I'm not going to lie; when I found out I had to look at a British newspaper and relate the theme with something we've talked about in my class, I got scared. What am I suppose to write about? What themes? I hate reading newspapers; do I really have to? Well, after looking through the website, one title caught my eye. An article written by Jane Martinson on the website for the Guardian, a British newspaper, entitled "The Everyday Sexism Project: A Year of Shouting Back," seemed to be a very interesting read. As I skimmed through the article, I found a theme that I could easily relate back to my class: Women's inequality. Now, please don't freak out on me; I am not a huge feminist, but there is evidence that my gender has been and is still one step behind our masculine opponents. While I was in my British Literature class discussing Aurora Floyd, we talked of ideology called Separate Spheres. In this theory, men are in one sphere and women are in a completely different one. The sad thing is that it makes sense. Looking at past times, we came up with the men's sphere containing education, government, alcohol, sex, work, and danger. The women's sphere included family, motherhood, the duties of a wife, passivity, meekness, home, and safety. Why is this so true? Why are we constantly placing women and men into these complete opposite places? What happens when one gender experiments with the other's sphere? They are labeled: gay, not enough of a man or woman, too this, too that.
You are probably starting to get curious about my article - and if you're not, well, that's too bad. Looking at the title of the piece I found should help you get a sense of what else I am going to talk about. "The Everyday SEXISM Problem". To sum it up, a woman set out on a journey to discover if women are experiencing prejudice and harassment. One year later (when the article was written), she looked back at her findings. Twenty-five THOUSAND entries from fifteen countries. If the number of replies doesn't shock you, then maybe what was in them will. A schoolgirl and a widow being pressured for sex. A female reverend not being able to conduct a marriage or a funeral because of her sex. A 14-year-old girl writing, "I am constantly told I can't be good at things because I'm a girl. That I need to get back in the kitchen. That all I'm good for is cleaning, cooking, and blow jobs." The messages that Martinson received weren't only from women, but also discouraging mail from men. One message read, "You experience sexism because women are inferior in every single way to men. The only reason you have been put on this planet is so we can fuck you. Please die." Why are women so much more prone to being the victim of this horrible type of harassment? Why are we constantly put under males? I know that this is not the case everywhere, but it is certainly a bigger problem than I had ever realized before. I am very proud of the courage it took for this woman to reach out and encourage others to speak up. What she has done not only created awareness for this disheartening subject, but it has created encouragement and hope for so many women who have just taken the abuse. Toward the end of the reading, Martinson finishes with some women's success stories. She took something that has been the "norm" for so many people and finally gave them a chance to realize that this isn't the way it needs to be. I have never personally been victim to said abuse on such a large scale, but it comes in all shapes and sizes. Just because we are a little different than the male gender does not mean we are anything less. Women are strong, independent, and beautiful. We are put on this world to become not just teachers and housewives, but owners of big corporations, truck drivers, and bankers. Sexual abuse should not stop anyone from doing what they love. It's time to take a stand like this lovely woman, and start reaching out to those who experience it everyday.
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Saturday, April 13, 2013
Criticizing With Some Criticisms
Reading The Return of the Native by Thomas Hardy was not always an easy experience - especially at the beginning. I'm one of those readers who, if the first chapter is less than ten pages and has actually created a desire in me that makes me want more of the book, I'll keep going. Hardy did not accomplish this. Since reading the book was a requirement for the class, I painfully read on. The book slowly progressed from then on, creating that desire that I had mentioned earlier. I started to understand the characters, who they were, what their part in the novel was, and what the consequences to their actions were. Toward the end of the book, I obviously found out who dies and who lives on. Usually, when someone dies in a book, I hate the book for a few pages until I start to forget about it. Unsurprisingly, the same the happened in The Return of the Native. I do believe, though, that Hardy ended the book on a fairly good note. Thomasin and Venn end up getting married, and that was something that I had been rooting for throughout the entire book.
Apparently, Mr. D. H. Lawrence in "Study of Thomas Hardy" had a different idea about the book than I did, but if all you do for a living is criticize poor Thomas Hardy's novels, then I guess you have some sort of right to do so. Anyway, the man did have some good points about each character in the novel. He talks about the obvious qualities of Eustacia, how she is indecisive and unsatisfied with the way things are. Lawrence then moves onto Clym and makes a few good points that I hadn't realized before. Clym is almost as indecisive as Eustacia. It shows when he goes to the ever sought after Paris, but then comes back because he wants to give back by teaching. It's an interesting thing to think about because Lawrence mentions that Clym's teaching equals Eustacia's Paris; both are fantasies that are within reach, but are never grasped in the context of the novel. Lawrence moves onto Thomasin and Venn (my favorite people in the novel) and mentions that, because the two are genuine, and almost perfect people according to the time, both receive each other, the greatest prize given in the book. Wildeve is talked about next. He is just as unsatisfied as Eustacia, and that is the end to him along with his current "love." Wildeve is opposite of Clym because he doesn't follow the rules per say which links to his never existing satisfaction. If only Wildeve could have loved Thomasin like a normal, true husband should, then he would still be living and loving the daughter he made. The last big character of the book is Mrs. Yeobright. She follows all of the rules of the system, but, because of that, she dies. The pressure of everything that goes on in her life becomes too great and she simply cannot take it anymore. Lawrence concludes his talk about the individual characters by stating that only the steady and genuine survive. The people who contain strong feelings or unusual characteristics are eventually destroyed in the book. If a person steps out of the established system, they will then be destroyed.
