Antigone #3

I am caught on both sides of the "yes v. no" argument.  Both Antigone and Creon have very valid points that make a lot of sense.  Antigone seems to think that saying no gives a person power because through doing so they are asserting their own desires, which I believe to be true.  I also agree with Creon when he says that saying yes is a lot harder than saying no because, to say yes, a person has to take into consideration what other people want in addition to their own desires.  Sometime, the popular opinion has to win out and a leader like Creon has to take a step back to placate and rule his people properly.  Creon is a good king, I think, he's just trying to set an example for his people.  The whole thirst for power thing is another issue, but as far as saying yes I think that Creon is just as right as Antigone.  The two characters' different views create a lot of tension between the ideas of being selfish and thinking of others.  At times, it is appropriate to get what you want if you think is right, but at the same time it's bad to be selfish? Gosh, I don't know.  I think I'm having trouble forming an opinion because both Creon and Antigone seem right to me.  This is one of those tragedy elements we were talking about.  If I could I would hashtag "literaryconnections", but I don't think that would look to great on an english assignment. #academicallyprofessional

Antigone #2

Chorus has gone from factual to straight-up philosophical (word).  He is introducing a view (perhaps the author's) on tragedy in a way that encourages the audience to adopt the same view.  He takes things people can relate to, like ordering a cup of coffee, to help people understand tragedy a little better.  I feel like in this scene, Chorus is a lot more personal with the audience than in his first long speech.  He uses words like "you" so that members of the audience can put themselves into the situations he is describing and better understand the subject of his monologue, which is tragedy.  By saying "you" so much, the author might be going as far as to say that eveybody's lives have little elements of tragedy in them that are much like the events Chorus describes to the audience. 

Antigone #1

TIMELINE (I'm not sure if this all happened within 48 hours, probably not, but I'm doing this for my own understanding)

1)Haemon Proposes
2) Eteocles and Polynieces duke it out, both of them die
3) Creon issues his proclamation
4) Antigone sneaks out to see Haemon.... or bury her brother?
5) Nurse finds an empty bed

Annouilh uses Chorus, a rather interesting character, to explain the events that lead up to the play actually getting underway. Chorus speaks in a less formal way than the other characters in the play do.  I think this is a way of connecting with the audience that one normally wouldn't get if they were just seeing the characters aside from Chorus.  The way Chorus speaks is almost comparable to the style we saw in The Stranger.  It is kind-of-sort-of dry (but a lot more captivating than Meursault's narrations- I really love how Chorus speaks) and very factual.  He tells simply what happened, but the way he does it makes it very interesting.  I can't get over how much I love reading Chorus' lines.  He has an almost sarcastic, cynical voice that I can relate to because I'm a teenager.  He does get a little bit philosophical at one point when he's talking about Antigone in his very first lines.  It would make sense that he would reserve some special kind of speech for her, since she is the tragic hero of the play.  He speaks about Creon like he doesn't think he should be king.  The way Creon "rolled up his sleeves" and stepped up to the thrown makes it sound like that Creon had no desire to be king, but took the job because he had to.  Chorus makes Haemon's motivations unclear as far as proposing to Antigone goes.    He makes it sound like Haemon has it all backwards and that Ismene was the one he should have gone for. 

Topic Sentence

Lorca gives Bride a strong aversion to elements of adult life, such as marriage and sex, to show that she is an immature girl who is not prepared for marriage. 

Blood Wedding #6

Marriage should be out of love, not passion or obligation.

The bride does not truly love the groom, but rather feels obligated to marry him because of the pressure placed on her by her father, the maid, and the groom's mother.  She has a preconcieved notion that marriage means being locked away behind a six foot wall for one's entire life.  This idea isn't appealing to her, so she runs away with a man that she lusts after but can't have.  She ends up losing both of her options here, because neither of them give Bride feelings that constitute a marriage. 

Young people often don't think before they act, and this leads to their downfall.

When talking to the little girls before running away, both the bride and the children admit that they "don't know anything"(68).  This stood out to be because it put the bride, who is supposed to be a mature woman now that she is married, on the same level as the girls she is talking to.  The bride had no desire to be married, so she acted selfishly and ran away with Leonardo.  Her running away caused the death of her husband and her lover, and she felt much guilt after running away and after the two men died.  Her guilt (and even a desire for her own death) is a consequence of her actions that would not have happened if she had thought things through and not gotten married in the first place.  Maid told Bride that she could get out of the marriage if she had wanted to, but she was blinded by her immature desire to please her elders. 

Control over others cannot bring happiness.

 The marriage felt like something of a transaction between Mother and Bride's father with the two children not getting a say in anything that went on.  Mother asserted her control over Bridegroom in act I scene three when she didn't allow him any wine.  Father showed that he is controlling over Bride by telling her to seem happier, and speaking of her like she was an animal ready to be sold to the mother.  I think that this control is part of the reason that the marriage didn't work out.  Bride was unhappy with the whole situation, which is why she ran away.  Her running away contributed to Mother's unhappiness because it was the event which indirectly killed her son.  Control was Mother's downfall, in this case. 

Blood Wedding #5

In act II, the setting is either the bride's veranda in scene one or the exterior of her home in scene two.  Everything is "as hard as a landscape on a piece of ceramic folk art"(58).  I find it interesting that Lorca refers to the Bride's home as a cave.  I have a hard time believing that she really does live in one, and I'm thinking that part of Lorca's intentions may have been lost in translation with this.  Either that, or Lorca is trying to make the situation just a tad bit unbelieveable in order to make the whole thing more surreal.  The shift between act II and act III is interesting because the setting in the first scene of act III is very organic.  It's a murky forest, which creates something of a gloomy mood in the play.  The setting being almost eerie works here because it adds to the craziness of the moon and death plotting to spill blood onto the earth.  I also feel like it gives an almost surreal, romanticized atmosphere.  We learned that romanticism plays a lot in to nature when we were researching Ibsen, and considering that Lorca was trying to rebel against Ibsen's views by writing this play I think the use of nature would make sense here. 

Blood Wedding #4

Leonardo is miserable because he feels tied down by his wife and child.  He refuses to ride in a carriage with his wife to the wedding because, I think, that the small space in the carriage represents confinement and he would rather be free to ride around on his horse.  Leonardo doesn't care much about his child, either.  In act I, he wakes it up with his yelling, and in act II he goes as far as to forget that the child even exists.  As mentioned by the bride's father and the groom's mother, children take much time to grow and mature.  I think that Leonardo doesn't wish to give that time committment because, again, that would be confining himself to 18 years with the same family.  His desire to rekindle his old relationship with the bride is what is driving him to be so miserable.  What's stopping her from getting his lady is the fact that, 1) He's married 2) She just got married 3) Society thinks it's bad to cheat.

