12/16/13
"A Girl"
The tree has entered my hands,
The sap has ascended my arms,
The tree has grown in my breast -
Downward,
The branches grow out of me, like arms.
Tree you are,
Moss you are,
You are violets with wind above them.
A child - so high - you are,
And all this is folly to the world.
-Ezra Pound
The struggle of wanting to choose another Sylvia Plath poem, but knowing that I should expand my knowledge of poets and poems. Even though I was hesitant, I decided to venture out a choose a poem by a poet that I have not heard of before. I chose "A Girl" by Ezra Pound. At first glance, this poem looks quite simple and is easy to read. However, I believe there is a deeper meaning within this poem.
The first stanza of the poem uses the pronoun "me." It talks as if a tree is growing out of the girl. I am assuming it is a girl because the title of the poem is "A Girl", but the speaker could be a boy. The reason I think that the speaker could also be a boy is because the second stanza uses the pronoun "you." A boy could be talking about himself and then talking about a girl he sees, or the speaker could be a girl talking to a person or an individual. Personally, I believe that the speaker is a girl talking about herself in the first stanza and is talking toward a specific individual in the second stanza.
Trees usually represent life or growth. The first stanza sets up the imagery of a tree entering this girl and then the tree begins to grow out of the girl. The tree entered through the HANDS. It did not enter through the head or the heart. I think it is significant that the tree entered through the hands over any other part of the body. Humans work with their hands, and the hands are one of the most sensitive areas of the body. People touch other people with hands to show comfort or feeling. The tree entered through the hands, so that it could be transferred to other people and grow in other people. The tree spreads its roots and sap throughout the girls body. It takes root in her "breast" and spreads out through her "like arms." The girl is now full of life. The tree could represent life and wisdom. The girl has transformed into a tree herself.
The second stanza focuses on the "you" pronoun. "Tree YOU are. Moss YOU are." It seems that the speaker in the first stanza has realized her own potential and wants to point it out to another individual. The speaker in the first stanza realizes the life and wisdom growing within her, and she wants another individual to realize the beauty, life, and wisdom within his or herself. The speaker says "A child." So the girl speaking seems to be older and wiser and she is speaking to a child. This girl has discovered the tree inside her and wants to enlighten the child to the tree inside his or herself. "Folly" is defined as a lack of sense or foolishness. The idea that a person could be a tree or could be colors in the wind (Pocahontas similarities) is foolish to the world. Not everyone believes that a person could be a tree. Most people in the world find this idea ridiculous. This seems to relate to the idea of innocence versus enlightenment. Those who are innocent do not believe that people can posses the life and wisdom of a tree and of nature. However, a person who is enlightened knows that people can posses the wisdom of a tree and life of nature. The girl in the poem is enlightened with the idea that a person can become full of life like nature is full of life. She is trying to enlighten an innocent child with this idea and make him or her aware of his or her potential.
Monday, December 16, 2013
Sunday, December 15, 2013
12/15/13
Oh The Age of Innocence. I was hoping that I would like this book so much better than I actually did. It was not an awful book! However, it was not what I was expecting. I liked the basic storyline between Newland, Ellen, and May. However, I felt that the novel dragged on at times and all of the connections between the families were confusing. UGH and that ending! HE JUST LEAVES. I have mixed emotions about the ending of the novel. I was angry at first because a part of me wanted to see what Ellen would have done. On the other hand, I kinda like how he just walked away. There seems to be some satisfaction in Newland walking away from the situation. But why did he walk away? What made him decide it was time to leave? Newland says that he was waiting for a signal. Newlands signal was the closing of the shutters. The narrator states, "At length a light shone through the windows, and a moment later a man-servant came out on the balcony, drew up the awnings, and closed the shutters. At that, as if it had been the signal he waited for, Newland Archer got up slowly and walked back alone to his hotel," (Wharton 293). This ending connects to the precious signal Newland waited for. When Ellen was standing on the beach, Newland convinced himself that he would go get her if she turned around. She never turned around, so he never went and got her. Newland seems to live his life merely on signals! I believe that deep down Newland knew that he did not want to interact with Ellen, so he made up a signal that sealed the deal. It convinced him of a feeling that he already had. Did he leave to honor his wife's memory? Did he leave because he did not want to deal with the past? Or did he leave because he would find no satisfaction in seeing Ellen again? I think he left because he finds more satisfaction in fantasizing a situation than actually experiencing a situation. It all goes back to the quote at the beginning of the novel. It states, "and thinking over a pleasure to come often have him a subtler satisfaction than it's realization," (Wharton 6). Sneaking you Mary Wharton, sneaky you sneaking in quotes in the beginning that will be relevant in the end. Newland does not go in because he likes to imagine what it would we like to see Ellen again. Ellen is no longer young and beautiful. She might have changed completely. But if Newland only imagines a scenario in his head, then she cannot disappoint him.
The Age of Innocence definitely had interesting aspects to the story line. I think that the ending was one of my favorite parts. It was interesting to see Newland walk away when most people would think that he would go and see Ellen again. It's also interesting that he stayed with May and the fact that May knew what was going on and his feelings for Ellen the WHOLE time. Yes the novel was slow and different than what I thought it would be. But it did have some interesting and thought provoking elements.
Oh The Age of Innocence. I was hoping that I would like this book so much better than I actually did. It was not an awful book! However, it was not what I was expecting. I liked the basic storyline between Newland, Ellen, and May. However, I felt that the novel dragged on at times and all of the connections between the families were confusing. UGH and that ending! HE JUST LEAVES. I have mixed emotions about the ending of the novel. I was angry at first because a part of me wanted to see what Ellen would have done. On the other hand, I kinda like how he just walked away. There seems to be some satisfaction in Newland walking away from the situation. But why did he walk away? What made him decide it was time to leave? Newland says that he was waiting for a signal. Newlands signal was the closing of the shutters. The narrator states, "At length a light shone through the windows, and a moment later a man-servant came out on the balcony, drew up the awnings, and closed the shutters. At that, as if it had been the signal he waited for, Newland Archer got up slowly and walked back alone to his hotel," (Wharton 293). This ending connects to the precious signal Newland waited for. When Ellen was standing on the beach, Newland convinced himself that he would go get her if she turned around. She never turned around, so he never went and got her. Newland seems to live his life merely on signals! I believe that deep down Newland knew that he did not want to interact with Ellen, so he made up a signal that sealed the deal. It convinced him of a feeling that he already had. Did he leave to honor his wife's memory? Did he leave because he did not want to deal with the past? Or did he leave because he would find no satisfaction in seeing Ellen again? I think he left because he finds more satisfaction in fantasizing a situation than actually experiencing a situation. It all goes back to the quote at the beginning of the novel. It states, "and thinking over a pleasure to come often have him a subtler satisfaction than it's realization," (Wharton 6). Sneaking you Mary Wharton, sneaky you sneaking in quotes in the beginning that will be relevant in the end. Newland does not go in because he likes to imagine what it would we like to see Ellen again. Ellen is no longer young and beautiful. She might have changed completely. But if Newland only imagines a scenario in his head, then she cannot disappoint him.
The Age of Innocence definitely had interesting aspects to the story line. I think that the ending was one of my favorite parts. It was interesting to see Newland walk away when most people would think that he would go and see Ellen again. It's also interesting that he stayed with May and the fact that May knew what was going on and his feelings for Ellen the WHOLE time. Yes the novel was slow and different than what I thought it would be. But it did have some interesting and thought provoking elements.
12/14/13
Our class discussion on A Doll House was quite interesting. I thought for the most part, everyone seemed to agree on many of the questions that were posed during the discussion. For example, when it came to the German ending, we all seemed to hate it. How could we not? It changed the WHOLE meaning of the poem! It completed defeated Nora's transformation as a character. In about three sentences, Ibsen changed the whole play. Nora would have gone back to the life as a doll in the doll house if she had stayed with Torvald and the children. Another question that came up when we were discussing was about Nora's decision to leave and whether or not it was selfish of her to leave her children. Personally I think Nora was being selfish, but I think she had to leave to complete her arch as a character. At first I thought Nora was making a good decision because she was breaking the cycle. The cycle that has started with her father and continued with Torvald and is now continuing with her children. However, a good point was brought up yesterday. Nora could be actually continuing the cycle. Nora grew up without a mother, so her father treated her as a doll. Since Nora left her children, Torvald could begin to treat his children as dolls and the cycle will never be broken. Could Nora be a hero if she selfishly left her children behind? I don't think so. A hero sacrifices things for other people. Nora is sacrificing her family and her children's lives for herself. Her duties are to herself. Will she ever go back to the Doll house? I don't think so. I think since she left without thinking of her family, she will learn to live without them and find something better.
Who do you feel sympathy for at the end of the play? This was a question that most people could not agree on. Some people said Torvald because he was just following the standards of society when it was Nora who lied and scammed. Some people said Nora because she is married to an awful man and is treated badly. And, some people said both! My very first reaction to this question was "neither," Yes Torvald followed the rules of society, but he treated Nora like a child and if he had opened his eyes he would have seen that Nora was playing him. Yes Nora lied and scammed to help save her husbands life, but she is blind to the "doll" life she is living and does not take charge. I believe that the fault for their situation at the end is both of their faults. That is why I have little sympathy for both of them.
Overall, I really enjoyed reading A Doll House. I liked it SO much better than The Age of Innocence. It was easier to get involved with the characters and it was easier to follow and understand. There was also a plus in hearing fellow students read each part!