This criticism was interesting in that it made the obvious visible (if that makes sense). I knew that the characters who were a little different were eventually punished, but I hadn't really thought too much of it. It makes sense, though. Each character that wasn't "common" is slowly cut down, in some cases until there was nothing left.
I proceeded to look at the book through the viewpoint of Richard Swigg in "Thomas Hardy and the Problem of the 'Middle Distance.'" One of the most interesting things Swigg mentioned is that when he killed Eustacia and Mrs. Yeobright, it was because he lost his creative energy. Both characters have such far-gazing dreams that they simply cannot be topped, so they both must die. This creates an interesting thought, at least about Hardy. Does he really just lack imagination about these two, or did he really feel that they must die? Looking at their deaths, I think that they both were well written and seemed to be thought out pretty well, but from what I understand, Swigg doesn't agree.
In the end, everyone is going to have their own criticisms about this book. There's a lot going on, and a lot to think about. I think reading a few criticisms created a different point of view on the book and the author, and it makes for an interesting read. One of the biggest lessons I will take away from reading this book and its criticisms, though, is that some people have way too much time on their hands.
Apparently, Mr. D. H. Lawrence in "Study of Thomas Hardy" had a different idea about the book than I did, but if all you do for a living is criticize poor Thomas Hardy's novels, then I guess you have some sort of right to do so. Anyway, the man did have some good points about each character in the novel. He talks about the obvious qualities of Eustacia, how she is indecisive and unsatisfied with the way things are. Lawrence then moves onto Clym and makes a few good points that I hadn't realized before. Clym is almost as indecisive as Eustacia. It shows when he goes to the ever sought after Paris, but then comes back because he wants to give back by teaching. It's an interesting thing to think about because Lawrence mentions that Clym's teaching equals Eustacia's Paris; both are fantasies that are within reach, but are never grasped in the context of the novel. Lawrence moves onto Thomasin and Venn (my favorite people in the novel) and mentions that, because the two are genuine, and almost perfect people according to the time, both receive each other, the greatest prize given in the book. Wildeve is talked about next. He is just as unsatisfied as Eustacia, and that is the end to him along with his current "love." Wildeve is opposite of Clym because he doesn't follow the rules per say which links to his never existing satisfaction. If only Wildeve could have loved Thomasin like a normal, true husband should, then he would still be living and loving the daughter he made. The last big character of the book is Mrs. Yeobright. She follows all of the rules of the system, but, because of that, she dies. The pressure of everything that goes on in her life becomes too great and she simply cannot take it anymore. Lawrence concludes his talk about the individual characters by stating that only the steady and genuine survive. The people who contain strong feelings or unusual characteristics are eventually destroyed in the book. If a person steps out of the established system, they will then be destroyed.
This criticism was interesting in that it made the obvious visible (if that makes sense). I knew that the characters who were a little different were eventually punished, but I hadn't really thought too much of it. It makes sense, though. Each character that wasn't "common" is slowly cut down, in some cases until there was nothing left.
I proceeded to look at the book through the viewpoint of Richard Swigg in "Thomas Hardy and the Problem of the 'Middle Distance.'" One of the most interesting things Swigg mentioned is that when he killed Eustacia and Mrs. Yeobright, it was because he lost his creative energy. Both characters have such far-gazing dreams that they simply cannot be topped, so they both must die. This creates an interesting thought, at least about Hardy. Does he really just lack imagination about these two, or did he really feel that they must die? Looking at their deaths, I think that they both were well written and seemed to be thought out pretty well, but from what I understand, Swigg doesn't agree.
In the end, everyone is going to have their own criticisms about this book. There's a lot going on, and a lot to think about. I think reading a few criticisms created a different point of view on the book and the author, and it makes for an interesting read. One of the biggest lessons I will take away from reading this book and its criticisms, though, is that some people have way too much time on their hands.
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Can't Get Enough Aurora Floyd
In case anyone wasn't already aware, I am currently in the process of a research project involving the novel Aurora Floyd by Elizabeth Braddon. It's a very interesting book, and I have been examining it very closely so that my project will follow it as precisely as possible. So, while I look at certain parts of the book in that light, I will pick some that spoke to me that won't do for my research.
First of all, I need to point out the passage that talks about Archibald Floyd. I love this page, because it speaks to me in such a way that I can relate.
...All forgetful of herself in her excitement, with her natural vivacity multiplied by the animation of the scene before her, she was more than usually lovely, and Archibald Floyd looked at her with a fond emotion, so intermingled with gratitude to Heaven for the happiness of his daughter's destiny as to be almost akin to pain. She was happy; she was thoroughly happy at last, this child of his dead Eliza, this sacred charge left to him by the woman he had loved; she was happy, and she was safe; he could go to his grave resignedly to-morrow, if it pleased God,- knowing this. Strange thoughts, perhaps for a crowded race-course; but our most solemn fancies do not come always in solemn places. Nay, it is often in the midst of crowds and confusion that our souls wing their loftiest flights, and the saddest memories return to us. You see a man sitting at some theatrical entertainment, with a grave abstracted face, over which no change of those around him has any influence. He may be thinking of his dead wife, dead ten years ago; he may be acting over well-remembered scenes of joy and sorrow; he may be recalling cruel words, never to be atoned for upon earth, angry looks gone to be registered against him in the skies; while his children are laughing at the clown on stage below him. He may be moodily mediating inevitable bankruptcy or coming ruin, holding imaginary meetings with his creditors, and contemplating prussic acid upon the refusal of his certificate, while his eldest daughter is crying with Pauline Deschappelles. So Archibald Floyd, while numbers were going up, and the jockeys being weighed, and the book-men clamouring below him, leaned over the broad ledge of the stone balcony, and, looking far away across the grassy amphitheater thought of the dead wife who had bequeathed tho him this precious daughter.