Blood Wedding #3

I don't know if the whole poetic, sing-songy aspects of the wedding in act II are meant to break the 4th wall that was introduced by realism.  Maybe that really was part of a wedding in Spanish culture.  Even so, for me as a reader, the poetry/songs/whatever it was that preceded the wedding brought about a rather surreal effect.  People normally don't break out into song or stanzas in everyday life (at least I sincerely hope not), and I think Lorca is creating a rather dream-like atmosphere by making people do so.  Perhaps Lorca is trying to illustrate the cloud of hysteria that can surround relationships/weddings between young people.  I know that today's youth is very easily infatuated with people of their fancies, and that "love" can oftentimes fog up real desires or better judgements.  This would be putting the people that are in "love" in a dream-like state that could be associated with Lorca's surrealism.

Blood Wedding #2

I thought that the mother was the most archetypical character out of the whole lot.  She worries excessively about her son, doesn't stop talking about her dead relatives, and wants to see her kid married off to a nice lady.  What more could one ask for in a mom, really?  I think this kind of characterization surrounding the mother creates a strong sense in the reader of the deep bond the mother has with her family (at least that's what I got out of it).

The groom is pretty stereotypical as well.  He is in love with his wife-to-be, so much in love that it makes him feel lost and want to cry.  I think that this love blinds him to the fact that the bride may not be as bride-ly as she first appears in act 1 scene 3.  When she meets the mother, the bride is a perfect woman.  She is an obedient girl, which her father attests to, and she is seen rather than heard for the most part which may have been the norm in that time period.  When the bride is alone with the maid, however, she breaks the stereotype.  She doesn't seem happy at all to be married.  In fact, she seems afraid, agitated, or what have you.  These emotions would be more associated with men, I would think.  I know that in our time and place marriage, to men, can be viewed as being tied down.  Maybe the bride took on a male perspective and viewed it that way as well.

Blood Wedding #1

The first symbol that is so very obvious in the play is the knife.  The mother hates it so much because she hates death.  Two of her family members are dead, so that makes a lot of sense.  The knife creates tension between the groom and his mother, because the groom seems to want to avoid the subject of death all together while the mother won't quit talking about it.  I think that both these characters' views towards death have something to do with the characters themselves being symbolic of things.  They could embody different ideals, stereotypical whatevertheyare's, or something that I haven't figured out yet because I'm really not sure.  The knife can be symbolic of death in two ways, I think.  The more obvious hidden meaning behind the knife is death, but we also have that idea of separation that we discussed in class today.  Death, brought about by the knife, severs the mother's family before the play with the father and brother and then at the end of the play when the groom dies, leaving the mother alone.

Another symbol I noticed was the machine that the neighbor lady talks about.  At first, I didn't pay it much mind, but looking at it closer I saw that it must have some importance because it is THE machine, rather than a machine.  Then again, Spanish translates so that there is a "the" in front of practically every noun that is talked about in a general sense. I looked back through the preceding pages and didn't really see this abnormality except for "the knife", which is also a symbol.  Ergo, the machine is a symbol. Boom.  I thought that the machine was a symbol (this may be a bit of a stretch) for logic.  I know that Lorca disliked realism and logic, and at times the logical, mathematical human brain is compared to a machine.  I saw the contrast between logic and surrealism when the neighbor says, "I think your son and I are better off where they are, asleep, resting, and not in danger of being left useless"(12).  The machine, representing logic which Lorca deems useless, is the very thing that made the neighbor's son a poor little stub with no arms or legs.  The fact that Lorca would bring up sleep is interesting because sleep and dreams are part of surrealism.  I think Lorca is using the machine to show his preference for surrealism over realism and logic.

Wild Duck #3

I definitely think that Gina and Gregers carry most of the blame for the craziness that occured in acts 3 and 4.  Gregers took it upon himself to pry into things that really weren't any of his business.  It may have been his "moral obligation" to do so, but I believe that the entire play could have been avoided if Gregers had just kept his head down and minded his own business.  As for Gina, she could have made it apparent that Hedvig may not be Hjalmar's daughter a lot earlier in her marriage.  Props to her for being able to lie for 15 years, that girl must have a very different set of morals, but if she told the truth at the beginning, Hedvig would have been young and oblivious enough to have not taken her father's freak-out so personally.  Maybe then she may not have killed herself. 

The number one person that should be blamed for Hedvig's death, however, is Old Werle.  He's the one that created the lie surrounding the Ekdal family in the first place.  It was him that got Gina pregnant, and according to the customs of the time he should have just married her anyway.  Instead, he set up a web of lies for poor Hjalmar by setting Gina up with him.  He even ensured that his lie would last long-term by getting Hjalmar a job and supporting the Ekdal family with Old Ekdal's paycheck and later the grant in Hedvig's letter.  The truth getting out about Hedvig being illigitimate would surely hurt Old Werle's reputation, which is probably why he put on the whole charade.

Wild Duck #2

Sickness, illness, etc are used in The Wild Duck to show what happens to certain people if they choose not to reveal the truth.  The first case of this "illness" can be seen at the end of act 3, right before Gregers gets the opportunity to get Hjalmar alone and perhaps tell him the truth about his child and marriage.  Relling diagnoses him with "moralistic fever"(178).  To me, this sounds like poor Gregers is ill because of a violation of his morals.  It is within Gregers' moral standards to reveal the truth.  Heck, it's his life mission.  The conflict he faces between his morals and keeping his buddy happy are causing a battle within in own mind. 

In Relling's mind, truth cas cause an illness if one is overexposed.  This is why he deems Gregers, and later Hjalmar (and everyone else in the world), as ill.  His cure for this illness is a life-lie, "the animating principle of life"(202).  This kind of lie "keep[s] life going"(202).  Relling believes that, sometimes, the truth can be too hard to bear.  This is especially true with Hjalmar, who eventually snaps and indirectly kills his daughter.  I think that Ibsen, through using illness and death as symbols, is trying to convey that knowing the truth is not always beneficial.  Covering up the truth, much like Gina did for almost 15 years, kept Hjalmar sane because he was in the dark as far as the illegitimacy of his child is concerned.

