A Final Farewell

I am truly happy that I took AP Lit this year. Although I struggled so much at times, I am happy that I can look back and see the progress I made. I went from a consistent three writer to a 6+ writer and that was a large accomplishment for me.

Looking over the course, All the Kings Men was the most beneficial book that we read. It helped with almost all of the themes that were presented to us. A little more time could have been spent on it because it did have so much, but it was very beneficial as a student to read that before the AP test.

Another important text that we read this year was Hamlet. Those power lines were terrible, but they helped me to understand the extreme power of one word. It also helped teach me how to analyze a couple of words and how those words could change or exemplify the phrase or text as a whole.

I wish poetry was discussed more. A lot of classes reviewed it a little every Friday, and it seemed like we hit it hard for about a week and then after that we were left with the poetry notebook. Just a suggestion to go over a little more spread out than hitting it in 5 days. But the poetry notebooks did help me to better look at poetry. It helped outline what I should look at and think about as a poetic scholar, and in the end I felt very accomplished to have completed it.

I also felt pretty prepared for the AP exam. I was kind of stressed about it though because I felt like in the practice, the questions were easier and then the essays had more details, so I’m kind of worried about my score, but that is why own fault. I time managed well, it just felt like I wasn’t reaching the so what.

All in all, I was very pleased with the course, and although it was very difficult I would recommend it for students that are willing to push themselves. But the students need to know the challenges, I heard nothing about it, and thought I would be fine since I did so well in AP Lang, so just spreading the word about it would be helpful.  I will miss you Ms. Clinch!! Thanks for all you have taught me about writing. Although I will never major in anything literature, this has taught me other skills like managing stress and workload and also how to properly analyze situations. I found myself analyzing Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone!!!

Thanks again!

The Importance of Being Earnest

The Importance of Being Earnest was in actuality a very well-written book and I greatly enjoyed it. I didn’t realize the underlying connotations within it though, until Ms. Clinch pointed them out to the class. Oscar Wilde was writing to the homosexual society and looking over the play once again reveals this.

The concept of marriage is despised within this play. Algernon consistently bashes it and believes that once one is married, the wine becomes duller and the person becomes less active. The bachelor life is far better for an individual. In Wilde’s sense, being married to a female was against the question, and that is why it was so critiqued throughout the entire play. The life of a bachelor also signifies the hidden life that a homosexual individual would have to live by. Because being gay was illegal in these times, homosexuals would have to pretend to be bachelors, and see their partner in a secret manner. Marriage was not allowed for them in this time period, and so Wilde criticizes society for a married couple.

Also all of the eating imagery is very prominent in this play. Algernon, Jack, Cecily, and Gwendolyn all eat significant amounts of food over the course of the play; and many of the sources of conflict come over eating (Algernon eating the muffins and cucumber sandwiches, and then Cecily’s and Gwendolyn’s spat over cake and coffee). This signifies the tension that is between many of the characters, but in a sexual tone. It suggests that they have other appetites and indulgences that cannot be fulfilled, yet they continually wish for them too (and they fight for them, which is why many of the major peaks of climax usually occur when the characters are eating some sort of meal.

Both the MALE characters also have alternate identities, showing how they cannot live one life perfectly without having the other life to make mistakes in. In Wilde’s society, people of the higher class were expected to be perfect in every way, and because of this continuous strain on the individual, a different life was created so the person could do wrong deeds without being punished by the harsh society. This alternate life though signifies the life between homosexuality and heterosexuality. Wilde had one life that he shared with his wife and children, which was considered his perfect life. The other life that he would call Bunburying, was his life with his partner Lord Alfred Douglas.

The gender roles were also switched in this play. Cecily and Gwendolyn constantly joke about how they run everything and how the males should know better. They place themselves above the males, and the males become subservient to them in return. This society deems that men are higher than women because they make money for the family and are stronger than women. Wilde opposes this though because in his homosexual life, the males are the weaker individuals. He makes fun of the male role and makes the women in this play appear stronger.

Not So Innocent

I look back on Emma and realize that Jane Austen actually had to think a lot harder than I thought she had to in the beginning. In the first volume, the context, plot, and characters were being developed and I was more focused on those characteristics than the actual underlying events that were occurring. I started to realize how well Austen’s style of writing was in the second and third volume when I noticed that I was thinking exactly what Emma was thinking. Looking back on the first and second volume, I realize that I missed a lot of important things, and this exemplified how Austen was considered one of the best authors of the time period.

One of the things that I took away from the seminar though was a different perspective on Mr. Woodhouse. He was always a timid and frightened character that I always saw as a small underlying character. Throughout the seminar though I realized that he was actually very influential in how he manipulated and got his point across.

Emma remained in the house and was determined to be an “old maid” simply because she could not leave her father. Mr. Woodhouse always had people come over whenever HE wanted them to come over. And whenever there was a party or outing, he was always ensured that special events or places were set up for him. Whenever news came in, Emma always had to ensure that her father would not be unsettled by it. Mr. Wood house’s character used all of these techniques to ensure that Emma would stay with him and that others would do as he wanted them to do.

He didn’t want Ms. Taylor to leave and continued to call her “poor Ms. Taylor” because she had to leave his household. Although she was leaving for a happy future he continued to lament about this because she went against what he wanted, which rarely occurs.

Also when Emma decides to marry Mr. Knightley, Mr. Woodhouse is deeply opposed. In marrying Mr. Knightley, Emma would be leaving his household and moving in with another man. He would be left alone, which is ironic because they have plenty of money for them to pay for an individual to come live in the house and take care of Mr. Woodhouse. In the end though, Mr. Woodhouse gets his way because Emma and Mr. Knightley end up living in his own house (he never loses Emma).

