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.
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
To Blog or Not to Blog: Post 2
"Someone needs to make him talk, or they are going to die!" (Prisoners)
In Prisoners, Keller Dover and Franklin Birch's daughters are kidnapped by an unknown individual. Dover takes matters into his own hands, keeping captive and torturing the man (Alex Jones) he believes stole his daughter, and experiences serious emotional turmoil over his own morality. His emotional turmoil is mostly caused by others reaction to what he is doing, although he does his best to show no weakness throughout the film. While Dover is torturing Jones, the investigator assigned to his case, Detective Loki, also attempts to find out who stole the girls, albeit in a much more legal manner.
Keller Dover and I have much in common, but I relate more to the theme of the movie as a whole, as opposed to one specific character, so really all of the characters in Prisoners have some kind of connection to my situation and my thoughts. The most obvious is that Dover and I both seek retribution, and our avenue of getting there is revenge. Dover takes it out on Jones, and I take it out on Claudius. However, we both need to feel morally justified in our actions. I justify the murder of Claudius through the play, as shown by " I’ll have grounds More relative than this. The play’s the thing Wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the king." (2.2.566-567). This is quite similar in nature to the tagline mentioned above, wherein Dover says how he justifies torturing Alex Jones-to find the location of his daughters.
We also both have an extreme emotional investment in the situation. I am going insane because of it, and so does Dover. My sentiment is shown when I rhetorically ask "What would he do Had he the motive and the cue for passion That I have? He would drown the stage with tears And cleave the general ear with horrid speech" (2.2.51-523) This is just like when Dover and Loki are in Loki's care, and Dover is screaming, and slamming the dashboard over and over, raging about how his daughter is waiting for him, but his not being there to protect her. He is enraged and feels helpless This outburst is also related to my moaning about how useless and indecisive I am, when I discuss ."That I, the son of a dear father murdered, Prompted to my revenge by heaven and hell, Must, like a whore, unpack my heart with words" (2.2.546-548), and also when I say "Oh, what a rogue and peasant slave am I!" (2.2.509)
In Prisoners, Keller Dover and Franklin Birch's daughters are kidnapped by an unknown individual. Dover takes matters into his own hands, keeping captive and torturing the man (Alex Jones) he believes stole his daughter, and experiences serious emotional turmoil over his own morality. His emotional turmoil is mostly caused by others reaction to what he is doing, although he does his best to show no weakness throughout the film. While Dover is torturing Jones, the investigator assigned to his case, Detective Loki, also attempts to find out who stole the girls, albeit in a much more legal manner.
Keller Dover and I have much in common, but I relate more to the theme of the movie as a whole, as opposed to one specific character, so really all of the characters in Prisoners have some kind of connection to my situation and my thoughts. The most obvious is that Dover and I both seek retribution, and our avenue of getting there is revenge. Dover takes it out on Jones, and I take it out on Claudius. However, we both need to feel morally justified in our actions. I justify the murder of Claudius through the play, as shown by " I’ll have grounds More relative than this. The play’s the thing Wherein I’ll catch the conscience of the king." (2.2.566-567). This is quite similar in nature to the tagline mentioned above, wherein Dover says how he justifies torturing Alex Jones-to find the location of his daughters.
We also both have an extreme emotional investment in the situation. I am going insane because of it, and so does Dover. My sentiment is shown when I rhetorically ask "What would he do Had he the motive and the cue for passion That I have? He would drown the stage with tears And cleave the general ear with horrid speech" (2.2.51-523) This is just like when Dover and Loki are in Loki's care, and Dover is screaming, and slamming the dashboard over and over, raging about how his daughter is waiting for him, but his not being there to protect her. He is enraged and feels helpless This outburst is also related to my moaning about how useless and indecisive I am, when I discuss ."That I, the son of a dear father murdered, Prompted to my revenge by heaven and hell, Must, like a whore, unpack my heart with words" (2.2.546-548), and also when I say "Oh, what a rogue and peasant slave am I!" (2.2.509)
We both put on a facade to further our causes, but in different ways. I am forced to act like a madman, and Polonius, while discussing me, says "That he is mad, ’tis true. Tis true, ’tis pity, And pity ’tis ’tis true—a foolish figure," (2.2.100-101) Keller Dove spends hours every day torturing Alex Jones, and in order to cover up his actions, he pretends that he is out drowning his problems in alcohol, stumbling around town with a bottle of whiskey in his hand.
.
