5/4/14

Siren Song
By Margaret Atwood

This is the one song everyone
would like to learn: the song
that is irresistible:

the song that forces men
to leap overboard in squadrons
even though they see the beached skulls

the song nobody knows
because anyone who has heard it
is dead, and the others can't remember.

Shall I tell you the secret
and if I do, will you get me
out of this bird suit?

I don't enjoy it here
squatting on this island
looking picturesque and mythical

with these two feathery maniacs,
I don't enjoy singing
this trio, fatal and valuable.

I will tell the secret to you,
to you, only to you.
Come closer. This song

is a cry for help: Help me!
Only you, only you can,
you are unique

at last. Alas
it is a boring song
but it works every time.

   I am currently sitting in the dressing room of the Georgia International Convention Center. I am here for KAR( a dance competition). I chose this poem because one of my contemporary dances is about sirens. The dance is about one siren who falls in love with a man. Sirens are supposed to lure men into their death, not fall in love with them. Throughout the song, the group of sirens attack and eventually kill the siren who went against the rules and fell in love. This poem is exactly what we try to embody in our dance.
   The song of the siren is irresistible. The song is the sirens weapon. They use it to lure sailors into the water and eventually to their death. The song forces men over the edge of their boats. The men "see the beached skulls" but the song is too irresistible.  No one knows the song of the sirens because they are all killed. I find it interesting that the speaker would say "and the others can't remember" because there are usually no survivors. Another interesting component of this poem is that the speaker refers to herself as a "bird". The speaker is squatting on the island like a bird waiting for her prey. So maybe this poem is not about typical sirens? Maybe this poem is about majestic birds who sit on the island. However, it could also be a reference to a weak animal. When I think of the word "bird", I think of a little blue bird or a fragile, harmless bird. I do not associate the word bird with an eagle or a vulture. I believe that the word bird is used to make the sirens look like prey when in reality they are the predators. The speaker states that they are sitting in a trio. This reminds me of the movie "O Brother Where Art Thou". The sirens in the movie are a group of three woman. They wait on a little island/swamp area waiting for men to travel by.
   There is a juxtaposition with the words "fatal and valuable". But if you think about it, fatal and valuable is a phrase used quite often. Are weapons fatal? Yes, but they are valuable in war. The next stanza portrays the speaker luring the listener in. The poem itself is the Sirens' song. The poem is drawing the reader in and forcing them to continuing reading for more. The song seems like a "cry for help" but this could be the Sirens' song. The siren is luring the reader in by portraying themselves as helpless and in need of saving. The last stanza captures this idea perfectly. It says, "alas it is a boring song but it works every time."  The reader has been drawn into the poem. The siren finds calls for help "boring", but it is the only way to draw people into her trap. It also works every time which shows that Sirens always get why they want. They fake and mock calls for help in order to draw people in.
    Well I have finished analyzing the poem, and we already went and performed our Sirens dance(it went really well). Off to a long day of dancing.

4/27/14

   Besides the fact that my British accent is extremely rough, I am enjoying reading "the Importance of Being Earnest" in class. It is entertaining to listen to everyone attempt a British accent.  I have to be honest, I did not think that this play would be as entertaining as it is. Everything is completely turned around in this play which makes it enjoyable. It is a lighthearted play that is interesting to read. I am looking forward to finishing the play so we can all find out how this big mess plays out. At this point, Jack is Ernest, Algy is Ernest, and Ernest is in a love triangle with Gwendolen and Cecily. Everything is backwards and nothing makes sense. Wilde chooses to portray his feelings on marriage, society, and religion through the use of comedy. The lively characters add to his humorous portrayal of these views.
   Wilde begins Act One by discussing the subject of marriage. Algy talkes about how marriage makes the quality of champagne go down. Marriage should be happy and should make everything better including champagne. People do not expect champagne to get worse after marriage. Algernon explains that marriage is not a good choice because it brings qualities down. Wilde presents contradictions throughout the play. In the first act, a comment is made that the lower class should be setting the example. In the real world, the higher class is the class that should be setting examples. Marriage is continuously bashed by making it out to be awful and boring.
   In the second act, the church is undermined and there is commentary on religion. The priest is able to change is sermon for joyous acassions or melancholy occasions. This is a comment on the quality of the message he is trying to get across. The church is able to change their message to fit any circumstance or situation. Both Jack and Algernon say that they will swing by the church to be baptized in a short twenty or so minutes.Baptisms are usually long and large ordeals for a family or person. This is when they accept Christ as their savior. Jack and Algernon are undermining the importance of this event by saying they will just swing by when they can, or they hope it only lasts about twenty minutes.  We are only a few pages into Act Two, so I am expecting many more comments on other social issues.
  The characters make this play. I enjoy Lane's character. It is funny to see how Lane agrees with Algernon no matter the situation. He takes the blame for all of the mistakes Algernon makes without a second thought. I do not like Algernon. I think he is a funny character to read, but I do not like is Pompous attitude. Cecily and Gwendolen both annoy me. BOTH of them want to marry a man named Ernest because they believe that Ernest is an interesting man! Cecily has made up a completely irrational life with Ernest(Algernon). We all laugh in class when either Gwendolen or Cecily speak about their Ernest because it sounds ridiculous! But hey, there are always ridiculous situations and people in a comedy.