Wild Duck #1

Option 2:

Hjalmar Ekdal, one of the main characters in the play, is twisted up in a bed of lies created by other characters as well as himself.  He percieves himself as hardworking, and yet he always makes an excuse as to why he can't complete his photography projects.  He needs an afternoon nap, his father is being a crazy, or he has his invention to attend to.  Overall, I would say that Hjalmar is like an IB student.  He says he's hardworking, and he can get the job done when he wants to, but there is always an excuse as to why he can't get the job done.  I also noticed that Hjalmar acts differently around a group of men (Relling, Molvik, and Gregers in act 3) than he does around his wife and child.  In act two, he is very sweet with Hedvig and makes good conversation with his wife.  However, when the boys are around, he turns to giving orders to Gina and Hedvig.  This could also be the alcohol he was consuming clouding his judgement, but that's another thing to think about. 

On the other side of the Ekdal family, we have Gina.  One might call her the typical housewife of the time period.  She is obedient towards her husband, keeps the house, and cares for her child.  Gina also has a line of work, which may not have been uncharacteristic of a women of her status (I'm starting to think that the Ekdals are part of the lower middle class).  I think it is very interesting that Gina re-touches photos while Hjalmar just takes them.  I see this as Hjalmar seeing what is actually there (but maybe not the whole picture), and Gina skewing things just a little to make them look more presentable.  We never know for a fact that Hedvig is an illegitimate child with Old Werle, but I think some of Gina's actions and attitudes point the readers in that direction.  Her shock at Old Werle's entrance in act 3 and her displeasure with Gregers' arrival all point out that she knows what is really going on, she is just going to hide it like she hides the imperfections in pictures. 

We #3 (Oh my gosh it rhymes)

I finished the book and I just want to say, "wow, not what I expected. At all. What a bummer". So I just said that and now I'm going to do my journal. 

As far as motifs go, nature is coming up a lot more than in the first third or half or so of the book.  This clearly is part of D-503 falling deeper into his illness, because on the last two pages after D has been cured he mentions no nature to speak of.  Although nature doesn't come up when D is well again, he still uses it to describe the more "ugly" things that take place in his life.  While the One State is essentially burning to the ground, Zamyatin describes the frantic people with "open mouths, arms waving like branches.  They must have been the source of all this howling, cawing, buzzing"(198).  These people are lost, with no idea what to do.  Their way of life is collapsing around them, so they are reverting to savagery.  The animalistic language combined with the motif of nature here is bringing a sense of negativity (I could use a better word here, but I can't think of one) towards all these people's conditions.  They, for the first time in their lives, are free! The problem is, however, that they think the way of the One State is the only way to live and that freedom brings savagery and unhappiness.  This is where we get D's negative feelings towards them as expressed in the nature-ish words like branches, cawing, howling and buzzing. 

Well, I kind of lumped motifs and language in with eachother on that one, so I'm going to do it again to be more thorough.  There is a point in the book where nature actually, much to the people's dismay, finds its way in to the one state.  The first time this happens is in D-503's 37th entry, when the brids come in from outside the green wall and it's electric cieling.  Nature is, again, described by Zamyatin with harsh, almost ugly language.  The birds produce "hoarse, gutteral drops of sound from above", and are described as "sharp, black, piercing, falling triangles"(191).  The first part of the passage makes a lot of sense to me as far as language goes. Words like hoarse and gutteral are used to express the society's disgust with nature, as we have seen throughout basically the whole book.  What I don't get is why the birds are also labeled as triangles.  Something that comes from nature, something so free, unpredictable, and "ugly", should not be labeled as a geometric shape.  Why? Because the One State loves math.  I bet they even love geometry, even though a lot of people don't.  Since geometry, and subsequently, such nice shapes as triangles, are part of the math that society is based on, then why label a "stupid", "ugly" bird with something so revered in society?  This could be D's way of showing us he has a soul, and is blending the society he loves with the nature he knows belongs in his life and is coming to accept.  Or it could be a translation issue.  I don't know if there are any other Russian words for triangle, but I know that some other people in my group have other translations.  It would be interesting to see what they have!

Setting is an entirely different ball game! The One State is pretty established as a setting, so there's not much to talk about there.  I did find one of the little blurbs on the Integral kind of interesting, and it clued me in as to how the society works.  The quote that I don't feel like properly integrating reads "everyone was already all assembled, everyone was in their places, all the honeycombs of the gigantic hive were filled.  There were tiny, antlike people below, [...] standing at telegraphs, dynamos, transformers, altimeters, valves, arrows, motors, pumps, pipes"(172).  It is shown here how complex the society is, and how everyone is working as part of a whole in order to achieve a greater purpose.  The people are almost like robots, and Zamyatin makes it appear that way by saying that they're "assembled".  Everyone is part of a machine, standing at their various parts and waiting to be activated.  The Integral is part of a mission that will spead the views of the One State intergalactically, so it is natural that the thing doing so is made according to these values.  The workers who run the integral are dehumanized, and deindividualized as they are lumped in as part of this greater being.  I also found the comparison to the beehive to be interesting, although it seemed rather off as part of a paragraph about a machine.  The people working the integral could also be a part of a beehive, all working towards a goal (or multiple goals, making honey, feeding the queen...), but here Zamyatin chooses to describe them using nature!  Since the people are also described as antlike not two sentences before the bee reference, I think Zamyatin might be doing something by involving insects in his writing.  Although insects are a part of nature, they aren't really that amazing or unpredictable or untamable.  Ants can be squished under a boot, and bees follow a simple routine of, leave hive, get nectar, come back to hive, deposit nectar, repeat.  Insects are mindless, predictable things that can easily be compared with the people of the One State who blindly follow the Benefactor and accept all the rules forced on to them because they don't know any better.  Nature can be somewhat predictable, but only in its simplest form. 

We #2

Language:
"I saw the stupid muzzle of some kind of beast, his yellow eyes, obstinately repeating one and the same incomprehensible thought at me"(83).

The moment when D-503 comes literally face to face with nature is a very key moment within the second third of the book.  When he faces the creature (I think it's one of the primitive people outside the wall, staring at him through the glass), the language Zamyatin uses reflects the views of society.  Nature is this unpredictable, uncontainable entity that the mathematical values of the One State deem ugly.  It is natural that D-503 would call the creature, well, its muzzle, stupid because the people residing within the glass wall find the freedom of nature to be a state ov savagery.  I also keyed in to the word obstinate, which I'm pretty sure means stubborn.  The idea of nature could be stubborn in a way because it evades the mathematical rules of the one state by remaining so unpredictable.  Logic and math cannot sway it away from being what it is, so therefore nature is obstinate.  This quote helps my understanding of the One State by revealing the society's views on nature and why people in the society find nature so ugly.

Setting:
"Up above the Wall: the sharp black triangles of some kind of bird were cawing and throwing their breasts at the solid barrier electrical of electrical waves and then being flung backward, only to try flying over the wall yet again"(105).

