Tuesday, December 17, 2013
Monday, December 16, 2013
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
The Rainbow
In The Rainbow, by D.H. Lawrence, the lives and thoughts of a farming couple are contrasted, as well as the lives and thoughts of Mr. Brangwen and the vicar, to show Mrs. Brangwen as a far-sighted, perceptive individual, with the ability to see a better life, but not now how to achieve it.
Lawrence compares the laboring, hard working Mr. Brangwen to the pensive Mrs. Brangwen. He writes that Mrs. Brangwen "stood to see the far-off world of cites and governments" (Lawrence, 19-20) while "it was enough for the men, that the earth heaved and opened it's furrow to them" (Lawrence, 1-2) Here Lawrence is comparing what drives the man to the woman, what makes them tic. Mr. Branwen is concerned with the day to day survival of the family, as he plows the far, and tens to his animals. However, his wife looks to distant cities and places where the world is run differently, where "men...set out to discover what was beyond" (Lawrence, 23-26) The irony lies in the fact that Mrs. Brangwen is clearly very perceptive, and can see a place where the word works differently, and yet she cannot see the value in her husbands work, the man who provides for her and keeps their family alive. The opposite is true of Mr. Brangwen, who only focuses on the "pulsing heat of creation" (Lawrence, 24-25) to feed his family, but cannot envision a better life. By contrasting the way of thinking of the wife and husband, Lawrence characterizes Mrs. Branwen.
Lawrence further emphasizes the farsightedness of Mrs. Brangwen by comparing the vicar and the man, and showing the situation through the eyes of Mrs. Branwen. The vicar leads the life that Mrs. Brangwen "could perceive, but could never attain to" (Lawrence, 42-43) The vicar uses his words and his brain to control the "slow, full-built men"(Lawrence, 45) like Mr. Brangwen, though the vicar is smaller and weaker. Mrs. Brangwen is essentially coing to the realization that smart people, regardless of physical size, control basic people, but she cannot find out how, partially because her husband is one of those basic people. She can see the way she wants to live, but cannot get there, since she is a woman, being held back by her not-as-intelligent husband.
D.H. Lawrence compares and contrasts different men and women in this excerpt to show an extreme irony of a farming family wife in rural England in the late 1800's. The wife is smarter than her husband, yet it is he who provides for the family. The wife can see the vicar, who dominates and controls men like her husband, but she cannot obtain that position, partly because she is a woman.
Part II
Nick Carr scored my essay a 6. He scored me this way because I aptly understood parts of the theme of the passage, and communicated them well, with solid textual support. I delved into a small part of the complexity, but not all of it. I discussed the irony of Mrs. Brangwen's being able to see a position of power, but not ever having the ability to reach it, and the irony that Mrs. Brangwen is clearly smarter and more perceptive than her husband, yet it is he that provides for the family and puts food on the table. This is a decently developed analysis, although I would have scored my essay a 5 because I only discussed compare and contrast. I developed that analysis quite well, but still did not mention any other literary device. The rubric for a 5 essay states that these essays have "some analysis" which is what my essay had.
The first change I would need to make would most definitely be to analyze more literary devices. Not a slew of them, but a few more to round out my analysis of the passage. I would discuss the repetition of certain words, phrases, and the parallelism found in several sentences. Lawrence repeats the word "blood" over and over, and references knowledge, or knowing, several times as well. He does this to add significance to those phrases/words, and Lawrence is well-known for his use of the term "blood-knowledge".
I also should have related the theme of the passage, and the contrasting of the vicar, the woman, and the man to the bigger picture, and not just to their situation. This excerpt is really a metaphor for the a way of life, and the contrasts between Mrs. Brangwen and her husband, and what she observes in him and the vicar, are very real, tangible thoughts and observations evident in real life. This would have been a giant step forward for my grade, being able to apply something we learned in comp, the "so what?" principle. I know we aren't usually supposed to use comp methods of analysis, but in this case it applies. This passage is a metaphor with layers of meaning, but it is useless to analyze what the situation is, and to analyze the thoughts of Mrs. Brangwen, without relating them to men and woman in general.
The final change that I would make would be to discuss that Mrs. Brangwen almost seems to desire to be a man. She is significantly smarter than her husband, yet can do nothing above her station because she has a role to fill, and that role is not to lead the family into the future. This is ironic because she has these deep thoughts about the societal ladder, but she cannot help herself or her family because she is a woman, and in that time period woman simply did not advance their families that way. I would have drawn a parallel to Cersei Lannister from Game of Thrones. Cersei is one of the smartest people in the realm, always scheming and kniving, but she would be able to do so much more to empower herself and her family if she were a man. Several times throughout the series does she mention this, and it is very real. She cannot fight, and cannot participate in making many decisions because she is a woman, despite the fact that she is far more intelligent than most characters in the series. This is quite like Mrs. Brangwen, and although Mrs. Brangwen is not fighting a war, she is still trying to improve her position on the societal ladder.