4/20/14

SPOILER ALERT(I will be talking about my Lit circle book: Snow Falling on Cedars. Do not read this blog if you plan to read the book). Okay I have to be honest, in the beginning, I was a little disappointed with the novel I chose for my lit circle. Everyone else seems to be so passionate about their novel, and I like my novel but I do not LOVE it. I chose the novel Snow Falling on Cedars, and I expected it to be a thrilling murder mystery! However, I soon found out that murder is not the center focus of the novel. The novel begins in the middle of the the trial of a Japanese American who is convicted with killing Carl Heine. The novel jumps between the life of Carl Heine, the life of Kabuo, the life of Hatsue and her relationship with Ishmael, and so much more! I have read half the book, and it seems that the author has given me so much information, yet I still do not have all the information to connect the dots!
   In out first lit circle, my group and I discussed the fact that the author did not write the novel chronologically. He wrote it so that each chapter focuses on a different person and a different point of view to the story. When I first started reading the novel, I was frustrated with the way it was written because I did not like all of the interruptions! I just wanted to find out who the murder is!  Now that I have gotten through half of the book, I have gotten used to the different aspects and points of view, and I now realize how important it is that the book is written this way. The author gives the reader so much information about the people on the island and the people related to the murder, so the reader will be able to try to figure out the results of the trial. I personally cannot decide who killed Carl! My lit circle group and I at this point in time do not think Kabuo killed Carl. We believe that he is a man who has been marked and hardened by war. He knows the sins he has committed, and it seems that he would rather stay in jail to pay for these sins. Although he has every motive to want to kill Carl, I think this solution would be too obvious. All good murder mysteries have a plot twist in the end. I think Kabuo has made mistakes and has sinned in the past, but I think he is innocent of killing Carl.
  I want to clarify that I do not dislike this novel at all! I actually enjoy learning about the history of the treatment of the Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor in a fictional story. The novel is growing on me, and I am finally getting into the characters and into the story. I know understand how it is written and how the different points of view and details of the different relationships are necessary! I looks forward to reading the rest of the novel and finding out who the murderer truly is!

3/31/14


  One of the most interesting aspects of the novel Invisible Man is that everything and I mean everything is flip flopped.  The colors white and black are flip flopped.  Not only are they contrasted throughout the ENTIRE novel, they have switched connotations and meaning.  The color white usually symbolizes purity, light, knowledge, and enlightenment.  BUT NO.  Ellison decides to make black symbolize all of these qualities.  The color black usually symbolizes darkness, confusion, and altered reality.  However, in this novel, white seems to be the color of the blind.  In the beginning, the students at the battle royal are blind folded with WHITE blindfolds.  The Battle Royal is not a pure or enlightened activity.  They poor students are blinded by the white blindfolds as they battle each other in front of the WHITE men.  Throughout the novel, the narrator seems to only be able to concentrate when he is in darkness.  At the end of the novel, the narrator is living in his cave underground.  It is in this darkness that he can truly see.  The narrator states, "And I awoke in the blackness.  Fully awake now, I simply lay there as though paralyzed," (Ellison 570).  The narrator is "fully awake" in the blackness.  He has finally awaken from a dreamlike state.  He has realized that he is invisible and he needs to do what he wants and stop obeying other people.  I talked about in my previous blog how the Liberty Paint episode shows the contrast between white and black.   The narrator fully understands that the black paint is black and blames the man for trying to trick him because the paint is supposed to be white.  However, when the narrator looks at the white paint, he becomes confused.  He thinks his eyes are playing tricks on him causing him to see the grey specks in the white paint.  White is supposed to be clear and pure white.  The narrator is always unsure of himself when he is confronted with the color white.  In contrast, when he is faced with the color black, he is aware of what is going on and knows what the reality is.
   Today during seminar, we discussed the hanging mannequins.  The point was brought up that the hanging is similar to that of lynching slaves. There is another element that is flip flopped in this section.  The hanging mannequins are actually hanging white women.  The slaves who were lynched were black and usually men.  The fact that the mannequins are not only white but women should be noted.  This could be another comment on women in the novel.  This contrast could be presented because the hanging of the mannequins is taking place in the north while lynching took place in the south.  In the riot scene, Ras orders the hanging of the narrator and calls the narrator a traitor.  Ras could be calling the narrator a white woman.  He has betrayed his own race and has turned into not only a white person but a white woman.  There are so many contrasts and elements that are flip flopped in this novel.  It would take 200 blogs to be able to discuss all of the contrasts let alone all of the other details of the novel!

