Everyone wears a mask at some point, whether it is actually a physical mask, or a metaphorical one. It's not really a big deal, unless you're a killer or something that wears a mask to keep people from finding out that you are, in fact, killing people.
As far as literal masks, I've worn a lot of those. What can I say, I love to dress up and wear costumes. I think it would be awesome to go to a masquerade ball where everyone is in a mask. Especially those Venetian masks because I think those re really awesome and beautiful. I got a blue bird mask for my birthday once, but I haven't had a chance to wear it yet. That kind of makes me sad.
As far as metaphorical masks go, I've worn my fair share of those. Maybe more. I already wrote an essay on this last year, and I really don't want anyone else to know about my metaphorical masks, since this is a public blog. I don't think I want a bunch of people in Canada or Russia or somewhere else reading about my psychological problems that require the use of a metaphorical masks. For some reason my blog is really popular in those places...
I also wear a mask because I'm secretly a superhero and the occasional super villain. Obviously, superheroes/villains wear masks- it's an occupational hazard if they don't. Except for Clark Kent/Superman. Apparently the people in his town all lack eyesight and basic reasoning skills. Fortunately, I'm not as naive as Clark, and no one knows my secret identity. It would really suck if they did.
Another time that I wear a mask is on Halloween and at masquerade parties. When I dress up as someone else, a mask is necessary in order to look more like the character I'm trying to portray. Otherwise, people look at you like you're stupid. Especially if it isn't actually Halloween...
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
Reflection on "The Pit and the Pendulum"
"The Pit and the Pendulum" by Edgar Allan Poe exhibits many of the characteristics of the Dark Romanticism literary style.
First, Poe creates the characteristic sense of mystery in the first sentences of the piece. One of the narrator's first sentences is "The sentence-the dread sentence of death-was the last of distinct accentuation which reached my ears." (Poe 263). The words in themselves create a sense of mystery and impending doom, but the reader obviously knows that the narrator doesn't die. If he did, then he wouldn't be able to tell the story like he was. This also spawns a curiosity in the reader to know what happens to the man.
This story is also very detail-oriented. One example that really stood out to me was when the narrator describes the curtains: "I saw, too. . . the soft and nearly imperceptible waving of the sable draperies which enwrapped the walls of the apartment." (Poe 263). This detail wasn't really necessary, but it added to the overall ambiance of the piece.
It also added to the mysterious setting that is also one of the characteristics of Dark Romanticism. We obviously know that wherever the narrator is, it has curtains around the walls, but the rest of the setting is a complete mystery. The character is taken to a dark place where he and the reader has no idea what will happen. When he finally gets to see his surroundings by way of a spooky light coming from the floor, he describes it like a horrific room of some sort, which is a common setting for Dark Romantic works.
Another hallmark of Dark Romanticism is it's acceptance of sin and evil in the world. The whole premise of "The Pit and the Pendulum" is the Spanish Inquisition which tried heretics as sinners. Obviously this story accepts sin and evil because the narrator is being tortured to get him to confess to some sin he didn't commit.
Many Dark Romantic works also have a sort of twist ending where the authors try to trick or surprise the reader in some way. This is also a part of "The Pit and the Pendulum". Even though the reader knows that the narrator survives because of the reasons mentioned above, the ending is so jarring that it takes the reader completely by surprise. All of a sudden the man is standing terrified at the edge of the pit and the next, "The fiery walls rushed back! An outstretched arm caught my own. . . It was that of General Lasalle." (Poe 273). Such an abrupt ending catches the reader off-guard, which is exactly what it was intended for. Though not a conventional twist ending, it has the essence of the others of the Dark Romanticism style.
"The Pit and the Pendulum" has characteristics of Dark Romanticism practically screaming at the reader from the beginning to the end. Some are standard issue like the setting and the theme, and some have Poe's distinct flair to them like the psychology and the ending. Either way, the style of the Dark Romantics is present in "The Pit and the Pendulum".
Poe, Edgar A. "The Pit and the Pendulum." Glencoe Literature. Comp. Jeffery D. Wilhelm. American Literature ed. Coumbus: McGraw-Hill, 2009. 263-73. Print.
First, Poe creates the characteristic sense of mystery in the first sentences of the piece. One of the narrator's first sentences is "The sentence-the dread sentence of death-was the last of distinct accentuation which reached my ears." (Poe 263). The words in themselves create a sense of mystery and impending doom, but the reader obviously knows that the narrator doesn't die. If he did, then he wouldn't be able to tell the story like he was. This also spawns a curiosity in the reader to know what happens to the man.
This story is also very detail-oriented. One example that really stood out to me was when the narrator describes the curtains: "I saw, too. . . the soft and nearly imperceptible waving of the sable draperies which enwrapped the walls of the apartment." (Poe 263). This detail wasn't really necessary, but it added to the overall ambiance of the piece.