Our class discussion on A Doll House was quite interesting. I thought for the most part, everyone seemed to agree on many of the questions that were posed during the discussion. For example, when it came to the German ending, we all seemed to hate it. How could we not? It changed the WHOLE meaning of the poem! It completed defeated Nora's transformation as a character. In about three sentences, Ibsen changed the whole play. Nora would have gone back to the life as a doll in the doll house if she had stayed with Torvald and the children. Another question that came up when we were discussing was about Nora's decision to leave and whether or not it was selfish of her to leave her children. Personally I think Nora was being selfish, but I think she had to leave to complete her arch as a character. At first I thought Nora was making a good decision because she was breaking the cycle. The cycle that has started with her father and continued with Torvald and is now continuing with her children. However, a good point was brought up yesterday. Nora could be actually continuing the cycle. Nora grew up without a mother, so her father treated her as a doll. Since Nora left her children, Torvald could begin to treat his children as dolls and the cycle will never be broken. Could Nora be a hero if she selfishly left her children behind? I don't think so. A hero sacrifices things for other people. Nora is sacrificing her family and her children's lives for herself. Her duties are to herself. Will she ever go back to the Doll house? I don't think so. I think since she left without thinking of her family, she will learn to live without them and find something better.
Who do you feel sympathy for at the end of the play? This was a question that most people could not agree on. Some people said Torvald because he was just following the standards of society when it was Nora who lied and scammed. Some people said Nora because she is married to an awful man and is treated badly. And, some people said both! My very first reaction to this question was "neither," Yes Torvald followed the rules of society, but he treated Nora like a child and if he had opened his eyes he would have seen that Nora was playing him. Yes Nora lied and scammed to help save her husbands life, but she is blind to the "doll" life she is living and does not take charge. I believe that the fault for their situation at the end is both of their faults. That is why I have little sympathy for both of them.
Overall, I really enjoyed reading A Doll House. I liked it SO much better than The Age of Innocence. It was easier to get involved with the characters and it was easier to follow and understand. There was also a plus in hearing fellow students read each part!
Saturday, November 30, 2013
11/30/13
Over Thanksgiving break, there were many specials on tv having to do with President Kennedy's assassination. I watched some of these specials with my dad, and he convinced me to read the book Killing Kennedy by Bill O'Reilly. Granted with all of the eating and sleeping, I have only had the chance to read the first 20 pages. But so far, I am quite interested and intrigued. Yes the conspiracy is extremely interesting and even the facts leading up to Kennedy's assassination are interesting, but what I found interesting is the way the book is written. Thanks to AP Lit, I found myself looking at the way the novel was written instead of just reading the book for information. It occurred to me that depending on the way the book is written a reader could be persuaded to believe that Kennedy was a great man or that he was an awful president. The way the book is written could also influence the reader to believe the conspiracy against Kennedy or believe that a single man was in charge of his assassination. In my opinion, O'Reilly does a pretty good job at stating the facts and keeping his opinion out of the novel so far. It dawned on me though that an author has the power to make a reader believe or feel the way he or she wants by using the right syntax and diction. A writer can make you hate a character by using negative diction or make you love a character by using positive diction. How else do we have heroes and enemies?! I do not read a lot of non fiction novels because to be honest I never found anything interesting about non fiction works. Why would I want to read about something in real life when I could escape and read about a fantasy works that I only wish existed. However, the more I think about it, I think non fiction works could be interesting. The author must have to focus on not sounding bias when writing non fiction novels. I know I would personally have a difficult time keeping my opinion out of certain real life situations. A question usually asked in English classes usually is "Can we trust the narrator and author?" "How do we know he or she is not biased?" After reading Frankenstein and Age of Innocence, it is common for authors to put aspects of their own life into their work. If an author hates 15 year old boys who play guitar, then it is likely for them to negatively describe a character like that in his or her novel which could in turn convince the reader that 15 year old boys who play guitar are awful human beings. How can we trust that not every author or narrator is biased? Is it possible for people to not be biased? I think that no matter how hard we try, people will always sound at least a little bit biased. The wording of every novel would have to be bland and perflectly worded as to not make people feel a certain way about a character or situation. Oh so complicated! Anyway it is time for me to either read some more or maybe go take a nap. We'll see which option wins!
Over Thanksgiving break, there were many specials on tv having to do with President Kennedy's assassination. I watched some of these specials with my dad, and he convinced me to read the book Killing Kennedy by Bill O'Reilly. Granted with all of the eating and sleeping, I have only had the chance to read the first 20 pages. But so far, I am quite interested and intrigued. Yes the conspiracy is extremely interesting and even the facts leading up to Kennedy's assassination are interesting, but what I found interesting is the way the book is written. Thanks to AP Lit, I found myself looking at the way the novel was written instead of just reading the book for information. It occurred to me that depending on the way the book is written a reader could be persuaded to believe that Kennedy was a great man or that he was an awful president. The way the book is written could also influence the reader to believe the conspiracy against Kennedy or believe that a single man was in charge of his assassination. In my opinion, O'Reilly does a pretty good job at stating the facts and keeping his opinion out of the novel so far. It dawned on me though that an author has the power to make a reader believe or feel the way he or she wants by using the right syntax and diction. A writer can make you hate a character by using negative diction or make you love a character by using positive diction. How else do we have heroes and enemies?! I do not read a lot of non fiction novels because to be honest I never found anything interesting about non fiction works. Why would I want to read about something in real life when I could escape and read about a fantasy works that I only wish existed. However, the more I think about it, I think non fiction works could be interesting. The author must have to focus on not sounding bias when writing non fiction novels. I know I would personally have a difficult time keeping my opinion out of certain real life situations. A question usually asked in English classes usually is "Can we trust the narrator and author?" "How do we know he or she is not biased?" After reading Frankenstein and Age of Innocence, it is common for authors to put aspects of their own life into their work. If an author hates 15 year old boys who play guitar, then it is likely for them to negatively describe a character like that in his or her novel which could in turn convince the reader that 15 year old boys who play guitar are awful human beings. How can we trust that not every author or narrator is biased? Is it possible for people to not be biased? I think that no matter how hard we try, people will always sound at least a little bit biased. The wording of every novel would have to be bland and perflectly worded as to not make people feel a certain way about a character or situation. Oh so complicated! Anyway it is time for me to either read some more or maybe go take a nap. We'll see which option wins!
Sunday, November 17, 2013
11/17/13
My two favorite poems out of the William Blake packet are "The Divine Image" and "The Human Abstract." These are the two poems that my group was assigned to piece back together. (Shout out to Sven and I for figuring out the order of "The Human Abstract." Trust me, that was no easy task to complete). "The Divine Image" is from Songs of Innocence while "The Human Abstract" is from Songs of Experience. The titles themselves connect yet contrast at the same time. When I hear "divine image" I usually lift the image up to a holy or God-like image. "Human Abstract" makes me think of an imperfect human. I think of all different parts of a human put together, and it is most certainly not God-like. "The Divine Image" seems to discuss God himself, and His interaction with humans. The humans pray to God with emotions of "Mercy, Pity, Peace, and Love" to say thank you. The poem seems to say that God is made of these emotions, so he made man of the same emotions. "Mercy has a human heart, Pity a human face, And Love, the human form divine, And Peace, the human dress," all of these emotions make up a part of a man. God is the "human form divine." God is the divine image, and humans have parts of God in them. God must love the humans because they all have a part of God in them. They appear to be God in human form. "The Divine Image" discusses the positive results of the emotions of mercy, pity, peace and love, but "The Human Abstract" talks about the negative side of being made of such emotions. "Pity would be no more, If we did not make somebody Poor." If people did not suffer, pity would not exist. People have to suffer, so that all aspects of human emotions can be felt. "The Catterpiller and Fly, Feed on the Mystery," These insects seem to feed on the mystery of human emotions. "The fruit of Deceit" relates to the Garden of Eden. The fruit is a lie, and it is "ruddy" and bloody. The men search to find the tree with fruit, insects, and Raven, but the tree grows in human brains. This is a tree of emotions that oppose one another. The Gods are searching to understand the humans' emotions and how they act. In this poem of experience, it seems that humans have taken the emotions of God and have manipulated them to fit their own evolution. When a human is innocent, they portray the pure emotions of God, however, when they have experience, they manipulate the pure emotions to fit their own progress and society.
I think that it was extremely wise and sneaky for John Gardner to put an expert of a Blake poem in the beginning of Grendel. It seems as if he was trying to warn us of Grendel's transformation. Grendel begins is life innocent of the world. He knows nothing out of his own little cave and his mother. Once Grendel explores the outside world and becomes connected with Hrothgar, he has gained experience. Grendel's own life journeys from innocence to experience. He ends up hating the men's society just as Blake did. Grendel thinks that the men's society is based on sacrifice (which is exactly what Blake thought). Sneaky Gardner, very very sneaky.
My two favorite poems out of the William Blake packet are "The Divine Image" and "The Human Abstract." These are the two poems that my group was assigned to piece back together. (Shout out to Sven and I for figuring out the order of "The Human Abstract." Trust me, that was no easy task to complete). "The Divine Image" is from Songs of Innocence while "The Human Abstract" is from Songs of Experience. The titles themselves connect yet contrast at the same time. When I hear "divine image" I usually lift the image up to a holy or God-like image. "Human Abstract" makes me think of an imperfect human. I think of all different parts of a human put together, and it is most certainly not God-like. "The Divine Image" seems to discuss God himself, and His interaction with humans. The humans pray to God with emotions of "Mercy, Pity, Peace, and Love" to say thank you. The poem seems to say that God is made of these emotions, so he made man of the same emotions. "Mercy has a human heart, Pity a human face, And Love, the human form divine, And Peace, the human dress," all of these emotions make up a part of a man. God is the "human form divine." God is the divine image, and humans have parts of God in them. God must love the humans because they all have a part of God in them. They appear to be God in human form. "The Divine Image" discusses the positive results of the emotions of mercy, pity, peace and love, but "The Human Abstract" talks about the negative side of being made of such emotions. "Pity would be no more, If we did not make somebody Poor." If people did not suffer, pity would not exist. People have to suffer, so that all aspects of human emotions can be felt. "The Catterpiller and Fly, Feed on the Mystery," These insects seem to feed on the mystery of human emotions. "The fruit of Deceit" relates to the Garden of Eden. The fruit is a lie, and it is "ruddy" and bloody. The men search to find the tree with fruit, insects, and Raven, but the tree grows in human brains. This is a tree of emotions that oppose one another. The Gods are searching to understand the humans' emotions and how they act. In this poem of experience, it seems that humans have taken the emotions of God and have manipulated them to fit their own evolution. When a human is innocent, they portray the pure emotions of God, however, when they have experience, they manipulate the pure emotions to fit their own progress and society.