3/31/14


  Over the past week, we have been having some interesting discussions on the novel Invisible Man.  Due to an art field trip, I missed the seminar about the Liberty Paint and Hospital episode.  However, in the other seminars, we have made connections back to this episode, so it is an important episode on the novel.  I believe this episode is so important because it is a transition period for the narrator.  The Liberty Paint episode seems to be the narrators last ditch effort to succeed according to his beliefs as a young college student.  The hospital episode is a transition period.  What exactly is the narrator transitioning to?  Well that question was debated on A LOT during the Eviction/Women seminar.
  Before I get ahead of myself, I would like to talk about the Liberty Paint episode.  There are many contrasts during this episode.  There is the definite contrast between white and black.  These colors are not only contrasted, their qualities are flipped.  Throughout the whole novel, white is blinding while people can only see in black or in darkness.  The narrator states, "All were the same, a brilliant white diffused with gray.  I closed my eyes for a moment and looked again and still no change," (Ellison 205).  Usually, it is easy to tell whether or not a color is purely white.  White is clean, bright, and easily recognizable.  It is interesting to note that the narrator is confused when looking at the white paint.  White usually stands for enlightenment, but it is making the narrator confused.  However, the narrator is not confused when he is starring at black paint.  The narrator states, "But when I looked into the white graduate I hesitated, the liquid inside was dead black.  Was he trying to kid me?" (Ellison 200).  The narrator is certain that the paint is black,  He does not doubt himself when looking at the black paint.  He believes that the man could be trying to trick him.  However, when the narrator is looking at the white paint, he doubts himself.  He thinks his own eyes are playing a trick on him.  When the narrator is faced with darkness and the color black, he is certain of himself.  When the narrator is faced with brightness and the color white, he becomes wary and uncertain.  This connects to the end of the novel.  The narrator is certain that he is invisible and he knows who he is and how he wants to live when he is in the darkness of his cave.  He was not able to figure out who he was when he was in the bright light of the world above.
   During the Eviction/ Women seminar we discussed whether or not the hospital episode was a transition or a rebirth.  Personally, I did not see the episode as a complete rebirth.  The narrator did completely lose his identity and had to start fresh, but I believe some of his old beliefs and tendencies are still present.  For example, when the narrator is eating the yams on the street, he realizes that he did not come to New York to enjoy yams on the side of the street.  He remembers that there is a specific reason he is in New York.  After this moment, he falls into the trap of the brotherhood.  This is why I read the hospital scene as more of a transition than a rebirth.  Yes the narrator loses his identity because he is given a new name, but he still has the same tendencies and follows other people like he did before the hospital scene.

3/30/14

Night Poem

Margaret Atwood

There is nothing to be afraid of,

it is only the wind
changing to the east, it is only
your father          the thunder
your mother          the rain

In this country of water
with its beige moon damp as a mushroom,
its drowned stumps and long birds
that swim, where the moss grows
on all sides of the trees
and your shadow is not your shadow
but your reflection,

your true parents disappear
when the curtain covers your door.
We are the others,
the ones from under the lake
who stand silently beside your bed
with our heads of darkness.
We have come to cover you
with red wool,
with our tears and distant whispers.

You rock in the rain's arms,
the chilly ark of your sleep,
while we wait, your night
father and mother,
with our cold hands and dead flashlight,
knowing we are only
the wavering shadows thrown
by one candle, in this echo
you will hear twenty years later. 

