what you mean without using "flowery language"(Colbert). Alexander’s response consisted on the definition of a metaphor and she argued that they are used just for comparison instead of facts. She responded that "a metaphor is using language where you make a comparison to let people understand something as it relates to something else." Poetry is about what the poet might be going through at some point, and the flowery language adds to those emotions. The idea of using metaphors can easily relate back to the idea of Kinetics (energy). As metaphors are being use by poets to increase meaning between their experiences and emotions, they also want to create this "energy" between their words and their audience. But going back to Olson, if this question would have been asked to him, he would elaborate more on the idea of what a lie really is? Olson had this intellectual perspective about life and he would of rather maintain the focus on the "lie" then into the "metaphor".
One of the last questions asked by Colbert was "What is an occasional poem?". He brought up a good point because readers, at times, may wonder about the occasion of the poem and if it is meaningful. Alexander simply responded "an occasional poem is a poem written for an occasion" (Alexander). The context of the poem is written for a certain event, an event that any reader could relate to. The good thing of poetry, is that it can be interpreted in various ways, which provides the audience with the option to interpret poems in any way they want.
Both Olson and Alexander agrees in similar aspects of poetry. Even though they write about different "occasions", they maintain the idea of writing with emotions yet giving the audience space to interpret their poems as freely as they can. Both Olson and Alexander use language to increase meaning. While Olson keeps his topics to be about Gloucester, to introduce this city to those who have never lived or visit it in a philosophical style, Alexander is more realistic and writes about events that are currently happening. The interview with Colbert, opened our minds to compare and contrast these two poets. With few knowledge of Alexander’s career, and with a higher knowledge of Charles Olson’s poetics, this interview would have been more meaningful is Olson was the one being interviewed. Even though Alexander never went off topic, her responses were quite simple. Olson, on the other hand, would have answered with the same ideas but he would have put more thought on his responses.
The interview would of definitely gone differently if Olson was present. I dare to say that perhaps if would have been less humorous and more intellectual. During Ferrini’s film "Polis is This", Olson was introduced as this high-intellectual man. Olson would of made this interview still interesting, he was a people’s person as many mentioned in Ferrini’s film, but he definitely had this influence over people that made everything more intense and profound.
In the interview Alexander tried to maintain a serious and important topic. A response, in particular, from Alexander, caught my attention; "[poems] should be emotionally true", she then elaborates that there must be "something in the poem that feel is true…that is how you connect to the poem". If Olson would have been present in this interview, he would of agreed with most of Alexander‘s response.
To elaborate more on this response, let’s look at Olson’s essay Projective Verse. At the beginning, Olson discusses about Kinetics and its role in poetry. His firsts thoughts: "A poem is energy transferred from where the poet got it" (Olson). This simple theory relates to Alexander’s response to Colbert’s questions "Poems aren’t true?". Alexander explained that there has to be something behind the poem that must be true, something that made the poet write about, and Olson’s kinetics ("high-energy construct") proves this. Even though Alexander’s response relates to Olson’s ideas, I believe Olson would of answered this questions in a much better manner. He would of elaborate more on it and go deeper into what separates poems between fiction and reality.
Moving forward, another question asked by Colbert; "What’s the difference between a metaphor and a lie?" created a deeper conversation yet comical. Colbert then continues to elaborate on the question by asking Alexander why can’t you just say what you mean without using "flowery language"(Colbert). Alexander’s response consisted on the definition of a metaphor and she argued that they are used just for comparison instead of facts. She responded that "a metaphor is using language where you make a comparison to let people understand something as it relates to something else." Poetry is about what the poet might be going through at some point, and the flowery language adds to those emotions. The idea of using metaphors can easily relate back to the idea of Kinetics (energy). As metaphors are being use by poets to increase meaning between their experiences and emotions, they also want to create this "energy" between their words and their audience. But going back to Olson, if this question would have been asked to him, he would elaborate more on the idea of what a lie really is? Olson had this intellectual perspective about life and he would of rather maintain the focus on the "lie" then into the "metaphor".
One of the last questions asked by Colbert was "What is an occasional poem?". He brought up a good point because readers, at times, may wonder about the occasion of the poem and if it is meaningful. Alexander simply responded "an occasional poem is a poem written for an occasion" (Alexander). The context of the poem is written for a certain event, an event that any reader could relate to. The good thing of poetry, is that it can be interpreted in various ways, which provides the audience with the option to interpret poems in any way they want.
Both Olson and Alexander agrees in similar aspects of poetry. Even though they write about different "occasions", they maintain the idea of writing with emotions yet giving the audience space to interpret their poems as freely as they can. Both Olson and Alexander use language to increase meaning. While Olson keeps his topics to be about Gloucester, to introduce this city to those who have never lived or visit it in a philosophical style, Alexander is more realistic and writes about events that are currently happening. The interview with Colbert, opened our minds to compare and contrast these two poets. With few knowledge of Alexander’s career, and with a higher knowledge of Charles Olson’s poetics, this interview would have been more meaningful is Olson was the one being interviewed. Even though Alexander never went off topic, her responses were quite simple. Olson, on the other hand, would have answered with the same ideas but he would have put more thought on his responses.
The interview would of definitely gone differently if Olson was present. I dare to say that perhaps if would have been less humorous and more intellectual. During Ferrini’s film "Polis is This", Olson was introduced as this high-intellectual man. Olson would of made this interview still interesting, he was a people’s person as many mentioned in Ferrini’s film, but he definitely had this influence over people that made everything more intense and profound.
Hamlet 1:5:Kenneth Branagh's video
In Kenneth Branagh’s video of Hamlet’s scene 1 Act 5, Branagh focuses when Hamlet meets his father’s ghost and the truth of his death is revealed. The video of this scene emphasizes the anger prince Hamlet is feeling once he found out his uncle killed his father. With the incorporation of flashbacks, the sound effects, and the setting (dark woods), Branagh gives his viewers a great understanding on the scene and it foreshadows the rest of the play.
A great technique used by Branagh are the flashbacks. These flashbacks allows the viewers to relive the crucial moments of Hamlet’s death. As Hamlet’s ghost is describing the moments of his death, flashbacks are brought up on the screen. In the play by Shakespeare, this scene does not give such details as the video does; instead the Ghost briefly states "The serpent that did sting thy father’s life/Now wears his crown" (Shakespeare 39-40). As the Ghost continues to express his anger, more flashbacks are being incorporated. For example, when the Ghost states "With witchcraft of his wits, with traitorous gifts-/O wicked wit and gifts that have the power/ So to seduce!- won to his shameful lust/ The will of my most seeming virtuous queen"(Shakespeare 44-46). These lines, in the video version, are being accompanied with flashbacks of Hamlet’s brother giving the queen "toys" and they happily play. The last flashback is the when Hamlet was murdered by his brother. In the video, the ghost raises his voice as he continues to advance on how he was killed; "And in the porches of my ears did pour…Holds such an enmity with blood of man/ That swift as quicksilver it courses through/ The natural gates and alleys of the body,"(Shakespeare 64-67). The use of flashbacks and the deep voice the Ghost uses, both work together to emphasize the anger the ghost feels towards his cowardly murder.
The sound effects give the scene a frightening feeling. As Hamlet is running through the woods, he is talking and looking around impatiently, repeating a passage from Shakespeare Act 1 Scene 4. Among the lines of that passage, the sounds effects increase starting with these lines "Bring with thee airs from heaven, or blast from hell,/Be thy intents wicked, or charitable,"(Shakespeare 42-43). When Hamlet pronounces "heaven", "hell", "death", "burst their cerements", and among others, the sound effects become louder and impact more the viewers. Hamlet is speaking with such a fast pace, and the effects become more and more noticeable, that the viewer is encounter with a mixture of significant details that make this scene perfect.
The setting also contributes to the formation of this scene. While reading Shakespeare’s The Tragedy of Prince Hamlet, this scene is not being portrayed in the woods. The reader would most likely picture this scene perhaps in a tower of a castle (since that is where Hamlet’s soldiers would most likely be guarding). But the dark woods give the scene a more frightening atmosphere, which connects with the appearance of the ghost.
The delivery of lines is an important fact when it comes about replicating someone else’s work. Each character effectively delivers each line with the correct tone, and pauses that create suspense. For example, the ghost highlights the word "Murther": "Revenge his foul and most unnatural murther" (Shakespeare 25) in the video, and as he mentions "murther", a vivid image of his ear with three holes appeared with blood pouring out. The ghost is mostly whispering in this scene, which demonstrates that the ghost is trying to maintain a quiet and secretly conversation with Hamlet. The whispering also creates suspense in the viewers as they patiently await for the next effect to take place.
Branagh ends the act of the ghost with the "Adieu, adieu, adieu! Remember me"(Shakespeare 91). The ghost vanishes into the air, making it an effective way for a ghost to disappear. Hamlet is now left in the woods, analyzing every detail his father told him, and with anger reflecting on his eyes, the viewers can easily tell that a war is about to break out in Denmark. The video concludes with Hamlet kissing his sword, which symbolizes that he is making a pact with his father to revenge his unnatural death. As he kisses his sword, he mentions "Now to my word:/It is ‘Adieu, adieu! Remember me.’/I have sworn’t" (Shakespeare 110-112). Branagh definitely captures the correct tone and the character delivered the last lines correctly, making the intensity the video increase.
In overall, both characters full achieved Shakespeare’s play. Branagh captured the correct setting, the tone, the effect, and most important, the delivery of lines. The intensity that was needed to deliver the accurate meaning of the scene, was demonstrated by both actors. This video gives a different interpretation of the setting but it fairly adapts to the play. The video version of Shakespeare’s Hamlet was well-directed and effectively operated.
A great technique used by Branagh are the flashbacks. These flashbacks allows the viewers to relive the crucial moments of Hamlet’s death. As Hamlet’s ghost is describing the moments of his death, flashbacks are brought up on the screen. In the play by Shakespeare, this scene does not give such details as the video does; instead the Ghost briefly states "The serpent that did sting thy father’s life/Now wears his crown" (Shakespeare 39-40). As the Ghost continues to express his anger, more flashbacks are being incorporated. For example, when the Ghost states "With witchcraft of his wits, with traitorous gifts-/O wicked wit and gifts that have the power/ So to seduce!- won to his shameful lust/ The will of my most seeming virtuous queen"(Shakespeare 44-46). These lines, in the video version, are being accompanied with flashbacks of Hamlet’s brother giving the queen "toys" and they happily play. The last flashback is the when Hamlet was murdered by his brother. In the video, the ghost raises his voice as he continues to advance on how he was killed; "And in the porches of my ears did pour…Holds such an enmity with blood of man/ That swift as quicksilver it courses through/ The natural gates and alleys of the body,"(Shakespeare 64-67). The use of flashbacks and the deep voice the Ghost uses, both work together to emphasize the anger the ghost feels towards his cowardly murder.
The sound effects give the scene a frightening feeling. As Hamlet is running through the woods, he is talking and looking around impatiently, repeating a passage from Shakespeare Act 1 Scene 4. Among the lines of that passage, the sounds effects increase starting with these lines "Bring with thee airs from heaven, or blast from hell,/Be thy intents wicked, or charitable,"(Shakespeare 42-43). When Hamlet pronounces "heaven", "hell", "death", "burst their cerements", and among others, the sound effects become louder and impact more the viewers. Hamlet is speaking with such a fast pace, and the effects become more and more noticeable, that the viewer is encounter with a mixture of significant details that make this scene perfect.