It also added to the mysterious setting that is also one of the characteristics of Dark Romanticism. We obviously know that wherever the narrator is, it has curtains around the walls, but the rest of the setting is a complete mystery. The character is taken to a dark place where he and the reader has no idea what will happen. When he finally gets to see his surroundings by way of a spooky light coming from the floor, he describes it like a horrific room of some sort, which is a common setting for Dark Romantic works.
Another hallmark of Dark Romanticism is it's acceptance of sin and evil in the world. The whole premise of "The Pit and the Pendulum" is the Spanish Inquisition which tried heretics as sinners. Obviously this story accepts sin and evil because the narrator is being tortured to get him to confess to some sin he didn't commit.
Many Dark Romantic works also have a sort of twist ending where the authors try to trick or surprise the reader in some way. This is also a part of "The Pit and the Pendulum". Even though the reader knows that the narrator survives because of the reasons mentioned above, the ending is so jarring that it takes the reader completely by surprise. All of a sudden the man is standing terrified at the edge of the pit and the next, "The fiery walls rushed back! An outstretched arm caught my own. . . It was that of General Lasalle." (Poe 273). Such an abrupt ending catches the reader off-guard, which is exactly what it was intended for. Though not a conventional twist ending, it has the essence of the others of the Dark Romanticism style.
"The Pit and the Pendulum" has characteristics of Dark Romanticism practically screaming at the reader from the beginning to the end. Some are standard issue like the setting and the theme, and some have Poe's distinct flair to them like the psychology and the ending. Either way, the style of the Dark Romantics is present in "The Pit and the Pendulum".
Poe, Edgar A. "The Pit and the Pendulum." Glencoe Literature. Comp. Jeffery D. Wilhelm. American Literature ed. Coumbus: McGraw-Hill, 2009. 263-73. Print.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Relfection on "The Composition of 'The Raven'"
The document I chose to write about for this reflection was written by Edgar Allan Poe himself. It gives his thought process when he wrote one of his most famous poems "The Raven". The document is called "The Composition of 'The Raven'". I found this document very interesting to read. I had no idea that Poe ever criticized his own work or wrote other things about them. I thought it was really cool to get that peek into the mind of the poet.
In this article, Poe writes about how he wrote "The Raven". I admit that I was pretty curious as to how he got the idea. It's nice to know, but now I'm kind of wishing I didn't. It takes some of the magic away to read that one of your favorite authors wrote one of your favorite poems because he wanted a bird to repeat a word and have it create a melancholy atmosphere. That aside, I realized it was actually a pretty sensible way to go about writing anything, not just a poem.
Poe also explains that he had the climax of the poem in his mind and worked his way from there: ". . .in the progress of the construction—I first established in mind the climax, or concluding query—that to which "Nevermore" should be in the last place an answer. . ." (Poe). This method made me respect Poe's ability as a writer even more because I find it very hard to do that and am impressed that Poe manages to accomplish such a task in such an eloquent fashion.
I always find it interesting to read what authors write about themselves. A lot of times, you find that they can be boastful and their words contain a thinly disguised pride in their work, regardless of whether it deserves it. This is not the case with Poe, at least, not in this article. He sticks to the facts and goes about explaining his point in an ordered way. He sets out to explain something and then explains it. It reads pretty similarly to a Rationalism work in its structure and intent.
This composition does not give an explanation for why Poe wrote it. It made me wonder why exactly he wrote it. If I were Poe, I don't think I would want to explain my thoughts on my works. I would want to stay wrapped in that shroud of mystery that the Dark Romantic authors seemed to favor. But since I am obviously not Poe, I really have no say in the matter.
Poe also seems to be a perfectionist. Anyone who reads this article can tell that he put a lot of thought into "The Raven" and that he always tried to make things as close to perfection as he could. This also made me respect him more as writer because it truly shows his dedication to the profession of writing.
As a whole, this article was really interesting to me, and I really appreciated the insight into one of my favorite poems.
Poe, Edgar Allan. "The Philosophy of Composition" (1846) in Edgar Allan Poe: Poetry, Tales, & Selected Essays (New York: Library of America, 1996): pp. 1378–80. Quoted as "The Composition of 'The Raven'" in Harold Bloom, ed. Edgar Allan Poe, Bloom's Major Poets. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishing, 1999. (Updated 2007.) Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= BMPEAP20&SingleRecord=True (accessed November 29, 2010).
In this article, Poe writes about how he wrote "The Raven". I admit that I was pretty curious as to how he got the idea. It's nice to know, but now I'm kind of wishing I didn't. It takes some of the magic away to read that one of your favorite authors wrote one of your favorite poems because he wanted a bird to repeat a word and have it create a melancholy atmosphere. That aside, I realized it was actually a pretty sensible way to go about writing anything, not just a poem.
Poe also explains that he had the climax of the poem in his mind and worked his way from there: ". . .in the progress of the construction—I first established in mind the climax, or concluding query—that to which "Nevermore" should be in the last place an answer. . ." (Poe). This method made me respect Poe's ability as a writer even more because I find it very hard to do that and am impressed that Poe manages to accomplish such a task in such an eloquent fashion.