I think that it was extremely wise and sneaky for John Gardner to put an expert of a Blake poem in the beginning of Grendel. It seems as if he was trying to warn us of Grendel's transformation. Grendel begins is life innocent of the world. He knows nothing out of his own little cave and his mother. Once Grendel explores the outside world and becomes connected with Hrothgar, he has gained experience. Grendel's own life journeys from innocence to experience. He ends up hating the men's society just as Blake did. Grendel thinks that the men's society is based on sacrifice (which is exactly what Blake thought). Sneaky Gardner, very very sneaky.
Sunday, November 10, 2013
11/10/13
Female Author
All day she plays at chess with the bones of the world:
Favored (while suddenly the rains begin
Beyond the window) she lies on cushions curled
And nibbles an occasional bonbon of sin.
Prim, pink-breasted, feminine, she nurses
Chocolate fancies in rose-papered rooms
Where polished higboys whisper creaking curses
And hothouse roses shed immortal blooms.
The garnets on her fingers twinkle quick
And blood reflects across the manuscript;
She muses on the odor, sweet and sick,
Of festering gardenias in a crypt,
And lost in subtle metaphor, retreats
From gray child faces crying in the streets.
-Sylvia Plath
Sylvia Plath strikes again. From the title itself, the reader can conclude that the poem is most likely going to be about a female. A female author literally wrote the poem (Sylvia Plath), and a female is the main focus of the poem. Words such as pink, feminine, rose-papered all relate to women. However, this poem highlights the more feminine qualities of a woman, but pins a grim and creepy twist to the stereotypical characteristics. The poem begins by saying that the woman plays chess with "bones of the world." Would anyone normally think of a female playing chess with bones of the world? Nope not normally. This could possibly mean that women actually run the world. They watch over everyone, and once they are gone, they use their bones to play games. Women take control and play games with the remains of the people they once knew. She lays on her posh cushion and takes and "nibbles" on a sin. Plath is highlighting the prim and proper qualities of a woman, but seems to be making fun of these qualities at the same time. This woman is proper, yet she nibbles on sin. In my opinion, he word "nibbles" in the sense to have a mocking tone. The woman knows that she is expected to be dainty and clean, yet she mocks these expectation by taking small bites of a sin. She commits these sins with a sly attitude. She knows it is unexpected for her to sin, yet she does it anyway. Oddly enough, I could not find the definition for a "higboy." Urban dictionary gave me a glorious description, "some weird word used by Sylvia Plath in her poem 'Female Author.'" Yes thank you for that fistful of knowledge. Safe to say, I am not sure what this word means. The poem continues describing feminine qualities of a room, but then takes an eerie twist when it says "whisper creaking curses." Could these curses be the curses a woman faces? This woman is forced in to a life full of cushions, and pink things, and rose-papered rooms. She is cursed with a prim and proper life, and the house she is in will not let her forget it. Garnets are defined as deep red, precious stones. There is an interesting connection between a red stone and the deep red color of blood. She seems mesmerized by the blood and by the smell of the blood. She seems more interested in the blood than the prim house around her. The odor is "sweet and sick" which is contradictory. The odor is similar to gardenias in a crypt. The flowers are described in a grim way by relating them to flowers given to dead people resting in a crypt. This woman seems to be related to death. She hides from the "gray child faces" outside her house. People who are dead are usually described as having a gray or white hue to their face. This woman is surrounded by prim and proper, feminine things, yet she is also surrounded by death. This poem could be mocking the prim and proper steryotypes that go along with being a woman by connecting them to qualities of death.
Female Author
All day she plays at chess with the bones of the world:
Favored (while suddenly the rains begin
Beyond the window) she lies on cushions curled
And nibbles an occasional bonbon of sin.
Prim, pink-breasted, feminine, she nurses
Chocolate fancies in rose-papered rooms
Where polished higboys whisper creaking curses
And hothouse roses shed immortal blooms.
The garnets on her fingers twinkle quick
And blood reflects across the manuscript;
She muses on the odor, sweet and sick,
Of festering gardenias in a crypt,
And lost in subtle metaphor, retreats
From gray child faces crying in the streets.
-Sylvia Plath
Sylvia Plath strikes again. From the title itself, the reader can conclude that the poem is most likely going to be about a female. A female author literally wrote the poem (Sylvia Plath), and a female is the main focus of the poem. Words such as pink, feminine, rose-papered all relate to women. However, this poem highlights the more feminine qualities of a woman, but pins a grim and creepy twist to the stereotypical characteristics. The poem begins by saying that the woman plays chess with "bones of the world." Would anyone normally think of a female playing chess with bones of the world? Nope not normally. This could possibly mean that women actually run the world. They watch over everyone, and once they are gone, they use their bones to play games. Women take control and play games with the remains of the people they once knew. She lays on her posh cushion and takes and "nibbles" on a sin. Plath is highlighting the prim and proper qualities of a woman, but seems to be making fun of these qualities at the same time. This woman is proper, yet she nibbles on sin. In my opinion, he word "nibbles" in the sense to have a mocking tone. The woman knows that she is expected to be dainty and clean, yet she mocks these expectation by taking small bites of a sin. She commits these sins with a sly attitude. She knows it is unexpected for her to sin, yet she does it anyway. Oddly enough, I could not find the definition for a "higboy." Urban dictionary gave me a glorious description, "some weird word used by Sylvia Plath in her poem 'Female Author.'" Yes thank you for that fistful of knowledge. Safe to say, I am not sure what this word means. The poem continues describing feminine qualities of a room, but then takes an eerie twist when it says "whisper creaking curses." Could these curses be the curses a woman faces? This woman is forced in to a life full of cushions, and pink things, and rose-papered rooms. She is cursed with a prim and proper life, and the house she is in will not let her forget it. Garnets are defined as deep red, precious stones. There is an interesting connection between a red stone and the deep red color of blood. She seems mesmerized by the blood and by the smell of the blood. She seems more interested in the blood than the prim house around her. The odor is "sweet and sick" which is contradictory. The odor is similar to gardenias in a crypt. The flowers are described in a grim way by relating them to flowers given to dead people resting in a crypt. This woman seems to be related to death. She hides from the "gray child faces" outside her house. People who are dead are usually described as having a gray or white hue to their face. This woman is surrounded by prim and proper, feminine things, yet she is also surrounded by death. This poem could be mocking the prim and proper steryotypes that go along with being a woman by connecting them to qualities of death.
Thursday, October 31, 2013
10/31/13
"True! Nervous -- very, very nervous I had been and am! But why will you say that I am mad? The disease had sharpened my senses -- not destroyed them.
Above all was the sense of hearing. I heard all things in the heaven and in the earth. I heard many things in the underworld. How, then, am I mad? Observe how healthily -- how calmly I can tell you the whole story
If still you think me mad, you will think so no longer when I describe the wise steps I took for hiding the body. I worked quickly, but in silence. First of all, I took apart the body. I cut off the head and the arms and the legs." The Tell Tale Heart by Edgar Allen Poe
In the spirit of Halloween, I decided to read The Tell Tale Heart by Edgar Allen Poe. (If you watch Criminal Minds and are in love with Matthew Gray Gubler like I am, then I suggest you google his reading of the poem/story. It's amazing!) Anyway, as I was reading the work, I decided to pick out the points that I found interesting. Interesting enough, the passages I found reminded me of chapter 7 in Grendel, the speaker is talking about how he is not mad. He brings up the question of if he is crazy or not. While Grendel, accuses himself of being crazy and points out that he is. The speaker of this work contrasts Grendel by pointing out that he is not crazy. Usually the word disease has a negative connotation. It leaves people weak and destroyed. But instead, the disease gifted him. The disease heightened his senses and made him a better man. It seems that the disease has given him a God like power. He is able to hear everything on Heaven and on Earth. He now has an omniscient presence. This new power does not make him mad however. He is able to stay calm even though he can sense every little thing going on around him. Nothing phases him because he is now God.
The second part of the work I selected was towards the end. He is still calming that he is not mad and that he is a rational human being. He is God and he can control the life and death of all people. He took specific steps to hide the body. It almost sounds as if he thinks himself as a genius because he hide the body so well. He worked "quickly but in silence." This ties back into the omniscient presence. God does not physically perform his deeds. He works silently like a ghost. The fact that he cuts up the old man's body reminds of fragmentation. He thinks he is organized and put together by taking the time to cut up the body. I think it is funny that he is trying to convince the reader that his mind is whole and not fragmented. In order to seem sane and whole, he cuts up the body which I think is a little ironic. He cuts off the head the arms and the legs. These parts are needed together to make the body seem whole. Without the limbs, the body is no longer pieced together how it is supposed to be naturally. He is taking on the role of God and performing an unnatural act. He is taking control of a situation when is mind is spinning out of control. I think it is interesting that he is earnestly trying to convince the reader that he is not crazy. He's claiming that he is not crazy because he did a good job and murdering the man and hiding the body. This is the logic of a mad man. A normal person would not be thinking of a murder as a natural and organized act. He could be trying to convince himself more than the reader that he is not crazy. He's trying to convince himself that what he did was a good thing. He is justifying the fact that he killed a man that never harmed him. The old man never harmed him, said a bad word about him, NOTHING. Yet he killed him. What a twisted work for a twisted Halloween. Happy Halloween everyone!
"True! Nervous -- very, very nervous I had been and am! But why will you say that I am mad? The disease had sharpened my senses -- not destroyed them.