The setting also contributes to the formation of this scene. While reading Shakespeare’s The Tragedy of Prince Hamlet, this scene is not being portrayed in the woods. The reader would most likely picture this scene perhaps in a tower of a castle (since that is where Hamlet’s soldiers would most likely be guarding). But the dark woods give the scene a more frightening atmosphere, which connects with the appearance of the ghost.
The delivery of lines is an important fact when it comes about replicating someone else’s work. Each character effectively delivers each line with the correct tone, and pauses that create suspense. For example, the ghost highlights the word "Murther": "Revenge his foul and most unnatural murther" (Shakespeare 25) in the video, and as he mentions "murther", a vivid image of his ear with three holes appeared with blood pouring out. The ghost is mostly whispering in this scene, which demonstrates that the ghost is trying to maintain a quiet and secretly conversation with Hamlet. The whispering also creates suspense in the viewers as they patiently await for the next effect to take place.
Branagh ends the act of the ghost with the "Adieu, adieu, adieu! Remember me"(Shakespeare 91). The ghost vanishes into the air, making it an effective way for a ghost to disappear. Hamlet is now left in the woods, analyzing every detail his father told him, and with anger reflecting on his eyes, the viewers can easily tell that a war is about to break out in Denmark. The video concludes with Hamlet kissing his sword, which symbolizes that he is making a pact with his father to revenge his unnatural death. As he kisses his sword, he mentions "Now to my word:/It is ‘Adieu, adieu! Remember me.’/I have sworn’t" (Shakespeare 110-112). Branagh definitely captures the correct tone and the character delivered the last lines correctly, making the intensity the video increase.
In overall, both characters full achieved Shakespeare’s play. Branagh captured the correct setting, the tone, the effect, and most important, the delivery of lines. The intensity that was needed to deliver the accurate meaning of the scene, was demonstrated by both actors. This video gives a different interpretation of the setting but it fairly adapts to the play. The video version of Shakespeare’s Hamlet was well-directed and effectively operated.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Jane Eyre Last Blog
By the end of Jane Eyre, many events came to an end and others begin. Starting from Jane finding close relatives up to Mr. Rochester losing everything he built. Jane’s and Rochester’s relationship has never been truthful, there was always something. But by the end of the story, this foolish relationship came together as one. Ending with the result of Rochester’s blindness and the crippled hand, he has become a more kind man who is in need of others to get himself around. A new personality has grown out of Rochester, making his life worth living.
Due to this incident, it leaves Jane in an advantage. She is now the one with complete power, both economically and physically: “…I cannot be so blest after all my misery…but kiss me before you go…” (Bronte 423). Rochester’s attitude when he realizes that Jane has come back, enlightened him with joy. The roles in this scene have change, Jane’s impression of Rochester when she first saw him, were the impressions Rochester felt once Jane came back. The difference is that unlike Rochester, Jane is more comprehensive and more friendly.
I believe that at this point, Rochester is at the same level of Jane; humble-like. He seems to consider more the people around him and appreciate them for who they are. “Jane! You think me, I daresay, irreligious dog: but my heart swells with gratitude to the beneficent God of this earth just now… His chastisements are mighty; and one smote me which has humbled me for ever. You know I was proud of my strength: but what is it now, when I must give it over to foreign guidance, as a child does it weakness?” (Bronte 435). This is the perfect example to get to know the new personality of Rochester. Rochester realizes that the power that he had before, no longer matter, as well as his pride. He now depends on Jane.
Rochester’s incident was crucial to his relationship with Jane. Jane finally saw a humble man willing to live by love. Rochester realized that status wasn’t everything. In chapter 38, the reader learns that their love has become stronger over the past ten years, and it is due to the little importance that they pay to what society says. This final chapter clarifies the universal issue of others caring what society thinks. Most couples are affected by this issue and both Jane and Rochester demonstrated that at the end what matters is that they are together and happy.
Due to this incident, it leaves Jane in an advantage. She is now the one with complete power, both economically and physically: “…I cannot be so blest after all my misery…but kiss me before you go…” (Bronte 423). Rochester’s attitude when he realizes that Jane has come back, enlightened him with joy. The roles in this scene have change, Jane’s impression of Rochester when she first saw him, were the impressions Rochester felt once Jane came back. The difference is that unlike Rochester, Jane is more comprehensive and more friendly.
I believe that at this point, Rochester is at the same level of Jane; humble-like. He seems to consider more the people around him and appreciate them for who they are. “Jane! You think me, I daresay, irreligious dog: but my heart swells with gratitude to the beneficent God of this earth just now… His chastisements are mighty; and one smote me which has humbled me for ever. You know I was proud of my strength: but what is it now, when I must give it over to foreign guidance, as a child does it weakness?” (Bronte 435). This is the perfect example to get to know the new personality of Rochester. Rochester realizes that the power that he had before, no longer matter, as well as his pride. He now depends on Jane.
Rochester’s incident was crucial to his relationship with Jane. Jane finally saw a humble man willing to live by love. Rochester realized that status wasn’t everything. In chapter 38, the reader learns that their love has become stronger over the past ten years, and it is due to the little importance that they pay to what society says. This final chapter clarifies the universal issue of others caring what society thinks. Most couples are affected by this issue and both Jane and Rochester demonstrated that at the end what matters is that they are together and happy.
Option Assignment: Paired Poems
In this optional assignment, I decided to do another paired-poem. I enjoyed very much the last paired-poem and chose to work this time with the Victorian Era. After doing some research, I found some quite useful information about this era, it was inspired by the romantic era and not many females were part of it. Fortunately, two sisters were one of the few women who left their legacy to us: Charlotte and Emily Bronte.
I decided to pick both sisters because I wanted to compare their styles. I thought it might have been interesting to seen their similarities but also their differences. Both sisters lived a life full with tragedies as each member of their family kept on dying. This caused them to write and incorporate their deep emotions into their work. Their background is what attracted me to read their work; I realized that their work must include many of those incidents that impacted their life. And in my opinion, I enjoy reading and learning about how some famous writers are able to include their dilemmas but still manage to make it open to the audience.
Charlotte Bronte, I would say her work was inspired by those closed to her. In this poem in particular, she explores what life means to her. In this poem, she explains how Life can easily end at any point. She gives the audience an advice “Enjoy them as they fly!”(Line 12) But she is also telling herself that life is too short, and she has plenty of things to live for and accomplish. Death has caused such a great impact in her life, (as she seen her mother, and sisters died in front of her eyes) that in this poem, she later mentions “What thought Death at times step in, /And calls our Best away?”(Lines 13-14). I found this poem so captivated because Bronte is doing two things at once. She is self-reflecting about her life, her family’s life, and yet she manages to speak to directly to the reader.
Emily Bronte, just like her sister, used the technique of writing as an escape or a way for her to relief her emotions. But unlike her sister Charlotte, Emily will talk more about her faith to God than about her life. In her poem No Coward Soul is Mine, Bronte is using a strong tone towards the subject of faith and death. She opens up her poem with a strong statement “No coward soul is mine” (Line 1) which is also the title. This first line clearly states how Emily has a strong will, with no desire to give up on anything, and if death is her path, she will happily agree with God. Bronte also describes her feelings towards heaven, “I see Heaven’s glories shine,” (Line 3).
I believe that the Bronte’s sister were so familiar with death that it inspired them to write about it and to not fear it. Instead, they waited for it. Charlotte saw death as a factor of life, while Emily saw it as an inevitable occurrence. What connects these two poems is their desire for hope, for faith, and for death.
Once again, I found this assignment to be quite interesting. I enjoyed learning about the lives of these two wonderful women.
I decided to pick both sisters because I wanted to compare their styles. I thought it might have been interesting to seen their similarities but also their differences. Both sisters lived a life full with tragedies as each member of their family kept on dying. This caused them to write and incorporate their deep emotions into their work. Their background is what attracted me to read their work; I realized that their work must include many of those incidents that impacted their life. And in my opinion, I enjoy reading and learning about how some famous writers are able to include their dilemmas but still manage to make it open to the audience.
Charlotte Bronte, I would say her work was inspired by those closed to her. In this poem in particular, she explores what life means to her. In this poem, she explains how Life can easily end at any point. She gives the audience an advice “Enjoy them as they fly!”(Line 12) But she is also telling herself that life is too short, and she has plenty of things to live for and accomplish. Death has caused such a great impact in her life, (as she seen her mother, and sisters died in front of her eyes) that in this poem, she later mentions “What thought Death at times step in, /And calls our Best away?”(Lines 13-14). I found this poem so captivated because Bronte is doing two things at once. She is self-reflecting about her life, her family’s life, and yet she manages to speak to directly to the reader.
Emily Bronte, just like her sister, used the technique of writing as an escape or a way for her to relief her emotions. But unlike her sister Charlotte, Emily will talk more about her faith to God than about her life. In her poem No Coward Soul is Mine, Bronte is using a strong tone towards the subject of faith and death. She opens up her poem with a strong statement “No coward soul is mine” (Line 1) which is also the title. This first line clearly states how Emily has a strong will, with no desire to give up on anything, and if death is her path, she will happily agree with God. Bronte also describes her feelings towards heaven, “I see Heaven’s glories shine,” (Line 3).
I believe that the Bronte’s sister were so familiar with death that it inspired them to write about it and to not fear it. Instead, they waited for it. Charlotte saw death as a factor of life, while Emily saw it as an inevitable occurrence. What connects these two poems is their desire for hope, for faith, and for death.
Once again, I found this assignment to be quite interesting. I enjoyed learning about the lives of these two wonderful women.
Jane Eyre: Passage Explication Volume I
"I lingered in the long passageway to which this led, separating the front and back rooms of the third story: narrow, low, and dim, with only one little window at the far end, and looking, with its two rows of small black doors all shut, like a corridor in some Bluebeard's castle...the laugh was as tragic, as preternatural a laugh as any I ever heard; and, but that it was a high room, and that no circumstance of ghostliness accompanied the curious cachinnation, but that neither scene nor season favoured fear, I should have been superstitiously afraid." Chapter 11. P. 114
Bronte incorporates the “Gothic” theme in most of Volume I of Jane Eyre. Most of Jane’s experiences involved dark rooms and dim environments, which demonstrate the tension that takes over her life and the amount of secrets that are unrevealed.
When Jane is given the tour around Thornfield Hall, she hears a strange and disturbing laugh coming from the attic. As she questions this, the only response she obtained was that it was only Grace Poole, sewing with Leah. But Jane’s above description of the house, completely lets the reader know that there is more to the story than the simple answer she was given. The gothic theme reappears when Jane describes the third floor of the house as “narrow, low, and dim, with only one little window at the far end…” demonstrating the evidence that there must be something or someone hidden in the house.
This takes us to the reference of the “Bluebeard’s castle”. The Bluebeard’s castle is known to be a Gothic French fairy tale where a Duke who “murders” all his wives and locking their bodies in different rooms of the castle, forbidding the new wife to open these doors. When the new wife disobeys and finds the bodies, she is then murdered. This reference provides an interesting foreshadow of what is behind the attic door. Bronte, while using a tale base on a pre-gothic plot, creates another gothic tale where perhaps the same tragedy is about to take place. Both tales have several factors in common, the dim-gothic looking castle, the master (Duke) of the house, a hidden secret behind doors, and a new victim.
To add more to this passage and the story behind it, another event occurs creating intrigue in Jane to know more about this mysterious person living in the attic. Towards the end of Volume I, while Mr. Rochester is asleep one night, Jane finds him in his bed and his covers are lighted up on fire. She quickly moves and saves Mr. Rochester. Both came to the conclusion that the responsible for this was “Grace Poole” but this is not a satisfactory response. Who really is Grace Poole? Why would Poole do this to the master? Putting this incident together with the plot of Bluebeard’s castle, and his unfaithful wife, create this idea that perhaps the person or secret hidden in the attic could be his ex- wife. Several questions are being asked and the gothic theme continues to appear in the story.