I always find it interesting to read what authors write about themselves. A lot of times, you find that they can be boastful and their words contain a thinly disguised pride in their work, regardless of whether it deserves it. This is not the case with Poe, at least, not in this article. He sticks to the facts and goes about explaining his point in an ordered way. He sets out to explain something and then explains it. It reads pretty similarly to a Rationalism work in its structure and intent.
This composition does not give an explanation for why Poe wrote it. It made me wonder why exactly he wrote it. If I were Poe, I don't think I would want to explain my thoughts on my works. I would want to stay wrapped in that shroud of mystery that the Dark Romantic authors seemed to favor. But since I am obviously not Poe, I really have no say in the matter.
Poe also seems to be a perfectionist. Anyone who reads this article can tell that he put a lot of thought into "The Raven" and that he always tried to make things as close to perfection as he could. This also made me respect him more as writer because it truly shows his dedication to the profession of writing.
As a whole, this article was really interesting to me, and I really appreciated the insight into one of my favorite poems.
Poe, Edgar Allan. "The Philosophy of Composition" (1846) in Edgar Allan Poe: Poetry, Tales, & Selected Essays (New York: Library of America, 1996): pp. 1378–80. Quoted as "The Composition of 'The Raven'" in Harold Bloom, ed. Edgar Allan Poe, Bloom's Major Poets. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishing, 1999. (Updated 2007.) Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= BMPEAP20&SingleRecord=True (accessed November 29, 2010).
Sunday, November 21, 2010
"The Raven" Analysis
Literal Meaning:
The narrator is reading books very late at night in his study when he hears knocking on the door to his room.
He comes to the conclusion that it is a visitor knocking at his door.
He remembers that this happened in December because there was a fire in the grate.
He desperately wanted to forget about his lost love (Lenore) by reading.
The haunting atmosphere starts to creep him out, so he tries to convince himself that it is only a visitor that is at his door and not something more sinister.
He gathers his courage and calls out an apology to the person at the door, but when he opens the door, no one is there.
He stares at the darkness for a while and calls out to "Lenore" (he probably thinks it was here ghost at the door) but the only answer he gets is the echo of his own voice.
He goes back into the room, rather unsettled, and hears the tapping again.
It's at the window this time and he resolves to go see what it is, convinced it is the wind.
He opens the window and a raven steps in then goes to perch on a bust of Pallas above the door.
The bird looks so solemn and serious that the narrator can't help but smile.
The narrator asks the bird what it is called and it replies with "Nevermore"
He is impressed that the bird seemed to understand his question and muses on the fact that not many people get to have a bird above their door.
The bird only speaks the one word.
The raven says nothing else, prompting the narrator to become sad at the thought that the bird will leave him like everyone else has.
The raven, again, responds with nevermore.
The narrator is startled by the bird's abruptness, but thinks it is only repeating what some previous master must have said often.
He pulls up a chair and begins to ponder the bird's meaning.
He keeps thinking and the raven keeps staring at him.
Then the narrator senses a change in the atmosphere.
He yells at the bird to help him forget Lenore, and it replies with the usual.
He asks if there will be any respite from his feelings. And the bird answers.
He asks it if he will get to see Lenore when he dies, and the bird speaks its word.
Then he gets up and yells at the bird to leave him alone in his sorrows.
The raven stays watching the narrator as he sinks deeper into the madness brought on by the sight of the raven.
Poetic Devices:
Repetition shows up a lot with all the Nevermores going on. It makes the poem easier to remember.
Similes and metaphors are used quite often, as when the narrator likens the raven to a devil or nobleman.
Imagery is used to describe the scene to the reader.
In addition to the standard device of rhyme scheme, Poe also uses internal rhyme within the poem such as in these lines: "While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping, As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door."
I also saw the raven as a symbol for the grief and loneliness that lived in the narrator's heart.
Figurative Meaning:
Personally, I think this poem is awesome. It's been one of my favorites for a while now. To me, its meaning isn't really important. I read poetry because of how it makes me feel, and this poem leaves me with a haunting, creepy kind of feeling that I find awesome. To others, however, I think it could be interpreted as a story of grief that manifested itself and drove the narrator into madness. It's a pretty straightforward poem.
Poe, Edgar Allen. "The Raven." PoemHunter.Com - Thousands of Poems and Poets.. Poetry Search Engine. Web. 21 Nov. 2010.
The narrator is reading books very late at night in his study when he hears knocking on the door to his room.
He comes to the conclusion that it is a visitor knocking at his door.
He remembers that this happened in December because there was a fire in the grate.
He desperately wanted to forget about his lost love (Lenore) by reading.
The haunting atmosphere starts to creep him out, so he tries to convince himself that it is only a visitor that is at his door and not something more sinister.