  I am starting to love Margaret Atwood's poetry. I never heard of her before I stumbled upon her poetry a few months ago. My favorite kind of poetry is dark poetry that is weird, different, and eerie. The poems I have read by her have fit these descriptions so far. For this month, I decided to analyze Night Poem. 

   The title itself leads the reader to believe that the poem will be dark and eerie. The word "night" connotates to many things.  During the night, creatures come out that would not normally show themselves in the day. It is hard to see at night so images and objects are distorted and can be mistaken for something else. The first line in the poem creates a sense that something not right is  happening. Personally, when I hear someone say "there is nothing to be afraid of" then there is most likely something to be afraid of. Especially when a person comes out of the darkness of the night saying everything is ok. Whoever the speaker is seems untrustworthy.  The speaker says it is only the "wind changing to the east" and the father which is thunder and the mother which is rain. The wind is changing its direction. This means that the wind could be unstable or the wind could be taking a new path. The father is thunder which is loud and strong. The mother is rain which can be light and cleansing or can be violent and harmful depending on the storm. These parents of the night are intertwined with nature. Meaning that nature can come to live at night. 
   The next stanza discusses all of nature. Nature seems to have a saggy or sullen mood. The moon is "beige". It does not glow a bright white like one would think of the moon. It resembles a "damp..mushroom".  Nature takes on more creature like qualities during the night. One of my favorite lines in this poem is "and your shadow is not your shadow but your reflection". Such a great line! This implies that people are their shadows. People have both positive qualities during the daylight and negative qualities during the night. A shadow self is a negative energy that is completely opposite of a person. Yet the speaker is saying that this shadow is the reflection. You are who you are bad qualities and all. This all becomes evident  at night.
  The next stanza is equally creepy and equally awesome. The speaker is saying that they are the new parents. They are the parents that appear when you shut your door at night. When you are locked alone in your room, they come out to stare at you.  They come from under the lake which means that they are damp and soggy. They probably look like they were dragged from the lake. They cover the child with "red wool". Red stands for violence and blood. Personally I find wool to be itchy and uncomfortable, so this piece of fabric is not comfortable or pleasant. The new parents cover the child with whispers and tears. Everything looks perfect during the day, but during the night, the real issues and problems emerge from the darkness. "You will rock in the rain's arms" means that the child will be rocked by his night mother. The child's night parents wait and watch. They have a "dead flashlight" which means they have no light to see. This could men that the night parents are not enlightened. They are blinded by the darkness. They cannot truly see the child they hold. However, they know that they are only shadows. They cannot be seen in the full sunlight. They can only be seen with one candle light. They lurk in the shadows wanting what they cannot have. Nature itself must want to consume the child at night to have for its own. Nature cannot have the child during the day in the light. At night, nature becomes distorted and people become their shadow selfs. Their negative qualities are reflected just as nature's negative qualities are reflected. 

3/9/14

   Wasn't that times writing on Friday great?! I kid I kid. I know that timesd writings make everyone said and dread the entire hour we must sit and write until our hands fall off.  Mrs. Clinch tires to boost our spirit with her fairy powers, and that definitely makes us laugh before we dive into the question sitting in front of us.  Although I was dreading the times writing on Friday, I took away many different viewpoints of Hamlet after writing the essay. I was surprised to see that there were three options to choose from on the prompt sheet. I chose the question having to do with a tragic figure and how they impose suffering on those around them and how they add to the overall tragedy of the play.
   After reading Hamle, I came to the conclusion that I did not like Hamlet as a character. I thought he was a hypocrite and way too judge mental for his own good. I mean come one buddy, you murdered Polonius, yet your damning Ophelia for telling one four worded lie? Give her a break! She has to follow her father in the society she is has to live in. (Sorry for the mini tangent. Since I played Ophelia in our group project, I now have a soft spot for her and her situation).  ANYWAY. After reading the question about the tragic figure, I realized Shakespeare probably made Hamlet a tragic figure to add to the tragedy of the play. He did not make Hamlet a jerk just to make him a jerk. He made Hamlet impose suffering on the other characters to create a tragedy.
   A way to read the play, is to read it in a way so that you can see that Hamlet is the one who causes everyone's death in the play. Besides King Hamlet's death, Hamlet either directly or indirectly causes the death of every other character. For example, he causes the death of Ophelia(here comes my soft spot again).  Personally, I believe that Hamlet and Ophelia were in love. I also believe that they had been intimate. First Hamlet tells her he doesn't lover her and that he never loved her. Then,  he insults her and makes awfulinnuendos toward Ophelia. Not only does he take their love away, he KILLS HER FATHER without an apology! Ophelia goes crazy due to her fathers death and her situation with Hamlet. In the end, I blame Hamlet for Ophelia stowing herself.
   Hamlet not only causes Ophelia's suffering and death, he causes the death of everyone else and his own death in the end.  After watching the Branagh version, I believe that Hamlet knew the drink was poisoned. Hamlet is always the smarted character in the room. He should have know that the cup was poisoned, yet he did not stop his mom from drinking out of the cup. It is as if he wanted her to die for her sins. He could care less by that point. He causes his own death by not taking the action of Claudius's murder until the very end. He was too calculated and too worried about playing God, so he caused everyone to suffer when he could have just killed Claudius!  