Bronte successfully creates curiosity in the audience by introducing this new mysterious character who would probably reveal the secret hidden in this castle. As for Jane, what the Bluebeard’s story foreshadowed seems to be an ugly and sad ending for her.
Bronte incorporates the “Gothic” theme in most of Volume I of Jane Eyre. Most of Jane’s experiences involved dark rooms and dim environments, which demonstrate the tension that takes over her life and the amount of secrets that are unrevealed.
When Jane is given the tour around Thornfield Hall, she hears a strange and disturbing laugh coming from the attic. As she questions this, the only response she obtained was that it was only Grace Poole, sewing with Leah. But Jane’s above description of the house, completely lets the reader know that there is more to the story than the simple answer she was given. The gothic theme reappears when Jane describes the third floor of the house as “narrow, low, and dim, with only one little window at the far end…” demonstrating the evidence that there must be something or someone hidden in the house.
This takes us to the reference of the “Bluebeard’s castle”. The Bluebeard’s castle is known to be a Gothic French fairy tale where a Duke who “murders” all his wives and locking their bodies in different rooms of the castle, forbidding the new wife to open these doors. When the new wife disobeys and finds the bodies, she is then murdered. This reference provides an interesting foreshadow of what is behind the attic door. Bronte, while using a tale base on a pre-gothic plot, creates another gothic tale where perhaps the same tragedy is about to take place. Both tales have several factors in common, the dim-gothic looking castle, the master (Duke) of the house, a hidden secret behind doors, and a new victim.
To add more to this passage and the story behind it, another event occurs creating intrigue in Jane to know more about this mysterious person living in the attic. Towards the end of Volume I, while Mr. Rochester is asleep one night, Jane finds him in his bed and his covers are lighted up on fire. She quickly moves and saves Mr. Rochester. Both came to the conclusion that the responsible for this was “Grace Poole” but this is not a satisfactory response. Who really is Grace Poole? Why would Poole do this to the master? Putting this incident together with the plot of Bluebeard’s castle, and his unfaithful wife, create this idea that perhaps the person or secret hidden in the attic could be his ex- wife. Several questions are being asked and the gothic theme continues to appear in the story.
Bronte successfully creates curiosity in the audience by introducing this new mysterious character who would probably reveal the secret hidden in this castle. As for Jane, what the Bluebeard’s story foreshadowed seems to be an ugly and sad ending for her.
Casting a character: "La llorona" vs.Hamlet
The play “The Tragedy of Prince Hamlet” by Shakespeare includes a variety of complex characters. The plot of this play helps the characters develop a lunatic and compulsive personality which makes this play so engaging. Ophelia, the daughter of Polonius and the woman Hamlet is “madly” in love for, is an example of a complex character. Her personality is confusing; she creates this innocent appearance but has a hidden dark side.
As the director of the play, I choose to compare Ophelia with the Hispanic legend because they both display innocence in their disturbing life. In my version of the play, I will use one of the theories mentioned before: Ophelia having an affair with King Claudius making it impossible to have a real relationship with Hamlet, and at the end, Ophelia realizes that Claudius will never be with her and drowns herself. In my version, I want to portray the same exact thing. There are not many changes I would like to make since I like the way Shakespeare leaves it up to the reader’s perspective to see each character as they would like. My version contains minor changes. La llorona is remembered as a lonely soul wondering around for the tragedy that happened in her life: the death of her children (whom she murdered). Ophelia, as well, wonders around with many hidden emotions. Both of these characters develop an outstanding and interesting persona; portraying innocence with their white fluffy outfits, using their crying and singing as a way to pretend they are the victims, and using their simple beauty to captivate those around them.
When reading Hamlet, Ophelia’s character appears to be a young lady with manners and well-educated: “I shall obey, my lord” (1:3:136). She listens to her father and tries to maintain a certain posture. Her obedience reflects innocence, making the reader compare her to an angel, who wears mostly white, fluffy dresses, giving her space to move more freely. My purpose to portray Ophelia as a white-looking angel is to demonstrate evilness. Those around her believe she would not do any harm but as the play continues, hidden messages appear through out her personality and her actions. This evilness and innocence compares to the image of La Llorona. Her white dress with various layers are used to hide her dark side and the sins she committed.
Beauty is another major factor that covers up Ophelia’s mysterious side. The reader gets a hint that Ophelia must be a beautiful woman in order for Hamlet to be so crazy for her: “To the celestial and my soul’s idol, the most beautified/ Ophelia” (2:2:109-110) as Hamlet states in one of the letters he sent to Ophelia. Throughout time, women, beautiful women to be more specific, have always had the choice to manipulate men with their beauty. And this case is not an exception. The real purpose for Ophelia to manipulate Hamlet is not yet certain, there are many theories that the readers can obtain, but one thing is for sure, Ophelia is not the person she seems to be. The innocence her beauty displays causes others to trust her.
A good manipulate technique used by both La llorona and Ophelia are their crying and their singing. La Llorona cries for her children, the ones she killed her self. She wonders around at night asking “where her children are?” begging for the return of her children. By her crying, it makes those who hear her feel sympathetic for her tragedy. As for Ophelia, after finding out about her father’s death, she instantly changed from being a calm woman into a crazy neurotic woman. “He is dead and gone, lady, / He is dead and gone, / At his head a grass-green turf, / At his heels a stone” (4:5:29-32). Ophelia begins to say or sing irrational things that cause others believe she is gone crazy. In my version of the play, Ophelia is using her father’s death as an escape to get closer to the King and have a legitimate excuse to stay away from Hamlet. Her crying makes her brother Laertes wanting to take revenge on Hamlet for his father’s death and his sister’s craziness. If we continue to follow my idea of the King and Ophelia’s affair, this is quite important to continue with their hidden relationship. Ophelia wants to get rid off as many people around them in order for her affair to one day become a public and official relationship.
To prove more my point of King Claudius and Ophelia’s affair, another song sang by Ophelia demonstrates their secret; “Quoth she, ‘Before you tumbled me, / You promis’d me to wed” (4:3:62-63) and Claudius responds “So would I ‘a’ done, by yonder sun, / And thou hadst not come to my bed” (4:3:64-65). With this duet, it is clear that something must have happened between them two. But now Claudius is somehow telling Ophelia that she is nothing more than just a one night accident. Keeping this in mind, Ophelia’s reaction is not surprising, having her heartbroken and feeling completely betrayed, Ophelia took the choice to commit suicide: “Your sister’s drown’d, Laertes” (4:7:164). The time for Ophelia’s death could have not been better for Claudius. She was a threat to his throne, and the purpose of her death was explained by the lost of her father.
Following with La Llorona’s plot, the similar incident occurred to Ophelia. La Llorona decided to end with her children lives right after they were born because the father of her children left her after he found out she was pregnant. This caused her to kill her babies and then drowned her self. As for Ophelia, her heart was devastated and could not handle the thought of being betrayed by the man who she was willing to leave everything behind.
The period of time of the play will most likely be the 21st century. I would like to see the play be act by the young generation since this century is causing an immense controversy in history. My version consists of taking part of the legend of La Llorona and continues with Shakespeare style of delivering the lines. My version contains a lot of drama and love triangles. It relates to the daily routines most people live now days. Young beautiful women falling into the arms of old married men, who at the end will leave them after obtaining what they wanted.
In overall, as a Director, I only changed the plot of the play. I took the lines Shakespeare used but made it my own with a different message: what goes around comes around. Instead of Hamlet being the main character, I focused more on Ophelia and her innocence covering her dark side. Ophelia played with Hamlet’s feelings and betrayed the trust of those around her, mainly the Queen’s, Gertrude. And for this, she paid with her life. The white fluffy outfit symbolizes virginity and innocence which is the opposite of what Ophelia really is but makes the play interesting. Her beauty is the factor that manipulates men and makes them fall in love. Beauty is her key to obtain what she wants. And last but not least, her singing revealed the truth of her emotions and the tragedy that was about to occurred: suicide.
As the director of the play, I choose to compare Ophelia with the Hispanic legend because they both display innocence in their disturbing life. In my version of the play, I will use one of the theories mentioned before: Ophelia having an affair with King Claudius making it impossible to have a real relationship with Hamlet, and at the end, Ophelia realizes that Claudius will never be with her and drowns herself. In my version, I want to portray the same exact thing. There are not many changes I would like to make since I like the way Shakespeare leaves it up to the reader’s perspective to see each character as they would like. My version contains minor changes. La llorona is remembered as a lonely soul wondering around for the tragedy that happened in her life: the death of her children (whom she murdered). Ophelia, as well, wonders around with many hidden emotions. Both of these characters develop an outstanding and interesting persona; portraying innocence with their white fluffy outfits, using their crying and singing as a way to pretend they are the victims, and using their simple beauty to captivate those around them.
When reading Hamlet, Ophelia’s character appears to be a young lady with manners and well-educated: “I shall obey, my lord” (1:3:136). She listens to her father and tries to maintain a certain posture. Her obedience reflects innocence, making the reader compare her to an angel, who wears mostly white, fluffy dresses, giving her space to move more freely. My purpose to portray Ophelia as a white-looking angel is to demonstrate evilness. Those around her believe she would not do any harm but as the play continues, hidden messages appear through out her personality and her actions. This evilness and innocence compares to the image of La Llorona. Her white dress with various layers are used to hide her dark side and the sins she committed.
Beauty is another major factor that covers up Ophelia’s mysterious side. The reader gets a hint that Ophelia must be a beautiful woman in order for Hamlet to be so crazy for her: “To the celestial and my soul’s idol, the most beautified/ Ophelia” (2:2:109-110) as Hamlet states in one of the letters he sent to Ophelia. Throughout time, women, beautiful women to be more specific, have always had the choice to manipulate men with their beauty. And this case is not an exception. The real purpose for Ophelia to manipulate Hamlet is not yet certain, there are many theories that the readers can obtain, but one thing is for sure, Ophelia is not the person she seems to be. The innocence her beauty displays causes others to trust her.
A good manipulate technique used by both La llorona and Ophelia are their crying and their singing. La Llorona cries for her children, the ones she killed her self. She wonders around at night asking “where her children are?” begging for the return of her children. By her crying, it makes those who hear her feel sympathetic for her tragedy. As for Ophelia, after finding out about her father’s death, she instantly changed from being a calm woman into a crazy neurotic woman. “He is dead and gone, lady, / He is dead and gone, / At his head a grass-green turf, / At his heels a stone” (4:5:29-32). Ophelia begins to say or sing irrational things that cause others believe she is gone crazy. In my version of the play, Ophelia is using her father’s death as an escape to get closer to the King and have a legitimate excuse to stay away from Hamlet. Her crying makes her brother Laertes wanting to take revenge on Hamlet for his father’s death and his sister’s craziness. If we continue to follow my idea of the King and Ophelia’s affair, this is quite important to continue with their hidden relationship. Ophelia wants to get rid off as many people around them in order for her affair to one day become a public and official relationship.