He gathers his courage and calls out an apology to the person at the door, but when he opens the door, no one is there.
He stares at the darkness for a while and calls out to "Lenore" (he probably thinks it was here ghost at the door) but the only answer he gets is the echo of his own voice.
He goes back into the room, rather unsettled, and hears the tapping again.
It's at the window this time and he resolves to go see what it is, convinced it is the wind.
He opens the window and a raven steps in then goes to perch on a bust of Pallas above the door.
The bird looks so solemn and serious that the narrator can't help but smile.
The narrator asks the bird what it is called and it replies with "Nevermore"
He is impressed that the bird seemed to understand his question and muses on the fact that not many people get to have a bird above their door.
The bird only speaks the one word.
The raven says nothing else, prompting the narrator to become sad at the thought that the bird will leave him like everyone else has.
The raven, again, responds with nevermore.
The narrator is startled by the bird's abruptness, but thinks it is only repeating what some previous master must have said often.
He pulls up a chair and begins to ponder the bird's meaning.
He keeps thinking and the raven keeps staring at him.
Then the narrator senses a change in the atmosphere.
He yells at the bird to help him forget Lenore, and it replies with the usual.
He asks if there will be any respite from his feelings. And the bird answers.
He asks it if he will get to see Lenore when he dies, and the bird speaks its word.
Then he gets up and yells at the bird to leave him alone in his sorrows.
The raven stays watching the narrator as he sinks deeper into the madness brought on by the sight of the raven.
Poetic Devices:
Repetition shows up a lot with all the Nevermores going on. It makes the poem easier to remember.
Similes and metaphors are used quite often, as when the narrator likens the raven to a devil or nobleman.
Imagery is used to describe the scene to the reader.
In addition to the standard device of rhyme scheme, Poe also uses internal rhyme within the poem such as in these lines: "While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping, As of some one gently rapping, rapping at my chamber door."
I also saw the raven as a symbol for the grief and loneliness that lived in the narrator's heart.
Figurative Meaning:
Personally, I think this poem is awesome. It's been one of my favorites for a while now. To me, its meaning isn't really important. I read poetry because of how it makes me feel, and this poem leaves me with a haunting, creepy kind of feeling that I find awesome. To others, however, I think it could be interpreted as a story of grief that manifested itself and drove the narrator into madness. It's a pretty straightforward poem.
Poe, Edgar Allen. "The Raven." PoemHunter.Com - Thousands of Poems and Poets.. Poetry Search Engine. Web. 21 Nov. 2010.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Journal #24: Mind Tricks
I don't really have many instances where my mind plays tricks on me and creeps me out. That just doesn't happen very often. Really the only time that I get freaked out over nothing is right after I watch a scary movie with my friends. If I have to drive home alone, then it's even worse.
The only time I can really remember something specific that was my mind playing tricks on me was at my birthday party one year. I think I was turning eight, or somewhere in that area, I can't really remember. Anyway, I was having a sleepover, and one of my friends there somehow managed to convince the rest of us that there was a stalker outside. Her paranoia made us paranoid and was helped along by a number of coincidences such as my brother coming home really late and entering the house in a really sneaky way. Since I live in the middle of a forest, there are always many strange noises outside at night. Naturally, we heard them, and they only served to freak us out more. It probably helped that we were eight and half of the girls had never been to my house before. Then there was the creepy shadow at one of my windows. You'd think that we would notice that it wasn't moving, but none of us wanted to get close enough to actually look outside the window and confirm that it was only a tree. I checked in the morning after everyone left, and it actually was only a human-shaped tree. The funniest part was that one of my friends had already fallen asleep, so when we all freaked out and locked ourselves in my room, we just left her down at the other end of the house.
We were all really freaked out at the time, but now we just look back and laugh at how stupid we were.
Recently, there have been no instances where my mind has played tricks on me. I like to think I'm smarter than that.
The only time I can really remember something specific that was my mind playing tricks on me was at my birthday party one year. I think I was turning eight, or somewhere in that area, I can't really remember. Anyway, I was having a sleepover, and one of my friends there somehow managed to convince the rest of us that there was a stalker outside. Her paranoia made us paranoid and was helped along by a number of coincidences such as my brother coming home really late and entering the house in a really sneaky way. Since I live in the middle of a forest, there are always many strange noises outside at night. Naturally, we heard them, and they only served to freak us out more. It probably helped that we were eight and half of the girls had never been to my house before. Then there was the creepy shadow at one of my windows. You'd think that we would notice that it wasn't moving, but none of us wanted to get close enough to actually look outside the window and confirm that it was only a tree. I checked in the morning after everyone left, and it actually was only a human-shaped tree. The funniest part was that one of my friends had already fallen asleep, so when we all freaked out and locked ourselves in my room, we just left her down at the other end of the house.
We were all really freaked out at the time, but now we just look back and laugh at how stupid we were.
Recently, there have been no instances where my mind has played tricks on me. I like to think I'm smarter than that.