Above all was the sense of hearing. I heard all things in the heaven and in the earth. I heard many things in the underworld. How, then, am I mad? Observe how healthily -- how calmly I can tell you the whole story
If still you think me mad, you will think so no longer when I describe the wise steps I took for hiding the body. I worked quickly, but in silence. First of all, I took apart the body. I cut off the head and the arms and the legs." The Tell Tale Heart by Edgar Allen Poe
In the spirit of Halloween, I decided to read The Tell Tale Heart by Edgar Allen Poe. (If you watch Criminal Minds and are in love with Matthew Gray Gubler like I am, then I suggest you google his reading of the poem/story. It's amazing!) Anyway, as I was reading the work, I decided to pick out the points that I found interesting. Interesting enough, the passages I found reminded me of chapter 7 in Grendel, the speaker is talking about how he is not mad. He brings up the question of if he is crazy or not. While Grendel, accuses himself of being crazy and points out that he is. The speaker of this work contrasts Grendel by pointing out that he is not crazy. Usually the word disease has a negative connotation. It leaves people weak and destroyed. But instead, the disease gifted him. The disease heightened his senses and made him a better man. It seems that the disease has given him a God like power. He is able to hear everything on Heaven and on Earth. He now has an omniscient presence. This new power does not make him mad however. He is able to stay calm even though he can sense every little thing going on around him. Nothing phases him because he is now God.
The second part of the work I selected was towards the end. He is still calming that he is not mad and that he is a rational human being. He is God and he can control the life and death of all people. He took specific steps to hide the body. It almost sounds as if he thinks himself as a genius because he hide the body so well. He worked "quickly but in silence." This ties back into the omniscient presence. God does not physically perform his deeds. He works silently like a ghost. The fact that he cuts up the old man's body reminds of fragmentation. He thinks he is organized and put together by taking the time to cut up the body. I think it is funny that he is trying to convince the reader that his mind is whole and not fragmented. In order to seem sane and whole, he cuts up the body which I think is a little ironic. He cuts off the head the arms and the legs. These parts are needed together to make the body seem whole. Without the limbs, the body is no longer pieced together how it is supposed to be naturally. He is taking on the role of God and performing an unnatural act. He is taking control of a situation when is mind is spinning out of control. I think it is interesting that he is earnestly trying to convince the reader that he is not crazy. He's claiming that he is not crazy because he did a good job and murdering the man and hiding the body. This is the logic of a mad man. A normal person would not be thinking of a murder as a natural and organized act. He could be trying to convince himself more than the reader that he is not crazy. He's trying to convince himself that what he did was a good thing. He is justifying the fact that he killed a man that never harmed him. The old man never harmed him, said a bad word about him, NOTHING. Yet he killed him. What a twisted work for a twisted Halloween. Happy Halloween everyone!
Sunday, October 27, 2013
10/27/13
So Grendel is a lot more complicated, twisted, and weird than I expected it to be. Like hello I did not know about how Grendel violated the woman in chapter seven. Way too much imagery there! However, I was interested in connecting the Zodiac signs to chapters and figuring out why each chapter was a certain zodiac sign was picked for a chapter over another. My group and I are discussing chapter seven for the lesson project. The zodiac sign for chapter seven is the Libra. I researched certain the characteristics of the Libra. Some of the positive words for a libra are diplomatic, graceful, peaceful, idealistic, and hospitable. Now these words do not sound like they relate to any of the characters in Grendel so far. Grendel is a monster who can never seem to make up his mind on who to trust. The men seem to do whatever they want whenever they want. So who shows the positive qualities of a Libra? Well, a woman is introduced in this chapter. She sacrifices herself for her people. She tries to help all of the men and tries to be the peacekeeper between them. She is the only one who is portrayed as graceful and peaceful in the novel so far. Unlike the positive words associated with a Libra, the negative words seem to connect to chapter seven. Negative words associated with a Libra include superficial, vain, indecisive, and unreliable. Now these words connect with this chapter perfectly! All of the characters, except for possibly the woman, are superficial and vain. They look out for themselves and strive for power. They want gold and woman and power. They have their brotherhood, but their ultimate goal is to lookout for themselves. The thanes want to protect the king, and they do so because of the brotherhood, but they also want to move up in their society. They want to be the best thane they can be in order to gain treasures and rewards from the king. I was so excited when I learned that indecisive was a word that connects to a Libra. Grendel is the most indecisive character in the novel. Hello! Just make a decision and be done with it! Words cannot describe how frustrated I get with him because he cannot make up his mind and is easily influenced. Does he agree with the dragon? Does he agree with the men and the shaper? Should he kill the men? Should he try and be at peace with the men? WHO KNOWS? He sure does not know. He cannot figure out what is going on in his mind. Not only is he at war with the men, but he is also at war with himself. Grendel is not just indecisive, he is also unreliable. Since he is so indecisive, can we trust him as a narrator? Can we trust his opinions on the men or on the dragon? Once again, WHO KNOWS? These are a few of the questions I have been asking myself since the beginning of the novel, and so far, I have not found the answers. I will continue to keep these questions in mind. I also think it is a good idea to look up the zodiac sign of a certain chapter after you read it because it helps you understand how the characteristics of the zodiac sign connect to the chapter.
Website used for zodiac sign info: http://zodiac-signs-astrology.com/zodiac-signs/libra.htm
So Grendel is a lot more complicated, twisted, and weird than I expected it to be. Like hello I did not know about how Grendel violated the woman in chapter seven. Way too much imagery there! However, I was interested in connecting the Zodiac signs to chapters and figuring out why each chapter was a certain zodiac sign was picked for a chapter over another. My group and I are discussing chapter seven for the lesson project. The zodiac sign for chapter seven is the Libra. I researched certain the characteristics of the Libra. Some of the positive words for a libra are diplomatic, graceful, peaceful, idealistic, and hospitable. Now these words do not sound like they relate to any of the characters in Grendel so far. Grendel is a monster who can never seem to make up his mind on who to trust. The men seem to do whatever they want whenever they want. So who shows the positive qualities of a Libra? Well, a woman is introduced in this chapter. She sacrifices herself for her people. She tries to help all of the men and tries to be the peacekeeper between them. She is the only one who is portrayed as graceful and peaceful in the novel so far. Unlike the positive words associated with a Libra, the negative words seem to connect to chapter seven. Negative words associated with a Libra include superficial, vain, indecisive, and unreliable. Now these words connect with this chapter perfectly! All of the characters, except for possibly the woman, are superficial and vain. They look out for themselves and strive for power. They want gold and woman and power. They have their brotherhood, but their ultimate goal is to lookout for themselves. The thanes want to protect the king, and they do so because of the brotherhood, but they also want to move up in their society. They want to be the best thane they can be in order to gain treasures and rewards from the king. I was so excited when I learned that indecisive was a word that connects to a Libra. Grendel is the most indecisive character in the novel. Hello! Just make a decision and be done with it! Words cannot describe how frustrated I get with him because he cannot make up his mind and is easily influenced. Does he agree with the dragon? Does he agree with the men and the shaper? Should he kill the men? Should he try and be at peace with the men? WHO KNOWS? He sure does not know. He cannot figure out what is going on in his mind. Not only is he at war with the men, but he is also at war with himself. Grendel is not just indecisive, he is also unreliable. Since he is so indecisive, can we trust him as a narrator? Can we trust his opinions on the men or on the dragon? Once again, WHO KNOWS? These are a few of the questions I have been asking myself since the beginning of the novel, and so far, I have not found the answers. I will continue to keep these questions in mind. I also think it is a good idea to look up the zodiac sign of a certain chapter after you read it because it helps you understand how the characteristics of the zodiac sign connect to the chapter.
Website used for zodiac sign info: http://zodiac-signs-astrology.com/zodiac-signs/libra.htm
Sunday, October 6, 2013
10/6/13
"The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" by T.S. Elliot is quite an interesting poem. I would like to start off by addressing the name of the speaker. J. Alfred Prufrock is such an interesting name for the name of a man who has his own love song. When I picture J. Alfred Prufrock, I see an older man who is quiet and unattractive. It is an odd name for a poem supposedly about a love song.
The poem itself took a different turn than what I was expecting when I read the title. The poem deals with society's pressure on the individual, inner conflict, sleep and dreams, fragmentation, etc. I thought the poem would be about a man falling in love. The poem was not only different than I expected, but a few aspects present in the poem are also present in the novel Winesburg, Ohio by Sherwood Anderson. The element of fragmentation is present in both works. The different stanzas of the poem seem to have a different image. The first stanza sets an image of the streets and life at night. The last stanza sets an image of drowning and dying. Then there are the stanzas in between, that talk about mermaids, and windows, and crying, and eyes. SO MUCH IMAGERY. While the poem is fragmented with imagery, Winesburg, Ohio is fragmented with different stories. That is one of the reasons why critics argue over whether the novel is a collection of short stories or one novel. Each chapter discusses a different story concerning a different grotesque. The story "Hands" discusses the life of Wing Biddlebaum and the truth that brought him into Winesburg. The story "Respectability" discusses the story of Wash Williams and his truth. The only element of the novel that connects the stories is the character George Willard. Similar to George, Prufrock is the only element of the poem that connects all of the imagery and fragmentation. All of the images describe what he is feeling, and what he is thinking about in regards to his life and the decisions he made.
Fragmentation is not the only connection between the novel and the poem. Dismemberment plays a significant role in both works. Certain parts of the body are focused on in both works. The body is not looked at as a whole. Prufrock states, "To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet; There will be time to murder and create, And time for all the works and days of hands," (Elliot 27-29). Faces and hands are parts of a whole. Elliot uses synecdoches often in the poem. Prufrock seems to look at people in parts. He does not look at people as a whole. These parts are what define people. Similar to Wing Biddlebaum in Winesburg. Wing's hands are what cause him to become a grotesque. His hands are the part of him that he is defined by. He is constantly trying to hide his hands from getting too excited and emoting any feelings he has. People in the town know him for his hands, not him as a whole.
Fragmentation and dismemberment are not the only connections between"The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" and Winesburg, Ohio. I could go on for days talking about all of the themes that we discussed about in class. Fragmentation and dismemberment were the two elements that I found to be interesting. I enjoyed reading both the poem and the novel. Analyzing the poem with the novel in mind helped me find deeper meaning in the poem. It really is possible to find connections between any two pieces of literature!