This realization was very important to me, because it helped me open my thoughts to other characters throughout the book that I didn’t see as major figures. This also showed the complexity of the novel as a whole and opened my point of view on Emma.  

The End of Emma

The ending of Emma, by Jane Austen, was very disappointing to me. I suspected from the beginning the ties and relationships that were going to occur, and in the end, all of my presumptions were correct. I do not enjoy knowing exactly what is going to occur in a novel in the very beginning chapters of the first volume. Ms. Clinch explained it to me though, that in every romantic comedy, no matter the time period, a specific archetype is followed. There are almost always two people that “shouldn’t” or do not want to be together, and then something climatic happens, and in the end, the fall desperately in love with each other, ending the novel or movie. This allowed me to view the ending of the novel in a better light, and I was happier after today’s class.

The most obvious relationship was that of Frank Churchill and Jane Fairfax. My first inclination came when they were discussing that Jane and Mr. Churchill had met earlier. Jane quickly changed the topic and did not discuss that matter further. This sparked my suspicion, and after that I was on the lookout for facts that they were in a secret relationship. The next suspicion came when Jane received the piano forte. This came from a secret lover, which sparked everyone’s intrigue. Like Emma though, I began to consider if maybe the secret lover was Mr. Dixon, who was travelling in Ireland at the time. But then I realized that Mr. Churchill was not present. He had departed from Highbury to London, and was not present at the party at the Coles. Although this was not valid evidence, it seemed questionable that he was not there and then suddenly this lovely piano arrived.

The next hint was the largest for me that clinched the fact that they were in a secret relationship. When Frank Churchill at the gathering asked to play with the alphabet he only made one notable word for Jane and that word was blunder. Before this part of the scene, Frank had observed that Mr. Perry did not have a carriage and that he had thought that he was planning on it. Mrs. Bates observes that this was true, but that it was only told to them and it was to remain a secret. Only she and Jane knew about it. He then says this to her in the form of one word later when they are playing with the letters. Jane and Frank must have been in contact with one another quite frequently for this to have arisen in their conversations. This was not a formal letter, or else more important discussions would have taken place. Because these letters must have been constant, small things were talked about like whether or not Mr. Perry was going to pay for a carriage.

All of these facts were not as obvious to Emma though, until she walked to the Weston’s’ house and was told of this engagement. Although she believed that she was to have a relationship with Frank (even though she wanted to remain an old maid), he showed many instances of love for Jane, and although he flirted with Emma, he meant none of it.

Emma

I actually kind of like the novel Emma. When I’m reading, I don’t very much, but looking back on the different chapters that I have read, I find that it actually is quite entertaining. I’m not sure if Jane Austen wanted it to be this sort of humor, but I took it that way. The different characters and the schemes that they work themselves into is what makes the novel so funny. I also like it though because I like this time period. I like learning about the manners and etiquettes that were meant to be followed at this time, and seeing the interaction (or the lack thereof) between the different ranks of people.

The funniest character in this novel is Mr. Woodhouse. He is so petrified of everything that moves, and even things that don’t. He panics over the smallest instances, and you wonder if he is completely sane or capable of higher thinking. When he is talking about the wedding cake incidence and says “he could not but acknowledge that wedding cake might certainly disagree with many” (13), it shows this perfectly. He cannot eat wedding cake because he believes that it is too rich for his stomach. Because of his deep disregard for wedding cake, he expects everyone around him to dislike it as well. He encourages people not to eat it and even tries taking it away from people. This seems strange though, because usually women were stereotyped in this way. Austen characterizes Mr. Woodhouse though as the female character in this novel and Emma as the dominating man. Women in this time period did many things though that were not publicly seen and for the most part ran everything around the house. This is another amusing part of the story. The male character has all the traits of the stereotypical female, while Emma (the expected heroine), leads the house and runs everyone and everything.

Another thing that I enjoy about Emma is learning all about the history of who they could talk to, their dress, and just the manners that surround the people of high rank. It was interesting to me how they asked for marriage. Harriet and Mr. Martin seemed to not have had a ton of interaction and he just wrote her a letter one day asking for her hand in marriage. It seemed so distant, but in this time, that was acceptable. It was also interesting that because he was of a lower social class, first, Harriet should not marry him or else that would look bad on her part, but also because Emma could no longer be her friend. Emma doesn’t seem to have that many close acquaintances, so it was peculiar that she was willing to throw away one of her only friends because she married a man of lower class. But that was expected of her because Harriet would then be a lower class than her (even if they were close friends before the marriage).

Emma isn’t a terrible book. Does it keep me wanting to read more and encourage me to stay up late to figure out whose love life Emma destroys next…..no. But it is an interesting and actually quite a funny book that has many quality aspects that give it literary merit and interesting to read.

Is It True Love?

We have been reading Hamlet for a while now, and the same question keeps being asked; does Hamlet truly love Ophelia, or was he just using her for her body or to help him appear crazy. I believe that he truly did love Ophelia, and although many things have appeared in their relationship, he still cares for her and she still cares for him.

During the famous nunnery scene with Hamlet and Ophelia, Hamlet exclaims “I did love you once” (3.1.125). Although this is can be taken very literal, there is also an underlying sign that Hamlet shows. He was hurt when Ophelia told him about the remembrances. If the reader takes the play and thinks that Hamlet knows what’s going on, then he understands that Ophelia is plotting against him. He knows that she is blatantly lying in front of his face. This is why many people believe that Hamlet no longer loves Ophelia, but this just shows how deeply in love he was and still is. He was so disappointed and angry when he found out that his love was plotting against him; if he didn’t love her, he wouldn’t have been so angry and so upset.