Well, this is a new development that I found rather iteresting.  Not only is there a wall all the way around the One State, but there is an electrical field around the top to keep all the birds out! There is an upside in that, because nobody will have to worry about bird poop on their aeros in the morning.  However, nothing says "I hate nature" like some good, hearty bird zapping!  While I viewed the wall previously as a mechanism to keep people contained within the control of the government, I now see it an its zappy roof as something meant to keep the outside world away.  As I previously stated, nature and math can't really coexist, unless you're balancing a Hardy-Weinburg equation.  Nature is just so free (in other words, savage) and unpredictable that it would be poisonus to the society to have it introduced.  The walls benefit society by keeping out all that nasty nature!

Motifs:
"My cozy walls had vanished.  For a second, I felt as though I'd been thrown out there, outside, where a giant wind is rushing abot on wings and the slanting, dusky clouds are getting lower and lower"(108).

Hey, I thought I just said walls were meant to keep nature out! Not to keep D all cozy! I think it works both ways, the wall (or any walls within the book, as walls are a motif) keeps things against society out and keept society's supporters locked up tight.  I think D feels so comfortable inside the wall beacause math and logic, the building blocks of his society, are all he knows.  Having things we think as completely normal, such as an imagination and a soul, is something D-503 labels as a sickness.  The predictablilty of his life, represented by his cozy wall, is disintegrating.  The clouds that get lower are symbolizing the uncertainty D is facing.  This quote makes me think that walls represent security, predictability, and also the oppression of the government.

We #1

Motifs, setting, and language for the first 3rd.  Here we go!

As far as motifs go, I'm seeing a lot of walls, lips, eyes, and glass. I'm going to address each one specifically.

Walls- It's pretty obvious, I think; the walls represent containment and control by the government.  The One State  is surrounded by a green wall that keeps out "ugly" and "stupid" nature.  D-503 feels comforted by such walls, because he knows nothing other than his life in the One State.  Walls represent the One State's idea that freedom is savage.  D-503 shares this belief, because he was raised on the idea that the four functions of arithmatic are the only things worth paying attention to.  Freedom of expression, like the "ancients" did with the piano, is frowned upon because it is not contained by numbers, equations, or the walls of the very mathematical society.

Lips- No matter who the character is, D-503 always takes the time to describe his or her lips.  African lips, pink lips, scissor lips, lips tucked inside, it's all over the place.  In a society where everyone is supposed to be the same (we wouldn't want anyone to be envious of each others' button noses, now would we?), the variety in people's lips struck me as a little odd.  Perhaps Zamyatin is trying to maintain some individuality between the characters in a society where everyone needs to be the same.  Speech and language, an important tool for expressing thought, also escapes through the lips.  People in the novel have different opinions that are beginning to emerge, such as O's want for a baby, and maybe their lips reflect their thoughts and desires that they wish to express but can't because of the One State?

Eyes- I love the comparison of eyes to windows.  It may be a bit overused, but who knows? This book is old, the whole window to the soul thing might have came from this very novel! D-503 sees both fire and darkness inside I-330's eyes, while in O's eyes he sees nothing.  I most likely has a soul (what an unfortunate condition), based on her strange behavior or sneaking around and evading the laws of the One State.  O wants a baby, which I can't tell if it's forbidden or not, but other than that none of her actions so far have really deviated from the wants of the One State. She isn't "ill", ergo, no soul, nothing in her eyes.

Glass- Glass is everywhere. Walls are glass, sidewalks are glass, even people's homes are made of glass.  I think it's a government control thing.  Everyone can see what you're doing all the time (except when you're having sex), so you had better not break the law or you'll get squished by the big glass (is it glass?) hand of the Benefactor!!  Glass contains the people of the One State, but at the same time you can see through it.  It almost gives the illusion of freedom, even though freedom is bad.  The people of the One State can see outside their confinement, but they can never escape it. 

Glass also ties in to the setting, which is the next thing I'll be typing about.  The book takes place in the One State, a city that sounds like is made entirely out of glass.  It's futuristic, I can tell because people take flying machines everywhere, and the government is extremely controling.  There are auditoriums where people are required to go see lectures, and the only normal (well to me it's normal) place in the whole city is the ancient house! It's a museum of sorts, I believe, that is colorful and opaque.  That contrasts greatly with the rest of the One State.  I think the strict schedule, everything being made of glass, and the futuristic time frame the novel is set in all give the idea that the One State is very controling.  It is also open with its citizens, though.  No secrets here! I think that's where the glass comes in to play.  Everyone seems to know the rules of the One State and what will happen to them if they break those rules.

Language.  Zamyatin likes to use math speak in a lot of his writing.  Words like "sinusoid", "parabola", and variables like X come up a lot.  I think Zamyatin chooses these words not only because he was wa mathematician of some sort, but to emphasize the views of the society he created.  Everything in the One State is planned out to a T, very exact in its operations.  The same is true for math, as there is only one right answer to an equation.  Unless there's a plus or minus sign in there, but that hasn't been mentioned yet.  The mathematical language also emphasizes the One State's want for a lack of freedom and imagination.  When doing a math problem, one isn't free to experiment, they have to stick to the formula. 

 

Tristy's Philosophy (Tristyism?)

Quit Your Worrying: All the little things that happen to you combine to make up your life experience.  If one or two things go wrong along the way, then you ultimately become a better person from learning from your mistakes.  If you stress about everything right, then more things will end up going wrong.  I came to this conclusion mainly through by experiences as a student.  Working hard at the right time is key, and prioritizing can make or break one's sleep schedule.  Bottom line: don't fret the small stuff.

Lower Your Expectations: If you expect too much, all you get are meltdowns that result in not getting an A or not getting first place in something.  Keep your expectations realistic to yourself.  Nobody's perfect, and neither are you!

Raise Your Expectations: Success is self-driven.  You're not going to amount to much if you're being guided by the wants of your teachers and/or parents.  It's much easier to find success and happiness if you work for yourself and not others.  Set goals for yourself, go out, and acheive them!

It's not all about you: Contrary to what most teenagers believe, the world does not revolve around you.  It revolves around the sun, so you should just get over yourself.  When a person thinks of only themselves, they tend to do more harm to other people than they do good.  Think of other people before you act or speak in a way that could harm another person.  Do good for the world and help those that are less fortunate, because people in middle-class tigard have it pretty darn good compared to a lot of folks. 

Don't close your mind to other points of view: I'm not trying to bash religion here.  I myself believe that there is something out there that's bigger than myself and everyone else.  It could be God, Buddah, or what have you.  I don't know.  I just feel like that if I accepted one religion, then I would be closing myself off to all the great stuff other beliefs have to offer.  This part of my philosophy doesn't solely pertain to religion, either! Other people that you happen to be acquainted with are intelligent individuals with valuable opinions.  It's important to be open to those opinions in order to learn the most you can about yourself and the world.  I hate politics, I think it brings out the worst in people, so I think this part of my thinking stems from that.