Lawrence compares the laboring, hard working Mr. Brangwen to the pensive Mrs. Brangwen. He writes that Mrs. Brangwen "stood to see the far-off world of cites and governments" (Lawrence, 19-20) while "it was enough for the men, that the earth heaved and opened it's furrow to them" (Lawrence, 1-2) Here Lawrence is comparing what drives the man to the woman, what makes them tic. Mr. Branwen is concerned with the day to day survival of the family, as he plows the far, and tens to his animals. However, his wife looks to distant cities and places where the world is run differently, where "men...set out to discover what was beyond" (Lawrence, 23-26) The irony lies in the fact that Mrs. Brangwen is clearly very perceptive, and can see a place where the word works differently, and yet she cannot see the value in her husbands work, the man who provides for her and keeps their family alive. The opposite is true of Mr. Brangwen, who only focuses on the "pulsing heat of creation" (Lawrence, 24-25) to feed his family, but cannot envision a better life. By contrasting the way of thinking of the wife and husband, Lawrence characterizes Mrs. Branwen.
Lawrence further emphasizes the farsightedness of Mrs. Brangwen by comparing the vicar and the man, and showing the situation through the eyes of Mrs. Branwen. The vicar leads the life that Mrs. Brangwen "could perceive, but could never attain to" (Lawrence, 42-43) The vicar uses his words and his brain to control the "slow, full-built men"(Lawrence, 45) like Mr. Brangwen, though the vicar is smaller and weaker. Mrs. Brangwen is essentially coing to the realization that smart people, regardless of physical size, control basic people, but she cannot find out how, partially because her husband is one of those basic people. She can see the way she wants to live, but cannot get there, since she is a woman, being held back by her not-as-intelligent husband.
D.H. Lawrence compares and contrasts different men and women in this excerpt to show an extreme irony of a farming family wife in rural England in the late 1800's. The wife is smarter than her husband, yet it is he who provides for the family. The wife can see the vicar, who dominates and controls men like her husband, but she cannot obtain that position, partly because she is a woman.
Part II
Nick Carr scored my essay a 6. He scored me this way because I aptly understood parts of the theme of the passage, and communicated them well, with solid textual support. I delved into a small part of the complexity, but not all of it. I discussed the irony of Mrs. Brangwen's being able to see a position of power, but not ever having the ability to reach it, and the irony that Mrs. Brangwen is clearly smarter and more perceptive than her husband, yet it is he that provides for the family and puts food on the table. This is a decently developed analysis, although I would have scored my essay a 5 because I only discussed compare and contrast. I developed that analysis quite well, but still did not mention any other literary device. The rubric for a 5 essay states that these essays have "some analysis" which is what my essay had.
The first change I would need to make would most definitely be to analyze more literary devices. Not a slew of them, but a few more to round out my analysis of the passage. I would discuss the repetition of certain words, phrases, and the parallelism found in several sentences. Lawrence repeats the word "blood" over and over, and references knowledge, or knowing, several times as well. He does this to add significance to those phrases/words, and Lawrence is well-known for his use of the term "blood-knowledge".
I also should have related the theme of the passage, and the contrasting of the vicar, the woman, and the man to the bigger picture, and not just to their situation. This excerpt is really a metaphor for the a way of life, and the contrasts between Mrs. Brangwen and her husband, and what she observes in him and the vicar, are very real, tangible thoughts and observations evident in real life. This would have been a giant step forward for my grade, being able to apply something we learned in comp, the "so what?" principle. I know we aren't usually supposed to use comp methods of analysis, but in this case it applies. This passage is a metaphor with layers of meaning, but it is useless to analyze what the situation is, and to analyze the thoughts of Mrs. Brangwen, without relating them to men and woman in general.