Another way that someone brought up in class is that Hamlet tells Ophelia “Get thee to a/ nunnery” (3.1.148-149), he is trying to protect her. He understands that Polonius and Claudius are watching behind closed doors, and he might be trying to warn Ophelia of the dangers that are surrounding her. If she gets to a nunnery, she can be safe from the physical aspects of living in this palace. She wouldn’t have to deal with the labors such as her father and Claudius plotting. Hamlet might also be protecting her from men in general. He knows the dangers that men can put on woman, both he and her father are examples of this, and he wants to protect her from the hardships that surround her. Getting her to a nunnery would protect her, and this is an obvious showing of how much he cares for her.

Many people believe that Hamlet no longer loves Ophelia because of the way he treated her before the play that was being presented. He accused her of the same things that her father did earlier; being a prostitute, and selling her body to an assortment of men. But this can be interpreted as his hurt. When his true love stopped all connection to him and then appeared before him lying and deceiving, anyone would be affected. Although it is not polite or decent, few people handle this situation valiantly. Hamlet is an example of this, and once he has cooled down I suspect that apologies will be made on both sides and all reason will persevere.

Who's the Damsel?

Jackson Pearce came to talk to all the literature classes about the different examples of archetypes and how they fit into all of the basic storylines that we know. The archetype that caught my attention was that of the damsel in distress. Pearce made it very clear though that the damsel in distress did not have to be completely incapable or dependent on other characters; just at certain parts throughout the work of literature that they are in, they need help from those surrounding them. At some point, I believe that every character within every work is a damsel that needs the help of others to help them in their time of need.

In the Hunger Games, this was very evident. The stereotypical damsel in distress archetype would be placed on Prim in the beginning though. She is a frail, young girl that needs the help of others to survive even in the beginning of the book. When it is stated that she is supposed to go fight in the Hunger Games, Katniss has to step in and take her place. Prim is the ultimate character that needed saving, but she is not the only character within this novel that is the damsel in distress.

 Katniss can also be considered a damsel in distress as well. Although this would not be the first archetype that readers would place her under, she still has qualities of a damsel in distress. She needs the help of Peeta to survive and finish first in the Hunger Games, and after to support her in the rebellion following. Katniss has her moments of weakness, and although she puts on this act of being a tough individual that is self- reliant, she needs that “warrior” or “protective” figure to stand by her and fight for her in her time of need.

Peeta can also be considered a damsel at times. He was Katniss’ protector and guardian for much of the novel’s series, but in the last book, when his memory is taken away, the roles are reversed. He needs Katniss to remind him of the person that he used to be. He needs her to remain close and act like the figure that he was to her. Peeta is also the softer of the two boys fighting for Katniss, which also makes it easier to place him under this category.

There are always a few characters though that have little to no connection to the damsel in distress archetype. Gale is one of those characters. He is the “warrior” figure and although his attitude about fighting and running away and war have changed since the beginning of the book, his archetype has not. He still wants to fight for those people that he loves and he wants to fight for something bigger than himself. Characters like Gale are needed to oppose the damsel image.

 Archetypes are always found within characters, but some may not be as apparent as others. The juxtaposition between the warrior and damsel in distress must always counteract each other in order for there to be balance in the novel.

Amazing

A Thousand Splendid Suns was an amazing book that everyone should read at some time in their lives. I just finished it and I was shocked it took me so long to read, because I had a hard time putting it down. Although it wasn’t the most action packed book out on the shelves of Barnes and Noble, it was one of the most interesting books that I have ever read.

Warning, I am about to spoil a very important moment in the book! My favorite part of the entire book was how there was always a twist when I was least expecting it. Tariq was dead and Laila was mourning his lose and also how Aziza would never know her true father. I, along with Laila, trusted the “honest” man that came to tell the terrible news, and I have to admit, I was furious when I learned about his death. But then when the times seemed too rough for Laila to handle, Tariq showed back up. These twists always came during the bleakest moments and inspired new hope within the characters.

The connection that was made between the characters was so realistic as well. Khaled Hosseini really personified them well and made me feel that same emotions for different characters that they themselves were feeling. I felt the hatred that Miriam and Laila must have felt toward Rasheed every time that he beat them or spoke condescendingly to them. I felt the sadness that haunted Laila when she had to give Aziza to the orphanage and leave her behind every single day. I felt the tormented struggle to determine the emotions about Zalmai; was he a good child or was he going to turn into the same exact being as his father. All of these aspects of the story really kept me wanting to read more and more.

Another aspect that I liked was that it was realistic. Not everything ended happily ever after, making the connections and the plot seem even more real. Not everyone makes it into the peace time after the long fought wars, and this is shown through Mariam's sacrifice to Laila, Tariq, and the children. She made a decision (which she hadn’t done in decades) and saved all of them and gave them a better life.

The entire book just leaves me wanting to read more and learn how everything turns out; which is weird because I have never truly felt that way about a book that wasn’t drowning in action. I liked that the story didn’t need all of the bells and whistles, it just had the simple facts and the story and that is what I believe made it a truly fantastic book. Like I said everyone should have the opportunity to read this book at some point in their life to see a different aspect on a war that we have been fighting for years.

Two Time Periods, One Image

Reading through Hamlet; it reminds me of my outside reading book A Thousand Splendid Suns written by Khaled Hosseini. Upon reading Hamlets soliloquy in class, I kept seeing the reoccurring image of isolation and the feeling of not being accepted that I found in A Thousand Splendid Suns.