"The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" by T.S. Elliot is quite an interesting poem. I would like to start off by addressing the name of the speaker. J. Alfred Prufrock is such an interesting name for the name of a man who has his own love song. When I picture J. Alfred Prufrock, I see an older man who is quiet and unattractive. It is an odd name for a poem supposedly about a love song.
The poem itself took a different turn than what I was expecting when I read the title. The poem deals with society's pressure on the individual, inner conflict, sleep and dreams, fragmentation, etc. I thought the poem would be about a man falling in love. The poem was not only different than I expected, but a few aspects present in the poem are also present in the novel Winesburg, Ohio by Sherwood Anderson. The element of fragmentation is present in both works. The different stanzas of the poem seem to have a different image. The first stanza sets an image of the streets and life at night. The last stanza sets an image of drowning and dying. Then there are the stanzas in between, that talk about mermaids, and windows, and crying, and eyes. SO MUCH IMAGERY. While the poem is fragmented with imagery, Winesburg, Ohio is fragmented with different stories. That is one of the reasons why critics argue over whether the novel is a collection of short stories or one novel. Each chapter discusses a different story concerning a different grotesque. The story "Hands" discusses the life of Wing Biddlebaum and the truth that brought him into Winesburg. The story "Respectability" discusses the story of Wash Williams and his truth. The only element of the novel that connects the stories is the character George Willard. Similar to George, Prufrock is the only element of the poem that connects all of the imagery and fragmentation. All of the images describe what he is feeling, and what he is thinking about in regards to his life and the decisions he made.
Fragmentation is not the only connection between the novel and the poem. Dismemberment plays a significant role in both works. Certain parts of the body are focused on in both works. The body is not looked at as a whole. Prufrock states, "To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet; There will be time to murder and create, And time for all the works and days of hands," (Elliot 27-29). Faces and hands are parts of a whole. Elliot uses synecdoches often in the poem. Prufrock seems to look at people in parts. He does not look at people as a whole. These parts are what define people. Similar to Wing Biddlebaum in Winesburg. Wing's hands are what cause him to become a grotesque. His hands are the part of him that he is defined by. He is constantly trying to hide his hands from getting too excited and emoting any feelings he has. People in the town know him for his hands, not him as a whole.
Fragmentation and dismemberment are not the only connections between"The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" and Winesburg, Ohio. I could go on for days talking about all of the themes that we discussed about in class. Fragmentation and dismemberment were the two elements that I found to be interesting. I enjoyed reading both the poem and the novel. Analyzing the poem with the novel in mind helped me find deeper meaning in the poem. It really is possible to find connections between any two pieces of literature!
Monday, September 30, 2013
9/30/2013
My legs are covered in bruises, and I can barely move my body. I'm positive people think I was kicked in the leg due to the giant bruise on my right knee. However, I was not beaten, and I did not fall down a hill. I actually started to learn my solo yesterday. My solo is to the song "Bottom of the River" by Delta Rae. Words cannot describe how much I love this song and how great the dance makes me feel(even though my stamina is not up to par, and I'm breathing like a dog only a minute in). At the beginning of the session with my teacher, he went into detail about the song and about its meaning. It seemed like he had sat down and analyzed it just like any piece of literature we would analyze in class. He wanted to look at the song from every possible angle so that we could portray the story that the song illustrated. After a lengthy discussion we decided to focus on the idea that a woman is possessed and believes that God is going to come for her baby. In order to save her baby, she goes to the river to baptize him, but in reality she drowns the baby. I am going to analyze a portion of the song to see if that section goes along with the main story my teacher and I came up with. Here is the portion of the song:
If you get sleep or if you get none
The cock's gonna call in the morning, baby
Check the cupboard for your daddy's gun
Red sun rises like an early warning
The Lords gonna come for your first born son
His hairs on fire and his heart is burning
Go to the river where the water runs
Wash him deep where the tides are turning
One word that describes this passage is "warning." The first two lines of the passage say that no matter how much sleep the woman gets the rooster is going to wake her up early in the morning. No matter what, the rooster is going to call to bid her to her duties. I had a little trouble interpreting the next line, "Check the cupboard for your daddy's gun." I asked myself, "Why would she need a gun if she is planning on baptizing her son?" I believe that the voice that is telling her to "baptize" her baby is telling her to grab a gun for protection. If anything goes wrong, then the woman has the gun. The line could also take an even darker turn if there could be a possibility that the woman will wake up from her dreamlike state and realize what she has done to her baby then she would need the gun to use it on herself. (And I did not think this song could get any darker!) The word "warning" comes into play with the next line. The red sun is rising early in the morning as a warning to the woman. She needs to hurry and baptize her son before the Lord takes him away. The line, "His hairs on fire and his heart is burning," connects to the idea of damnation. The baby is damned if the mother does not baptize him in the river. The words "fire" and "burning" remind me of hell. The baby will go to hell if the woman does not save him. The woman must go to the river and wash him DEEP. She does not need to put the baby in the water and then take him out. She must push him deep into the river. If she does not push him deep into the river, then the baby cannot be saved. The woman is possessed to believe that she is doing the right thing in trying to save her son when in reality she is killing him.
I absolutely love this song, and I am ecstatic that I get to interpret this song not only in the way of analyzing literature, but in movement with my body. I can analyze the song and create movements that portray the deeper meaning of the song. This is why I love to dance, and love to express myself through dance. It allows me to analyze a song with movement and with expression, and allows me to portray is with my body not just with words.
My legs are covered in bruises, and I can barely move my body. I'm positive people think I was kicked in the leg due to the giant bruise on my right knee. However, I was not beaten, and I did not fall down a hill. I actually started to learn my solo yesterday. My solo is to the song "Bottom of the River" by Delta Rae. Words cannot describe how much I love this song and how great the dance makes me feel(even though my stamina is not up to par, and I'm breathing like a dog only a minute in). At the beginning of the session with my teacher, he went into detail about the song and about its meaning. It seemed like he had sat down and analyzed it just like any piece of literature we would analyze in class. He wanted to look at the song from every possible angle so that we could portray the story that the song illustrated. After a lengthy discussion we decided to focus on the idea that a woman is possessed and believes that God is going to come for her baby. In order to save her baby, she goes to the river to baptize him, but in reality she drowns the baby. I am going to analyze a portion of the song to see if that section goes along with the main story my teacher and I came up with. Here is the portion of the song:
If you get sleep or if you get none
The cock's gonna call in the morning, baby
Check the cupboard for your daddy's gun
Red sun rises like an early warning
The Lords gonna come for your first born son
His hairs on fire and his heart is burning
Go to the river where the water runs
Wash him deep where the tides are turning
One word that describes this passage is "warning." The first two lines of the passage say that no matter how much sleep the woman gets the rooster is going to wake her up early in the morning. No matter what, the rooster is going to call to bid her to her duties. I had a little trouble interpreting the next line, "Check the cupboard for your daddy's gun." I asked myself, "Why would she need a gun if she is planning on baptizing her son?" I believe that the voice that is telling her to "baptize" her baby is telling her to grab a gun for protection. If anything goes wrong, then the woman has the gun. The line could also take an even darker turn if there could be a possibility that the woman will wake up from her dreamlike state and realize what she has done to her baby then she would need the gun to use it on herself. (And I did not think this song could get any darker!) The word "warning" comes into play with the next line. The red sun is rising early in the morning as a warning to the woman. She needs to hurry and baptize her son before the Lord takes him away. The line, "His hairs on fire and his heart is burning," connects to the idea of damnation. The baby is damned if the mother does not baptize him in the river. The words "fire" and "burning" remind me of hell. The baby will go to hell if the woman does not save him. The woman must go to the river and wash him DEEP. She does not need to put the baby in the water and then take him out. She must push him deep into the river. If she does not push him deep into the river, then the baby cannot be saved. The woman is possessed to believe that she is doing the right thing in trying to save her son when in reality she is killing him.
I absolutely love this song, and I am ecstatic that I get to interpret this song not only in the way of analyzing literature, but in movement with my body. I can analyze the song and create movements that portray the deeper meaning of the song. This is why I love to dance, and love to express myself through dance. It allows me to analyze a song with movement and with expression, and allows me to portray is with my body not just with words.
Thursday, September 26, 2013
9/26/13
"Frog Autumn" By Sylvia Plath
Summer grows old, cold-blooded mother.
The insects are scant, skinny.
In these palustral homes we only
Croak and wither.
Mornings dissipate in somnolence.
The sun brightens tardily
Among the pithless reeds. Flies fail us.
he fen sickens.
Frost drops even the spider. Clearly
The genius of plenitude
Houses himself elsewhere. Our folk thin
Lamentably.
I would like to start off by saying that Sylvia Plath's poems are extremely interesting to read. They are not completely straight forward, and it is hard to figure out the meaning of the poem by only reading it once. It was difficult to pick out one poem from the long list of her poems, but "Frog Autumn" stuck out to me. I not only picked it because it was one of the shorter poems, but I picked it because after I read this poem and continued looking at other poems in the list, I could not get "Frog Autumn" out of my mind. The title itself is what drew my attention. "Frog Autumn." Autumn is the season that comes after summer, and it is usually a transition season where weather begins to change and elements of life begin to change. But why did Plath add the word frog? The definitions of frog are: 1. tailless amphibian with smooth skin with long legs for leaping 2. person who is characterized as repulsive in appearance or character 3. a french person 4. thing used to hold something 5. raised area on a surface. When I first read the word "Frog" I thought this poem could possibly be about a frog, the amphibian, in autumn. After looking up the definition, I think that definition number four could be the possible definition that goes along with the poem as a whole.