2/21/14

Hamlet just keeps getting more and more complicated. Thanks to the snow week, we had to read Act three of Hamlet on our own. I read the act and understood what was going on, but these past few days in class have definitely helped me fuehrer understand the deeper meaning in the play. I mean the conversation Hamlet has with Ophelia in scene two... What?! I did not catch how rude Hamlet was being or what he was referring to.  I think most of us were shocked by how rude Hamlet is in that scene. He is back to being the moral judge. He is judging Ophelia and his mother in front of everyone!  In the Branagh version, Hamlet, Ophelia, Claudius, and Gertrude are watching the play amongst an audience. When I first read the scene, I believed that Hamlet was speaking only to Ophelia and Gertrude, and they were the only ones who get hear him. But oh no! In the Branagh version the whole audience hears the rude comments Hamlet is making towards his mother and Ophelia.  I think this adds a whole new meaning to Hamlet. Isn't he being a little hypocritical? He is bashing Ophelia and his mother for the wrong doings he believes they have committed, but isn't Hamlet being rude and a bad person by publicly humiliating them? Hamlet is the moral judge of everyone, but the standards he holds of everyone else to not seem to apply to him.
  Another part of Act three that I found to be interesting is Hamlet's aside at the end of scene two. Depending on the way you read the aside, you could claim that Hamlet has in fact gone mad. However, there is still a collected method to Hamlet. In this aside, it seems there is a method to his madness. He his planning on telling his mother how he truly feels and accusing her of what she's done. He states, " I will speak daggers to her, but use none," (line 429).  He is planning out how he is going to come across to his mother. However, when he goes to speak to her the method to his madness disappears. He could not kill Claudius before because he was too busy contemplating whether it was the right time or not. And in scene three, he runs and stabs Polonius before he can even make sure that he is killing the right person! Hamlet's method is gone and his ways of doing things have changed. In the Branagh version, Hamlet sees the ghost in his mother's room. His mother cannot see the ghost and believes that Hamlet is mad. It can be argued that Hamlet has in fact finally gone mad. In the beginning of the play, Horatio and others could see the ghost. Now only Hamlet can see the ghost. Could it all be in his head? Has all of the stress finally gotten to Hamlet? It is hard to come to a certain conclusion because the play can e interpreted in so many ways! I'm interested to see what shenanigans Hamlet gets himself in to in Act four.

2/9/14

WALKIG DEAD SPOILER ALERT: Okay, so that Walking Dead episode was insane. I just finished watching the episode, and I am not going to lie, I was yelling at the tv the whole time I was watching it. My mom and I are the only two in my house who watch the show, so my dad and sister sat in the other room annoyed with our yelling. Other than the anxiety that I received as a result of that episode, I noticed a major arc and transformation in the character names Michone.
   Michone appeared in the series in the beginning of season three. She started off the show as a hard character who would not let anyone get to know her.  Similar to other characters, Michone went through a tragic time where she lost all of her loved ones to the mindless zombies killing everyone in their path. This experience made her hard as stone. When she met all of the other main characters, she became part of the group, but she only slowly opened up to them over time. She protected herself from being hurt again by trying to stay as guarded as possible. Although she tried to stay guarded, she eventually let the people around her get to know her. She became close with the people she was surviving the zombie apocypse with BUT every good thing comes to an end. SO OF COURSE something awful happened in the mid season finale. The prison was attacked and the group was split up. Michone was left by herself not knowif where her friends had gone or if any of them had survived.
   At the beginning of this episode, Michone reverted back to her old self. She created her own zombie group and disguised herself among them. She was angry and frustrated and killed all of the zombies surrounding her in a moment of rage. This marks as a turning point for Michone. She realized that she can not go back to her old life. She cannot pretend to be zombie-like and survive alone. She needs to go out and find people and try to live. After her moment of rage, Michone wakes up from a dream that further transforms her. She has a dream that flashes back to her life before the zombie apocalypse. She recalls the life with her boyfriend, friend, and son before the zombies appeared. The dream deteriorates and evolves to when her friend, boyfriend, and son die. It is as if her mind is telling her that she needs to move on and needs to live. From this point on, Michone travels and finds her two friends that she thought she had lost. In one episode alone, she went from angry and a hard character, to realizing that she needed to let go of her past and be open to the world and to living. AGH such an insane episode, but it was so interesting to see a character make a giant transformation.