Hamlet feels isolated for many different reasons. His father has recently died and it hasn’t even been two months, before everyone has moved on. His mother is even remarrying to Hamlets uncle; her brother-in-law. This was considered incestuous at the time, but Hamlet is the only one that sees the marriage as such. Everyone else seems perfectly content with it. Hamlet also feels like he cannot properly mourn his father because everyone else has moved on. He idolized his father, and while the other citizens and country people have moved on under the reign of Claudius, Hamlet refuses this and continues to think of his father as the true and better king. Hamlet doesn’t even interact with many of the other characters found in the play. While speaking in court, he only addresses his mother and never directly speaks to Claudius.

Almost the same exact story line is occurring in A Thousand Splendid Suns. Miriam has lived with her mother in an isolated area because she is considered a “bastard” child that everyone wants to forget about. They are sent away to this deserted area so people can forget about them and the original sins of the father. This is very similar to Hamlet, because Hamlet was next in line for the throne, yet people seem to want to cast him aside. Miriam also goes through a terrible loss of her Nana (her mother’s name). While she continues to mourn, others are already making plans for her future. After just 2 weeks of mourning time in her biological father’s house, he finds a suitor for her and marries her off. When she cries in front of her new husband, Miriam is continually asked why? No one seems to understand the heavy lose that she has gone through. They all expected her to move on within the course of a few weeks, which is the same exact emotional response that Hamlet is receiving from the different members of his own family.

Miriam is also very isolated. She rarely talks to different characters and when others do approach her, she rarely comments directly back to them. She prefers to spend her times alone in the comfort of her own house.

It was interesting to see almost the same exact occurrences happening in two stories that couldn’t have been more different. Although they are set in different time periods in different parts of the world, this reoccurring imagery of being alone and not being understood is prevalent in many of the stories found in literature. I thought it was very interesting just how closely related these stories were though.

Ted Kooser

In class, we discussed Ted Kooser’s “Blind” poem, to better ourselves in analyzing poetry. I found that I really liked the way that he styled his poems. They were simple thoughts and words written in a pretty simple structure, but each different aspect had a key place. I enjoyed that each word’s denotation would lead to another words connotation or denotation. The web that it created was fascinating to look at and connect to other pieces of the puzzle.

I was planning on doing a more in depth read for my blog, but when I tried to find the poem “Blind”, I could only find the poem that he wrote called “A Blind Woman”. I decided that I was just going to look at it, and see if it was at least similar, and this is when I decided that Ted Kooser is my favorite poet.

She had turned her face up into
a rain of light, and came on smiling.

The light trickled down her forehead
and into her eyes. It ran down

into the neck of her sweatshirt
and wet the white tops of her breasts.

Her brown shoes splashed on
into the light. The moment was like

a circus wagon rolling before her
through puddles of light, a cage on wheels,

and she walked fast behind it,
exuberant, curious, pushing her cane

through the bars, poking and prodding,
while the world cowered back in a corner.

I liked the imagery of the light that is streaming in. When I think of light I think of the little rainbows that show up and the happiness that it usually brings along. But the specific colors that Kooser uses are white and brown. These colors are extremely muted, which was ironic for a piece about being light and colorful. The other imagery that came from the repetition of the word light was joyous happiness and even the curiosity that follows a young girl. But then there is that repeated imagery that is somewhat of a caged animal. The “cage of wheels” and how she is “pushing through the bars” makes it seem like she is caged and only sees light on a small occasion.

This led me to think, is she literally caged within a prison cell, or caged within her own body? She cannot see, which can be told from the title (Blind), but that could mean that her eyes cannot see at all, or that she is blind to the outside world that she is trying so hard to get to. The bars could be that she cannot overcome the struggles that await her.

It also makes me think that she is a sort of animal that people want to see, but at the same time, want to keep their distance from at the same time. The speaker talks about seeing the circus wagons, but then she goes on to say “through the bars, poking and prodding,
while the world cowered back in a corner”. She’s the act that people hope to keep their distance from. But then that also lead me back to the question of what are they wanting to see from her. She might be blind to this as well. She might not see what they see.

This used to frustrate me about poetry that I could never have a clear answer to a question that I had. The poet wasn’t right there to explain the exact uses for the words that he had chosen. But this actually interests me. I like to think of all the different questions and actually using the text to support and disclaim the different theories that float through my head. Poetry is interesting once you find a poet that writes in a style that you prefer.

Not That Bad

When Ms. Clinch first told us that we were about to start a poetry unit, I secretly panicked inside. I have never been able to completely analyze poems the way that the teacher and even the other students have, and knowing that complete analysis is needed for this class, the poetry unit seemed like a difficult unit to cover.

But I’ve learned over the past week that I can find almost anything in a poem and write a semi-solid response on it.  There are so many ways that the poet both visually captures the poems central theme by using various word structures but also the specific words that can be the ultimate piece of understanding the poem and it’s so what.

My favorite poet that we have read in class so far is e.e cummings. I like that he goes against everything that English professors pick over. Nothing is capitalized and words seem to be randomly thrown around, while the stanza’s structure is so diluted that there seems to be no meaning. But every single piece of the poem has a meaning. In the poem in Just, only two words are capitalized, and even after an entire class period discussing it, a proper answer wasn’t formed.