Take Risks: It's that IB philosophy, right? We're all risk-takers! But seriously, I think living a wee bit dangerously is important because it helps people discover their boundaries, know what they're good at, and figure out what they need to improve on.  Failure is the best way to learn, but you can't fail if you nail yourself up in a little box and don't take risks.  I also feel like risk taking is a great, if not the only way, to get over your fears.  I've taken risks in my life that helped me shed my fears of heights, spiders, and public speaking! I still haven't dealt with those bees, though.  But having a fear of bees is valid, right?

Respect and learn from your elders: Parents, teachers, family friends, doctors, doesn't matter! Old people have had more life experience, and they probably know a lot more than you do! Their experiences have combined to make them who they are.  Some of those experiences may have been negative, and I have no doubt that most level-headed adults have learned from those experiences.  With that in mind, I feel like it's critical that young people take into account the wishes of their parents or whoever has been your mentor of sorts when making decisions.  Sometimes, your elders tell you things they don't want to hear or prevent you from doing things that you want to do.  That's because they don't want you to make the same mistakes they made, so you should deal with it.

Stranger #4

At the end of the novel, I think Mersault becomes a less self-centered person and starts realizing that other people, in addition to himself, control his fate.  He does this by actually getting angry at someone, the chaplain, and expressing his emotions.  He also opens himself up to the "gentle indifference of the world" and actually wants people to come to his execution.  Earlier in the book, Mersault didn't look at other people in the same light as he did on those last few pages.  He found others annoying, had other, rather crude, opinions, and didn't even care about getting married.  I don't know if the marriage thing was ever resolved in part 2, partly because Camus himself frowned apon marriage and partly because Mersault was dead before he could get married.  I think that Camus wants the reader to come to the same conclusion that Mersault did because, ultimately, Mersault developed largely as a character while he was in jail.  He went from being a flat, almost boring person to being a complex character with strong opinions and emotions that were not expressed in part one of the book.

Stranger #3

I think Camus has divided the novel in to two parts to show that Mersault has changed as a character after the murder, but the situations surrounding him really haven't. 

Mersault's thoughts expressed in the 1st person narration of the novel shift pretty dramatically between part one and part two.  In part two, Camus uses more complex sentences and imagery to describe what is going on around Mersault as opposed to describing things in a list like, "this happened, and then this happened" way that we saw in part one.  This could be partially because Mersault has a lot more time on his hands to think about and observe things in his life now that he is confined to jail.  Mersault also spends more time pondering the past in part two.  He thinks about Marie, Maman, and every detail of his room back home.  Mersault admits later in the book (not sure where, I highlighted it though) that he was used to thinking about the future, either today or tomorrow.  The shift in Mersault's thinking is an important part of his character development as we move in to part two. 

I drew some parallels between the two parts.  One of them was the old people in chapter one and the jury in part 2.  Both of the groups of people blend together and are indistinguishable, and both groups either are or appear to be judging Mersault.  The walk to Maman's funeral took 45 minutes, and the wait for the verdict of the trial was the same amount of time.  The little robot woman appears again, but this time with a young man that reminds Mersault of himself.  In part one, time is very definate and Mersault keeps track of what day it is, what time he needs to catch his bus, etc.. In part two, time blends together for Mersault.  Days run together without ending. 

Question: Why does part 1 have six chapters and part 2 have 5? Was Mersault's life cut short too soon? I want things to be parallel, and that bothers me.

Stranger #2

When the sun or light is present, Mersault is often unhappy or in an unhappy situation.  This idea is repeated from Maman's death, to the beach, and most recently to the room where Mersault was questioned in chapter 6.  He also gets tired in the presence of sunlight, and calls daytime "a slap in the face".  The sun also makes Mersault "drunk" on two occasions (the funeral and at the beach) so he is unable to think straight. 

Come to think of it, the sun makes Mersault a lot of things.  It's a blanket reason that he uses to justify his mental state.  That would make sense because the sun is pretty much always there except for night time (during which Mersault sleeps, CONTRAST!).  The sun makes him drowsy, makes him drunk, and makes him kill the Arab.  The sun makes us do things, like going outside on a beautiful day like today, and it might give us emotions like happiness, but I don't think our lives are being as dictated by the sun as Mersault is.  Perhaps the sun is representing some greater being, like God, that Camus believes has power over people because he makes is affect Mersault so heavily. 

The sun could also embody the psychological idea of determinism, under which every action and every choice a person makes can be boiled down to some reason or past event that made he or she perform an action.  Since it makes Mersault feel things like tired or angry and do things like kill people, the determinism argument would make sense here!  The sun is described as oppressive, and may demonstrate Mersault's desire to have free will (which does not exist under determinism).  Maybe Camus is saying determinism isn't really the way to go, but that we can't really go any other way because the sun is always there.  Except for at night time.  Maybe we have free will in our dreams.

Stranger #1

Old Salamano is Mersault's grumpy old neighbor that likes to swear at his dog.  Both he and the dog have gross skin conditions.  Salamano beats and swears at his dog, but he still misses it when it runs away.  He used the dog to fill the hole his wife left behind when she passed, and I think Camus is using Salamano and the dog to say something about relationships.  Salamano hates and at the same time loves his dog, and the dog seems to forget that he gets beaten and yelled at so often.  So... one's love for another can blind them to all the bad stuff that's in a relationship?

Raymond is also Mersault's neighbor and he also beats things inside his apartment.  This time, instead of a dog, it's a woman.  He lives in a one-room apartment that is crudely decorated with pictures of naked women.  He also has an angel above his bed, which I find interesting.  Raymond is a pimp (sorry, don't know what else to call it) who gets enjoyment out of going to whorehouses and beating his girlfriend.  In his defense, she did cheat on him, but violence is never the answer, my friends.  However, it might have been the norm in 1942 so maybe it was the answer to beat your ladies back then.  Mersault and Raymond have a "manly" relationship.  They connected on a level and became pals, and Raymond seems to think Mersault gets him and wants to talk to him because he's a man! Camus is using Raymond and his relationship with Mersault to say something about men, and also women.  Seeing as Raymond's interactions with Mersault are quite different from those with his lady friends, I would think that Camus is contrasting men and women. 