Reflection: Walden
The literary criticism I decided to read is titled "Thoreau's Walden and the American Dream: Challenge or Myth?". In this, the author presents the American Dream as one of two things: material gain and success or a dream of new beginnings. I admit that I like the idea of the second one better, but I am realistic enough to know that it is most often the first option that is the goal in today's commercial world. It's sad, but it certainly doesn't make me want to spend time in the woods in an almost pointless venture such as Thoreau did. Even the author of this article, Michaela Keck, admits that many have viewed Thoreau's endeavors as rather pointless, objectionable, and even hypocritical at times. On the one hand, I agree with the people who say that, but, on the other, I also disagree with them. I think what Thoreau did doesn't really count because he wasn't really that far from society, and he still went to his family's house to eat dinner with his sister on a regular basis. He didn't do exactly what he said he was, which discredits him in a lot of people's eyes. The thing that redeems him in my eyes is the fact that at least he tried to do something about what he felt. A lot of people only complain about the world and spout all these "philosophical thoughts" but do nothing about them. They just continue their annoying little lives and secretly hate their situation. Unlike those phonies, Thoreau actually does step back to closely analyze how he can change his situation.
This article brings up the point that Thoreau "shuns business as best he can and strives for 'voluntary poverty'"(Keck). I think this is kind of counter productive to Thoreau's grand scheme. Not to drag religion into a school work, but the Bible says we should work to be successful so that we can share what we have with those less fortunate. It seems to me that since Thoreau was so disgusted with the way the world was he should have been actively working to change it. As an influential man with influential friends, I believe he could have gotten many things accomplished.
This article really didn't take much of a stand on either side of the fence, instead preferring to sit in the middle of the question it poses in its title. Normally, this would annoy me to no end, but as I am unable to completely chose a side myself, I don't mind it at all. The author obviously knows more about Walden and Thoreau than I do, and presents a very well-rounded discussion of the topic they chose to write about. As far as the American Dream aspect, I really do not believe that the American Dream amounts to living in a shack in the woods, cut off from everyone else, no matter which of the definitions you accept as the true American Dream. I think what it really comes down to is that the American Dream is just being free to do what you feel you have to, such as Thoreau leaving society to reflect on himself and the world.
Keck, Michaela. "Thoreau's Walden and the American Dream: Challenge or Myth?" In Bloom, Harold, ed. The American Dream, Bloom's Literary Themes. New York: Chelsea Publishing House, 2009. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= BLTTAD021&SingleRecord=True (accessed December 1, 2010).
This article brings up the point that Thoreau "shuns business as best he can and strives for 'voluntary poverty'"(Keck). I think this is kind of counter productive to Thoreau's grand scheme. Not to drag religion into a school work, but the Bible says we should work to be successful so that we can share what we have with those less fortunate. It seems to me that since Thoreau was so disgusted with the way the world was he should have been actively working to change it. As an influential man with influential friends, I believe he could have gotten many things accomplished.
This article really didn't take much of a stand on either side of the fence, instead preferring to sit in the middle of the question it poses in its title. Normally, this would annoy me to no end, but as I am unable to completely chose a side myself, I don't mind it at all. The author obviously knows more about Walden and Thoreau than I do, and presents a very well-rounded discussion of the topic they chose to write about. As far as the American Dream aspect, I really do not believe that the American Dream amounts to living in a shack in the woods, cut off from everyone else, no matter which of the definitions you accept as the true American Dream. I think what it really comes down to is that the American Dream is just being free to do what you feel you have to, such as Thoreau leaving society to reflect on himself and the world.
Keck, Michaela. "Thoreau's Walden and the American Dream: Challenge or Myth?" In Bloom, Harold, ed. The American Dream, Bloom's Literary Themes. New York: Chelsea Publishing House, 2009. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= BLTTAD021&SingleRecord=True (accessed December 1, 2010).
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Journal #23: "Unplug" for one week
It would be extremely easy for me to disappear into the woods for a week. Especially at this point in time. I have a lot of things I need to think about now, but haven't had the time to consider lately. I would spend most of my time thinking about those things, recharging, and catching up on the many books I have to read. It is probably easier for me to go without technology for a week than many of my classmates because I spend a large portion of my time away from it already. I have many extracurriculars that keep me busy most days, and the time I have left, I usually spend reading. I don't have time to watch much TV anymore, and I mainly use the computer for homework.
A week in the woods would be awesome. I love camping, and think I'm pretty good at it, considering that I don't get to go very often. The only problem I can think of with the no technology thing is not having a cell phone. A cell phone would be really handy if I got in trouble and needed to call for help. Knowing me, that would be bound to happen.
To get away from society, I would just walk into my backyard. My house is surrounded by a small forest, so I would just go to the center of that and secret myself in a grove of trees or something.