Prisoners Official Trailer #1 (2013) - Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal Mov...
http://www.youtube.com/v/bpXfcTF6iVk?autohide=1&version=3&autohide=1&showinfo=1&autoplay=1&attribution_tag=wji6-Wtunoo-1M-Q-vpwRw&feature=share
To Blog or Not to Blog: Post 1
Lord save me from the hell that is my day-to-day life. My father has died, and not a soul in the kingdom cares. I have never been so depressed, and felt so alone. "...I have that within which passeth show, These but the trappings and the suits of woe." (1.2.86-87) I act and dress to express how I feel, but no one gets it. I dwell to often on the thought of taking my own life. "How weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable Seem to me all the uses of this world!" None can comprehend my sorrow.(1.2.133-134) Not even my mother, who says I'm really special, seems to care. She married her brother-in-law, hardly any time at all after my father passed. His memory seems gone like dust in the wind. The moral frailty of women is sickening. "O God, a beast that wants discourse of reason Would have mourned longer!" (1.2.151-152) And Claudius, that bastard. That lying, incestuous son of a gun. To think that he believes he can replace my father. Perish the thought! My father was "So excellent a king, that was to this Hyperion to a satyr." (1.2.141-142) It takes all my will not to wrap my hands round his throat. He deserves not the title my father held, nor his throne, and certainly not his bed. My father was a man among boys, a lion among puppies."I shall not look upon his like again" (1.2.186-187).
Sunday, September 8, 2013
The Adding Machine
http://www.youtube.com/v/yRKNW5BN3eI?autohide=1&version=3&attribution_tag=ZhYHLAKDV56scOaKx39dbA&autoplay=1&feature=share&autohide=1&showinfo=1
Friday, September 6, 2013
Thursday, September 5, 2013
Wednesday, September 4, 2013
Tuesday, September 3, 2013
Monday, September 2, 2013
Sunday, September 1, 2013
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Unfortunate Assignment #3- Group Roles
Considering what an obnoxious and loud person I am, it may be surprising that I would consider myself a coordinator/energizer when I am placed in a group setting. The job of the coordinator, essentially, is to not so much make sure everyone gets their opinion heard, but to work out differences among the group members, to solve disputes, to make sure there is good communication, and to above all make sure the group functions in an efficient manner, and does not waste its time with internal squabbling. An energizer makes the group work and prevents it from getting stagnated. This may sound odd, but I would relate my combined role as coordinator/energizer to the role of Jesus. His purpose on earth was to help humanity get itself together, and to focus on what really mattered: getting into heaven. He tried to resolve the old feuds, to dissipate the anger, to guide and direct and teach, and in general give mankind a kick in the pants. He wanted what was best for them. He wanted them to get into heaven. I am a coordinator/energizer because I am able to begin with the end in mind. The "end" that our group is trying to achieve is to get an A on the project. Jesus' "end" was to help people get into heaven. It doesn't matter whose ideas we use, or if Fred did his share of the work, or if Sally really did kiss Jim, only that we get the A. To do so, the group has to work with each other, not against each other.
Perhaps the more obvious role that I serve is as the tension reliever. I crack jokes, laugh, lower the stress, relax people, and make the group a more friendly environment conducive to more efficient work. No one works well when they don't feel comfortable with the people around them. I go to battle like Hercules, fighting the monster of awkwardness and formality. And in many groups, especially when no one knows each other, the battle I do in the group, trying to get people to be friends, to interact, to talk, is just as difficult as killing a mythological beast. Some people are just plain unsociable, and are very tough nuts to crack. But I can talk and joke all day long, and eventually can get through to even the most reclusive individuals.
Perhaps the more obvious role that I serve is as the tension reliever. I crack jokes, laugh, lower the stress, relax people, and make the group a more friendly environment conducive to more efficient work. No one works well when they don't feel comfortable with the people around them. I go to battle like Hercules, fighting the monster of awkwardness and formality. And in many groups, especially when no one knows each other, the battle I do in the group, trying to get people to be friends, to interact, to talk, is just as difficult as killing a mythological beast. Some people are just plain unsociable, and are very tough nuts to crack. But I can talk and joke all day long, and eventually can get through to even the most reclusive individuals.
Monday, August 26, 2013
Unfortunate Assignment #2- Exam Reflection
My strong suit in analyzing literature most definitely lies in being able to skim a passage quickly and be able to answer most of the questions without really looking back at the passage. I am good at determining authors purpose, especially for individual lines or words, and hardly ever have issues with those problems. I also typically pick up on what is going on behind the scenes, the unwritten messages, especially with poems. I am good at picking up hints in the poem that point to authors purpose, setting, and other details like that that are often not specifically stated. I also do not usually miss problems that ask you to infer something from the passage, or that ask what blank refers to.