Marie used to work with Mersault and is his love interest throughout the novel.  We see their romance in part one of the book, while in part two she doesn't appear save for Mersault's trial and when she visits him in jail.  While he is in jail, Mersault continues to think about her even though their relationship has deteriorated.  Her appearance isn't really described, except for that Mersault thinks she's beautiful.  She is a cheerful person from what I gathered.  She jumps up and down because of the weather and pokes fun at Mersault quite often.  Camus uses Marie to bring out some of Mersault's slightly off-kilter views on things like love.  Mersault narrates the story, and when thinking of Marie he often describes her body.  Camus is using Mersault's thoughts about Marie's body to sort of objectify women.  

Eyes #4

Hi Mrs. Wecker. I wrote this up on paper because I was babysitting the night before it was due and you checked it off in class, so we're all good. Here's journal 4!

The first paragraph of chapter 8 is a marvelous example of Hurston's language manipulation in the following categories:

SYNTAX
"New thoughts had to be thought and new words said"(81).
Traditionally, Joe is the thinker and speaker of Eatonville.  Since he is incapacitated by his illness, he is no longer the figurehead of the community.  The parallel structure between new thoughts and new words foreshadows the change that is coming to the town after Joe's death.  With the passing of one leader, a new one has to step up.  Ergo, new thoughts and words.

WORD CHOICE
ex: Adressing Joe as "Jody" rather than "Joe".
From the end of chapter 7 on, the narrator calls Joe Starks "Jody".  The high amount of submission shown to him by Janie is gone because he falls ill and can no longer control her.  This makes Jody equal to, if not below, Janie at this point.  Choosing this change in name is Hurston's way of signifying Janie's change in attitude towards Joe.

TONE
ex: "He had crawled off the lick his wounds"(81).
Here, Joe is compared to an animal.  Hurston adopts a tone of disrespect towards Joe to change the reader's attitude about him.  Dehumanizing Joe takes him off the pedestal that tge people of Eatonville placed him on for 20 years and puts him far below them.  The Joe who was compared to a slave driver is heavily contrasted with the present Joe, who is old, ill, and animalistic.

SOUND
"But the stillness was in the sleep of swords"(81).
The "s" sound brings an ominous, slithery, creepy sound to the passage.  This could be a signal for Joe's death (note how death is later described as holding an "icy sword") or one for the impending conflict between Joe and Janie shortly prior to his death.

Eyes #8

1.  I think Zora Neale Hurston chose the title she did in order to draw the reader's attention to a certain theme in the book.  With the word "God" in the title, readers tend to be more apt to look for religious allusions within the text.  It is possible that Hurston chose such a title in order to put most of the attention on what she was trying to say about God and religion in her writing. It is also important to note that the title says "their eyes" and not only "her eyes".  Yes, the book is mainly about Janie, but the title lets the reader know that Hurston has something to sat about the human experience as a whole.

2. An alternative title may be, as mentioned before, "Her Eyes Were Watching God".  This may alter the reading experience by narrowing the reader's thinking to only encompass Janie or possible the females of the world.  Hurston does have a lot of things to say about the female experience in Eyes, so it's a definite possibility.

3.  I just now named my pastiche "The Only Thing She Could Ever Want".  It's like Hurston's title in that it's a line out of the text.  Mine is a little more specific as in who it's referring to.  The "she" is referring to one of my characters who feels trapped by her husbands very materialistic way of life (sound familiar?).  People who are materialistic want things, another word in the title, but in this case there is only one thing that the "she" in my title wants.  My pastiche is trying to highlight hurston's theme that Materialism is not a healthy basis for relationships (romantic or otherwise) with other people.  Using all your fancy stuff to make yourself better than everyone else isn't cool, man (Note: find a more eloquent way to say that later). I'm trying to highlight my theme with my title, and I feel like I do an OK job with it.

Eyes #7

"And that he spit in that gold-lookin' vase that that anybody else would have been glad to put on their front room table"(47).

Joe is proudly displaying his power over others by buying nice things, surprise! I put the spitoon under symbol, because it represents Joe's materialistic views and how he uses the things he gains to feel powerful.  Other symbols that fall under this category may include the house and/or the store.  By having things that are "better" than those around him, Joe puts himself up on a throne not unlike that of a king.  To top it all off, he spits in that pretty vase, proving that he is in a higher spot than those who wouldn't dare spit in such a fine decoration.  He tries to get Janie to do the same thing by buying her something similar.  It is never specified whether or not she uses it, and I wonder if Hurston does that on purpose.  I also made the connection to at the beginning of the book to when nanny was telling Janie that she didn't want any men making a spit cup out of her.  In Joe's situation, he's making a spit cup out of the whole town by parading his posessions around.  This doesn't get him any respect, and he ends up disliked by some for that reason.

"They made burning statements with questions, and killing tools out of laughs.  It was mass cruelty"(2).

The sudden change from Hurston's usual flowing style full of complex sentences and imagery and other things of the like certainly draws the readers attention to the shorter sentences.  By using a short sentence, Hurston points out the importance of the situation by drawing the readers attention to something different.  This could also be used to point out a contrast, set up a different mood, or keep a reader awake.

"She saw a dust-bearing bee sink into the sanctum of a bloom"(11).

The repeated "s" sound in this super sentence creates a sense of calm simliar to that of the water flowing in and out at the beginning of the novel.  Outside under the trees, Janie feels a sense of happiness that the things her husbands give her can't necessarily bring.  The "s" could also be the whisper of the seeds floating through the air and sinking in to the soil.

Eyes Journal #6

Oh, revisions.  I'm still revising, and I probably will continue revising until the actial due date of this darn paper.  This is so much fun!

I took the charming letter that I recieved last class into much consideration while making changes to my paper.  Some suggestions were made about my chronology, word choice and literary techniques that I tried to add.  I changed the order of some things so that the chronology of the thing wasn't quite so confusing.  Some awkward sounding words were changes, paragraphs were moved around and/or deleted, and sentences were added.  Overall, I'm much happier with the flow of the paper and I think everything fits together more cohesively than it did before!  I still don't have an ending.  It would probably be good to get one of those soon.

Eyes #5

And Henry started to think of Love.  Love, the powerful being with forceful hands that lived on the breeze and in the air.  The great one who men stood in line to meet like a flock of girls at a Justin Beiber concert.  How does love obtain its power, and how does it force it upon others?  He waits in the light that touches all that inhabit the world.  Waits with his bow drawn, searching for a victim to strike from behind.  He stands with a mother, a neighbor, a friend.  He was likely to find an arrow jutting out from between his shoulder blades any day now.  He was frightened and sick to his stomach.  Oh Elizabeth! She ain't gots ta stand in the corner of that big ol' gym like that with nobody to dance wid.  He sent Mike in to ask if she wanted a dance, but Lizzy said no.  Dem wingmen wuz alright wid the sociable women, but Mike didn't know nuthin' 'bout a girl like her.  She'd be fine to dance after a glass of punch and a quick chat.  She was going to come out of her shell after all.  That was what she thought.  But Mike told him differently, so he knew.  And if he hadn't, by the end of the night he ought to know, for people began to disperse from the dance floor and walk out the doors into the outside world.  People who would have whiddled the night away at an after party simply slithered into their cars and left.  Just mosied on home and slept.  Fear, that coiled serpent, had stricken the night.      