As far as food and shelter and things like that, I would bring my family's tent with me. We don't go camping much anymore, so it's not like they would miss it. I would pack a lot of soup and crackers and granola bars and things that I could eat as they were or could cook over a fire.
I really don't think I would be able to put this impromptu "plan" into action though. My parents would prevent it from happening because they would worry.
A week in the woods would be awesome. I love camping, and think I'm pretty good at it, considering that I don't get to go very often. The only problem I can think of with the no technology thing is not having a cell phone. A cell phone would be really handy if I got in trouble and needed to call for help. Knowing me, that would be bound to happen.
To get away from society, I would just walk into my backyard. My house is surrounded by a small forest, so I would just go to the center of that and secret myself in a grove of trees or something.
As far as food and shelter and things like that, I would bring my family's tent with me. We don't go camping much anymore, so it's not like they would miss it. I would pack a lot of soup and crackers and granola bars and things that I could eat as they were or could cook over a fire.
I really don't think I would be able to put this impromptu "plan" into action though. My parents would prevent it from happening because they would worry.
Reflection: Thoreau vs. Gandhi
In my opinion, Gandhi was a much better writer than Thoreau, when looking at the two pieces of "Civil Disobedience" and "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March". In "Civil Disobedience", Thoreau spends much more time on describing his surroundings than on the thoughts and beliefs that brought him to jail. In "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March", however, Gandhi details why it is important that his followers and associates continue the march even if he is unable to, rather than describing the march plans themselves. Gandhi's writing seems more logical to me. I really got what he was trying to say much better than what Thoreau was talking about.
Gandhi's tone is also much more serious than Thoreau's. Gandhi even starts his speech with the very serious "In all probability this will be my last speech to you" (Gandhi 229). Gandhi's speech sounds like Gandhi is ready to be imprisoned for his cause and accepts that fate as long as his followers will still carry on. Thoreau's anecdote is just that- an amusing anecdote. When I read it, I remembered the night he spent in jail more clearly than the reason he was in jail.
These two works are obviously different in the style and circumstances aspects, but they are also similar in some ways. Though they were written by completely different people from different worlds, they both carry that air of dissatisfaction with the government and the state of the world. Both authors wrote these pieces with the aim of righting what they saw as a wrong. Despite my opinion on who wrote better, I can still see that much. For Thoreau it was the poll tax, and for Gandhi it was the English and salt.
Another comparison between the two is that both Thoreau and Gandhi were very detailed in their writing. A point of contrast, however, is what area their details went to. Thoreau's descriptiveness went to painting a picture of his surroundings and detailing his night spent in jail. Gandhi's went to giving his followers specific instructions for carrying on the march with or without him present. Gandhi also gives the reader a clear idea on how he is feeling by using his descriptive language.
All in all, I enjoyed reading Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" much more than Gandhi's "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March". Even though Thoreau's lack of focus on his political point he was trying to make completely annoyed me, structure and language wise, I thought his was better. Gandhi's work was clearly written as a speech, and I find that format boring. I did appreciate how articulate he was on his points. It almost looked like Rationalism writing with it's clear and orderly statements of opinions and support. I could understand his writing and the point he was trying to make so much better than I could with Thoreau. It is for that reason that I believe Gandhi to be the better writer in this case. I can see that, even though I personally may not enjoy reading his works.
Gandhi, Mahatma. "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March." American Literature. Comp. Jeffory Willhelm. Columbus: McGraw Hill, 2009. 229-30. Print.
Thoreau, Henry D. "Civil Disobedience." American Literature. Comp. Jeffory Willhelm. Columbus: McGraw Hill, 2009. 222-27. Print.
Gandhi's tone is also much more serious than Thoreau's. Gandhi even starts his speech with the very serious "In all probability this will be my last speech to you" (Gandhi 229). Gandhi's speech sounds like Gandhi is ready to be imprisoned for his cause and accepts that fate as long as his followers will still carry on. Thoreau's anecdote is just that- an amusing anecdote. When I read it, I remembered the night he spent in jail more clearly than the reason he was in jail.
These two works are obviously different in the style and circumstances aspects, but they are also similar in some ways. Though they were written by completely different people from different worlds, they both carry that air of dissatisfaction with the government and the state of the world. Both authors wrote these pieces with the aim of righting what they saw as a wrong. Despite my opinion on who wrote better, I can still see that much. For Thoreau it was the poll tax, and for Gandhi it was the English and salt.
Another comparison between the two is that both Thoreau and Gandhi were very detailed in their writing. A point of contrast, however, is what area their details went to. Thoreau's descriptiveness went to painting a picture of his surroundings and detailing his night spent in jail. Gandhi's went to giving his followers specific instructions for carrying on the march with or without him present. Gandhi also gives the reader a clear idea on how he is feeling by using his descriptive language.