To prove more my point of King Claudius and Ophelia’s affair, another song sang by Ophelia demonstrates their secret; “Quoth she, ‘Before you tumbled me, / You promis’d me to wed” (4:3:62-63) and Claudius responds “So would I ‘a’ done, by yonder sun, / And thou hadst not come to my bed” (4:3:64-65). With this duet, it is clear that something must have happened between them two. But now Claudius is somehow telling Ophelia that she is nothing more than just a one night accident. Keeping this in mind, Ophelia’s reaction is not surprising, having her heartbroken and feeling completely betrayed, Ophelia took the choice to commit suicide: “Your sister’s drown’d, Laertes” (4:7:164). The time for Ophelia’s death could have not been better for Claudius. She was a threat to his throne, and the purpose of her death was explained by the lost of her father.
Following with La Llorona’s plot, the similar incident occurred to Ophelia. La Llorona decided to end with her children lives right after they were born because the father of her children left her after he found out she was pregnant. This caused her to kill her babies and then drowned her self. As for Ophelia, her heart was devastated and could not handle the thought of being betrayed by the man who she was willing to leave everything behind.
The period of time of the play will most likely be the 21st century. I would like to see the play be act by the young generation since this century is causing an immense controversy in history. My version consists of taking part of the legend of La Llorona and continues with Shakespeare style of delivering the lines. My version contains a lot of drama and love triangles. It relates to the daily routines most people live now days. Young beautiful women falling into the arms of old married men, who at the end will leave them after obtaining what they wanted.
In overall, as a Director, I only changed the plot of the play. I took the lines Shakespeare used but made it my own with a different message: what goes around comes around. Instead of Hamlet being the main character, I focused more on Ophelia and her innocence covering her dark side. Ophelia played with Hamlet’s feelings and betrayed the trust of those around her, mainly the Queen’s, Gertrude. And for this, she paid with her life. The white fluffy outfit symbolizes virginity and innocence which is the opposite of what Ophelia really is but makes the play interesting. Her beauty is the factor that manipulates men and makes them fall in love. Beauty is her key to obtain what she wants. And last but not least, her singing revealed the truth of her emotions and the tragedy that was about to occurred: suicide.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Summer AP Essay: Irony
In “Things Fall Apart” by Chinua Achebe, the author uses both verbal and dramatic irony to tell the reader the life of the main character Okonkwo. Achebe starts off by describing Okonkwo as a strong and controlling man who feels no pity for those around him, up to the point where his life falls apart.
At the beginning of Things Fall Apart, Achebe described Okonkwo’s father, Unoka, as “lazy and improvident and incapable of thinking about tomorrow” (4). Unlike his father, Okonkwo was known in Umuofia, as a “tall and huge” man who brought honor to his village. Okonkwo felt no pity for those around him; he was disappointed in those who were weak, including his father. He had no “patience with unsuccessful men” (4). This created Okonkwo’s personality to be somewhat arrogant; causing the characters in the novel to believe that such strong man would most likely succeed in his village and become a better man than his father.
The verbal irony first began when Okonkwo wanted everyone to be strong just like him. He detested those who didn’t work hard so he always gave that image of a frightening man because of how “strong” he supposedly was. People in the village looked up to him, making Okonkwo feel superior and believed that he had the right to boss
Restrepo 2
people around. Achebe achieved his goal to make everyone in the story believe that Okonkwo’s future was a bright one. What kept Okonkwo motivated was the “failure” his father was as a grown-up. The verbal irony works in favor of the audience and against the characters in the novel. According to How to Read Literature like a Professor by Thomas C. Foster, “irony works because the audience understands something that eludes one or more of the characters” (240). The audience knows that Okonkwo’s attitude is not going to take him anywhere, unlike the village of Umuofia, who believes that he is a great man with great standards.
The dramatic irony began when Okonkwo’s actions went a bit too far. A serial of events happened before Okonkwo’s life slowly became to fall apart. One of them was when a young boy was kept in the village, lived with Okonkwo for several years and at the end, the young boy was sentenced to death. Okonkwo took part in this murder even after many told him not to; “that boy calls you father…do not bear a hand in his death” (57). But Okonkwo felt that he needed to be there in order to get “stronger”. Following this, Okonkwo was then exiled to his mother’s land because of a murdered he committed at a funeral. Slowly, Okonkwo was becoming weaker, even if he didn’t believe it. At this point of the story, the audience believes that this is the punishment for his personality and the way he treats those around him. But “that’s irony- take our expectations and upend them, make them work against us” (How to Read…238). Achebe had a different ending for Okonkwo, one a lot different than what the audience expected.
Restrepo 3
Achebe “pays attention to expectations” (How to Read…240) and his purpose is to cause a big impact in the audience with the ending of Okonkwo. Irony is all about what the audience expects. It is up to the writer to make those expectations work against the readers. Okonkwo, after coming back from his exiled time (seven years) to Umuofia, he realized that his village was now controlled by white man. Okonkwo now didn’t have the authority he had before, even his son Nwoye left him and joined the white man. The village was not the same, nobody relied on Okonkwo anymore. And when Okonkwo wanted to gain control once again, the whole village gave him their backs. It is ironic how Okonkwo criticized his father for being lazy and a failure as an adult. But now, he was about to end worse than his father. Okonkwo committed suicide; “his body was dangling” (207) from a tree. Okonkwo went from being “one of the greatest men in Umuofia…and now he will be buried like a dog” (208). This dramatic ending caused controversies not only in the village but also in the audience.
The verbal and dramatic irony worked great in this novel. Achebe definitely played with both of the characters and readers expectations. As the characters expected Okonkwo to be a successful leader, the audience knew he would end up alone. But neither expected that he would of committed suicide. This is the purpose of the Achebe, to “keeps us readers on our toes, inviting us, compelling us, to dig through layers of possible meaning and competing signification” (How to read…244). Achebe accomplished his goal of playing with both the characters and readers mind. Irony controlled everything in this novel.
At the beginning of Things Fall Apart, Achebe described Okonkwo’s father, Unoka, as “lazy and improvident and incapable of thinking about tomorrow” (4). Unlike his father, Okonkwo was known in Umuofia, as a “tall and huge” man who brought honor to his village. Okonkwo felt no pity for those around him; he was disappointed in those who were weak, including his father. He had no “patience with unsuccessful men” (4). This created Okonkwo’s personality to be somewhat arrogant; causing the characters in the novel to believe that such strong man would most likely succeed in his village and become a better man than his father.
The verbal irony first began when Okonkwo wanted everyone to be strong just like him. He detested those who didn’t work hard so he always gave that image of a frightening man because of how “strong” he supposedly was. People in the village looked up to him, making Okonkwo feel superior and believed that he had the right to boss
Restrepo 2
people around. Achebe achieved his goal to make everyone in the story believe that Okonkwo’s future was a bright one. What kept Okonkwo motivated was the “failure” his father was as a grown-up. The verbal irony works in favor of the audience and against the characters in the novel. According to How to Read Literature like a Professor by Thomas C. Foster, “irony works because the audience understands something that eludes one or more of the characters” (240). The audience knows that Okonkwo’s attitude is not going to take him anywhere, unlike the village of Umuofia, who believes that he is a great man with great standards.
The dramatic irony began when Okonkwo’s actions went a bit too far. A serial of events happened before Okonkwo’s life slowly became to fall apart. One of them was when a young boy was kept in the village, lived with Okonkwo for several years and at the end, the young boy was sentenced to death. Okonkwo took part in this murder even after many told him not to; “that boy calls you father…do not bear a hand in his death” (57). But Okonkwo felt that he needed to be there in order to get “stronger”. Following this, Okonkwo was then exiled to his mother’s land because of a murdered he committed at a funeral. Slowly, Okonkwo was becoming weaker, even if he didn’t believe it. At this point of the story, the audience believes that this is the punishment for his personality and the way he treats those around him. But “that’s irony- take our expectations and upend them, make them work against us” (How to Read…238). Achebe had a different ending for Okonkwo, one a lot different than what the audience expected.
Restrepo 3
Achebe “pays attention to expectations” (How to Read…240) and his purpose is to cause a big impact in the audience with the ending of Okonkwo. Irony is all about what the audience expects. It is up to the writer to make those expectations work against the readers. Okonkwo, after coming back from his exiled time (seven years) to Umuofia, he realized that his village was now controlled by white man. Okonkwo now didn’t have the authority he had before, even his son Nwoye left him and joined the white man. The village was not the same, nobody relied on Okonkwo anymore. And when Okonkwo wanted to gain control once again, the whole village gave him their backs. It is ironic how Okonkwo criticized his father for being lazy and a failure as an adult. But now, he was about to end worse than his father. Okonkwo committed suicide; “his body was dangling” (207) from a tree. Okonkwo went from being “one of the greatest men in Umuofia…and now he will be buried like a dog” (208). This dramatic ending caused controversies not only in the village but also in the audience.
The verbal and dramatic irony worked great in this novel. Achebe definitely played with both of the characters and readers expectations. As the characters expected Okonkwo to be a successful leader, the audience knew he would end up alone. But neither expected that he would of committed suicide. This is the purpose of the Achebe, to “keeps us readers on our toes, inviting us, compelling us, to dig through layers of possible meaning and competing signification” (How to read…244). Achebe accomplished his goal of playing with both the characters and readers mind. Irony controlled everything in this novel.
Style Metacognition
Deciding what to do on this assignment was a bit challenging yet interesting. I wanted to convey more Hemmingway’s style than Faulkner’s. I found it fascinating the way Hemmingway uses only a conversation to provide a deep meaning. The three options provided by Master G were great but I wanted to do something different. Since I like Hemmingway’s style of writing in actual speech, I decided to focus my story style in that way but I also wanted to incorporate Faulkner. One of the options given to us in the assignment was to use only quotes/lines from both Hemmingway and Faulkner and write a conversation between them too. Well, my first step was to take this idea but instead of a conversation between these two writers, I used their quotes/lines to create a story between another two characters.
Second step, putting together the conversation was quite challenging because I had to go back to the stories we read in class from these two writers and find quotes/lines that would flow together. And not only this, but to also cite every quote/line use in my story. While creating my story, I had a good time and I found myself writing a story about love and a murder. I used mostly quotes from “Hill like White Elephants” by Hemingway and “Barn Burning” by Faulkner. These two stories have a whole different style and meaning but they both give great quotes and lines that I could use to write my love and murder story. As “Hills like White Elephants” talks about a couple about to make an important decision that will change their lives, I decided to use it in my story because a murder will most likely change every one who is involve in it. So to follow the pattern, I used “Barn Burning” quotes that conveyed what is wrong or right, and anger. It was difficult to make the conversation flow because some of the quotes were not written in the way that I would have like them to be written but at the end, I believe that I achieve my purpose.
My purpose of the conversation is to show how love can make us do things that we would not normally do. The woman in the story is in love with her boyfriend but her boyfriend is forcing her to kill a man for him. The woman, who clearly demonstrates an immense insecurity in her relationship, ends up killing the man just so her boyfriend would love her again. The title says it all; “Killing for love”. Even though it sounds creepy, I wanted to portray drama, which is what my story is about.
Third step, peer-editing, it helped me on my process to make this story a great one. My classmates make great comments of it, and they both found it amusing. Their only critic was to name my characters and also to revise some of my quotes which didn’t really made sense with the other ones. I was glad that they both thought I have done a great job because I spent a lot of work finding the quotes, putting them together, and creating a conversation with a meaning. I made a few changes to my story; of course I name my characters and took some quotes out of the story that really didn’t make sense. But in overall, I kept most of my story the same. I feel that I achieved my goal and that I mocked well Hemmingway’s style of writing. Not only that by also the use of quotes and their flow.