I used to not like that poetry had no answer. That even after a lot of thought and discussion, the true meaning that the poet was trying to convey is never properly struck down. But after last semester of intense analysis, I enjoy that I can take a different meaning from the poem and not be entirely correct. And seeing all the small things that the class picks up is very interesting and adds to my own thoughts about the poem as a whole.

When Ms. Clinch stated that we would have a timed writing on analyzing a poem, my heart did sort of drop though. I did not believe that I was ready to jump into the deep end of completely analyzing a poem for myself. How would I be able to come up with my own ideas and write a solid essay without the help of Ms. Clinch or my fellow peers?

When I walked into class Friday, I was dreading writing this timed writing. I looked at the poem and had a literal pity party for myself for at least a minute, but then I looked at it, read the prompt and started analyzing the prompt. I soon started to see how the structure of the stanzas was leading me to believe one thing about the poem, and that led me to see another aspect of the poem that I had missed in the beginning. Before I knew it, my poem was marked up and I had questions scattered around the margins that would help me write this timed writing. It wasn’t as difficult as it seemed and I realized that poetry isn’t as terrible as it first seemed merely a week ago.

Shadow Hero?

In psychology, we discussed the different archetypes that Carl Jung created. While I was reading the different passages I noticed some key points that really helped put Grendel into perspective, and put it in a way that seemed to capture Grendel specifically.

The first aspect that stood out was “the shadow” character that Jung argued is found in every single work. The Shadow can also be called a villain. What stood out the most though was that, the shadow is neither good nor bad, but is similar to an animal. It stated that an animal is capable of tender care for its young and vicious killing for food, but it doesn’t choose, it does what it has to do. But in the perspective of a human, the animal looks harsh and inhuman, so we as human beings push it aside. This brings back the question of whether Grendel is good or bad. Although in Beowulf, it characterizes him as a ruthless killer for just sport; his personal narrative shows his true proposes. It is hard to characterize whether Grendel is good or bad, and it is difficult to determine if what he is doing is moral or not. He needs to attack to eat, but he also doesn’t need to attack the specific people of Herot (Hart). Grendel was born into the monster that he is, and although he tried desperately in the beginning to gain the trust and love of the humans, they saw him as a threat and treated him as such. This makes the humans look like the monsters. It makes me wonder who is right and who is shaping our ideas to make their own ideas sound better.

The other character that Jung created was called “The Persona”. This character represents the public image of a character and it also comes from the Latin for mask. It can be a good impression or a false one, depending on the individual. Both of these sides show Grendel. He wants to be accepted by the people, but he knows the consequences that will follow. The mask that he puts on could be his “monstrous face” or his gentle side. Both have been seen. Sometimes Grendel kills ruthlessly without a care. Other times he gently treats people; him lifting Unferth up and carrying him home. The characters in the mead hall only see his public face, which shows that he is violent and filled with rage, while he stomps around the castle killing people. The private side shows that he is still scared of weapons, even though he knows they cannot harm him. The different masks that Grendel puts on, helps increase the complexity that arises in determining whether he is good or bad.

We read this passage today in psychology class, and it just jumped out at me how similar it was to Grendel, and how it shows that this difficulty in determining whether the “villain” is good or bad is found in all different kinds of works. It also helped to word the mixed feelings that I was trying to express about Grendel.

Their True Side

I thought the character shifts from Beowulf to Grendel were very interesting to observe, and that is why I chose to write my blog on it this week.

In Beowulf, Hrothgar is characterized as a man of great worth and respect. The mood when he was around was pitiful because of all the hardships that he had gone through. He was losing beloved friends and men, and his large mead hall that was compared to heaven was being torn to shreds by one monster. This is the tone that followed Hrothgar around throughout Beowulf. But when Grendel speaks of him, the reader sees how Hrothgar came into power. He overpowered all the other tribes of individuals living in the woods and made them pay tribute to him. The tribute was so large, that many had a difficult time paying for it, and had barely enough goods to manage themselves. Although Hrothgar offered comfort and safety for them, his character was not the same one that was seen in Beowulf.

Another character that changed quite a bit was Grendel. Even by the first few pages of the book, the reader understood more aspects of Grendel than an entire section of Beowulf. Grendel is described in such great depth, while in Beowulf, it is almost like a game to try and uncover small facts about Grendel. Yes he is the main character in this book and needs to be characterized, but the fact that so much of him was explained in less than half the time he had in Beowulf, shows that the character that he was personified to be in Beowulf, was not even close to the individual that he is.

Grendel’s mother was also different from Grendel to Beowulf. In Beowulf, the mood was fierce and full of revenge. But, as Grendel pointed out earlier, only individuals with thought and knowledge could process the act of revenge. In Beowulf, Grendel’s mother seems to have a plan of attack and knows what she must do in order to properly avenge her son. She seems almost human in this respect, because the Anglo- Saxons believed in avenging their dead and fallen kinsmen. But in the book Grendel, she is portrayed as a monster who has no understanding of language or reasoning. She sits in the corner of the cavern and does little to nothing during the day. Grendel, her own son, does not understand her and has a difficult time approaching her.

The characters started to show their true colors in the beginning stages of this novel. The discovery that Hrothgar was not as honorable of a king as he appeared to be in his later years, helped show how he came into complete power over all of the towns. The characterization of Grendel and his mother also seems switched. This adds more depth to character, in contrast to Beowulf where none of the characters were heavily described.

Feed the Weak to the Strong

I wanted to discuss the topic of Nora and Torvald. In class we have already discussed how their relationship was false and based on the fantasy of a perfect doll house. But when Nora leaves the doll house, is she ready to take on the challenges of reality, or will she end up alone and helpless? Can she handle the struggles that are certain to come against her? The answer is that, no, Nora cannot handle the struggles that will come her way, and she will end up miserable and helpless, and because of her choice, her children will end up just like her.