Now, I'm sorry that there is just so much information here. It really does seem to keep going on and on, but it really does have a message that anybody who has lost a loved one can relate to. When I was much younger, eight years old to be exact, I lost my younger brother. Death is not something that I am a stranger to. Losing the love of my life is something that is harder to relate to. Nonetheless, I still can somewhat sympathize with Mr. Floyd. He is at a race track with his beautiful daughter, and suddenly it strikes him that his dead wife is what helped bring this life into the world. She was the one that made him love, and she wasn't here today to celebrate in the beauty of the woman that he raised. This passage immediately spoke to me when I read it, and I had to share it again with those who have read it before. It's a common feeling for those who have lost a loved one, and when it does hit the person, it's a slap in the face. Trying to hold back tears that aren't fitting for the situation in front of him or her. It's hard to appreciate the feeling when death hasn't been experienced, but when it comes to someone, the only thing to do is wait it out.
Another thing that I would like to analyze is how much I do not like Mrs. Powell. The point at which this feeling started to come about was when Braddon explains servants. It's something that I had never really thought about before, but it makes so much sense! She mentions that when tragedy strikes in the home, that's what your servants feed off of because they have nothing else. This is a part of the novel that I'm sure jumped out at a few Victorians way back in the day. Here they are, sitting and enjoying life, being waited on hand and foot, reading this book and suddenly the realization occurs that the person bringing them their drink probably spit in it. How true is that, though? Anyone who has worked in an occupation similar (like a waiter) probably felt the same way when his table was being a bunch of jerks. Just a loogey in their coffee. They won't notice. They probably won't leave me a tip anyway. What's that? You've got problems in your life? Well try having my job; it sucks. Now, I can't say that this was the situation in every household, but I'm sure it was present enough that when Braddon addressed it, the help in the home became a bit more careful about how much they gossiped.
Anyway, on with Mrs. Powell. I can understand her hatred for Aurora, which was clearly found within the pages of the book. Whether it was trying to lock her out of the house when Aurora had met with James or when she tried the words that were clearly for James's eyes only, Mrs. Powell was ready to bring Aurora down. But why? Aurora had given her a home, a nice room, and gave her a small amount of duties around the house. My understanding for her hatred had to do with a great amount of jealousy that she kept hidden in her heart. Why not be jealous, though? Aurora's father was rich and gave her anything she wanted, and then she goes and marries a man (the second time around) that does the exact same thing! So, before anyone can just judge this old woman for being a jerk, not really realizing the roots of the situation, they need to realize that Mrs. Powell did have a pretty good reason for being a jerk.
Aurora Floyd held my interest in a ton of different ways. Whether it was the title character's rebelliousness or her husband who was a big teddy bear, the book was full of action that kept me wanting more. If Aurora Floyd had been a book written at a different time, the whole novel would have a different tone to it. She wouldn't be such of an odd Victorian, and instead would probably of fit into today's society. The book really needs to be read with a mind that has been placed back in time, and, if that's not done, you will not get the same satisfaction of reading it that I did.
First of all, I need to point out the passage that talks about Archibald Floyd. I love this page, because it speaks to me in such a way that I can relate.
...All forgetful of herself in her excitement, with her natural vivacity multiplied by the animation of the scene before her, she was more than usually lovely, and Archibald Floyd looked at her with a fond emotion, so intermingled with gratitude to Heaven for the happiness of his daughter's destiny as to be almost akin to pain. She was happy; she was thoroughly happy at last, this child of his dead Eliza, this sacred charge left to him by the woman he had loved; she was happy, and she was safe; he could go to his grave resignedly to-morrow, if it pleased God,- knowing this. Strange thoughts, perhaps for a crowded race-course; but our most solemn fancies do not come always in solemn places. Nay, it is often in the midst of crowds and confusion that our souls wing their loftiest flights, and the saddest memories return to us. You see a man sitting at some theatrical entertainment, with a grave abstracted face, over which no change of those around him has any influence. He may be thinking of his dead wife, dead ten years ago; he may be acting over well-remembered scenes of joy and sorrow; he may be recalling cruel words, never to be atoned for upon earth, angry looks gone to be registered against him in the skies; while his children are laughing at the clown on stage below him. He may be moodily mediating inevitable bankruptcy or coming ruin, holding imaginary meetings with his creditors, and contemplating prussic acid upon the refusal of his certificate, while his eldest daughter is crying with Pauline Deschappelles. So Archibald Floyd, while numbers were going up, and the jockeys being weighed, and the book-men clamouring below him, leaned over the broad ledge of the stone balcony, and, looking far away across the grassy amphitheater thought of the dead wife who had bequeathed tho him this precious daughter.