Even though I feel that I did a good job on this essay, I believe that I can still improve on my way of writing. I often tend to just go straight to the point, instead of analyzing in more depth. I focused more on getting the job done than actually taking my time to analyze it. But in the past assignments, I have demonstrated that I’m capable of doing both, getting the assignment done on time and analyze it with depth. I believe that this paper shows the amount of work I putted in it. The amount of thought I putted in it. It portrays that I understood the assignment; I was able to incorporate one the two writers’ style, Hemingway, and also able to create a conversation using only quotes from both Hemingway and Faulkner.
I enjoyed this assignment. It made me realize my own style somehow (I am most of a Hemingway than a Faulkner). I would like to be able to create a stronger voice when I write; I want my paper stand out among others. I am looking forward for more assignment like this one. It forced me to analyze both styles first and then make them my own. I hope anyone who reads this paper can see my purpose and can find it as amusing as my peer-editors saw it. =)
Second step, putting together the conversation was quite challenging because I had to go back to the stories we read in class from these two writers and find quotes/lines that would flow together. And not only this, but to also cite every quote/line use in my story. While creating my story, I had a good time and I found myself writing a story about love and a murder. I used mostly quotes from “Hill like White Elephants” by Hemingway and “Barn Burning” by Faulkner. These two stories have a whole different style and meaning but they both give great quotes and lines that I could use to write my love and murder story. As “Hills like White Elephants” talks about a couple about to make an important decision that will change their lives, I decided to use it in my story because a murder will most likely change every one who is involve in it. So to follow the pattern, I used “Barn Burning” quotes that conveyed what is wrong or right, and anger. It was difficult to make the conversation flow because some of the quotes were not written in the way that I would have like them to be written but at the end, I believe that I achieve my purpose.
My purpose of the conversation is to show how love can make us do things that we would not normally do. The woman in the story is in love with her boyfriend but her boyfriend is forcing her to kill a man for him. The woman, who clearly demonstrates an immense insecurity in her relationship, ends up killing the man just so her boyfriend would love her again. The title says it all; “Killing for love”. Even though it sounds creepy, I wanted to portray drama, which is what my story is about.
Third step, peer-editing, it helped me on my process to make this story a great one. My classmates make great comments of it, and they both found it amusing. Their only critic was to name my characters and also to revise some of my quotes which didn’t really made sense with the other ones. I was glad that they both thought I have done a great job because I spent a lot of work finding the quotes, putting them together, and creating a conversation with a meaning. I made a few changes to my story; of course I name my characters and took some quotes out of the story that really didn’t make sense. But in overall, I kept most of my story the same. I feel that I achieved my goal and that I mocked well Hemmingway’s style of writing. Not only that by also the use of quotes and their flow.
Even though I feel that I did a good job on this essay, I believe that I can still improve on my way of writing. I often tend to just go straight to the point, instead of analyzing in more depth. I focused more on getting the job done than actually taking my time to analyze it. But in the past assignments, I have demonstrated that I’m capable of doing both, getting the assignment done on time and analyze it with depth. I believe that this paper shows the amount of work I putted in it. The amount of thought I putted in it. It portrays that I understood the assignment; I was able to incorporate one the two writers’ style, Hemingway, and also able to create a conversation using only quotes from both Hemingway and Faulkner.
I enjoyed this assignment. It made me realize my own style somehow (I am most of a Hemingway than a Faulkner). I would like to be able to create a stronger voice when I write; I want my paper stand out among others. I am looking forward for more assignment like this one. It forced me to analyze both styles first and then make them my own. I hope anyone who reads this paper can see my purpose and can find it as amusing as my peer-editors saw it. =)
Memoir Metacognition
I would like to first state that this book has taught me about sacrifice, strength (mentally and physically), and love. Holocaust is my favorite history topic. And this memoir definitely kept me more interested in the topic. When our assignments were given, I thought of designing a book cover and making the CD soundtrack. For my third option, I had some difficulty choosing one because neither of the remaining three caught my attention. But at the end, I decided to write a page of the memoir, including myself in it.
I love art and music; therefore I enjoyed making the cover and the soundtrack. I thought of doing both separately but Master G brought up the idea that we could make a CD and then have a CD cover for it and it will count as two assignments in one. I loved this idea so I decided to do it. I began with the CD first. I searched for Yiddish songs, songs that related to the holocaust, etc. A whole list of songs appeared but it was difficult to download them since they are old songs and also in a different language. A few of the songs I putted in the CD were from the film “Schindler’s List”. I believe they also relate to the memoir “Thanks to my mother” because they both are about the same topic, Holocaust. The songs I chose demonstrate intensity and drama which is what the holocaust portrays. Two of the songs that are on the CD, “Vilnius” and “”, are songs that the author of “Thanks to my mother” mentioned in the book that she used to sing in the concentration camps. I decided to put them in the CD because I thought it was important to notice how this young girl is going through so much at that moment but still manages to sing for freedom. It was quite touching. I also included the Israel national anthem. I wanted the CD to include songs that represented strength and I believe that when people sing their country’s anthem, it gives them some type of hope. One song in general, called “My Yiddishe Mamma” impacted me the most and I decided to name it the theme of the whole memoir. This song is dedicated to mothers. It explains how mothers are willing to sacrifice anything in order to save their children. It also sings for the respect of mothers and how they work so hard to keep their families happy. Since the memoir is called “Thanks to my mother”, I believe that this song exactly represents the memoir. Thanks to her mother, Rabinovici survived.
I love art and music; therefore I enjoyed making the cover and the soundtrack. I thought of doing both separately but Master G brought up the idea that we could make a CD and then have a CD cover for it and it will count as two assignments in one. I loved this idea so I decided to do it. I began with the CD first. I searched for Yiddish songs, songs that related to the holocaust, etc. A whole list of songs appeared but it was difficult to download them since they are old songs and also in a different language. A few of the songs I putted in the CD were from the film “Schindler’s List”. I believe they also relate to the memoir “Thanks to my mother” because they both are about the same topic, Holocaust. The songs I chose demonstrate intensity and drama which is what the holocaust portrays. Two of the songs that are on the CD, “Vilnius” and “”, are songs that the author of “Thanks to my mother” mentioned in the book that she used to sing in the concentration camps. I decided to put them in the CD because I thought it was important to notice how this young girl is going through so much at that moment but still manages to sing for freedom. It was quite touching. I also included the Israel national anthem. I wanted the CD to include songs that represented strength and I believe that when people sing their country’s anthem, it gives them some type of hope. One song in general, called “My Yiddishe Mamma” impacted me the most and I decided to name it the theme of the whole memoir. This song is dedicated to mothers. It explains how mothers are willing to sacrifice anything in order to save their children. It also sings for the respect of mothers and how they work so hard to keep their families happy. Since the memoir is called “Thanks to my mother”, I believe that this song exactly represents the memoir. Thanks to her mother, Rabinovici survived.
College Essay (1st Draft)
“I’m not God to judge nobody, yes my father made many mistakes and he had a lot of chances but I, as a human being make mistakes as well… and the only way to live in peace is by forgiving”. This was one of my many thoughts during my Colorado trip two years ago. Before this trip, I thought I was strong because of all what I’ve been through, but compared to what I experienced on my trip, it made me think twice. Since I was a little girl, I had a horrible experienced with my father. Instead of loving him, I hated him; for all those nights of fear, those nights of violence, those nights where he blamed me for all his problems.
Arriving to the United States was a dream come true. It was a whole new life for me, not only living in a different country but living with a stranger, my father. The two years I lived with him were a nightmare. But I’m not here to talk about how horrible my life has been for the past seven years but to reflect on how much I have grow as a person. Growing up in a violent environment, it forced me to mature at a young age. My life began changing when I entered high school. I had more opportunities to be myself and to find people that might be going through similar situations like mine.
A program, in particular, caught my attention. The program helps low-income students to become leaders, go to college and be successful. Summer Search, it was the beginning of my new life. The process to be accepted was rigorous. I had to open myself to strangers and tell them about my life. I have never done that, I always keep everything to myself and once I let all my feelings out, I realized that I have a good messed up life. But my main reason to join this program was for me to be a normal teenager with a lot of friends. And it happened. I was accepted into a family that constantly reminds me that I’m way too young to be looking out for my sister. I am constantly remembered that I deserve a better life because I have work hard to get where I am today. Summer Search encourages me to do better, to be stronger, to reach out and be heard. I was often told that I needed to speak up more for myself. I used to always keep quiet and do what others wanted me to do. I tried to please the rest of the world but me. Now, Summer Search is teaching me that I can’t fix everyone’s lives. I am someone who has been hiding in my problems for a while and should be leaving my past behind.
Summer Search provided me with two trips during the past two summers. One to an expedition to Colorado for three weeks and the second one for a two week enrichment classes at Penn State University. In Deer Hill Colorado I realized that I’m capable of doing anything. The first two weeks were adventurous. The last week, I lived in a Hopi Reservation with a Hopi family. And let me tell you, it was the best week of my life. The Hopi family took me into their home and treated me as one of their children. I didn’t even mind the long hours of work around the community, everything was worth it when I heard my new parents say “I’m proud of you”. It was the first time anyone has ever said those words to me. I cried of happiness. My second trip was different. I was by myself, no mentors, no Hopi family. I had to make myself stand out in the crowd in order to make friends. This was my time to prove to myself that College is a place so diverse that if I don’t get myself known, I will be a “nobody”. I became more active and tried my best to make the best out of everything. In these two trips, I learned how to stand out, how to be a leader, and how to make friends. I was forced to forget about those back home and just focus on myself. I was able to see that I can interact with people my age, that I am not so different after all. I was able to smile and not think about tomorrow. I was able to be happy for more than a day. I met awesome people that by just looking at me they saw how much potential I have. It was a great experience to interact with so many different people, different cultures. Summer Search lent me a hand that has changed my perspective towards life. I am now a more active person, someone that can easily interact with others, learn from others. Someone that is not afraid to reach out for help. I am a different Melissa than the one from seven years ago. I have many goals that I know I will achieve one day. I learn to love me for who I am and not for what others say. I learn from my mistakes and if I fail, I try it more times until I get it right.
I am now a leader; I now carry the reins of my life. I now follow my own path.
Arriving to the United States was a dream come true. It was a whole new life for me, not only living in a different country but living with a stranger, my father. The two years I lived with him were a nightmare. But I’m not here to talk about how horrible my life has been for the past seven years but to reflect on how much I have grow as a person. Growing up in a violent environment, it forced me to mature at a young age. My life began changing when I entered high school. I had more opportunities to be myself and to find people that might be going through similar situations like mine.
A program, in particular, caught my attention. The program helps low-income students to become leaders, go to college and be successful. Summer Search, it was the beginning of my new life. The process to be accepted was rigorous. I had to open myself to strangers and tell them about my life. I have never done that, I always keep everything to myself and once I let all my feelings out, I realized that I have a good messed up life. But my main reason to join this program was for me to be a normal teenager with a lot of friends. And it happened. I was accepted into a family that constantly reminds me that I’m way too young to be looking out for my sister. I am constantly remembered that I deserve a better life because I have work hard to get where I am today. Summer Search encourages me to do better, to be stronger, to reach out and be heard. I was often told that I needed to speak up more for myself. I used to always keep quiet and do what others wanted me to do. I tried to please the rest of the world but me. Now, Summer Search is teaching me that I can’t fix everyone’s lives. I am someone who has been hiding in my problems for a while and should be leaving my past behind.