I decided that before I could analyze this poem, I needed to define the words that I did not know. Here is the list of definitions I found:
1. palustral: living in or pertaining to marshes
2. dissipate: scatter or disperse
3. somnolence: sleepy state; sleepiness
4. pithless: weak; lacking strength
5. fen: low, marshy area; frequently flooded area of land
6. plenitude: abundance
7. lamentably: deplorably; unfortunate manner; deserving strong condemnation
Without looking up these words, I would not have been able to fully understand the poem. In the first line of the poem, Plath uses the word mother. I believe that mother could be referring to mother nature because the summer is growing cold. Mother nature is turning cold blooded as fall and winter approach. Insects begin to die when the weather turns cold. Plath seems to be utilizing the word palustral to create a marshy, dark, cold, swamp imagery for the environment. The people who live in the marshy home live in the middle of nature. They are being affected by mother nature just as the insects and the weather are. It does not seem to have a positive connotation because the imagery is dark and damp. The mornings during autumn disperse in a sleepy state indicating that nature and life and in the swampy area are in a sleepy state. This puts an image in my mind of an early morning when the sun is rising and the grass has dew on it and it is cold and damp and there is a slight fog in the air. The mornings seem to scatter without anyone noticing. The shift to colder weather has put everyone in a sleepy dreamlike state. The sun rises late like it is in no hurry to light up the sky indicating a perpetual dreamlike state. The flies are dying, and the plants are weakening. The "he" before fen seems to give it a human like quality. The life of the marshy are begins to sicken as the cold weather descends in the area. Even the genius spiders begin to die. They attempt to house themselves in places that they hope are safe from the cold, but even the most genius insects cannot save themselves from the frost of the coming season. The family is also affected. The folk thins in an unfortunate manner. When I read this line, I think of family members retreating into themselves during the cold months. They tend to be in a sleep like state, and want to be by themselves. They want to survive on their own during the changing season.
The definition of "Frog" that best fits this poem is: a thing used to hold to something. Elements in the swampy area try to hold on to life during the shift of mother nature. The weather is changing and life seems to be dying. The spiders try to hold on to life, but even the genius spiders cannot survive the changing season. Overall, this poems seems to shine a negative light on the changing season. It describes a swampy area with life dying all around. Families disperse, and nature and organisms seem to be in a sleep like state. I love this poem, and enjoyed reading it. I love the eerie feeling it gives to autumn. I always thought of winter as being the season where everything dies. But now, I can picture an early fall morning that is quiet and serene. Life seems to be still and silent, and even though everything seems to be dying, the morning has a peaceful quality that I can relate to when I think of autumn.
*definitions found on google.com definitions*
"Frog Autumn" By Sylvia Plath
Summer grows old, cold-blooded mother.
The insects are scant, skinny.
In these palustral homes we only
Croak and wither.
Mornings dissipate in somnolence.
The sun brightens tardily
Among the pithless reeds. Flies fail us.
he fen sickens.
Frost drops even the spider. Clearly
The genius of plenitude
Houses himself elsewhere. Our folk thin
Lamentably.
I would like to start off by saying that Sylvia Plath's poems are extremely interesting to read. They are not completely straight forward, and it is hard to figure out the meaning of the poem by only reading it once. It was difficult to pick out one poem from the long list of her poems, but "Frog Autumn" stuck out to me. I not only picked it because it was one of the shorter poems, but I picked it because after I read this poem and continued looking at other poems in the list, I could not get "Frog Autumn" out of my mind. The title itself is what drew my attention. "Frog Autumn." Autumn is the season that comes after summer, and it is usually a transition season where weather begins to change and elements of life begin to change. But why did Plath add the word frog? The definitions of frog are: 1. tailless amphibian with smooth skin with long legs for leaping 2. person who is characterized as repulsive in appearance or character 3. a french person 4. thing used to hold something 5. raised area on a surface. When I first read the word "Frog" I thought this poem could possibly be about a frog, the amphibian, in autumn. After looking up the definition, I think that definition number four could be the possible definition that goes along with the poem as a whole.
I decided that before I could analyze this poem, I needed to define the words that I did not know. Here is the list of definitions I found:
1. palustral: living in or pertaining to marshes
2. dissipate: scatter or disperse
3. somnolence: sleepy state; sleepiness
4. pithless: weak; lacking strength
5. fen: low, marshy area; frequently flooded area of land
6. plenitude: abundance
7. lamentably: deplorably; unfortunate manner; deserving strong condemnation
Without looking up these words, I would not have been able to fully understand the poem. In the first line of the poem, Plath uses the word mother. I believe that mother could be referring to mother nature because the summer is growing cold. Mother nature is turning cold blooded as fall and winter approach. Insects begin to die when the weather turns cold. Plath seems to be utilizing the word palustral to create a marshy, dark, cold, swamp imagery for the environment. The people who live in the marshy home live in the middle of nature. They are being affected by mother nature just as the insects and the weather are. It does not seem to have a positive connotation because the imagery is dark and damp. The mornings during autumn disperse in a sleepy state indicating that nature and life and in the swampy area are in a sleepy state. This puts an image in my mind of an early morning when the sun is rising and the grass has dew on it and it is cold and damp and there is a slight fog in the air. The mornings seem to scatter without anyone noticing. The shift to colder weather has put everyone in a sleepy dreamlike state. The sun rises late like it is in no hurry to light up the sky indicating a perpetual dreamlike state. The flies are dying, and the plants are weakening. The "he" before fen seems to give it a human like quality. The life of the marshy are begins to sicken as the cold weather descends in the area. Even the genius spiders begin to die. They attempt to house themselves in places that they hope are safe from the cold, but even the most genius insects cannot save themselves from the frost of the coming season. The family is also affected. The folk thins in an unfortunate manner. When I read this line, I think of family members retreating into themselves during the cold months. They tend to be in a sleep like state, and want to be by themselves. They want to survive on their own during the changing season.
The definition of "Frog" that best fits this poem is: a thing used to hold to something. Elements in the swampy area try to hold on to life during the shift of mother nature. The weather is changing and life seems to be dying. The spiders try to hold on to life, but even the genius spiders cannot survive the changing season. Overall, this poems seems to shine a negative light on the changing season. It describes a swampy area with life dying all around. Families disperse, and nature and organisms seem to be in a sleep like state. I love this poem, and enjoyed reading it. I love the eerie feeling it gives to autumn. I always thought of winter as being the season where everything dies. But now, I can picture an early fall morning that is quiet and serene. Life seems to be still and silent, and even though everything seems to be dying, the morning has a peaceful quality that I can relate to when I think of autumn.
*definitions found on google.com definitions*
Sunday, September 22, 2013
9/22/2013
Throughout the week, our class has been having an insightful discussion about the novel, Winesburg, Ohio. Doing the seminar in smaller groups was a good choice. I liked how there was a bigger chance of someone having the opportunity to make their claim and have a chance to explain it without having to worry about someone else needing to talk. Doing the seminars in smaller groups allowed for more in depth conversations about the individual stories, and helped me look at the stories in a new light.
My group did our seminar over the story "Adventure." I thought our discussion went extremely well, and we all brought up good points that showed our close reading of the text. One of the points that we talked about was the point about the words "walk" vs. "run" not only in "Adventure," but throughout the entire novel of Winesburg, Ohio as a whole. While I was reading the book, I indexed, circled, and underlined the word walk like a madman. Every time the word came up (which was a lot), I would think to myself, "This is an important word that has a much deeper meaning, and I am going to find out what that meaning is." The word walk is important because it shows up in about every story in the novel. Many characters end up walking up and down the roads of Winesburg, and many go outside to walk and gather their thoughts. I think walking represents confusion, being unsure, and being troubled with aspects of life. When a character walks, he or she is confused or unsure of his or her thoughts. However, when a character runs, he or she is certain and acting on impulse. He or she is not thinking about the consequences or the causes of his or her actions, but letting his or her impulses make the decisions. The first time I figured out the significance of the word "run" was in "Adventure." The narrator states, "Without stopping to think of what she intended to do, she ran downstairs through the dark house and out into the rain. As she stood on the little grass plot before the house and felt the cold rain on her body a mad desire to run naked through the streets to possession of her," (Anderson 111). At this point, Alice is not thinking, but doing. She is letting her impulses make decisions for her that she would not normally make. The Alice stops and realizes what she is doing. She collapses to the ground and begins to crawl on her hands and knees back to her house. Her impulses scare her so much that she can't even get up and walk back to her house. She has to crawl on her hands and knees because she is defeated and mortified. She crawls back to her house and accepts her truth. She accepts her fate of being alone for the rest of her life and gives up hope. This is the truth she accepts which makes her a grotesque.
There are so many other interesting points that I could talk about from my group's discussion as well as other groups' discussions. I enjoy doing seminars like this because they help me further understand the stories and look at them with a new point of view.
Throughout the week, our class has been having an insightful discussion about the novel, Winesburg, Ohio. Doing the seminar in smaller groups was a good choice. I liked how there was a bigger chance of someone having the opportunity to make their claim and have a chance to explain it without having to worry about someone else needing to talk. Doing the seminars in smaller groups allowed for more in depth conversations about the individual stories, and helped me look at the stories in a new light.
My group did our seminar over the story "Adventure." I thought our discussion went extremely well, and we all brought up good points that showed our close reading of the text. One of the points that we talked about was the point about the words "walk" vs. "run" not only in "Adventure," but throughout the entire novel of Winesburg, Ohio as a whole. While I was reading the book, I indexed, circled, and underlined the word walk like a madman. Every time the word came up (which was a lot), I would think to myself, "This is an important word that has a much deeper meaning, and I am going to find out what that meaning is." The word walk is important because it shows up in about every story in the novel. Many characters end up walking up and down the roads of Winesburg, and many go outside to walk and gather their thoughts. I think walking represents confusion, being unsure, and being troubled with aspects of life. When a character walks, he or she is confused or unsure of his or her thoughts. However, when a character runs, he or she is certain and acting on impulse. He or she is not thinking about the consequences or the causes of his or her actions, but letting his or her impulses make the decisions. The first time I figured out the significance of the word "run" was in "Adventure." The narrator states, "Without stopping to think of what she intended to do, she ran downstairs through the dark house and out into the rain. As she stood on the little grass plot before the house and felt the cold rain on her body a mad desire to run naked through the streets to possession of her," (Anderson 111). At this point, Alice is not thinking, but doing. She is letting her impulses make decisions for her that she would not normally make. The Alice stops and realizes what she is doing. She collapses to the ground and begins to crawl on her hands and knees back to her house. Her impulses scare her so much that she can't even get up and walk back to her house. She has to crawl on her hands and knees because she is defeated and mortified. She crawls back to her house and accepts her truth. She accepts her fate of being alone for the rest of her life and gives up hope. This is the truth she accepts which makes her a grotesque.