Now, I'm sorry that there is just so much information here. It really does seem to keep going on and on, but it really does have a message that anybody who has lost a loved one can relate to. When I was much younger, eight years old to be exact, I lost my younger brother. Death is not something that I am a stranger to. Losing the love of my life is something that is harder to relate to. Nonetheless, I still can somewhat sympathize with Mr. Floyd. He is at a race track with his beautiful daughter, and suddenly it strikes him that his dead wife is what helped bring this life into the world. She was the one that made him love, and she wasn't here today to celebrate in the beauty of the woman that he raised. This passage immediately spoke to me when I read it, and I had to share it again with those who have read it before. It's a common feeling for those who have lost a loved one, and when it does hit the person, it's a slap in the face. Trying to hold back tears that aren't fitting for the situation in front of him or her. It's hard to appreciate the feeling when death hasn't been experienced, but when it comes to someone, the only thing to do is wait it out.
Another thing that I would like to analyze is how much I do not like Mrs. Powell. The point at which this feeling started to come about was when Braddon explains servants. It's something that I had never really thought about before, but it makes so much sense! She mentions that when tragedy strikes in the home, that's what your servants feed off of because they have nothing else. This is a part of the novel that I'm sure jumped out at a few Victorians way back in the day. Here they are, sitting and enjoying life, being waited on hand and foot, reading this book and suddenly the realization occurs that the person bringing them their drink probably spit in it. How true is that, though? Anyone who has worked in an occupation similar (like a waiter) probably felt the same way when his table was being a bunch of jerks. Just a loogey in their coffee. They won't notice. They probably won't leave me a tip anyway. What's that? You've got problems in your life? Well try having my job; it sucks. Now, I can't say that this was the situation in every household, but I'm sure it was present enough that when Braddon addressed it, the help in the home became a bit more careful about how much they gossiped.
Anyway, on with Mrs. Powell. I can understand her hatred for Aurora, which was clearly found within the pages of the book. Whether it was trying to lock her out of the house when Aurora had met with James or when she tried the words that were clearly for James's eyes only, Mrs. Powell was ready to bring Aurora down. But why? Aurora had given her a home, a nice room, and gave her a small amount of duties around the house. My understanding for her hatred had to do with a great amount of jealousy that she kept hidden in her heart. Why not be jealous, though? Aurora's father was rich and gave her anything she wanted, and then she goes and marries a man (the second time around) that does the exact same thing! So, before anyone can just judge this old woman for being a jerk, not really realizing the roots of the situation, they need to realize that Mrs. Powell did have a pretty good reason for being a jerk.
Aurora Floyd held my interest in a ton of different ways. Whether it was the title character's rebelliousness or her husband who was a big teddy bear, the book was full of action that kept me wanting more. If Aurora Floyd had been a book written at a different time, the whole novel would have a different tone to it. She wouldn't be such of an odd Victorian, and instead would probably of fit into today's society. The book really needs to be read with a mind that has been placed back in time, and, if that's not done, you will not get the same satisfaction of reading it that I did.
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
I Actually Understood the Movie
For this blog in my British Literature class, I was given two options:
1) Read several Beatrix Potter books
2)Watch a film based on an Oscar Wilde play
Well, just like any other high-achieving, very smart student, I watched the movie. To my surprise, I actually liked it! The movie that I chose to watch was The Ideal Husband. While I watched this movie, I took some of the techniques I had learned in my high school Shakespeare class and applied them. I paid attention to the characters; What were their purposes? Comical or for the plot? I paid attention to foreshadowing: What does he mean when he says this? What does the father's role in wanting his son to get married have to do with anything? I also read the short summary of the movie that's on the back of any movie (which means I didn't really know much about it at all) before I watched it so that I could better understand what it was about. What I knew about the movie before I viewed it was that some man was about to be blackmailed.
The hardest thing about watching this movie was the fact that it's done in the old English way. This makes sense since the play was written in 1895. So, if anyone was wondering what this movie is about, then you should just watch it. It's only an hour and a half long, and - while it doesn't have very much of today's action, violence, or profanity in it - you just might surprise yourself with watching the movie.
I thought the main story of the movie was a very interesting part of the play. While this story was the main idea, there are other events that are happening. For example, Lord Goring's father and his love story. This happened to be my favorite part of the movie. I liked the character; he was charming, funny, handsome, and a typical lady's man. I also sympathized with him. His father kept placing tremendous pressure on him to get married, and when we find out that he almost did get married, (thank God he didn't get married to Lady Cheveley) the reason for the split is a good one. I could tell that this character was put into the play for comic relief. While he was part of the problem for awhile, (messing up when he thought Lady Gertrude was in the room next to him and Sir Robert instead of Lady Cheveley), you couldn't help but love him.
I guess I should probably talk about the big idea of the whole play: Sir Robert's folly. He made a stupid mistake, but he loves his wife so much and doesn't want that to change, so he never tells her what he did. I can't help but feel for this man. While it's wrong to lie to your spouse, he was only trying to protect her. He was only trying to keep up this perfect image of himself that she had in her mind. I like this idea. It's so real to today's society. We all hold certain things in our lives to a higher standard than what they are that, when we find out something bad they or it did, we can't help but feel betrayed. We only set ourselves up to be let down. We can't expect everything to be perfect or anything to be honest.
Now that you know my opinion of the movie, I hope that you can see why I think that. It's full of many different stories that intertwine to make one interesting view. Stay tuned, and next time I'll be looking at something else from the British area!