Nora has had no personal experience with taking care of herself. She has been handed almost everything in her life. Nora was “simply transferred from papa’s hands into [Torvald’s], who arranged everything for his own taste” (260), not allowing Nora for anytime for herself and her own needs. Nora has proven herself to be manipulative and able to persuade Torvald and those around her with her sexuality. Although she has this indirect power over Torvald, she still cannot use it to sway his opinion on larger scale events. She cannot use this manipulative sexuality in the real world, because, as Krogstad proved, it does not appeal to everyone. Nora has no means of attaining money, because she has never had to work or directly care for herself and her family. Although she did a little sewing on the side, this will not support her financially or for a long span of time. Nora believes that when she walks out of Torvald’s perfect doll house, she will be able to manage like Kristine, but with limited experience in any workforce or any knowledge of what she is capable of, she will not be able to support herself.

                Nora is also leaving her children in an impossible situation, because she thoroughly did not plan out her departure. In this timeframe, it was very rare that a woman left her household and her children. Nora lost her mother when she was very young, and grew up with her father. She does not want to influence her children, and does not want them to end up unhappy like she did. But Nora did not take into account that she was leaving all of her children in the same situation that she had been left in. They will grow up with Torvald, and not get the nurturing that a mother would give them, which is also what Nora lacked. Because Nora wanted what was best for the children, she left them so they would not grow up in the perfect doll house. But in doing so, she has left them in the same situation that she was placed in as a child, and it will be more likely for them to develop into the same individual that Nora was in. Nora is not ready to depart into the real world because she could not even imagine the outcomes and consequences that will occur to the children. She is still in her own childhood state thinking about herself, and with this frame of mind, she will not be able to support herself in the harsh reality of the world outside the doll house.

Past in the Present

This is late, but I think that the entire purpose of Chapter 4 was to relate back to Jack and his life in the present. Cass and all the individuals that surrounded that story can be found translated back to the people in Jack’s own life. In a way, it seems like this is how Jack is trying to learn more about the story. Jack had all the facts, but not the truths, and through this selection of people, he can understand those truths that he left decades before.

                Cass reminded me the most of Willie, in his attitude and the way he went from an uneducated sap to a man that could run his own business.  Like Willie, Cass grew up uneducated and not ready to enter into any political or business management position. But over the course of a few years both “were not hobbledehoy” (245) and had learned how to manage certain aspects of the realm they had not understood earlier. They both had the use of mentors (for Cass it was Gilbert and for Willie it was Jack), that helped them develop into these educated men though. Both grew into men that could organize and successfully run a plantation and an entire government. Both were also interested in politics, although not at first (252). Willie became a good politician because Jack encouraged him and told him what to do at all time. Willie developed into this strong natured individual after this and made his own decisions about the policies that he was enforcing. Cass was forced into politics by Gilbert. Although Cass did not want to enter into this work field, he learned that he could be quite successful at it, yet he did not stay in the political field long.

                Gilbert also reminded me of Jack, in how he developed the Cass/Willie character and also how they continuously would take control of a situation. Jack and Gilbert encouraged and mentored their respected individual and brought them into the political and management positions that they had throughout their lives. Without Gilbert/ Jack, Cass/ Willie would not have been the success that they were. Cass wrote that “Gilbert treats me like a wayward and silly child” (274), just like Jack treats Willie in the beginning. Because both of the characters were so lost in the beginning of their political careers, Jack and Gilbert had to guide them and treat them like young children because they were so ignorant to the important business surrounding them. Jack considered Willie a sap in the beginning of his career and had to direct him in everything that Willie did. Both Gilbert and Jack are also not the forefront of the story. Willie is the Governor, and Cass was the focal point of the history paper, and the two other men were not primary characters. Although they were not the leading roles, they still had such a great influence that they might as well have been the lead character.

                Although chapter 4 seems really random, it does tie back into the life that Jack and Willie are leading during the main course of the story. It was interesting to try and find the links between the characters because there were so many of them throughout the chapter.

Just the Beginning to the start of great papers

I believed that I did very well on this essay. I put a lot of detail and thought into it and furthered the analysis more than I have ever done on any other essay written in this class. That showed in the grade and I am very happy with the grade that I received.

Every single essay though I struggle with organization. Although sometimes it is because of the small amount of time and I rush through the essay, this paper I had more time. I need to focus on gathering my thoughts and putting them coherently on the paper. Sometimes I put events in the wrong order as well when it should be in chronological order. Making sure that this organization is present in all of my essays will definitely help increase the average score because it will make it easier for the reader to move through the essay and also make comprehension easier.

I thought that I did a fairly good job at analyzing the characters. Every quotation that was inserted within the paper always had a detailed description of how it fit within the topic that I was discussing and also explained how I saw the character develop. Finding arguments for June was very difficult for me though. I knew what I wanted to say about her because of the things that I had picked up on throughout the course of the short story, but it was difficult for me to put the right quotations down without them being too long or too wordy. The mom I thought I did a better job with, but I still needed to think through the quotations to make sure that the reader understood what I was trying to portray the mother as. This also goes back to the organizational aspect of the paper. As soon as I start organizing my paper better and ensuring that all of my quotations and analysis flow together, this will help everything overall.

I did not talk about Arnold Friend a lot. And he is the one that references the old lady down the block. He was the first to kind of show the ageing process within the story. Although it was present with the first introductions of June and the mother, the old lady showed me the final pieces that helped me put everything together. I should have included Arnold Friend in more detail to discuss how he greatly impacted the short story and helped place all the pieces of the puzzle together.