The final change that I would make would be to discuss that Mrs. Brangwen almost seems to desire to be a man. She is significantly smarter than her husband, yet can do nothing above her station because she has a role to fill, and that role is not to lead the family into the future. This is ironic because she has these deep thoughts about the societal ladder, but she cannot help herself or her family because she is a woman, and in that time period woman simply did not advance their families that way. I would have drawn a parallel to Cersei Lannister from Game of Thrones. Cersei is one of the smartest people in the realm, always scheming and kniving, but she would be able to do so much more to empower herself and her family if she were a man. Several times throughout the series does she mention this, and it is very real. She cannot fight, and cannot participate in making many decisions because she is a woman, despite the fact that she is far more intelligent than most characters in the series. This is quite like Mrs. Brangwen, and although Mrs. Brangwen is not fighting a war, she is still trying to improve her position on the societal ladder.
Friday, November 15, 2013
Monday, November 11, 2013
Saturday, November 9, 2013
Friday, November 8, 2013
To Blog or Not to Blog: Post 3
Imagery dealing with the uncertainty of death
"something after death, The undiscovered country from whose bourn No traveler returns" (3.1.81-83)
Hamlet is saying that death is like a foriegn, unknown land, that people travel to, but never come back, and that no one understands it. By calling it undiscovered, he is saying that attempts are being made to discover, and this is his way of saying that he is dancing with death, so to speak.
"here’s the rub, For in that sleep of death what dreams may come When we have shuffled off this mortal coil" (3.1.66-69)
Hamlet is comparing death to sleeping, and saying that whatever happens after death is like the dreams of that sleep. Dreams are wildly unpredictable, can change instant to instant, and are for the most part uncontrollable. By using this imagery, Hamlet is saying that like dreams, death is unavoidable, yet complicated, and capricious.
Imagery dealing with the negative experience of life
"Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And, by opposing, end them?" (3.1.58-61)
In this case, Hamlet is using imagery that brings to mind images of war, and of battles. But not just the fighting, but also that they cause us to "suffer". By comparing life to a battle, he is saying we have to fight back against it, or we will be consumed by it, in one way or another. Either life causes us enduring suffering, or we give up and commit suicide.
Pathos
"The heartache and the thousand natural shocks" (3.2.63)
"The pangs of despised love" (3.2.75)
Hamlet inspires pity by referencing how said his love life is, by using words like "pangs" and "heartache" By inspiring pity, he also makes the idea of suicide more plausible.
Logos
"Th' oppressor’s wrong, the proud man’s contumely, The pangs of despised love, the law’s delay, The insolence of office, and the spurns That patient merit of th' unworthy takes"
Here he lists many of the most stereotypical downfalls of humanity. These specific problems have been around for a long time, and are not really affected too much by the changing of cultures, technology, and the like.
Ethos
"With this regard their currents turn awry, And lose the name of action." (3.1.91)
Hamlet is talking about how his morality prevents him from killing Claudius, and the fact that Hamlet is hesitating to kill the man who murdered his father and usurped his throne makes the reader much more sympathetic to Hamlet.
Paradox
The paradox is that even though Hamlet openly admits he has no idea what happens when you die, he still seems to view it as a sweet escape from the hell of life.
Parallelism
"When we have shuffled off this mortal coil, Must give us pause. There’s the respect That makes calamity of so long life. For who would bear the whips and scorns of time" (3.1.69-73)
He uses the parallel structure here to add flow and to point out how hard life his.
Infinitive
"To die, to sleep...To sleep" (3.1.61, 3.1.65)
By listing those verbs one after another in clos succession is implying that dying and sleeping are very similiar or even the same thing.
Tone
The tone of the soliloquy is very depressed and pensive, as Hamlet is considering the idea of suicide, and it is discussed in a very mature, serious manner.
Diction
Hamlet uses several metaphors and examples, such as comparing life to war, and death to sleep/ an undiscovered place, and uses specific word choice to enhance those metaphors, and to contribute to the tone of depression.
Hamlet uses several metaphors and examples, such as comparing life to war, and death to sleep/ an undiscovered place, and uses specific word choice to enhance those metaphors, and to contribute to the tone of depression.
Metaphor
The two main metaphors in the soliloquy are comparing death to an "undiscovered country" (3.1.82), and comparing life to a war (3.1.58-61).
Comparisons: Life on earth, afterlife, death, humans, thinking
Hamlet compares life on earth to a war (3.1.59-60), and he compares the afterlife to an "undiscovered country" (3.1.82) He compares death and sleeping through the use of the infinitive (3.1.61).
Three oppositions to the argument that Hamlet makes
He admits that our fear of death is what prevents us from, well, dying (3.1.86), which he is saying would probably be a more pleasant alternative than life.
He says that death would be like sleeping; a release from the worries and troubles of life, but also that he doesn't really know "what dreams may come" (3.1.68)
He says that death would be easy, and alleviate the struggles of living, but also that death is an "undiscovered country" (3.1.82), so he doesn't actually know what happens when you die.