1) Read several Beatrix Potter books
2)Watch a film based on an Oscar Wilde play
Well, just like any other high-achieving, very smart student, I watched the movie. To my surprise, I actually liked it! The movie that I chose to watch was The Ideal Husband. While I watched this movie, I took some of the techniques I had learned in my high school Shakespeare class and applied them. I paid attention to the characters; What were their purposes? Comical or for the plot? I paid attention to foreshadowing: What does he mean when he says this? What does the father's role in wanting his son to get married have to do with anything? I also read the short summary of the movie that's on the back of any movie (which means I didn't really know much about it at all) before I watched it so that I could better understand what it was about. What I knew about the movie before I viewed it was that some man was about to be blackmailed.
The hardest thing about watching this movie was the fact that it's done in the old English way. This makes sense since the play was written in 1895. So, if anyone was wondering what this movie is about, then you should just watch it. It's only an hour and a half long, and - while it doesn't have very much of today's action, violence, or profanity in it - you just might surprise yourself with watching the movie.
I thought the main story of the movie was a very interesting part of the play. While this story was the main idea, there are other events that are happening. For example, Lord Goring's father and his love story. This happened to be my favorite part of the movie. I liked the character; he was charming, funny, handsome, and a typical lady's man. I also sympathized with him. His father kept placing tremendous pressure on him to get married, and when we find out that he almost did get married, (thank God he didn't get married to Lady Cheveley) the reason for the split is a good one. I could tell that this character was put into the play for comic relief. While he was part of the problem for awhile, (messing up when he thought Lady Gertrude was in the room next to him and Sir Robert instead of Lady Cheveley), you couldn't help but love him.
I guess I should probably talk about the big idea of the whole play: Sir Robert's folly. He made a stupid mistake, but he loves his wife so much and doesn't want that to change, so he never tells her what he did. I can't help but feel for this man. While it's wrong to lie to your spouse, he was only trying to protect her. He was only trying to keep up this perfect image of himself that she had in her mind. I like this idea. It's so real to today's society. We all hold certain things in our lives to a higher standard than what they are that, when we find out something bad they or it did, we can't help but feel betrayed. We only set ourselves up to be let down. We can't expect everything to be perfect or anything to be honest.
Now that you know my opinion of the movie, I hope that you can see why I think that. It's full of many different stories that intertwine to make one interesting view. Stay tuned, and next time I'll be looking at something else from the British area!
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Let's Tackle Some Poetry
Kudos to each and every one of you who enjoys poetry, because I am not in your group. I'm sorry to say that, when I read poetry, about two lines into the probably beautiful piece of work, my mind suddenly starts to wander. By the end of the poem, if it's about dogs, I'll probably be thinking about what's for lunch. There's the only rare occasion when I actually understand what I'm reading, and I must say that William Wordsworth has finally caught my attention on a poem simple, yet slightly interesting.
My British Literature professor mentioned that many people don't enjoy Wordsworth's poem, "I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud," because it's too "cute." While this accusation might be true to some extent, I rather enjoyed the poem. There are some things in it that make me feel connected to him in a weird way. It could possibly be because I enjoy being outside, and it reminds me of things that I love.
There are a couple of things that I want to look at in this poem with you. I may be using some of the things that my class has discussed with the poem, mixed with my opinion. Feel free to throw your opinions at me, too, if you think I'm completely wrong!
I wandered lonely as a cloud
That floats on high o'er vales and hills,
When all at once I saw a crowd,
A host, of golden daffodils;
Beside the lake, beneath the trees,
Fluttering and dancing in the breeze.
Continuous as the stars that shine
And twinkle on the milky way,
They stretched in never-ending line
Along the margin of a bay: 10
Ten thousand saw I at a glance,
Tossing their heads in sprightly dance.
The waves beside them danced; but they
Out-did the sparkling waves in glee:
A poet could not but be gay,
In such a jocund company:
I gazed--and gazed--but little thought
What wealth the show to me had brought:
For oft, when on my couch I lie
In vacant or in pensive mood, 20
They flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the daffodils.
(Thank you http://www.bartleby.com/145/ww260.html for the poem!)
Okay, in my class, we discussed how many of the things in this poem are given human qualities (personification), while humans are given nonhuman qualities. Why does he do this? When he mentions the daffodils fluttering or dancing in the breeze, or tossing their heads in sprightly dance, what does it make you think of? Are the daffodils actually dancing, or do you imagine them being tossed back and forth in the wind? So, while we don't actually imagine the daffodils tip-toeing around a stage to a beautiful song, the words create a much more beautiful way to describe how he sees them. He also uses this method in the last lines when he mentions how his heart with pleasure fills, and dances with the daffodils. I feel a similar experience to this when I think of hiking at Devil's Lake in Baraboo, Wisconsin. When I feel down about something, I imagine myself hiking up the bluffs and seeing that breathtaking view which only personally taking on the challenge of going up them can satisfy.
I also enjoy how Wordsworth mentions how no person could be but gay when he or she is experiencing exactly what he sees. I guess that no one could ever experience that exact thing; I mean, he is a cloud when he's writing this, but you get the idea.
Finally, the thing about this poem is that it's about these wonderful daffodils.