I really liked my paragraph about the old lady though. I did that one first and im happy with all the quotations that I picked out. I thought I supported them well with analysis and then how it ended the paper with the thoughts that I wanted to put in the readers head.

I know that I still have a lot to work on, but I am very happy with the grade that I received on this paper and will focus on the things that Ms. Clinch pointed out to better my papers and ensure that I get an even higher grade on the next one.

Black, White, Gray

                Willie Stark is a character that is difficult to categorize. It is difficult to tell whether his intentions are for the best, or if they are only a means of gaining a higher political standing. The other characters and Willie himself seem to have a difficult time categorizing him as well.

            People including Hugh and Jack, who have gone with Willie through his change see the difference, but they still have a hard time characterizing him. Jack has been an associate/ therapist/ friend to Willie since the beginning and has seen him change into the governor. There is no question that a change has occurred, but the question is, is it for the better or worse for the society? Jack reminisces about the past, “back when the Boss had been Willie Stark (208). Jack believes that the change has been for the worst. He remembers the babbling man that stood in front of the crowd and read them statistics. The man that Willie is now goes around blackmailing people, and then using them when he finds the time that he needs them for. Jack sees all of this and knows that Willie is changing for the worst. Jack encourages this from the start though. He wanted Willie to go out there and make the people mad. Certain aspects of the way that Willie does business seems to have no effect on Jack. Even though he has been working with Willie the longest, he cannot characterize the man he has become. Hugh, the Attorney General, on the other hand, sees Willies change as becoming soft. Hugh claims that Willie treated Byram White “like he was human, and that [Willie] was saving Byram’s hide” (203). Willie is blackmailing Byram and making him sign his own resignation letter for when Willie needs it for his to discharge Byram. Although Willie threatens Byram, he never actually takes away his job, but gives him the impression that he could take it away any day that he wants to. Hugh is exaserapted at how Willie could be so soft to Byram, and treat him like an individual human being. This is the exact opposite of what is expected. Hugh sees Willie as becoming soft with power, whereas Jack see’s him becoming a monster that Willie was trying to avoid from the start. Both men have been working with Willie for a long period of time, and neither can determine the man that Willie is becoming.

            Willie also seems confused about the route he is taking. Willie used to be considered a sap that had no idea about the running of politics, and was completely naïve to the concept of blackmailing people. He claimed that he did not want to turn out like Dr. Pillsbury and the sheriff, whom he used to oppose greatly. Now he is running the town the same way that they did; through fear tactics and other types of black mail. As soon as Willie was done blackmailing Byram, he claimed that he was going to build “a big, chromium-plated, formaldehyde-stinking free hospital” (209). Willie subconsciously understands that the way that he is running the government and the people is wrong, and tries to make up for it in many different ways, but it does not account for the fact that he is still black mailing people. Willie is his own self and he still appears to not understand his own motives and ways of business. Willie is also always described as wearing all different sorts of gray’s in all of his clothing. This gray characterizes how nothing is in black and white. Willie does not truly understand what is going on and who he is becoming and that is why he is constantly in the gray and why others always see him there. His material things such as a car (which is black) and house (white) appear to be things that he truly understands.

            Throughout the novel, it is not clearly understood what side of politics that Willie presents. Warren could be trying to depict how this is true of real life politics. Everyone is trying to achieve greatness through honesty, but that is not possible and they must resort to the dishonest side of politics.  

Underlying Power

Willie Stark is a man that is portrayed in the beginning of the novel as having the most power. He dominates the town, and every citizen and follower of his listens intently to the speeches that he gives and every word that he speaks. Although Willie seems to be this dominating force that makes his own ideas and theories, he seems easily influenced by the important people surrounding him, and also in certain situations, he seems to have no control. Although these individuals are portrayed as being followers of Willie and beneath him; they are the ones influencing him and the ones showing more dominance.

            The first indicator of the underlying characters influencing Willie is his wife Lucy. Although Lucy is a woman, who in this timeframe has limited rights and powers, she encourages Willie to follow her own ideals. She “don’t much favor drinking” (26), and although she doesn’t push Willie to follow this, Willie does. Willie is meeting with Tiny and Jack in Slade’s bar, and even though they are all drinking beers, Willie will not because Lucy does not like it. Although Lucy is not there at that moment, he still follows her lead, even though she is a woman. Willie is also described as a “teacher’s pet” (21), while Lucy is the “school-teacher” (21). A teacher’s pet follows every rule and procedure that the teacher tells them. The boys were all giving Willie a tough time during this section of the novel because Lucy is the woman that is bossing Willie, when it should be the other way around. Even though Lucy is portrayed as a docile individual who is a doting wife, who follows her husband’s lead; she is secretly the woman who is running the show.

            Jack is another individual that influences Willie Stark. Jack Burden is Willie’s right hand man; a man that is supposed to help him make decisions, but not the one that actually makes the final decision. Jack tells Willie to follow the strategy of “making them mad. Even if they were made at [him].” (108). Willie had been going through the political process with the mind frame that the people wanted statistics and facts. He had been sprouting these around during his speeches and didn’t understand why the people did not enjoy his speeches. Jack was the first to tell Willie to change his strategy, and become more human and less mechanical during these. Willie listened and started doing as Jack said, and as soon as he started listening to Jack, he started becoming, little by little more popular in the votes. Willie is supposed to be the leader and make the final decisions once he’s heard others point of views; but instead he just listens to them and does not make a decision of his own.