I made the contrast between love and fear here because I feel like those two things are a prevalent part of Janie's experience.  At first, she fears marriage to Logan because she didn't know how to love.  She comes full circle with Tea Cake when at first she is afraid to canoodle with him because of his age and how the townspeople might percieve her differently so soon after Joe's death.  The scene is supposed to be at a school dance/club/wherever people party.  I chose that because it's more familiar than Florida in the mid-1900s.  Write about what you know, right?

Journal Number 3

Techniques that add to Hurston's style:

Dialect (Obviously)
ex: "'Oh, er, Pheoby, if youse ready to go, Ah could walk over dere wid you,' Mrs. Sumpkins volunteered. 'It's sort of duskin' down dark. De booger man might ketch yuh'"(Hurston, 4).

Similes
ex: "Janie saw her life like a great tree in leaf with the things suffered, things enjoyed, things done and undone.  Dawn and doom was in the branches"(Hurston, 8).

Metaphors
ex: "'You know, honey, us colored folks is branches without roots and that makes things come round in queer ways'"(Hurston, 16).

With this quote I immediately saw the connection with the tree comparison made not that much earlier in the text.  If life is a tree, one would assume that it has a solid trunk as a foundation.  Janie, being a woman AND a person of color makes her tree a little bit less functional.  Being a branch without roots means that she will have to work harder to ultimately gain what she wants out of the tree of life because she doesn't have that strong foundation.  Things that make up said foundation could include money, being white, having friends in high places, coming from the "right" family, etc.  With this metaphor, Hurston is trying to communicate the struggles of being a black woman during her time period.

Alliteration
ex: "She often spoke to falling seeds and said..."(Hurston, 25).

The soft "s" sound communicates the fragility of new life as it sinks slowly to the soil.

Allusions, especially biblical references.
ex: "The town had a basketfull of feelings good and bad about Joe's positions and possessions, but none had the temerity to challenge him.  They bowed down to him rather, because he was all of these things, and then afain he was all of these things because the town bowed down."

Being a mayor puts Joe in a very high position of power within the town.  Some might even call him God-like.  Hurston makes him appear that way through making her characters not oppose Joe in his rise to power, making Joe himself a well-respected leader in the community, and even making his speech more sophisticated and "white" than the other characters in the town he runs.  The above quote offers a more cynical take on Joe's, and also God's, power.  Hurston is expressing the belief that God only has as much power as he does over people because everybody is too afraid to question Him.  God has authority, to people submit to it.  At the same time, nobody is challenging that authority.  It is for this reason he has so much power. 

Journal #2

I'm kiiind of trying to mimic the structure on page 31! Here it goes.

     Jonathan Barr wiped the thin layer of sweat from his brow and slowly tilted his head back .  If he hadn't known any better, he would have guessed she was a gobbling turkey.
     "Exyuse me, Mistuh Baw," drawled the blonde with enough hair to make a blanket for a small child, "Ah've beeyun noticin' that yew ain't really beeyun payin' me much mine durin' this heeyuh conversation.  Ah really wood lahk ta git these heeyuh paypuhs signed!"
     Mr. Barr slowly thumbed through the mountain of divorce papers that lay under a thin film of dust on his desk.  The glare of his client dug under the hair and skin on the top of his head, but he paid it no mind.  He deliberately took his time in finding the folder labeled "Gwendolyn Adams" before removing it from the stack and placing it in front of him.
    "Oh-kay Mrs. Adams, less see wha'I kin do foa ya taday! Kin I ask ya why yeh choosin' ta git a divorce?"
   "Weyull, mah previous husban' just stopped lovin' me! He tol' me that he didn' much cayuh fo' my hayur, the way Ah dreyus, o' the way I tawk! He reckoned that it was annoyin' o' somethin'!"
   "Oh deah Mrs. Adams, seems to me like we got us a real unfoartunate prablem on ah hands.  I would love to fix this up quickity-split foa ya! Tell me, ah the people in yoa community also oafferin' ya assistence?"
     "Oh why yes of coase! Everyone a' church, a' my church tha' ah used ta go to wid' mah husban', have been hayelpin me so much! Ah jus' moved heeyuh an' it's already lahk Ah'm part o' the family!"
     "Mrs. Adams, the people at yoa husband's church ah takin' yoa side?"
     "Mistuh
 Baw, if you love the lawd an' you talk real southen' an' yew brin' deezert when it's yo turn, people repect ya aroun' heeyuh!"
     Jonathan Barr looked up at Gwendolyn through his square, wire-rimmed glasses, and let out a long, deep sigh.


So my idea for this was a Jewish divorce attorney from New York and a nice lady from Alabama modeled after my darling aunt Lauren.  Here are the rules:

SOUTHERN ACCENT
I >>> Ah
Ar/Or at the and of a word >>> A/OW
ing >>> in'
you >>> yew
or >>> oa (pronounced more like O-wah)
nd >>> n' OR ne, depending on what the word ends with
Or (as a word) >>> o'
I like to add "y"s in the middle of some words to add that southern drawl.  I have to say it first and then write out what it sounds like...

JEWISH NEW YORKER
-ear >>> eah (pronounced EEyuh)
our (the word) >>> Ah (like our, but drop the R)
our in "your" or the word "or" >>> oa (Same as southern accent but more nasally)
a like in "can" >>> I like in "it"
the O sound in "you" >>> a

Journal #1

I really liked the activity we did about the first page of a book the other day, so I'm going to start talking about the narrator by only looking at the first page.  Most of chapter one is dialogue anyway, and one of the only huge chunks of narration is on page one. Hooray.

Right off the bat I can tell that this book is going to be largely about the female experience.  The very first paragraph of the novel is a statement about men.  That statement is followed with one about women, which offers great contrast.  This might be compared to the differences between the roles of males and females that are seen throughout the entire book, but all that fun stuff comes later.   One of Hurston's first statements in the novel is about women, and the first character introduced is a woman.  So far, and I definitely don't feel like I'm stating the obvious by saying so, this is a book about women.