(Thanks Google for the picture)While yes, they are beautiful, he thinks that they are the best thing that he experiences while he is this cloud. How could that be? He sees beautiful sparkling waves from the lake that they are near, he sees hills and vales, but all that he truly loves are the daffodils? What I think Wordsworth is really getting at here is that we need to find beauty in everything. Yes, the daffodils are beautiful, but if I were the cloud, I'd probably have to write about the view of everything altogether! I guess that's why I'm not the cloud, Wordsworth is, and if he is, indeed, trying to say that there is beauty in even the smallest of things, then I wish that I could say, "Got your message man!"
It's a beautiful poem; I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did!
My British Literature professor mentioned that many people don't enjoy Wordsworth's poem, "I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud," because it's too "cute." While this accusation might be true to some extent, I rather enjoyed the poem. There are some things in it that make me feel connected to him in a weird way. It could possibly be because I enjoy being outside, and it reminds me of things that I love.
There are a couple of things that I want to look at in this poem with you. I may be using some of the things that my class has discussed with the poem, mixed with my opinion. Feel free to throw your opinions at me, too, if you think I'm completely wrong!
I wandered lonely as a cloud
That floats on high o'er vales and hills,
When all at once I saw a crowd,
A host, of golden daffodils;
Beside the lake, beneath the trees,
Fluttering and dancing in the breeze.
Continuous as the stars that shine
And twinkle on the milky way,
They stretched in never-ending line
Along the margin of a bay: 10
Ten thousand saw I at a glance,
Tossing their heads in sprightly dance.
The waves beside them danced; but they
Out-did the sparkling waves in glee:
A poet could not but be gay,
In such a jocund company:
I gazed--and gazed--but little thought
What wealth the show to me had brought:
For oft, when on my couch I lie
In vacant or in pensive mood, 20
They flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the daffodils.
(Thank you http://www.bartleby.com/145/ww260.html for the poem!)
Okay, in my class, we discussed how many of the things in this poem are given human qualities (personification), while humans are given nonhuman qualities. Why does he do this? When he mentions the daffodils fluttering or dancing in the breeze, or tossing their heads in sprightly dance, what does it make you think of? Are the daffodils actually dancing, or do you imagine them being tossed back and forth in the wind? So, while we don't actually imagine the daffodils tip-toeing around a stage to a beautiful song, the words create a much more beautiful way to describe how he sees them. He also uses this method in the last lines when he mentions how his heart with pleasure fills, and dances with the daffodils. I feel a similar experience to this when I think of hiking at Devil's Lake in Baraboo, Wisconsin. When I feel down about something, I imagine myself hiking up the bluffs and seeing that breathtaking view which only personally taking on the challenge of going up them can satisfy.
I also enjoy how Wordsworth mentions how no person could be but gay when he or she is experiencing exactly what he sees. I guess that no one could ever experience that exact thing; I mean, he is a cloud when he's writing this, but you get the idea.
Finally, the thing about this poem is that it's about these wonderful daffodils.
It's a beautiful poem; I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did!
Sunday, February 10, 2013
Some of the Icarus Girl in my view
The first novel that I managed to read is The Icarus Girl by Helen Oyeyemi. This book got me interested right away; it was easy to understand and I highly suggest it to anyone. If you have that burning desire to open up a book, then I'd suggest for you to quickly read it NOW so that when you finish this post, it'll make sense!
Okay, there are a few passages that I want to look at because, honestly, they don't make sense in the real world! Once you read them, you'll understand where I'm coming from. Take a look at this one. The book's text is in a different color than my own thoughts. Just remember that TillyTilly has brought Jess here:
Colleen McLain's kitchen was much, much neater than Jessamy's.
...The room was filled with a light steam, which was emerging from the pot bubbling out stewy smells on the cooker. Meat, potatoes and some kind of green vegetable, maybe. It was the bubbling pot, the fact that Mrs. McLain was actually in the process of making dinner and would probably return tot the kitchen any minute, that alarmed Jess.
"We're going to get caught, TillyTilly!" she whispered. She ignored TillyTilly's snort of derision as her eyes began surveying the room for places to hide.
Both Jess and Tilly froze as the sound of a woman yelling floated in through the doorway. From upstairs?
...Jess laughed aloud, then clapped her hand over her mouth to stifle the sound. TillyTilly began pulling her towards the kitchen doorway. Jess bent her knees to make herself heavier, but it didn't work. Tilly continued to drag her, and she began to panic.
...They were tussling in the passage now. Jess managed to snatch her arm back.
...Then Mrs. McLain came down the staircase, swinging down the passageway towards the kitchen, a laundry basket filled with crumpled clothes tucked under her arm.
(oh no!)
Jess seized her friend's arm, realizing that she and TillyTilly were standing directly in Mrs. McLain's path, that they couldn't just run away without making things look worse than they were-
But Mrs. McLain wasn't looking at them.
Her eyes seemed to slide over them as if they were part of the pristine, stripy wallpaper that covered the passage walls.
How could she have missed them?
...What had just happened?
..."How come Mrs. McLain couldn't see us?"
TillyTilly looked at her without smiling or saying anything. It was a patient look, come on, Jessy, think about it.
..."We're invisible," she said hesitantly, then at TillyTilly's nod, more boldly: "We're invisible!"
"And she can't hear us, either, so I don't know why you were making such a fuss about me laughing," TillyTilly added.