What eternal philosophical questions does Hamlet ponder?
He asks whether or not the hardships of life are worth the joys of living. He wonders what happens when you die; where you go, what it is like. He asks whether or not suicide is worth it, and whether it is actually a respite.
What conclusions does Hamlet draw?
That we as humans are too scared of dying, of the unknown, because of our basic human morality and conscience, to find out what happens when you die. He says that this fear of death is what holds us back from accomplishing many things, "And enterprises of great pith and moment With this regard their currents turn awry, And lose the name of action." (3.1.89-91)
Mis En Scene Analysis
Kenneth Branagh
Throughout the whole scene, the camera is pointing over Branagh's shoulder at a mirror, so we get to see the scene not only from Branagh's point of view, but we also get to see his body language. This creates the interesting effect of having you see through his eyes, yet at the same time he can the way he is acting. He is staring at himself in the mirror, so in a way he is conversing with himself out loud, and as the scene progresses, he gets closer and closer to the mirror, which symbolizes him reaching the end of his monologue, and once he reaches the mirror, and touches it, he is at one with himself. He is wearing black, which shows his depression and morbidity, which is contrasted to the well-lit, bright environment he is in. In the beginning of the scene, there is no music, but as he progresses towards the mirror, music begins to play, heightening the intensity, and when he draws his dagger, it makes a sharp ringing sound, drawing your attention to the action
Laurence Olivier
This scene begins with a crazily spinning camera, with loud, erratic music, causing quite a chaotic opening. The camera slowly stops spinning as it focuses on Olivier, and it focuses in on his head, and then the camera goes inside his head (still with chaotic music) and the music quiets when he begins speaking. But since you are in his head, and you see a montage of blurry images, he is just narrating, so it creates the effect that he is thinking. The camera then moves outside of his head, and he continues narrating, although his lips don't move, and his eyes are closed, so you can tell that he is still thinking. The camera zooms in on his face, and he awakens with a start. He slowly pulls out a dagger, all the while keeping its point directed towards his chest, so you can tell that he is thinking about killing himself. While his eyes are open, he is staring off into the distance, seeming pensive and forlorn. The dagger slips from his grasp, and he gets up and walks into mist, telling you that he has made the decision not to kill himself.
Mel Gibson
Gibson enters the scene coming down a set of stairs, the top of which are brightly lit, but the bottom (where the camera is) is dark and shadowy. This symbolizes he is coming into a very dark, depressed state of mind, and at the end of the scene he exits the stygian catacombs, going into the light, symbolizing his return from the brink of suicide. There is no music throughout the entire scene, which emphasizes every word Gibson says, since there are no distracting sounds. He is dressed all in black, almost melding with the dingy background, showing his despondency. He speaks lowly and softly, drawing attention to his words and accentuating his emotion.
Ethan Hawke
Unlike the other versions of this soliloquy, Hawke is in a seemingly happy, colorful environment-a children's bookstore. While he is dressed all in black, he is also wearing a red beany, which contrasts heavily with his somber garb. There are gun shots and explosions coming from a tv in the back of the store, which underscores the mental turmoil Hawke is experiencing. While wandering aimlessly through the bookstore, he looks around at all the books, appearing to be browsing, which symbolizes how he is trying to decide what he will do (suicide or not). At first, just like Laurence Olivier, he is narrating the scene but his lips don't move, which shows he is having an internal monologue, and he begins speaking later in the scene, speaking softly and distractedly.
Mel Gibson does the best portrayal of my character out of the four remakes. First off, he is by far the most handsome, so he gets brownie points for that. But overall, his symbolism of my intense, deep, internal turmoil is very well done. I appreciate the symbolism of leaving the light, entering the stygian catacombs, having the internal debate, deciding not to commit suicide, and then leaving into the light. Also, I enjoy the lack of music in his scene and how it makes me hang on his every word. After all, there is no background music in life. His black clothing melts into the background, making him seem a part of it, showing his desolation and gloom. All in all, he really drives home the intensity of the monologue through the deep symbolism of the setting, costume, voice, and sheer good looks.
Laurence Olivier's representation of Hamlet could have used some work in several ways. First off is his costume. He looked like a sailor from the age of piracy or a musician in a colonial era bar. The clothing is very important, because it helps display emotion, and the choice of costume does nothing to show the internal turmoil. Also, Olivier needed to have better voice control, and display more emotion through his voice. Branagh did an excellent job of this, but Olivier sounds rather flat and monotone, which also does nothing to show the depression Hamlet feels. The setting for Olivier's scene is atop a castle, with mists and clouds all around. This makes him seem free and unburdened, while he should have been enslaved to his feelings and thoughts, and weighed down by his depression. The catacombs that Gibson is in during his soliloquy are an excellent example.