And my weak points. Too many to talk about. I am absolutely terrible at identifying tone. For some reason, I get questions about tone wrong all the time. That has always been a big problem for me. Also, I have no clue what the lyrics and sonnets and ballads and dramatic monologues and odes and elegy's and whatevers are. Not even a smidgen of an idea. I also don't get the questions where it asks you to identify what blank refers to, or what blank is parallel to. I seem to have a hard time drawing connections between separate lines in passages. I also usually get wrong questions that ask me to translate old english into modern english, or what the old english really means.
My first, most obvious, and (hopefully) easiest goal is to have learned all of the types of poems and passages by the AP Exam. All of the lyrics and sonnets and all that jazz. I need to do this because there were several questions about them on the practice exam, and I got them all wrong. But those are easy questions that are a piece of cake if you know the answer, and impossible if you don't. I need to get those easy points.
My second goal is to be able to get 100% of the questions that talk about referring, paralleling, and inferring correct on one of the practice exams we take in class. It doesn't matter which one, I just want to be able to show that I improved my skill in that category. Even if I don't get exactly 100%, I would be happy with a high percentage of those questions, since they seem like they should be easy. I think I just need to take more time going through the passages so I remember more of it, instead of rushing through the questions like I usually do. My third goal is to get 100% of the tone questions correct on one practice exam. I like these two goals because they sum up the majority of my weak spots in analysis questions. I don't think the tone questions are that hard, I just need to make sure I pay more attention to the authors purpose, and the adjectives the author uses to find out what the tone is.
And my weak points. Too many to talk about. I am absolutely terrible at identifying tone. For some reason, I get questions about tone wrong all the time. That has always been a big problem for me. Also, I have no clue what the lyrics and sonnets and ballads and dramatic monologues and odes and elegy's and whatevers are. Not even a smidgen of an idea. I also don't get the questions where it asks you to identify what blank refers to, or what blank is parallel to. I seem to have a hard time drawing connections between separate lines in passages. I also usually get wrong questions that ask me to translate old english into modern english, or what the old english really means.
My first, most obvious, and (hopefully) easiest goal is to have learned all of the types of poems and passages by the AP Exam. All of the lyrics and sonnets and all that jazz. I need to do this because there were several questions about them on the practice exam, and I got them all wrong. But those are easy questions that are a piece of cake if you know the answer, and impossible if you don't. I need to get those easy points.
My second goal is to be able to get 100% of the questions that talk about referring, paralleling, and inferring correct on one of the practice exams we take in class. It doesn't matter which one, I just want to be able to show that I improved my skill in that category. Even if I don't get exactly 100%, I would be happy with a high percentage of those questions, since they seem like they should be easy. I think I just need to take more time going through the passages so I remember more of it, instead of rushing through the questions like I usually do. My third goal is to get 100% of the tone questions correct on one practice exam. I like these two goals because they sum up the majority of my weak spots in analysis questions. I don't think the tone questions are that hard, I just need to make sure I pay more attention to the authors purpose, and the adjectives the author uses to find out what the tone is.
Sunday, August 25, 2013
Unfortunate Assignment #1- Blog Design
I wanted to make my blog look handwritten, more like a diary than an essay you would write in microsoft word. That is why I chose the fonts that I did. The font of the title looks like a more formal handwriting, as if more time and effort was spent to make it look nice, while the blog text is messier handwriting, which is quite similar to my own. The title of the blog makes you think of the book series about young kids who are plagued by a villainous authority figure. In other words, AP Literature and Composition. But instead of stopping someone from taking our money, we have to write essays. The story of my life for the next few months is going to involve a lot of writing, hence the title.
I chose the background to be a piece of lined paper because it fits in with the whole handwritten diary theme. The font is handwriting, and the background is paper. The blog will be filled with writing assignments. The whole theme ties together. The text is white to contrast with the dark grey background, in the same way that dark grey graphite contrasts with the white background of paper.
I chose the background to be a piece of lined paper because it fits in with the whole handwritten diary theme. The font is handwriting, and the background is paper. The blog will be filled with writing assignments. The whole theme ties together. The text is white to contrast with the dark grey background, in the same way that dark grey graphite contrasts with the white background of paper.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)