(pages 100-103)
Alright, that's a bit of the story that just baffles my mind. The two are invisible? What?! Oyeyemi only confirms that this happened later in the story when Jess uses that secret against Colleen. It clearly happened. I mean, Jess knows something about Colleen that nobody else knows - except, of course, for TillyTilly - but it still doesn't make sense. This book is not about fairy tales, and while it's not based on a true story, it wouldn't surprise me if some other little girl has gone through such a strange experience herself.
Both Jess and Tilly froze as the sound of a woman yelling floated in through the doorway. From upstairs?
I rewrote this line because if Tilly knows that no one can see or hear them, why does she freeze? Maybe because she didn't expect the yell, but the line has an intensity that makes me feel the same way that Jess is surely feeling, like, Oh crap, I don't even talk to this girl and now I'm going to get caught and then she's going to call my mum, and why did I even come here? I don't like this girl! Oh man, I hope that yelling isn't for me! I guess one of the biggest parts of this passage that I like is that it really shows the mystery of TillyTilly and what's going on in Jess's mind. While I never truly understand who TillyTilly is or if she's actually real or not, this part of the novel really makes me believe that she is.
The next part I want to look at is when Shivs meets TillyTilly; it's probably the creepiest part of the whole book, if you ask me.
Jess looked at TillyTilly, who held up a finger to her to indicate that she couldn't say anything, then began walking in a wide circle around Shivs, noiselessly climbing up onto the bed and jumping down again when she had to walk behind her. I don't get why she does this. It's definitely creepy, though. The fact that all she does is walk around Shivs, but Shivs still knows she's there is just mind blowing. She was looking at Shivs carefully, unsmiling, almost grim-faced. This just shows how much TillyTilly dislikes Shivs. Jess, watching, was briefly worried that TillyTilly might break her promise and do something, but she showed no sign of any such intention.
Siobhan was struck by how cold she felt, but it was a constantly moving coldness, sometimes giving way to normal air, as if it was expanding all around her. She feared that it might tighten, and she longed to rub her arms, but didn't dare drop them in case she saw TillyTilly. She didn't want to see her at all: from the moment that Tilly had come into the room, Shivs had felt a...badness. It was the only way to describe it: it was like being sick and hearing rattling in your ears that wasn't really there; it was slow, bottomless, soundless, creeping...and it wasn't just inside her stomach, but inside her head as well, slowly building in pressure. She'd had to make sure that she wasn't imagining it, she'd needed the security of Jess's touch to ensure that she wasn't alone in the room with this...thing. This was not another girl. This was not the kind of imaginary friend that you'd mistakenly sit on. She was a cycle of glacial ice. This paragraph really just shows how bad TillyTilly is. If Shivs can feel these things without even seeing the girl, then I'm not sure I even want to know what TillyTilly really is.
...She almost shouted out, almost. But she didn't-she was tougher than that, and anyway, she realised with a breathtaking suddenness, this was not her fear to hold but Jess's. This thing meant to harm Jess, punish her in a bad way, the worst way, maybe. Siobhan was scared that Jess was going to die. She had to tell her.
(pages 204-205)
This part of the story just gets me scared. I reread this, imagining myself to be Shivs, and tried to experience exactly what she did. The description in this passage is so intense and so eerie that it got my heart racing again even while I was typing it. At this point in the book, it's still incredibly hard to say if TillyTilly is a real person or not, but her spirit is definitely there. There is something with Jess, making her experiences legitimate, not just part of the imagination. It also played a major effect on Shivs, too, because she left almost right away after "meeting" TillyTilly.
The book, as a whole, is a rather interesting read. It makes you question yourself as you read it because it's hard to tell what's real and what isn't. While I hope no person, especially anyone as young as Jess, ever has to experience anything like this, I'm sure there are many that do. This book peers into different worlds that many people don't experience or even think about, and makes us wonder what could really be out there.
Oyeyemi is a fantastic writer, and reading her writing was a wonderful experience. If you read this book because of this post, then I think I've done my good deed for the day!
Okay, there are a few passages that I want to look at because, honestly, they don't make sense in the real world! Once you read them, you'll understand where I'm coming from. Take a look at this one. The book's text is in a different color than my own thoughts. Just remember that TillyTilly has brought Jess here:
Colleen McLain's kitchen was much, much neater than Jessamy's.
...The room was filled with a light steam, which was emerging from the pot bubbling out stewy smells on the cooker. Meat, potatoes and some kind of green vegetable, maybe. It was the bubbling pot, the fact that Mrs. McLain was actually in the process of making dinner and would probably return tot the kitchen any minute, that alarmed Jess.
"We're going to get caught, TillyTilly!" she whispered. She ignored TillyTilly's snort of derision as her eyes began surveying the room for places to hide.
Both Jess and Tilly froze as the sound of a woman yelling floated in through the doorway. From upstairs?
...Jess laughed aloud, then clapped her hand over her mouth to stifle the sound. TillyTilly began pulling her towards the kitchen doorway. Jess bent her knees to make herself heavier, but it didn't work. Tilly continued to drag her, and she began to panic.
...They were tussling in the passage now. Jess managed to snatch her arm back.
...Then Mrs. McLain came down the staircase, swinging down the passageway towards the kitchen, a laundry basket filled with crumpled clothes tucked under her arm.
(oh no!)
Jess seized her friend's arm, realizing that she and TillyTilly were standing directly in Mrs. McLain's path, that they couldn't just run away without making things look worse than they were-
But Mrs. McLain wasn't looking at them.