Summer Search provided me with two trips during the past two summers. One to an expedition to Colorado for three weeks and the second one for a two week enrichment classes at Penn State University. In Deer Hill Colorado I realized that I’m capable of doing anything. The first two weeks were adventurous. The last week, I lived in a Hopi Reservation with a Hopi family. And let me tell you, it was the best week of my life. The Hopi family took me into their home and treated me as one of their children. I didn’t even mind the long hours of work around the community, everything was worth it when I heard my new parents say “I’m proud of you”. It was the first time anyone has ever said those words to me. I cried of happiness. My second trip was different. I was by myself, no mentors, no Hopi family. I had to make myself stand out in the crowd in order to make friends. This was my time to prove to myself that College is a place so diverse that if I don’t get myself known, I will be a “nobody”. I became more active and tried my best to make the best out of everything. In these two trips, I learned how to stand out, how to be a leader, and how to make friends. I was forced to forget about those back home and just focus on myself. I was able to see that I can interact with people my age, that I am not so different after all. I was able to smile and not think about tomorrow. I was able to be happy for more than a day. I met awesome people that by just looking at me they saw how much potential I have. It was a great experience to interact with so many different people, different cultures. Summer Search lent me a hand that has changed my perspective towards life. I am now a more active person, someone that can easily interact with others, learn from others. Someone that is not afraid to reach out for help. I am a different Melissa than the one from seven years ago. I have many goals that I know I will achieve one day. I learn to love me for who I am and not for what others say. I learn from my mistakes and if I fail, I try it more times until I get it right.
I am now a leader; I now carry the reins of my life. I now follow my own path.
Memoir (CD)
Memoir CD Soundtracks…
Auschwitz- Birkenau by John Williams
Vilnius- Kaunas by Kastaneda
Lorelei – Unknown
Yeroushalaim Chel Zahav (Jerusalem of Gold)- John Williams
Shalom Alechem by Laura Wetzler
Hatikva- Israel anthem
Es brent by Shoshana Damari
My yiddishe mama by Sophie Tucker
Carmina Buranah by Mosart
Earth Song by Michael Jackson
Auschwitz- Birkenau by John Williams
Vilnius- Kaunas by Kastaneda
Lorelei – Unknown
Yeroushalaim Chel Zahav (Jerusalem of Gold)- John Williams
Shalom Alechem by Laura Wetzler
Hatikva- Israel anthem
Es brent by Shoshana Damari
My yiddishe mama by Sophie Tucker
Carmina Buranah by Mosart
Earth Song by Michael Jackson
Memoir (Project 1)
Melissa Restrepo in “Thanks to my Mother”
After Adriana (my mother) and I[1] decided to stay behind in the concentration camp, the whole room was now at our disposal and we had enough space to lie down and sleep. At that moment, I was burning with fever; therefore I was almost not aware of my surroundings. The guard that was left at the camp to check on those who stayed behind came into our room. Adriana before she lay down asked the guard “When we will be shot?”. The German guard answered quickly, “I haven’t gotten any orders yet. When I get the order to shoot you, I will”.
Adriana covered me with the a few blankets left behind from the others prisoners. She then lay down beside me and I fell asleep.
The next morning I felt better. The German guard brought us a breakfast that compared to the ones that were given to us before, was a luxury. The breakfast was given from the farmers in the neighborhood; it included bread, margarine, jam and tea. At noon, we also received lunch, hot chicken soup with meat. And at evening, hot porridge, along with more breach and tea again.
During the day, we would hear the guard’s footsteps approaching our barrack; Adriana would take my hand and hold me close to her. We then wonder, if this would be our last meal before “the order” has been given to the German guard? Was he coming this time to liquidate us? But days passed quickly and we kept on getting food and were allow to rest in the barracks all day long. My daily routine, I slept, woke up sometimes through out the day, ate something and slept again.
Adriana would sometimes go to the square to look for news. But no one else besides our guard was here with us. One day, when Adriana returned, she told me that all the camp inmates had gone. We were the only two left. She began preparing me for “the end”.
In the evening, we heard cannons and rocket launchers from the front. That night, we woke up by the noise of heavy engines close to the street of the camp, passing our barrack. Adriana looked outside and saw tanks driving through the direction of Gdansk. Our camp. The earth quivered, the noise was loud, and we could hear gunshots and explosions time after time.
In the morning, Adriana recognized the symbols on the military vehicles. They were red stars. It was the Soviet army- our liberators!
Adriana, full of joy, she cried, “Melissa, the Russians arrived! We are rescued; we are saved, we are liberated, Melissa, we have our freedom back! Everything is over my daughter!”
Her words would not penetrate my consciousness; I began to mumble, “Too bad, out of all the days, they arrived now that we have a good German guard and we are getting enough good”.
Then I lost my conscious again.[2]
[1] Adriana is my mother’s real name. In the memoir, Susie was unable to call her mother by “mom” because they were afraid to be separated. Therefore, I decided to use my mother’s real name and include her in the story instead of Raja- Susie’s mother.
[2] This section of the memoir was taken from the last pages of chapter “The Death March” (222-223)
After Adriana (my mother) and I[1] decided to stay behind in the concentration camp, the whole room was now at our disposal and we had enough space to lie down and sleep. At that moment, I was burning with fever; therefore I was almost not aware of my surroundings. The guard that was left at the camp to check on those who stayed behind came into our room. Adriana before she lay down asked the guard “When we will be shot?”. The German guard answered quickly, “I haven’t gotten any orders yet. When I get the order to shoot you, I will”.
Adriana covered me with the a few blankets left behind from the others prisoners. She then lay down beside me and I fell asleep.
The next morning I felt better. The German guard brought us a breakfast that compared to the ones that were given to us before, was a luxury. The breakfast was given from the farmers in the neighborhood; it included bread, margarine, jam and tea. At noon, we also received lunch, hot chicken soup with meat. And at evening, hot porridge, along with more breach and tea again.
During the day, we would hear the guard’s footsteps approaching our barrack; Adriana would take my hand and hold me close to her. We then wonder, if this would be our last meal before “the order” has been given to the German guard? Was he coming this time to liquidate us? But days passed quickly and we kept on getting food and were allow to rest in the barracks all day long. My daily routine, I slept, woke up sometimes through out the day, ate something and slept again.
Adriana would sometimes go to the square to look for news. But no one else besides our guard was here with us. One day, when Adriana returned, she told me that all the camp inmates had gone. We were the only two left. She began preparing me for “the end”.
In the evening, we heard cannons and rocket launchers from the front. That night, we woke up by the noise of heavy engines close to the street of the camp, passing our barrack. Adriana looked outside and saw tanks driving through the direction of Gdansk. Our camp. The earth quivered, the noise was loud, and we could hear gunshots and explosions time after time.
In the morning, Adriana recognized the symbols on the military vehicles. They were red stars. It was the Soviet army- our liberators!
Adriana, full of joy, she cried, “Melissa, the Russians arrived! We are rescued; we are saved, we are liberated, Melissa, we have our freedom back! Everything is over my daughter!”
Her words would not penetrate my consciousness; I began to mumble, “Too bad, out of all the days, they arrived now that we have a good German guard and we are getting enough good”.
Then I lost my conscious again.[2]
[1] Adriana is my mother’s real name. In the memoir, Susie was unable to call her mother by “mom” because they were afraid to be separated. Therefore, I decided to use my mother’s real name and include her in the story instead of Raja- Susie’s mother.
[2] This section of the memoir was taken from the last pages of chapter “The Death March” (222-223)
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Hemingway and Faulkner Style Essay
Killing for love by Hemingway and Faulkner
It was late and everyone had left the café except for (A clean, well-lighted place, Hemingway, 158) the American [Dick] and the girl [Jig] with him that sat at a table. (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 120).
“That’s the only thing that bothers us. It’s the only thing that’s made us unhappy” [Jig said] (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 121)
“But what will you have me do about it?” (A rose for Emily, Faulkner, 27)
“Let’s drink beer” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 120)
“Where’s the nigger?” [She said] (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 163)
“The man himself lay in the bed” he said.
“What was left of him, rotted beneath what was left of the nightshirt” (A rose for Emily, Faulkner, 23)
“Oh, cut it out”
“It’s really an awfully simple operation” [Dick said] (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 121)
“And if I do it you’ll be happy and things will be like they were and you’ll love me?” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“Well, we’ll wait till October” (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 172)
“Then, I’ll do it” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“All right. But you’ve got to realize-“(Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“I want some poison.” She said.
“I want arsenic” (A rose for Emily, Faulkner, 29)
“That’ll do” He said. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 164)
“I’ll do it and then everything will be fine”
“And we could have everything” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“We’ll wait and see” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
That night they camped, in a grove of oaks and beeches where a spring ran. The nights were still cool and they had a fire against it, of a rail lifted from a nearby fence and cut into lengths- a small fire, neat, niggard almost, a shrewd fire. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 165)
“We are two different kinds” She said. (A clean, well-lighted place, Hemingway, 161)
“I don’t care about me” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“Well, I care about you” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“Oh, yes. But I don’t care about me. And I’ll do it and then everything will be fine” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“Don’t you want me to help?” He whispered. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 169)
“All right” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 121)
“Where’s the nigger?” (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 163)
“I’ll hold him” she said.
“You’ll hold him better than that. If he gets loose don’t you know what he is going to do?”... “Maybe I’d better tie him” (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 173)
“Go get the oil” [Dick screamed] (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 173)
“Let me do it” she said. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 168)
“Don’t you know all they wanted was a chance to get at me because they knew I had them beat?” the nigger cried. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 166)
“Get out of my way nigger” Dick said. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 167)
“It’s really an awfully simple operation, Jig”… “I know you wouldn’t mind it” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 121)
“I’d do anything for you” [Jig answered] (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 123)
He went on down the hill, toward the dark woods within which the liquid silver voices of the birds called unceasing- the rapid and urgent beating of the urgent and quiring heart of the late spring night. He did not look back. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 175)
“Do you feel better?” he asked. (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 123)
“I feel fine” she said. (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 123)
It was late and everyone had left the café except for (A clean, well-lighted place, Hemingway, 158) the American [Dick] and the girl [Jig] with him that sat at a table. (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 120).
“That’s the only thing that bothers us. It’s the only thing that’s made us unhappy” [Jig said] (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 121)
“But what will you have me do about it?” (A rose for Emily, Faulkner, 27)
“Let’s drink beer” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 120)
“Where’s the nigger?” [She said] (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 163)
“The man himself lay in the bed” he said.
“What was left of him, rotted beneath what was left of the nightshirt” (A rose for Emily, Faulkner, 23)
“Oh, cut it out”
“It’s really an awfully simple operation” [Dick said] (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 121)
“And if I do it you’ll be happy and things will be like they were and you’ll love me?” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“Well, we’ll wait till October” (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 172)
“Then, I’ll do it” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“All right. But you’ve got to realize-“(Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“I want some poison.” She said.
“I want arsenic” (A rose for Emily, Faulkner, 29)
“That’ll do” He said. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 164)
“I’ll do it and then everything will be fine”
“And we could have everything” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“We’ll wait and see” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
That night they camped, in a grove of oaks and beeches where a spring ran. The nights were still cool and they had a fire against it, of a rail lifted from a nearby fence and cut into lengths- a small fire, neat, niggard almost, a shrewd fire. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 165)
“We are two different kinds” She said. (A clean, well-lighted place, Hemingway, 161)
“I don’t care about me” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“Well, I care about you” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“Oh, yes. But I don’t care about me. And I’ll do it and then everything will be fine” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 122)
“Don’t you want me to help?” He whispered. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 169)
“All right” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 121)
“Where’s the nigger?” (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 163)
“I’ll hold him” she said.