1/26/14

Hamlet, Hamlet, Hamlet. I have to admit, I was worried about reading another one of Shakespeare's works. I read Romeo and Juliet in ninth grade, and I read Twelfth Night in 10th grade.  I remember thinking that I understood Romeo and Juliet in ninth grade, but after reading barley one act of Hamlet, I have realized that I did not understand it as well as I could have. The same goes for Twelfth Night. There are so many different meanings behind one word in Hamlet,  I do not even want to think of how many different uses of a word Shakespeare used in Romeo and Juliet. If ninth grade me read Hamlet like we are reading it in class, my freshman mind would have been blown. I do not think there is another book that captures the  "it is all how you interpret it" concept. If you read one word a different  way than another reader, then  you could have a completely different interpretation and take away something else from that passage. For example, one reader can read the King's speech to Hamlet in Act 1 Scene 2 as message from a concerned fatherly figure or a person in a political situation who wants to keep an eye on the heir to the thrown. Personally, I interpreted the King's speech as the second scenario I listed. It all depends on the reader and how they look at the character.
   Reading aloud in class most definitely helps me understand Shakespeare more than I would have been able to understand it myself. Watching the videos in class also helps me further understand the play. I also find it interesting to watch how the director decided to portray the characters.  For example, the version we watched in class portrayed Ophelia as already having a sexual relationship with Hamlet. Kate Winslet looks worried and nervous as her father scolds her because she has already opened her "treasure" to Hamlet. I am intrigued to see how Hamlet and Ophelia's relationship pans out in the future. Hamlet seems a little to preoccupied with his dead father to even pay any attention to Ophelia.
  Okay, I have to talk about that scene that we watched in class on Friday. We had yet to read the part we watched on Friday, so I had to pay close attention to make sure that I knew what was going on. The word "interesting" does not even to begin to capture the essence of that scene. The effects were strange and everything was extremely dramatized. But hey, I guess I would be yelling and stressed out if I saw my father as a ghost and he told me that he was murdered by my uncle. That is the major element that I took out of that scene. Poor Hamlet had to see his father'a ghost only to find out that the man who is now king is a murderer. Not only is he a murderer, he is a murderer who married his mother. That is a lot to take in after Hamlet has been grieving for only two months. Hopefully positive things will happen to Hamlet. However, since his father'a ghost is most likely a bad omen, it does not look like things are going to get better any time soon. We shall see what poor Hamlet has to endure in the future!

1/19/14


"A Sad Child"
 By Margaret Atwood


You're sad because you're sad.
It's psychic. It's the age. It's chemical.
Go see a shrink or take a pill,
or hug your sadness like an eyeless doll
you need to sleep.

Well, all children are sad
but some get over it.
Count your blessings. Better than that,
buy a hat. Buy a coat or pet.
Take up dancing to forget.

Forget what?
Your sadness, your shadow,
whatever it was that was done to you
the day of the lawn party
when you came inside flushed with the sun,
your mouth sulky with sugar,
in your new dress with the ribbon
and the ice-cream smear,
and said to yourself in the bathroom,
I am not the favorite child.

My darling, when it comes
right down to it
and the light fails and the fog rolls in
and you're trapped in your overturned body
under a blanket or burning car,

and the red flame is seeping out of you
and igniting the tarmac beside your head
or else the floor, or else the pillow,
none of us is;
or else we all are.  