All in all, I enjoyed reading Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience" much more than Gandhi's "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March". Even though Thoreau's lack of focus on his political point he was trying to make completely annoyed me, structure and language wise, I thought his was better. Gandhi's work was clearly written as a speech, and I find that format boring. I did appreciate how articulate he was on his points. It almost looked like Rationalism writing with it's clear and orderly statements of opinions and support. I could understand his writing and the point he was trying to make so much better than I could with Thoreau. It is for that reason that I believe Gandhi to be the better writer in this case. I can see that, even though I personally may not enjoy reading his works.
Gandhi, Mahatma. "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March." American Literature. Comp. Jeffory Willhelm. Columbus: McGraw Hill, 2009. 229-30. Print.
Thoreau, Henry D. "Civil Disobedience." American Literature. Comp. Jeffory Willhelm. Columbus: McGraw Hill, 2009. 222-27. Print.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Journal #22: Breaking the Law- Romanticism Style
Apparently in Romanticism it was considered morally right to break the law if your intentions were good. This puts lawmakers and enforcers in quite the jam. And didn't they ever hear the saying "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions"?
Despite the obvious problems and consequences that could come from this type of thinking, I do think that sometimes it is okay to break the law if you have a good reason. The best example I can think of is a man with his pregnant wife that is about to give birth. As long as he doesn't crash into anyone, I think it is more than okay if he breaks several speed laws rushing her to the hospital.
Back in the olden days of stereotypical western movies, killing was also alright under the correct circumstances. Dueling was the norm for many, many years and was considered the gentleman's way of settling matters of honor. We learned in A.P. U.S. History that Alexander Hamilton was killed in a duel by Aaron Burr. Though in this case, the people tried to punish Burr because he killed Hamilton. Either way, I find it incredibly stupid. Nothing says gentlemen like randomly shooting in the hopes of killing the person standing across the street from you.
I bet a lot of people in this class used the example of a hungry person stealing food to feed their family. This is only acceptable to me if certain conditions are met by the person who is doing the stealing. Its really complicated. If the person is stealing from someone who can actually handle being stolen from, then it's better. Like Robin Hood, only not dressed in green. Also, kleptomaniacs don't count because they don't even really have the thought process required to make a desicion not to steal.
Superhero comics are awesome for that kind of thing. Especially Batman because he's got that vigilante angle going on. He breaks the law sometimes in his pursuit of the various vile villians that pervade the pages. But it's okay because he always gets the villians in the end. And he's Batman.
Despite the obvious problems and consequences that could come from this type of thinking, I do think that sometimes it is okay to break the law if you have a good reason. The best example I can think of is a man with his pregnant wife that is about to give birth. As long as he doesn't crash into anyone, I think it is more than okay if he breaks several speed laws rushing her to the hospital.
Back in the olden days of stereotypical western movies, killing was also alright under the correct circumstances. Dueling was the norm for many, many years and was considered the gentleman's way of settling matters of honor. We learned in A.P. U.S. History that Alexander Hamilton was killed in a duel by Aaron Burr. Though in this case, the people tried to punish Burr because he killed Hamilton. Either way, I find it incredibly stupid. Nothing says gentlemen like randomly shooting in the hopes of killing the person standing across the street from you.
I bet a lot of people in this class used the example of a hungry person stealing food to feed their family. This is only acceptable to me if certain conditions are met by the person who is doing the stealing. Its really complicated. If the person is stealing from someone who can actually handle being stolen from, then it's better. Like Robin Hood, only not dressed in green. Also, kleptomaniacs don't count because they don't even really have the thought process required to make a desicion not to steal.
Superhero comics are awesome for that kind of thing. Especially Batman because he's got that vigilante angle going on. He breaks the law sometimes in his pursuit of the various vile villians that pervade the pages. But it's okay because he always gets the villians in the end. And he's Batman.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Reflection: "Emerson and the Work of Meloncolia"
This critical analysis takes a look at Emerson and his obsession with mourning. I say obsession because based on how the author views and has written about Emerson's works, it really does sound like an obsession. Emerson hated mourning and considered it a waste of time. I was really surprised to learn that he didn't mourn the death of his wife or brother. Most people would be devastated. Or, if they were more private people who didn't want to grieve openly, they would quietly mourn the loss of their loved ones in their own special way.
In a way, I kind of agree with Emerson. I don't necessarily believe that people should completely cut mourning out of their lives. I just think they shouldn't give it so much of their time. Grieving should be done quickly so that the person can move on with their lives. It seems so pointless to waste all of your time mourning a person who isn't around to appreciate the gesture anymore. All it does is hurt the people around you.
I loved how the author compared Emerson to Freud. I've been interested in Freud's works for a while now, but have never really had the chance to read any of them. The paragraph gave me some new insights into Freud's works and philosophies. The author of the article quoted another's thoughts on Freud that I found very interesting and helpful in understanding Emerson better:
I think that Emerson stopped writing so much in the Romanticism style because, even though he might have denied it, he was mourning the loss of so many loved ones. I know from experience that it is extremely hard to write anything close to the Romanticism style when you've just lost someone close. I think he was disillusioned with the world. I also don't see why all these authors have chosen to write about his switch from Romanticism to Transcendentalism so much. Can't they just agree that it was his decision and leave it alone?