Mis En Scene Analysis
Kenneth Branagh
Throughout the whole scene, the camera is pointing over Branagh's shoulder at a mirror, so we get to see the scene not only from Branagh's point of view, but we also get to see his body language. This creates the interesting effect of having you see through his eyes, yet at the same time he can the way he is acting. He is staring at himself in the mirror, so in a way he is conversing with himself out loud, and as the scene progresses, he gets closer and closer to the mirror, which symbolizes him reaching the end of his monologue, and once he reaches the mirror, and touches it, he is at one with himself. He is wearing black, which shows his depression and morbidity, which is contrasted to the well-lit, bright environment he is in. In the beginning of the scene, there is no music, but as he progresses towards the mirror, music begins to play, heightening the intensity, and when he draws his dagger, it makes a sharp ringing sound, drawing your attention to the action
Laurence Olivier
This scene begins with a crazily spinning camera, with loud, erratic music, causing quite a chaotic opening. The camera slowly stops spinning as it focuses on Olivier, and it focuses in on his head, and then the camera goes inside his head (still with chaotic music) and the music quiets when he begins speaking. But since you are in his head, and you see a montage of blurry images, he is just narrating, so it creates the effect that he is thinking. The camera then moves outside of his head, and he continues narrating, although his lips don't move, and his eyes are closed, so you can tell that he is still thinking. The camera zooms in on his face, and he awakens with a start. He slowly pulls out a dagger, all the while keeping its point directed towards his chest, so you can tell that he is thinking about killing himself. While his eyes are open, he is staring off into the distance, seeming pensive and forlorn. The dagger slips from his grasp, and he gets up and walks into mist, telling you that he has made the decision not to kill himself.
Mel Gibson
Gibson enters the scene coming down a set of stairs, the top of which are brightly lit, but the bottom (where the camera is) is dark and shadowy. This symbolizes he is coming into a very dark, depressed state of mind, and at the end of the scene he exits the stygian catacombs, going into the light, symbolizing his return from the brink of suicide. There is no music throughout the entire scene, which emphasizes every word Gibson says, since there are no distracting sounds. He is dressed all in black, almost melding with the dingy background, showing his despondency. He speaks lowly and softly, drawing attention to his words and accentuating his emotion.
Ethan Hawke
Unlike the other versions of this soliloquy, Hawke is in a seemingly happy, colorful environment-a children's bookstore. While he is dressed all in black, he is also wearing a red beany, which contrasts heavily with his somber garb. There are gun shots and explosions coming from a tv in the back of the store, which underscores the mental turmoil Hawke is experiencing. While wandering aimlessly through the bookstore, he looks around at all the books, appearing to be browsing, which symbolizes how he is trying to decide what he will do (suicide or not). At first, just like Laurence Olivier, he is narrating the scene but his lips don't move, which shows he is having an internal monologue, and he begins speaking later in the scene, speaking softly and distractedly.
Mel Gibson does the best portrayal of my character out of the four remakes. First off, he is by far the most handsome, so he gets brownie points for that. But overall, his symbolism of my intense, deep, internal turmoil is very well done. I appreciate the symbolism of leaving the light, entering the stygian catacombs, having the internal debate, deciding not to commit suicide, and then leaving into the light. Also, I enjoy the lack of music in his scene and how it makes me hang on his every word. After all, there is no background music in life. His black clothing melts into the background, making him seem a part of it, showing his desolation and gloom. All in all, he really drives home the intensity of the monologue through the deep symbolism of the setting, costume, voice, and sheer good looks.
Laurence Olivier's representation of Hamlet could have used some work in several ways. First off is his costume. He looked like a sailor from the age of piracy or a musician in a colonial era bar. The clothing is very important, because it helps display emotion, and the choice of costume does nothing to show the internal turmoil. Also, Olivier needed to have better voice control, and display more emotion through his voice. Branagh did an excellent job of this, but Olivier sounds rather flat and monotone, which also does nothing to show the depression Hamlet feels. The setting for Olivier's scene is atop a castle, with mists and clouds all around. This makes him seem free and unburdened, while he should have been enslaved to his feelings and thoughts, and weighed down by his depression. The catacombs that Gibson is in during his soliloquy are an excellent example.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)