“You’ll hold him better than that. If he gets loose don’t you know what he is going to do?”... “Maybe I’d better tie him” (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 173)
“Go get the oil” [Dick screamed] (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 173)
“Let me do it” she said. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 168)
“Don’t you know all they wanted was a chance to get at me because they knew I had them beat?” the nigger cried. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 166)
“Get out of my way nigger” Dick said. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 167)
“It’s really an awfully simple operation, Jig”… “I know you wouldn’t mind it” (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 121)
“I’d do anything for you” [Jig answered] (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 123)
He went on down the hill, toward the dark woods within which the liquid silver voices of the birds called unceasing- the rapid and urgent beating of the urgent and quiring heart of the late spring night. He did not look back. (Barn Burning, Faulkner, 175)
“Do you feel better?” he asked. (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 123)
“I feel fine” she said. (Hills like white elephants, Hemingway, 123)
Sunday, September 28, 2008
IND AFF: Setting
IND AFF: Setting
There is a saying that people should think twice before they act. This saying well-adapts to the story of Fay Weldon IND AFF or Out of Love in Sarajevo. The story is told by its main character, where she is telling the audience about her trip with her “lover”, Professor Peter, and telling the incident that caused World War I. Both the character and the History Professor are in their trip around Europe (currently in Sarajevo, Yugoslavia), at the exact place where Princip assassinated the Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife. Weldon decided to place the characters in this setting in order to find similarities in the decision both Princip and narrator chose at the end of the story.
The narrator opens up the story by talking about weather, “The rain filled up Sarajevo’s pride” (201), which refers to the two outcomes that were about to take place. In this story, rain symbolizes three major factors war, death, and love. First, the outbreak of the war. Due to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife, World War I began. Second, the death of the Archduchess and the millions of people who died during the war. And lastly, love. The two main characters seem to be in love but at the end, it was just a bad decision just like the one Princip decided to take. Rain indicates that there are problems that must be solved. It is not only raining in Sarajevo but also “it was raining on [Peter’s] wife, too, back in Cambridge” (202). This demonstrates that their wrong actions are damaging those around them. It is important to be aware of these signs because just like the narrator mentions, it “filled up Sarajevo’s pride”. In other words, the assassination of the Archduchess caused this place to be an immense tourist place, where the narrator, thanks to this event, happens to make a decision that will most likely change her life for the better.
The narrator constantly keeps bringing up the cause of World War I. According to her, “He [Peter] liked to be asked questions” (205), but behind her curiosity to analyze more this incident, Weldon wanted the audience to learn a bit more about this historical event but also to see how the decision of Princip to assassinate relates to the narrator’s decision to maintain a relationship with a married man. As the couple sits at a restaurant in Sarajevo, the narrator converse with her lover about World War I. While she continues to analyze Princip’s story, she realizes that her life is not so different to his. The narrator comments on Princip’s age, “Princip was nineteen – too young” (204); she does not only mention his age as part of the story but to reflect on the age difference between her and her partner. She figures that she is also too young to be expending her life with someone who is “forty-six” (203) while she is “twenty-five” (203). The narrator continues to feel pity for Princip, not realizing that she was feeling pity for her self as well. She comments on how Princip died for the “love of a country” (204) which once again relates to her life. She is dying for the love of an old professor-married man.
As their conversation continues in the restaurant about the Archduke’s assassination, the narrator continues to realize that her relationship was a mistake. From the beginning of the story, the narrator emphasizes the term “wife” in various occasions. On page 201, the narrator introduces the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and then in parenthesis highlights “(Don’t forget his wife; everyone forgets his wife…)”. Later on in the text, when she decides to leaves the professor, she states that his head smelt like chlorine and “may have come from thinking about his wife so much” (206). This demonstrates that through out their “holiday” trip, both have not forgotten about the wife. The narrator uses Franz’s wife as a method to cover the guilt she feels for doing such thing to Peter’s wife and Peter, deep inside, is constantly thinking of his “twenty-four years” (202) of marriage.
The narrator wanted to demonstrate how a quick decision can change one’s life forever. The narrator “was finally aware how much [she has] lied” (206) when she said “I love you” to Professor Peter. Due to their trip in Sarajevo and its past history with Princip, it helped her realize that she had made a mistake, a mistake that she regrets. The narrator states that she is “grateful to this day” (206) with the city of Sarajevo because it taught her a lesson. She continues to relate her “silly sad episode” (206) with Princip’s silly and sad decision. She feels sympathy towards Princip because at such of young age, he ruined his life, similar to her. Their only difference was that she thought twice before she continue with this false romance that was not going to take her anywhere in life.
Weldon use of setting made this story meaningful. Sarajevo’s sad history changed the characters life for the better. Weldon wanted the audience to see that a quick decision is not the best choice to take; it is better to think twice and perhaps the second choice would have a better ending. The narrator also highlights this at the end of the story, “…If he’d just hung on a bit, there in Sarajevo, that June day, he might have come to his senses. People do, sometimes quite quickly” (207). She refers to herself and how she took her time to think about it, to relate her story to young Princip, and at the end, took the best decision for herself.
There is a saying that people should think twice before they act. This saying well-adapts to the story of Fay Weldon IND AFF or Out of Love in Sarajevo. The story is told by its main character, where she is telling the audience about her trip with her “lover”, Professor Peter, and telling the incident that caused World War I. Both the character and the History Professor are in their trip around Europe (currently in Sarajevo, Yugoslavia), at the exact place where Princip assassinated the Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife. Weldon decided to place the characters in this setting in order to find similarities in the decision both Princip and narrator chose at the end of the story.
The narrator opens up the story by talking about weather, “The rain filled up Sarajevo’s pride” (201), which refers to the two outcomes that were about to take place. In this story, rain symbolizes three major factors war, death, and love. First, the outbreak of the war. Due to the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife, World War I began. Second, the death of the Archduchess and the millions of people who died during the war. And lastly, love. The two main characters seem to be in love but at the end, it was just a bad decision just like the one Princip decided to take. Rain indicates that there are problems that must be solved. It is not only raining in Sarajevo but also “it was raining on [Peter’s] wife, too, back in Cambridge” (202). This demonstrates that their wrong actions are damaging those around them. It is important to be aware of these signs because just like the narrator mentions, it “filled up Sarajevo’s pride”. In other words, the assassination of the Archduchess caused this place to be an immense tourist place, where the narrator, thanks to this event, happens to make a decision that will most likely change her life for the better.
The narrator constantly keeps bringing up the cause of World War I. According to her, “He [Peter] liked to be asked questions” (205), but behind her curiosity to analyze more this incident, Weldon wanted the audience to learn a bit more about this historical event but also to see how the decision of Princip to assassinate relates to the narrator’s decision to maintain a relationship with a married man. As the couple sits at a restaurant in Sarajevo, the narrator converse with her lover about World War I. While she continues to analyze Princip’s story, she realizes that her life is not so different to his. The narrator comments on Princip’s age, “Princip was nineteen – too young” (204); she does not only mention his age as part of the story but to reflect on the age difference between her and her partner. She figures that she is also too young to be expending her life with someone who is “forty-six” (203) while she is “twenty-five” (203). The narrator continues to feel pity for Princip, not realizing that she was feeling pity for her self as well. She comments on how Princip died for the “love of a country” (204) which once again relates to her life. She is dying for the love of an old professor-married man.
As their conversation continues in the restaurant about the Archduke’s assassination, the narrator continues to realize that her relationship was a mistake. From the beginning of the story, the narrator emphasizes the term “wife” in various occasions. On page 201, the narrator introduces the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and then in parenthesis highlights “(Don’t forget his wife; everyone forgets his wife…)”. Later on in the text, when she decides to leaves the professor, she states that his head smelt like chlorine and “may have come from thinking about his wife so much” (206). This demonstrates that through out their “holiday” trip, both have not forgotten about the wife. The narrator uses Franz’s wife as a method to cover the guilt she feels for doing such thing to Peter’s wife and Peter, deep inside, is constantly thinking of his “twenty-four years” (202) of marriage.
The narrator wanted to demonstrate how a quick decision can change one’s life forever. The narrator “was finally aware how much [she has] lied” (206) when she said “I love you” to Professor Peter. Due to their trip in Sarajevo and its past history with Princip, it helped her realize that she had made a mistake, a mistake that she regrets. The narrator states that she is “grateful to this day” (206) with the city of Sarajevo because it taught her a lesson. She continues to relate her “silly sad episode” (206) with Princip’s silly and sad decision. She feels sympathy towards Princip because at such of young age, he ruined his life, similar to her. Their only difference was that she thought twice before she continue with this false romance that was not going to take her anywhere in life.
Weldon use of setting made this story meaningful. Sarajevo’s sad history changed the characters life for the better. Weldon wanted the audience to see that a quick decision is not the best choice to take; it is better to think twice and perhaps the second choice would have a better ending. The narrator also highlights this at the end of the story, “…If he’d just hung on a bit, there in Sarajevo, that June day, he might have come to his senses. People do, sometimes quite quickly” (207). She refers to herself and how she took her time to think about it, to relate her story to young Princip, and at the end, took the best decision for herself.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
May-dum Characterization Essay
“May-dum” Characterization
In The Red Carpet by Lavanya Sankaran, the author creates this want-to-be youth woman, who is kind, and wealthy; also known as May-dum. Sankaran creates this character in the country of India, where is most known about its traditions and beliefs. This causes the character to come out as a rebel against her country’s culture and the behavior of a wealthy woman.
Sankaran begins the story introducing a character called T.R. Gavirangappa, who becomes known as Raju. Sankaran introduces this character in the story to enable the audience to see the character of May-dum. Unlike May-dum, Raju is a hardworking male, who is responsible to “support his parents, his sister, his wife of four years, and their little daughter” (1). Raju meets May-dum when he applies to be her driver. Raju had a different concept about May-dum. He thought she was going to be the typical middle-aged wealthy woman, who feels no pity for others, with proper manners. But May-dum had a different character. She was wealthy but she was kind to those who work for her and those who needed her help. But she was also a teenage at heart in a middle-aged woman’s body. She wore clothing that characterized her as a “prostitute”, she also “curses, jokes, comments and conversation of a frankness” (5) that Raju was happy he could barely follow the English language. Raju was introduced in the story so the reader can learn about the traditions in India, and see the difference between a hardworking man who follows his culture and a wealthy-middle-aged woman who follows her own rules.
May-dum can be portrayed in two different ways; either as a sympathetic woman or a woman that just cares about fitting-in. May-dum likes to help her servants. They look up to her and felt well-treated by her. Instead of her servants gossiping “to see who had it worst” (5), they all just “traded hard-luck stories” (5). From this perspective, the audience can perceive that May-dum is a great woman and a great boss. Sankaran wanted to include these testimonies from May-dum’s servants so the reader can see another side of May-dum. Deep inside, May-dum cares for others, she cares for the luck of those who helped her get through each day. Another action that contributed to May-dum’s sympathetic personality is when she went to meet Raju’s family and she paid Raju’s daughter education for a whole year (10). Sankaran knows that the reader would have never expected this from May-dum. The purpose of the creation of such character is to expect the unexpected.