It took me a while to find a poem that I wanted to read and analyze this month.  I used the list that Mrs. Clinch gave us in the beginning of the year and looked up the poet Margaret Atwood.  I enjoy reading poems that capture my interest right away and usually have a more grim or darker tone.  I found "A Sad Child" to be extremely interesting.  It is not a complicated read and is not that hard to understand what the poem is saying, but it is intriguing.  It makes the reader think about his or herself and his or her own happiness or sadness. "You're sad because you're sad."  This statements starts off the poem with a "get over it" attitude.  It is like it is saying "yeah you might be sad, but so is everyone else."  The next line gives a list of reasons why a person could be sad.  When I read it, I sense that the speaker is giving of a know it all attitude.  It is like she is trying to say that everyone is sad and that they all try to blame it on a certain reason why.  In reality, everyone is sad and some people can deal with it and some people cannot deal with it.  The people who cannot deal with it try to blame there sadness on something else.  The speaker lists things that children can do to get over it.  They can buy things to make them happy or they can "take up dancing to forget."  Personally, I think this statement is relatable.  I am a dancer, and I dance to release emotion and to forget about the difficulties I might be facing or the problems that I might have.  When I am dancing, I truly forget about everything going on in my life for that three minute number or improv period. 
  The third stanza discusses that moment when every child realizes, "I am not the favorite child."  This moment is the moment when a child loses his or her innocence.  There is a moment when a child realizes the world is not what it seems and that he or she can disappoint his or her parents.  Usually, when a child upsets his or her parents when they are young, they become upset.  The moment of realizing that "I am not the favorite child" is a moment when the sadness could begin to grow in a child.
   The next two stanzas describe a rather grim accident.  The speaker describes a car accident, yet it also seems that she is hinting that it could be a dream.  The speaker uses the words "blanket" and "pillow" to show that the sadness can consume you while you sleep or in an actual accident.  When the sadness consumes you, everything becomes chaos no matter what situation you are in.  My favorite lines of the poem are, "none of us is; or else we all are."  I interpret that to mean either none of us are sad, or everyone is sad.  Every "child" is consumed with his or her own sadness.  They are so consumed that they do not recognize the sadness around them.  It is usual for a child to be somewhat narcissistic.  They are self absorbed and can only see their own problems.  Margaret's choice to describe a child's sadness is fitting.  The speaker is scolding the child for being so self absorbed in her own sadness because either everyone is sad or no one is sad at all. 

1/12/14

I have finished reading the prologue of Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison. Very very interesting. However, it was not as strange as I thought it would be. One of the first things I noticed is that the invisible man goes from talking about himself to then talking towards the reader. He doesn't say that HE feels a certain he says YOU feel a certain way. He generalizes the emotions to make it seem that the reader could feel these emotions as well. He says "you ache with the need to convince yourself that you do exist in the real world, that you're a part  of all the sound and anguish, and you strike out with your fists, you curse and you swear to make them recognize you. And, alas, it's seldom successful," (Ellison 4). Statements like these make the reader question wether or not they have experienced the same feelings the invisible man feels.
  The invisible man seems to act on his emotions. He is angry and frustrated that people do not or cannot open their eyes and see him. He almost kills a man because he ran into him. He almost kills him out of pure rage but then decides against it. At the end of the prologue he sates that he was not responsible for almost killing the man. He is the one who ran into him and it was irresponsible of him not to kill him to help society.
  The invisible man talks about light and dark quite a few times during the prologue. I think that this indicates that there will be a constant presence of light and dark throughout the novel. The invisible man loves light because without it, he doesn't not exist. The light gives him form and it seems to make him feel visible in the invisible life he lives. One of the issues or conflicts that might be present throughout the novel has to do with light. He is taking the light energy from the Monopolated Light and Power. I find it interesting that the it is name light AND power. This could be seen as literally light and the power that gives energy. Or it could mean that light gives way to actual power. The invisible man feels more a live and it seems more powerful when there is light around him. Because to exist is to have power and without light, he would not exist.
  Time. Time is an important aspect to the invisible man that I believe will be an important aspect through the rest of the novel. He is intrigued by time and learns that everyone has their own sense of time. He uses the examples of the fighters. He states, "The yokel had simply stepped inside of his opponents sense of time," (Ellison 8). Once you figure out your own sense of time and someone else's sense of time, you can become invincible. The invisible man thinks that he is invincible, so I think it will be a good point to follow his "invincibility" throughout the novel.

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.
 

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.

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! 

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!

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.  

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.

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!

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