There are so many other interesting points that I could talk about from my group's discussion as well as other groups' discussions. I enjoy doing seminars like this because they help me further understand the stories and look at them with a new point of view.
Sunday, September 15, 2013
9/15/2013
In chapter eighteen of Frankenstein, Mary Shelley quotes a passage from "Tintern Abbey." I believe Shelley uses this section of the poem to show Victor Frankenstein's connection to nature and the difference between Henry and Victor. In this part of the book, Victor is talking about his journey with Clerval. He talks about how the nature and scenery calm him and help him feel better. Victor states, "I seemed to drink in a tranquility to which I had long been a stranger," (Shelley 138). In "Tintern Abbey," Wordsworth talks about how he has been absent for five years. He has come back to a place that he now views differently. It is almost like he is looking at scenery from a different point of view similar to the point of view of stranger.
The part of the poem that Shelley selected comes from the third section of the poem that we discussed in class. In the third section of the poem, Wordsworth travels deeper into his memory and talks about what he has gained and what he has lost when coming back to the Abbey. Similar to Wordsworth, Victor is dealing with inner thoughts of what he has to lose and what he has to gain. In chapter eighteen, Victor must decide if he should finish creating the female creature or to ignore the creature's request and hope that he does not come after him. During this stressful time, Victor finds solace in nature and in his friend Henry Clerval.
Shelley uses this part of the poem to describe Clerval directly. Victor is delighted that Henry is eager to see the world and to travel. This part of the poem illustrates how Henry feels about nature. He is in awe by the scenery and consumed by nature. Henry seems to represent a younger version or healthier/happy version of Victor. Victor used to find solace in nature when he was younger, and still finds solace in it when he is not feeling well. However, Henry is more excited to see the world and all it has to offer. In my mind, I connect this to Wordsworth and his sister. Wordsworth's sister represents a younger version of Wordsworth that can still be awed by nature. Wordsworth has grown and is less amazed by nature. The feeling he gets when he sees nature is calm and more subdued than when he was younger. I believe that Victor feels the same way about Henry. Victor is dealing with the creature and the threats the creature made against him. Victor can be relaxed by nature, but he is not excited or amazed by nature. On the other hand, Henry is happy and energetic and excited to see what the world has to offer. Shelley states Wordsworth, "Their colours and their forms, were then to him An appetite; a feeling, and a love," (Shelley 140). Henry has an appetite for nature and to see the world. He is hungry for it. Henry and Wordsworth's sister are similar because they are young and adventurous. Victor and Wordsworth are similar because they have gone through hardships and have grown up and now view things differently than they did when they were younger. Shelley uses this poem to describe Henry's connection to nature compared to Victor's connection. I believe she also uses it to parallel Wordsworth and Victor, and Henry and Wordsworth's sister.
In chapter eighteen of Frankenstein, Mary Shelley quotes a passage from "Tintern Abbey." I believe Shelley uses this section of the poem to show Victor Frankenstein's connection to nature and the difference between Henry and Victor. In this part of the book, Victor is talking about his journey with Clerval. He talks about how the nature and scenery calm him and help him feel better. Victor states, "I seemed to drink in a tranquility to which I had long been a stranger," (Shelley 138). In "Tintern Abbey," Wordsworth talks about how he has been absent for five years. He has come back to a place that he now views differently. It is almost like he is looking at scenery from a different point of view similar to the point of view of stranger.
The part of the poem that Shelley selected comes from the third section of the poem that we discussed in class. In the third section of the poem, Wordsworth travels deeper into his memory and talks about what he has gained and what he has lost when coming back to the Abbey. Similar to Wordsworth, Victor is dealing with inner thoughts of what he has to lose and what he has to gain. In chapter eighteen, Victor must decide if he should finish creating the female creature or to ignore the creature's request and hope that he does not come after him. During this stressful time, Victor finds solace in nature and in his friend Henry Clerval.
Shelley uses this part of the poem to describe Clerval directly. Victor is delighted that Henry is eager to see the world and to travel. This part of the poem illustrates how Henry feels about nature. He is in awe by the scenery and consumed by nature. Henry seems to represent a younger version or healthier/happy version of Victor. Victor used to find solace in nature when he was younger, and still finds solace in it when he is not feeling well. However, Henry is more excited to see the world and all it has to offer. In my mind, I connect this to Wordsworth and his sister. Wordsworth's sister represents a younger version of Wordsworth that can still be awed by nature. Wordsworth has grown and is less amazed by nature. The feeling he gets when he sees nature is calm and more subdued than when he was younger. I believe that Victor feels the same way about Henry. Victor is dealing with the creature and the threats the creature made against him. Victor can be relaxed by nature, but he is not excited or amazed by nature. On the other hand, Henry is happy and energetic and excited to see what the world has to offer. Shelley states Wordsworth, "Their colours and their forms, were then to him An appetite; a feeling, and a love," (Shelley 140). Henry has an appetite for nature and to see the world. He is hungry for it. Henry and Wordsworth's sister are similar because they are young and adventurous. Victor and Wordsworth are similar because they have gone through hardships and have grown up and now view things differently than they did when they were younger. Shelley uses this poem to describe Henry's connection to nature compared to Victor's connection. I believe she also uses it to parallel Wordsworth and Victor, and Henry and Wordsworth's sister.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
8/29/13
I am only seven pages in of Winesburg, Ohio, and I am already in love with the book. I find it to be mysterious, and I think that it holds an abundance of deeper meaning that can be interpreted in any way the reader wants to interpret it. Today in class, we were not even able to finish the first story which is only five pages long because we went into great detail as to what we thought the text was trying to say. There is no space to write anything else in the margins of those five pages because they are filled with my own interpretations as well as different interpretations that my classmates came up with that I did not think about.
One of the interesting aspects of the book that I have noticed so far is the repeating of certain words. While reading the "The Book of the Grotesque" in class today, I circled the words: window, bed, and woman. These three words are mentioned quite often in ONLY the first five pages. I wonder how many more times they will be repeated throughout the book.
The one word that I circled the most was the word bed. The bed seems to be the old writer's sanctuary. He calls a carpenter and asks him to raise the bed so that he can look outside the window. Since he wants the bed, his sanctuary, to be raised higher, it seems like he wants to be closer to the heavens. He knows that he is soon going to die, and he wants to be able to see the beauty outside of the window before he goes. After seeing the grotesques passing before his eyes, he gets out of bed to write after seeing a certain grotesque. The narrator presence states, "Although it was a painful thing to do, he crept out of bed and began to write," (Sherwood 5). This indicates that the grotesque he saw had enough influence to urge the man to get out of his sanctuary and write. This grotesque had the power to take the old write out of his safe haven, so that he could write down the truths of the grotesques.
Another aspect of the first story or chapter is that the narrator is unknown. Who is the mysterious identity narrating the old writer's story? When beginning the story, the reader does not know that the story is in first person. I could not tell that it was being written from the first person perspective when I began reading it. All of a sudden, the word I is presented, and the reader realizes that there is some sort of narrator telling the old writer's story. The narrator seems to be a presence. The narrator does not seem to be any certain human in the story or relating to the story. The narrator seems to be just a presence who wants to tell the story of the old writer.
I am looking forward to reading further into the novel. I enjoyed finding the deeper meaning of the first story, so I cannot wait to see what the rest of the stories are like and find out what they mean.
I am only seven pages in of Winesburg, Ohio, and I am already in love with the book. I find it to be mysterious, and I think that it holds an abundance of deeper meaning that can be interpreted in any way the reader wants to interpret it. Today in class, we were not even able to finish the first story which is only five pages long because we went into great detail as to what we thought the text was trying to say. There is no space to write anything else in the margins of those five pages because they are filled with my own interpretations as well as different interpretations that my classmates came up with that I did not think about.
One of the interesting aspects of the book that I have noticed so far is the repeating of certain words. While reading the "The Book of the Grotesque" in class today, I circled the words: window, bed, and woman. These three words are mentioned quite often in ONLY the first five pages. I wonder how many more times they will be repeated throughout the book.
The one word that I circled the most was the word bed. The bed seems to be the old writer's sanctuary. He calls a carpenter and asks him to raise the bed so that he can look outside the window. Since he wants the bed, his sanctuary, to be raised higher, it seems like he wants to be closer to the heavens. He knows that he is soon going to die, and he wants to be able to see the beauty outside of the window before he goes. After seeing the grotesques passing before his eyes, he gets out of bed to write after seeing a certain grotesque. The narrator presence states, "Although it was a painful thing to do, he crept out of bed and began to write," (Sherwood 5). This indicates that the grotesque he saw had enough influence to urge the man to get out of his sanctuary and write. This grotesque had the power to take the old write out of his safe haven, so that he could write down the truths of the grotesques.
Another aspect of the first story or chapter is that the narrator is unknown. Who is the mysterious identity narrating the old writer's story? When beginning the story, the reader does not know that the story is in first person. I could not tell that it was being written from the first person perspective when I began reading it. All of a sudden, the word I is presented, and the reader realizes that there is some sort of narrator telling the old writer's story. The narrator seems to be a presence. The narrator does not seem to be any certain human in the story or relating to the story. The narrator seems to be just a presence who wants to tell the story of the old writer.
I am looking forward to reading further into the novel. I enjoyed finding the deeper meaning of the first story, so I cannot wait to see what the rest of the stories are like and find out what they mean.
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
8/28/13
One of my favorite movies of all time is Pride and Prejudice (2005). I have probably watched it over twenty times, and I am not exaggerating. I have read the book, and I think that the movie is an accurate adaptation of the book. To be completely honest, I watched the movie before I even read the book. But after watching the movie, I knew I had to read the book, and I loved the book as well. I think it is quite interesting how directors try to portray the story. The way they dress the characters, set up the lighting, portray relationships, etc. are completely thought out and intended.