            Willie is portrayed as a character with the most political power, and as being a “big man”. But without his main group of followers, including his wife and Jack, he would not be as powerful as he is in the town. Willie cannot make decisions for himself, and as soon as he was assisted, he became a more dominant leader. Willie went from “a sap” (112), to a political dominator who the entire town followed, and merely because of his underlying friends and influencers, who helped him achieve his success.

Beauty and the Beast

We looked at Cinderella in all the different lens theories. I decided to look at another Disney movie, Beauty and the Beast, and see if there was a common theme, if it was viewed through the Marxist lens.

The quick role changes from oppressor to victim was one aspect that stood out the most in the movie. In the beginning, the prince was the oppressor, who viewed very individual as ranking below him. When the beggar woman came, he saw her and decided that he did not need to offer his help. He quickly changed from the oppressor to the victim though when he was changed into the beast. The old beggar woman changed from a needy homeless woman, to a strong enchantress. Later on in the story as well, the Beast took Belle hostage. As a hostage she was forced to wear a certain dress and forced to come down to dinner, Belle was clearly the victim, while the Beast dictated her. Belle soon took control though and did not fear the Beast when he yelled, and continuously yelled back. Although she was still considered a hostage, she was conversing and acting like she was an equal.

The difference between Belle and Cinderella though was their economic status. Cinderella was very pretty and came from a rich family, although she was treated poorly. Although Belle was good looking, she came from a middle to lower class family. Cinderella was able to move through the upper ranks to get to the prince because of her social standings and because of her looks. If she had not been a part of the upper class, her and her family would not have been invited to the ball. Belle did not have to move through the upper ranks to marry her prince. If she had been upper class, she would have travelled on a better road in better transportation and would not have been in the situation that Belle was in. Because of her lower rank, she was able to meet the Beast and fall in love.

Material items were also not as prevalent in Beauty and the Beast, as they were in Cinderella. Gowns and carriages and other wealthy material items, were very important to Cinderella in achieving her status. Without these things, she would not have been “good enough” to go to the ball. Everything that was described in the story Cinderella was very lavish and decorated, and that did not appear in Beauty and the Beast. The setting was in a dreary castle with a mangy beast. The first recollection of material goods is at the end of the movie when they are dancing in the ballroom, in their formal dress.

Although Cinderella and Belle have many similarities throughout the simple watching of the movie, they are very different in the Marxism lens. Where Cinderella focuses on moving up in her status, Belle is comfortable in her status. Cinderella focuses heavily on lush material objects to gain her prince, while Belle focuses on getting out of the castle. The switching of roles can be seen in both stories though. The Beast and Belles change of roles can be related to how Cinderella became a princess. Cinderella used to be the victim of her sisters, but as soon as she became a person of power, they bowed down to her, and she became the oppressor (although Cinderella did not use this power to gain revenge). Cinderella and Beauty and the Beast, although written for similar purposes, are very different in the Marxist lens.  

Loneliness in a Croweded Town

In class discussions, almost all of the stories have been discussed, except for the story of “Loneliness”. I thought that it was very interesting that this story was never discussed in great detail during the discussions, but I can see why. The story itself seems to have no real connection to the rest of the story as a whole at first, and also the main character, George Willard, is only mentioned one time. But the story of “Loneliness” shows the resounding themes that everyone in the story relates to, being lonely and finding a place for themselves. It also helps show how key George is to the other characters in the story, and how he helps them and learns to understand them all.

Enoch, like the rest of the characters in the story, feels this lonely sense of not belonging, although he tries to acknowledge societies expectation of him, he cannot grasp the norms. He was very proud of himself when he “became a citizen of the world”, which is when he listened to society. Enoch voted, married, had children, and read the newspaper on his front porch, but this was not the life that he expected for himself. He became bored and claustrophobic with this life that he had created for himself, so he quite it. Many other characters were not satisfied with the lives that they had chosen for themselves, including Elizabeth, who married but not for love and Alice, who was continuously waiting for a man to show up, but never did. What is different is that he had the love that he thought he wanted, but in the end tossed it away. Many characters spend their entire lives waiting for their spouse, and he found one and just left her.

Enoch follows his own path for fitting into society though and makes up his imaginary friends. Society did not give him a proper group to fit into so he made his own. He dreamed, and the result was a group of close, but imaginary friends. He tries to take his fantasy world and bring it into the real world when he tells his next door neighbor, but as soon as he professes his dreams to her, his friends vanish. This contradicts what is stated about dreams in the rest of the story though. Dreams should be kept and followed through. As soon as he spreads his dream and tells another person, they vanish and he never sees his “friends” again. Dreams do not exist in the real world of Enoch.  

            Enoch also had dreams about his future, like many other characters within the story, but they were quickly crushed by life. Enoch wanted to go to Paris to become an artist, but this did not turn out well and that is why he moved to Winesburg. Although he was a very good artist, this dream was crushed. Elizabeth did not want the same thing happening to George and that is why she wanted him to keep dreaming. Wing also encouraged George to keep dreaming, although they could be quickly crushed.

            Enoch also goes to talk about these occurrences with George. George is a young boy, who everyone is trying to save from becoming a grotesque. Enoch can be characterized as one of the loneliest people in this story, and by telling George his story; he can try and prevent George from becoming like him. He does not want George to become as lonely and as desperate for a place to fit in as he is.

            Loneliness is a very important story and shows how lonely almost all the characters are in one single and unified character. Every character has their own reason for being lonely, but when Enoch tries to bring his fantasies into the real world, that is when he becomes completely alone.