This book is written in the 3rd person narrative.  As far as I can tell she (I'm calling the narrator a she because she likes to talk about women... oh and a woman wrote the book) is the omniscient type of narrator because she gives us a little bit of insight into the characters thoughts and feelings.  An example of this can be seen on page 2 when Hurston writes, "Seeing the woman as she was made them remember the envy they had stored up from other times"(Hurston, 2).  Correct me if I'm wrong on the type of narrator.  I'm thankful that I didn't have the opportunity to confuse all 2 billion of them on the literary terms quiz.

The narrator likes to use figurative language in her descriptions.  Hurston uses personification to say that words walk without masters on page 2.  When I read this I wondered if it was an allusion to slavery. My favorite bit in chapter one was on the first page when she compared the townspeople sitting on their porches to mules.  That would be a comparison, another literary term.  Learning is so great.

Based on her dialogue and other characters' reactions to her, I would make the judgement that Janie is a fairly grounded person who knows what she wants out of life.  She's at least 40 according to the nice folks on the porch, so it's safe for a first-time reader of this book to assume that she's had plenty of life experiences.  Money isn't a concern for Janie.  She makes this clear by saying, "...Ah ain't got nothing to make me happy no more where Ah was at"(Hurston, 7).  Janie has $900 dollars in the bank that she and Tea Cake had saved.  If she had wanted to, Janie could have made a very nice living for herself with that money.  My guess would be that her experiences with Joe ruined the concept of money for her and that she became less of a material person throughout the course of that relationship.

Post #4 - Quiz!

1) "The Beast with two backs"(Othello) is an example of a _____________.
2) In Brave New Worls, the word "Soma" has several different ___________ depending on the character.
3)"All our science is just a cookery book, with an orthodox theory of cooking that nobody's allowed to question, and a list of recipes that mustn't be added to except by special permission from the head cook."(Brave New World) This passage is an example of a ______________.
4)  "Lawd, you know mah heart. Ah done de best Ah could do. De rest is left to you." She scuffled up from her knees and fell heavily across the bed. A month later she was dead"(Eyes).  The _________ of the dialogue is part of the dialect.
5)In Farenheit 451 (I know we all love that book, right?) Mildred is the _____ of Clarice.

Post #3 - Satire

Satire is defined on Dictionary.com as "the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc."

What I take away from this definition is that satire is when you take a part of the human experience, be it a part of human nature, an idea, or a recent/ongoing event, and expose its flaws in a literary work.  I like to think of it as a sort of humorous criticism of the way society functions.  An older example I have of satire was a piece of writing (I don't remember the name of it) in which all the characters were somehow hindered so that their best qualities could not be expressed.  Attractive people had to wear ugly masks, star athletes were forced to wear weights around their ankles so they couldn't run, etc.  I believe this short story was written (Mr. Dessert can correct me if I'm wrong) to expose some of the flaws in the idea that everyone needed to have the exact same opportunities as everyone else.  If one's natural abilities are hindered, the world would become a significantly more boring, less opportune place.  That piece of writing tried to express that idea with satire.  

To me, Brave New World is a perfect example of satire.  In that novel, everything is backwards.  Marriage is frowned apon, people are doing drugs left and right, and the people that are normal to our society's standards are locked away on reservations.  In Brave New World, the common "rules" that our society follows are stomped on and left to die.  Things that are considered "normal" in our way of living are frowned apon in Brave New World.  The fact that everything is backwards is a perfect example of Satire.    

I even use satire myself in my spare time! As many of you know, I'm a nerd who likes to spend my Saturdays talking in front of audiences.  To close this post I'm going to copy and paste the first few lines of a satirical speech I wrote about female behavior.  Thinking of this speech helps me remember satire, but if you don't think it will help you then you should stop reading.  If you're a feminist, you should definately stop reading because you'll be offended if you continue.

"Ladies, sorry to break it to you, but we have a problem. Throughout history, we have thought ourselves to be superior to men, but with the coming of recent events that idea is no longer a reality.  What started out as honest work out on the farm turned into disasters like suffrage, and (Horrified) equal pay!"

Thanks for reading, I like your comments :) 

Alliteration!

I chose this term because while I was strolling down freshman hall today I saw a pair of lacy ladies lengerie laying on the ground. True story.

I define alliteration as the repetition of the same sound (some people just say consonant sounds, but others include vowels as well) at the beginning of a string of words.  It really is a fun and fanciful way to add a little spice, spirit, or stress to a sentence.  It could be utilized to add some umph to your utterences that makes people pay closer attention to what you have to say.  This is an adventageous advertizing approach in newspapers, magazines, and plastic playthings like Polly Pockets.  One couldn't help but read a headline that said "Rick Santorum Slipped on a Serpent".

The leading letter of a long or little word may hold its very own meaning in a short piece of writing like a poem.  Cultural connotations are given to some letters because they either sound "hard" or "soft" in different languages.  A harder sound like the one produced by the letter "k" can certainly cause a complaint.  Softer sounds like "s" offer a smooth and soothing sound that which our ears are eager to eavedrop apon.

I hope this helps people! I had a lot of fun writing it!  

Post #1

IB Junior English! How exciting!

My favorite out of the three books from the summer reading was Brave New World.  Whenever I read the word savage my brain jumped to Pocahontas and it made the reading experience a lot more enjoyable!  I did find it strange that everyone "belonged" to everyone else and that children were brainwashed in their sleep, but hey, it wouldn't be dystopian without a few issues here and there.

I don't know what was going on in the world when Brave New World was written or the types of drugs that were available during that time period.  It seemed to me that Soma would be the equivalent of today's hallucinogens that people take to escape from their problems.  Soma meant different things to different characters.  The savage's mother (her name escapes me) was dependent on it, while the people who were integrated into the dystopian society presented in the novel saw taking the drug as a leisure activity.

My least favorite book was The Stranger.  I thought the writing style was dry, overly simplistic, and boring to read.  The style the author chose probably meant something, but I was much too bored to pay a lot of attention to it.  I know the book was originally published in French, and I wonder if some of the richness of the novel was lost in translation.  I'm guessing not, because French isn't that hard to translate.

The narrator of The Stranger bothered me because he just didn't care about anything.  He may have loved his mother, but it didn't matter.  He only wanted to get married if Marie wanted to, but it didn't really matter to him.  He completely disreguarded, in my opinion, one of the biggest parts of the human experience: emotion.  Not to say that the author did that, he made up for Frenchie's lack of zeal by using colors and things like that.  That part of the book was one of the few I enjoyed, which is why I'm doing my IOP on it!

If I were to write an essay on Eyes, I think I would choose to focus on the motif of nature throughout the novel.  Several important events in the novel were brought about through natural means, such as the huge symbolic hurricane, Teacake getting rabies, ect.  Nature is often idealized as perfect and harmless, and I feel like Janie's changing view of it is an important part of her characterization.