An interesting fact about me is that I love watching the commentaries with the directors and/or actors. Watching the commentary shines a light on the decisions the directors make and why they make those decisions. After watching the commentary on the Pride and Prejudice DVD, I looked at the movie a different way. I noticed lighting in certain places that was supposed to make a statement. I noticed how symbols were present throughout the movie that hinted to the overall plot of the movie. Watching the commentary helped me analyze and understand the story even more than I had before.
Symbols are present in the movie that allude to different aspects of the movie as a whole. In the commentary, Joe Wright, the director, commented on the first shot of the film. The film opens on a shot of Elizabeth Bennett walking to her house while reading a book. Wright presents the idea that Elizabeth is in fact reading the story that is about to take place. She is actually reading the love story that is about to happen. Most people would not notice this or interpret this on their own. But after finding out that Elizabeth is reading her own story, one can come to the conclusion that Elizabeth is smart and enjoys reading and reading about stories of love, but she is headstrong and will not marry unless she is truly in love. The beginning shot could imply that she is ignorant about the fact that she is soon to fall in love. She is blindsided and does not expect to have her own love story. An interesting symbol that shows up in the film is mirrors. In the opening scene, Elizabeth looks through a window seeing her mother and father talking. Wright comments that the window symbolizes fails of perception. He says that Pride and Prejudice is all about, "seeing people through windows of your own understanding." The people in the story are blinded by their pride and their prejudices. Elizabeth looks at Mr. Darcy through eyes of her pride and prejudice. She is blinded by her love for him because she lets her pride get the better of her. Events throughout the movie cause Elizabeth to have certain prejudices and feelings against Mr. Darcy. She thinks him to be an awful man full of pride when she does not know his whole story. It amazes me that one little symbol like a window can actually mean so much more than a square one can look through.
The commentary highlights introduces many more ideas than just symbolism in the move. That is why I love commentaries. The commentaries help the watcher understand something he or she might not have understood, or allows him or her to catch something they never noticed. I highly recommend watching the commentaries if you want to look at the movie or story itself in a different way.
One of my favorite movies of all time is Pride and Prejudice (2005). I have probably watched it over twenty times, and I am not exaggerating. I have read the book, and I think that the movie is an accurate adaptation of the book. To be completely honest, I watched the movie before I even read the book. But after watching the movie, I knew I had to read the book, and I loved the book as well. I think it is quite interesting how directors try to portray the story. The way they dress the characters, set up the lighting, portray relationships, etc. are completely thought out and intended.
An interesting fact about me is that I love watching the commentaries with the directors and/or actors. Watching the commentary shines a light on the decisions the directors make and why they make those decisions. After watching the commentary on the Pride and Prejudice DVD, I looked at the movie a different way. I noticed lighting in certain places that was supposed to make a statement. I noticed how symbols were present throughout the movie that hinted to the overall plot of the movie. Watching the commentary helped me analyze and understand the story even more than I had before.
Symbols are present in the movie that allude to different aspects of the movie as a whole. In the commentary, Joe Wright, the director, commented on the first shot of the film. The film opens on a shot of Elizabeth Bennett walking to her house while reading a book. Wright presents the idea that Elizabeth is in fact reading the story that is about to take place. She is actually reading the love story that is about to happen. Most people would not notice this or interpret this on their own. But after finding out that Elizabeth is reading her own story, one can come to the conclusion that Elizabeth is smart and enjoys reading and reading about stories of love, but she is headstrong and will not marry unless she is truly in love. The beginning shot could imply that she is ignorant about the fact that she is soon to fall in love. She is blindsided and does not expect to have her own love story. An interesting symbol that shows up in the film is mirrors. In the opening scene, Elizabeth looks through a window seeing her mother and father talking. Wright comments that the window symbolizes fails of perception. He says that Pride and Prejudice is all about, "seeing people through windows of your own understanding." The people in the story are blinded by their pride and their prejudices. Elizabeth looks at Mr. Darcy through eyes of her pride and prejudice. She is blinded by her love for him because she lets her pride get the better of her. Events throughout the movie cause Elizabeth to have certain prejudices and feelings against Mr. Darcy. She thinks him to be an awful man full of pride when she does not know his whole story. It amazes me that one little symbol like a window can actually mean so much more than a square one can look through.
The commentary highlights introduces many more ideas than just symbolism in the move. That is why I love commentaries. The commentaries help the watcher understand something he or she might not have understood, or allows him or her to catch something they never noticed. I highly recommend watching the commentaries if you want to look at the movie or story itself in a different way.
Sunday, August 25, 2013
8/25/2013
Earlier today, I decided to clean out my bookshelf. I spent the morning going through piles upon piles of books laying around my bookshelf. I decided to put all of the books by the same author in separate piles. I was looking through my Agatha Christie pile when I found a book that I had read at the beginning of the summer, Murder on the Orient Express. For those who have not read it, I highly recommend it. Those who enjoy mysteries will find it to be an interesting story, and for those who enjoy plot twists and surprises will enjoy it even more. Stumbling upon this book made me think of all of the characters and the unexpected twists and turns that occurred in the book. While I was thinking about the plot, a thought occurred to me. The victim vs victimizer theme present in Frankenstein is also present in Murder on the Orient Express.
In Frankenstein, the roles of victim and victimizer switch throughout the book. I realized that the roles of victim and victimizer also switch throughout the Murder on the Orient Express. The story is centered around detective Hercule Poroit. He is traveling on a train full with people from different social classes and different parts of the world. On the second night, Mr. Ratchett is murdered in his compartment. Ratchett was stabbed twelve times. Poroit takes charge of the investigation, and begins searching the train and interviewing the passengers. The reader follows Poroit's journey which includes finding clues, discovering alibis, interviewing suspects, and keeping an eye for the murderer.
At the beginning of the novel, Mr. Ratchett is presented as the victim. Even thought the reader does not particularly like Mr. Ratchett's character the reader feels bad for Mr. Ratchett because the poor man was murdered in his sleep. However, it is discovered later in the novel that Mr. Ratchett is actually a man named Cassetti. Cassetti kidnapped and murdered a little girl named Daisy Armstrong many years ago. At this point in the novel, the reader no longer feels that Mr. Ratchett is the victim. The reader feels that Mr. Ratchett got what he deserved for killing an innocent child. WARNING: SPOILER ALERT. If you actually want to read this book, do not read any further! Once Mr. Ratchett is identified as Cassetti, Poroit begins to discover that the passengers on the train are connected to the Armstrong family. One by one, the reader begins to see the passengers as the victims. These poor people knew the innocent little girl who was murdered, and they all adored her. At the end of the novel Poroit comes to the conclusion that everyone on the train plotted to kill Mr. Ratchett together which is why he had twelve different stab wounds. By the end of the novel, the reader does not feel bad for the victim, the person murdered, he or she feels bad for the victimizers, the murderers. However, the victim/victimizer role could be different depending on the reader's point of view. The reader can look at Mr. Ratchett or Cassetti as the victimizer. He murdered an innocent child and got what he deserved. The reader can look at the twelve murderers on the train as the victims. These twelve people were connected to this poor child and suffered for many years. After making the connection from the Murder on the Orient Express to Frankenstein, I believe that the victim vs victimizer theme is a theme present in multiple novels, and can be interpreted in many different ways.
Earlier today, I decided to clean out my bookshelf. I spent the morning going through piles upon piles of books laying around my bookshelf. I decided to put all of the books by the same author in separate piles. I was looking through my Agatha Christie pile when I found a book that I had read at the beginning of the summer, Murder on the Orient Express. For those who have not read it, I highly recommend it. Those who enjoy mysteries will find it to be an interesting story, and for those who enjoy plot twists and surprises will enjoy it even more. Stumbling upon this book made me think of all of the characters and the unexpected twists and turns that occurred in the book. While I was thinking about the plot, a thought occurred to me. The victim vs victimizer theme present in Frankenstein is also present in Murder on the Orient Express.
In Frankenstein, the roles of victim and victimizer switch throughout the book. I realized that the roles of victim and victimizer also switch throughout the Murder on the Orient Express. The story is centered around detective Hercule Poroit. He is traveling on a train full with people from different social classes and different parts of the world. On the second night, Mr. Ratchett is murdered in his compartment. Ratchett was stabbed twelve times. Poroit takes charge of the investigation, and begins searching the train and interviewing the passengers. The reader follows Poroit's journey which includes finding clues, discovering alibis, interviewing suspects, and keeping an eye for the murderer.
At the beginning of the novel, Mr. Ratchett is presented as the victim. Even thought the reader does not particularly like Mr. Ratchett's character the reader feels bad for Mr. Ratchett because the poor man was murdered in his sleep. However, it is discovered later in the novel that Mr. Ratchett is actually a man named Cassetti. Cassetti kidnapped and murdered a little girl named Daisy Armstrong many years ago. At this point in the novel, the reader no longer feels that Mr. Ratchett is the victim. The reader feels that Mr. Ratchett got what he deserved for killing an innocent child. WARNING: SPOILER ALERT. If you actually want to read this book, do not read any further! Once Mr. Ratchett is identified as Cassetti, Poroit begins to discover that the passengers on the train are connected to the Armstrong family. One by one, the reader begins to see the passengers as the victims. These poor people knew the innocent little girl who was murdered, and they all adored her. At the end of the novel Poroit comes to the conclusion that everyone on the train plotted to kill Mr. Ratchett together which is why he had twelve different stab wounds. By the end of the novel, the reader does not feel bad for the victim, the person murdered, he or she feels bad for the victimizers, the murderers. However, the victim/victimizer role could be different depending on the reader's point of view. The reader can look at Mr. Ratchett or Cassetti as the victimizer. He murdered an innocent child and got what he deserved. The reader can look at the twelve murderers on the train as the victims. These twelve people were connected to this poor child and suffered for many years. After making the connection from the Murder on the Orient Express to Frankenstein, I believe that the victim vs victimizer theme is a theme present in multiple novels, and can be interpreted in many different ways.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)