Sankaran also created another side personality of May-dum, which she only reveals to the outside world. From the way she dresses to the way she acts, is an informal way of a middle-aged woman to be acting. The audience gets to know this side of her once again from Raju’s thoughts. He describes her behavior as “unacceptable” and “immoral” (6). This personality makes the audience confuse to see how a kind woman can act this way. This “May-dum” demonstrates the universal theme of “fitting-in”. May-dum dresses and acts this certain way to maintain her friends. To prove this, on page 11, May-dum meets her friend after coming back from Raju’s village (where she was actually dressed as someone of her class) and her friend, surprise comments right away about her “elegant dress”. This demonstrates that in front of her friends, May-dum does not like to show formality and elegance. She only wants to fit-in. What Sankaran is trying to prove is that May-dum deep inside shares the culture of her country, she also wants to create that good “first impression” on those who she does not really know. But with her friends, she wants to be this rebel going against the rules and creating her own rules. Sankaran purpose of creating May-dum is for the reader to see that just because people expect you to act a certain way, you have to. May-dum somehow proves this wrong. She does like to create good impressions, but she also likes to live free.
This short story gives back to the reader a wide range of thoughts and doubts. The development of the characters creates the meaning of this story. The characters do not change, but they do make this story meaningful by contributing their personalities and actions. Both Raju and May-dum had something in common, they both needed each other. Both pretended to be a different person to please one another. May-dum changed her informal behavior to a high-class woman, and Raju pretended to not dislike May-dum’s behavior. This was Sankaran’s purpose: to prove how in every day life, people pretend to be someone else to please others, to fit in.
In The Red Carpet by Lavanya Sankaran, the author creates this want-to-be youth woman, who is kind, and wealthy; also known as May-dum. Sankaran creates this character in the country of India, where is most known about its traditions and beliefs. This causes the character to come out as a rebel against her country’s culture and the behavior of a wealthy woman.
Sankaran begins the story introducing a character called T.R. Gavirangappa, who becomes known as Raju. Sankaran introduces this character in the story to enable the audience to see the character of May-dum. Unlike May-dum, Raju is a hardworking male, who is responsible to “support his parents, his sister, his wife of four years, and their little daughter” (1). Raju meets May-dum when he applies to be her driver. Raju had a different concept about May-dum. He thought she was going to be the typical middle-aged wealthy woman, who feels no pity for others, with proper manners. But May-dum had a different character. She was wealthy but she was kind to those who work for her and those who needed her help. But she was also a teenage at heart in a middle-aged woman’s body. She wore clothing that characterized her as a “prostitute”, she also “curses, jokes, comments and conversation of a frankness” (5) that Raju was happy he could barely follow the English language. Raju was introduced in the story so the reader can learn about the traditions in India, and see the difference between a hardworking man who follows his culture and a wealthy-middle-aged woman who follows her own rules.
May-dum can be portrayed in two different ways; either as a sympathetic woman or a woman that just cares about fitting-in. May-dum likes to help her servants. They look up to her and felt well-treated by her. Instead of her servants gossiping “to see who had it worst” (5), they all just “traded hard-luck stories” (5). From this perspective, the audience can perceive that May-dum is a great woman and a great boss. Sankaran wanted to include these testimonies from May-dum’s servants so the reader can see another side of May-dum. Deep inside, May-dum cares for others, she cares for the luck of those who helped her get through each day. Another action that contributed to May-dum’s sympathetic personality is when she went to meet Raju’s family and she paid Raju’s daughter education for a whole year (10). Sankaran knows that the reader would have never expected this from May-dum. The purpose of the creation of such character is to expect the unexpected.
Sankaran also created another side personality of May-dum, which she only reveals to the outside world. From the way she dresses to the way she acts, is an informal way of a middle-aged woman to be acting. The audience gets to know this side of her once again from Raju’s thoughts. He describes her behavior as “unacceptable” and “immoral” (6). This personality makes the audience confuse to see how a kind woman can act this way. This “May-dum” demonstrates the universal theme of “fitting-in”. May-dum dresses and acts this certain way to maintain her friends. To prove this, on page 11, May-dum meets her friend after coming back from Raju’s village (where she was actually dressed as someone of her class) and her friend, surprise comments right away about her “elegant dress”. This demonstrates that in front of her friends, May-dum does not like to show formality and elegance. She only wants to fit-in. What Sankaran is trying to prove is that May-dum deep inside shares the culture of her country, she also wants to create that good “first impression” on those who she does not really know. But with her friends, she wants to be this rebel going against the rules and creating her own rules. Sankaran purpose of creating May-dum is for the reader to see that just because people expect you to act a certain way, you have to. May-dum somehow proves this wrong. She does like to create good impressions, but she also likes to live free.
This short story gives back to the reader a wide range of thoughts and doubts. The development of the characters creates the meaning of this story. The characters do not change, but they do make this story meaningful by contributing their personalities and actions. Both Raju and May-dum had something in common, they both needed each other. Both pretended to be a different person to please one another. May-dum changed her informal behavior to a high-class woman, and Raju pretended to not dislike May-dum’s behavior. This was Sankaran’s purpose: to prove how in every day life, people pretend to be someone else to please others, to fit in.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Miss Brill's Point of View
Miss Brill’s Point of View
In Miss Brill by Katherine Mansfield, the author demonstrates how the narrator can describe a character to the audience by using the character’s thoughts. Mansfield uses impartial omniscience in the story by presenting only Miss Brill’s thoughts and actions, giving the reader the opportunity to see the difference between reality and imagination.
Mansfield decides to use a narrator that is intimately close to Miss Brill, someone or something that knows Miss Brill’s steps, likes and dislikes. The audience gets to know Miss Brill through her thoughts; they get to know Miss Brill through her conscience. Her conscience speaks to her and to the reader. It lets everyone knows the setting and what is around her, what is important to Miss Brill like her “fur coat”, and what others think about her “…stupid old thing…” (36).
Mansfield wants the audience to see how an old lonely woman gets happy with the most insignificant things in life. From the narrator perspective, the audience sees Miss Brill’s loneliness and her hunger to find a meaning for her living. The narrator describes Miss Brill’s routine and observations, “Sunday after Sunday, and –Miss Brill often noticed- there was something funny about nearly all of them” (34). The audience can tell that Miss Brill observes and critics others but does not focus on her own self. Miss Brill tries to ignore that she is an elderly woman. When she begins to think of herself as old, she brushes that thought away. She tries to create happiness in every thought or situation. She has tingling in her hands and arms, but says to herself, “It must have been from walking – she supposed.” (33). Miss Brill does not let herself think these thoughts because then that would be evidence to her that she was old. Miss Brill constantly changes her mind when she begins to realize that she is lonely and old.
The story has two narrators, one for the use of Miss Brill to tell herself about the world around her, and another narrator for the audience to see the life that Miss Brill is living. Miss Brill is her own narrator; she wants to make herself believe that she is living in a whole different world. This is the purpose of Mansfield use of point of view, she wants the audience to really live the life of this old woman, to think the way she thinks, to observe what she observes, to create an image with the help of her thoughts. But at the same time, the reader is not only observing what Miss Brill is observing, the reader is actually beginning to get to know Miss Brill through out her thoughts. The reader begins to feel sympathetic towards this character; they begin to see that instead of being a happy woman she is actually lonely and is trying hard to find a meaning for her life.
The story is written in the third person point of view for a purpose: to not show Miss Brill’s fears. Mansfield decides to use Miss Brill’s thoughts as a narrator to hide the real purpose of the story. She wanted to reveal Miss Brill’s character through this point of view to make the story more meaningful. Mansfield decides to keep the point of view limited to Miss Brill and also exclude the others characters thoughts in order for the reader to center all their attention to Miss Brill. The narrator does not judge Miss Brill and does not include his/her thoughts into the story. The narrator focuses just on Miss Brill in order to make the story an effective one. Mansfield wanted to tell the story from a third person narrator to show the difference between Miss Brill’s imagination and the reality of her situation. It is clear that what the narrator is trying to prove how Miss Brill uses her imagination to hide some of the pain that reality might have caused her. For example, on page 36, Miss Brill states that everything was “a play”, that she plays “an important role in the play” and that she has been “an actress for a long time”. This demonstrates how Miss Brill wants to find any way to believe that she is still useful and important to someone.
Mansfield successfully uses the third person omniscient point of view. She shows how Miss Brill was trying to hide her loneliness without feeling sympathy for her own self. The use of creating illusions also contributed to the story since it was another method to hide Miss Brill true emotions. At the end, Miss Brill faces reality and the narrator creates a distance from her in order to show Miss Brill point of view and so the reader is able to know her thoughts and feelings from her own self.
In Miss Brill by Katherine Mansfield, the author demonstrates how the narrator can describe a character to the audience by using the character’s thoughts. Mansfield uses impartial omniscience in the story by presenting only Miss Brill’s thoughts and actions, giving the reader the opportunity to see the difference between reality and imagination.
Mansfield decides to use a narrator that is intimately close to Miss Brill, someone or something that knows Miss Brill’s steps, likes and dislikes. The audience gets to know Miss Brill through her thoughts; they get to know Miss Brill through her conscience. Her conscience speaks to her and to the reader. It lets everyone knows the setting and what is around her, what is important to Miss Brill like her “fur coat”, and what others think about her “…stupid old thing…” (36).
Mansfield wants the audience to see how an old lonely woman gets happy with the most insignificant things in life. From the narrator perspective, the audience sees Miss Brill’s loneliness and her hunger to find a meaning for her living. The narrator describes Miss Brill’s routine and observations, “Sunday after Sunday, and –Miss Brill often noticed- there was something funny about nearly all of them” (34). The audience can tell that Miss Brill observes and critics others but does not focus on her own self. Miss Brill tries to ignore that she is an elderly woman. When she begins to think of herself as old, she brushes that thought away. She tries to create happiness in every thought or situation. She has tingling in her hands and arms, but says to herself, “It must have been from walking – she supposed.” (33). Miss Brill does not let herself think these thoughts because then that would be evidence to her that she was old. Miss Brill constantly changes her mind when she begins to realize that she is lonely and old.
The story has two narrators, one for the use of Miss Brill to tell herself about the world around her, and another narrator for the audience to see the life that Miss Brill is living. Miss Brill is her own narrator; she wants to make herself believe that she is living in a whole different world. This is the purpose of Mansfield use of point of view, she wants the audience to really live the life of this old woman, to think the way she thinks, to observe what she observes, to create an image with the help of her thoughts. But at the same time, the reader is not only observing what Miss Brill is observing, the reader is actually beginning to get to know Miss Brill through out her thoughts. The reader begins to feel sympathetic towards this character; they begin to see that instead of being a happy woman she is actually lonely and is trying hard to find a meaning for her life.
The story is written in the third person point of view for a purpose: to not show Miss Brill’s fears. Mansfield decides to use Miss Brill’s thoughts as a narrator to hide the real purpose of the story. She wanted to reveal Miss Brill’s character through this point of view to make the story more meaningful. Mansfield decides to keep the point of view limited to Miss Brill and also exclude the others characters thoughts in order for the reader to center all their attention to Miss Brill. The narrator does not judge Miss Brill and does not include his/her thoughts into the story. The narrator focuses just on Miss Brill in order to make the story an effective one. Mansfield wanted to tell the story from a third person narrator to show the difference between Miss Brill’s imagination and the reality of her situation. It is clear that what the narrator is trying to prove how Miss Brill uses her imagination to hide some of the pain that reality might have caused her. For example, on page 36, Miss Brill states that everything was “a play”, that she plays “an important role in the play” and that she has been “an actress for a long time”. This demonstrates how Miss Brill wants to find any way to believe that she is still useful and important to someone.
Mansfield successfully uses the third person omniscient point of view. She shows how Miss Brill was trying to hide her loneliness without feeling sympathy for her own self. The use of creating illusions also contributed to the story since it was another method to hide Miss Brill true emotions. At the end, Miss Brill faces reality and the narrator creates a distance from her in order to show Miss Brill point of view and so the reader is able to know her thoughts and feelings from her own self.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)