Her eyes seemed to slide over them as if they were part of the pristine, stripy wallpaper that covered the passage walls.
How could she have missed them?
...What had just happened?
..."How come Mrs. McLain couldn't see us?"
TillyTilly looked at her without smiling or saying anything. It was a patient look, come on, Jessy, think about it.
..."We're invisible," she said hesitantly, then at TillyTilly's nod, more boldly: "We're invisible!"
"And she can't hear us, either, so I don't know why you were making such a fuss about me laughing," TillyTilly added.
(pages 100-103)
Alright, that's a bit of the story that just baffles my mind. The two are invisible? What?! Oyeyemi only confirms that this happened later in the story when Jess uses that secret against Colleen. It clearly happened. I mean, Jess knows something about Colleen that nobody else knows - except, of course, for TillyTilly - but it still doesn't make sense. This book is not about fairy tales, and while it's not based on a true story, it wouldn't surprise me if some other little girl has gone through such a strange experience herself.
Both Jess and Tilly froze as the sound of a woman yelling floated in through the doorway. From upstairs?
I rewrote this line because if Tilly knows that no one can see or hear them, why does she freeze? Maybe because she didn't expect the yell, but the line has an intensity that makes me feel the same way that Jess is surely feeling, like, Oh crap, I don't even talk to this girl and now I'm going to get caught and then she's going to call my mum, and why did I even come here? I don't like this girl! Oh man, I hope that yelling isn't for me! I guess one of the biggest parts of this passage that I like is that it really shows the mystery of TillyTilly and what's going on in Jess's mind. While I never truly understand who TillyTilly is or if she's actually real or not, this part of the novel really makes me believe that she is.
The next part I want to look at is when Shivs meets TillyTilly; it's probably the creepiest part of the whole book, if you ask me.
Jess looked at TillyTilly, who held up a finger to her to indicate that she couldn't say anything, then began walking in a wide circle around Shivs, noiselessly climbing up onto the bed and jumping down again when she had to walk behind her. I don't get why she does this. It's definitely creepy, though. The fact that all she does is walk around Shivs, but Shivs still knows she's there is just mind blowing. She was looking at Shivs carefully, unsmiling, almost grim-faced. This just shows how much TillyTilly dislikes Shivs. Jess, watching, was briefly worried that TillyTilly might break her promise and do something, but she showed no sign of any such intention.
Siobhan was struck by how cold she felt, but it was a constantly moving coldness, sometimes giving way to normal air, as if it was expanding all around her. She feared that it might tighten, and she longed to rub her arms, but didn't dare drop them in case she saw TillyTilly. She didn't want to see her at all: from the moment that Tilly had come into the room, Shivs had felt a...badness. It was the only way to describe it: it was like being sick and hearing rattling in your ears that wasn't really there; it was slow, bottomless, soundless, creeping...and it wasn't just inside her stomach, but inside her head as well, slowly building in pressure. She'd had to make sure that she wasn't imagining it, she'd needed the security of Jess's touch to ensure that she wasn't alone in the room with this...thing. This was not another girl. This was not the kind of imaginary friend that you'd mistakenly sit on. She was a cycle of glacial ice. This paragraph really just shows how bad TillyTilly is. If Shivs can feel these things without even seeing the girl, then I'm not sure I even want to know what TillyTilly really is.
...She almost shouted out, almost. But she didn't-she was tougher than that, and anyway, she realised with a breathtaking suddenness, this was not her fear to hold but Jess's. This thing meant to harm Jess, punish her in a bad way, the worst way, maybe. Siobhan was scared that Jess was going to die. She had to tell her.
(pages 204-205)
This part of the story just gets me scared. I reread this, imagining myself to be Shivs, and tried to experience exactly what she did. The description in this passage is so intense and so eerie that it got my heart racing again even while I was typing it. At this point in the book, it's still incredibly hard to say if TillyTilly is a real person or not, but her spirit is definitely there. There is something with Jess, making her experiences legitimate, not just part of the imagination. It also played a major effect on Shivs, too, because she left almost right away after "meeting" TillyTilly.
The book, as a whole, is a rather interesting read. It makes you question yourself as you read it because it's hard to tell what's real and what isn't. While I hope no person, especially anyone as young as Jess, ever has to experience anything like this, I'm sure there are many that do. This book peers into different worlds that many people don't experience or even think about, and makes us wonder what could really be out there.
Oyeyemi is a fantastic writer, and reading her writing was a wonderful experience. If you read this book because of this post, then I think I've done my good deed for the day!
Tuesday, January 22, 2013
Getting to know me
About two months ago, I sat down with my advisor in her office and composed a schedule for my second semestor of college. One of my requirements to fulfill my dream of becoming a teacher was to take an english class, and the only one that fit into my schedule between my Teacher Orientation class and Chemistry II was British Literature. When I started to order my books for the class, I became very nervous. How was I going to find time between basketball, work and all of my other classes to read all of these thick books? When the first day arrived, I felt like I was doomed. Poetry-which has never been an interest or strength of mine to understand-was the first thing we looked at. Not only were we analyzing a poem, but the poem was about coffee, and I don't drink coffee. I didn't understand how people were making this bizarre connection between coffee and our souls, but they were. That's when I realized that critical thinking was something that I'd need to work on, and it's something that I've always wanted to become better at. So in the end, if all this class teaches me is how I can connect coffee to my afterlife, maybe I'll be okay.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)