I understood some of the ideas presented in this article, and my favorite one was about the gulf and deciding whether to leap or be pushed into it. Emerson understood the difference, which makes me respect him a little bit more now.
"Emerson and the Work of Melancholia." Raritan (Spring 1987). Quoted as "Emerson and the Work of Melancholia" in Bloom, Harold, ed. Ralph Waldo Emerson, Updated Edition, Bloom's Modern Critical Views. New York: Chelsea House Publishing, 2006. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=1&iPin=MCVRWE007&SingleRecord=True (accessed November 7, 2010).
In a way, I kind of agree with Emerson. I don't necessarily believe that people should completely cut mourning out of their lives. I just think they shouldn't give it so much of their time. Grieving should be done quickly so that the person can move on with their lives. It seems so pointless to waste all of your time mourning a person who isn't around to appreciate the gesture anymore. All it does is hurt the people around you.
I loved how the author compared Emerson to Freud. I've been interested in Freud's works for a while now, but have never really had the chance to read any of them. The paragraph gave me some new insights into Freud's works and philosophies. The author of the article quoted another's thoughts on Freud that I found very interesting and helpful in understanding Emerson better:
From this pronouncement comes Philip Rieff 's formulation of the Freudian ethic: "The therapy of all therapies, the secret of all secrets, the interpretation of all interpretations, in Freud, is never to attach oneself exclusively or too passionately to any one particular meaning or object." The ethic is as characteristic of Emerson as it is of Freud (Emerson).This whole thing seems pretty complicated to me. In his prose, Emerson appears to be saying the grieving is worthless and shouldn't be done, but everyone mourns some kind of loss at one point or another. Mark Edmundson even quotes a line that says "Alas! I chiefly grieve that I cannot grieve; that this fact takes no more deep hold than other facts, is as dreamlike as they; a lambent flame that will not burn playing on the surface of my river" (Emerson). I like Emerson's ideas about rebirth a lot better.
I think that Emerson stopped writing so much in the Romanticism style because, even though he might have denied it, he was mourning the loss of so many loved ones. I know from experience that it is extremely hard to write anything close to the Romanticism style when you've just lost someone close. I think he was disillusioned with the world. I also don't see why all these authors have chosen to write about his switch from Romanticism to Transcendentalism so much. Can't they just agree that it was his decision and leave it alone?
I understood some of the ideas presented in this article, and my favorite one was about the gulf and deciding whether to leap or be pushed into it. Emerson understood the difference, which makes me respect him a little bit more now.
"Emerson and the Work of Melancholia." Raritan (Spring 1987). Quoted as "Emerson and the Work of Melancholia" in Bloom, Harold, ed. Ralph Waldo Emerson, Updated Edition, Bloom's Modern Critical Views. New York: Chelsea House Publishing, 2006. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://www.fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=1&iPin=MCVRWE007&SingleRecord=True (accessed November 7, 2010).
Journal #21: Emerson vs. Franklin
Ralph Waldo Emerson's writing style is very different from Benjamin Franklin's writing style for several obvious reasons. The most obvious is that Emerson was a Romanticist, and Franklin was a Rationalist. Therefore, Emerson's writing is less structured than Frankin's systematic style. Emerson's theme's are also different, but that can be mostly explained by the different time periods of the two authors. Another aspect of the differences was the way the authors went about presenting their points. Emerson relies more on making his readers feel his points are what is right, where Franklin uses a systematic fact and support structure to make his readers see the logic of his arguements. In short, Emerson uses intuition and feelings in his writing, and Franklin uses facts and logic to make the readers agree with whatever topic he is presenting.
Despite the differences, there are also a few similarities between Emerson and Franklin. One of the similarities is the passion they put into their writing. No matter which author or which work you choose to read, you can see that the authors really care about their subject matter. Also, both authors are very eloquent in their writing. Both Emerson and Franklin show a mastery of the English language in all of their works, and they are easy to understand and have a good word flow.
As far as the authors themselves, I think that Emerson and Franklin were quite a bit alike. Both were writers, obviously. Both of them also wanted to make a difference in the world in their own unique ways and used their writing to try to accompllish that, though Franklin wanted political change and Emerson appears to have just wanted to create more beautiful things in the world.
I'm going to go with the obvious again and say that Emerson wrote more poetry than Franklin, who really only wrote his little aphorisms and essays and speeches. Emerson did not write very many political essays, especialy compared to Franklin. They were in different time periods, so it is understandalbe that they would be different.
Despite the differences, there are also a few similarities between Emerson and Franklin. One of the similarities is the passion they put into their writing. No matter which author or which work you choose to read, you can see that the authors really care about their subject matter. Also, both authors are very eloquent in their writing. Both Emerson and Franklin show a mastery of the English language in all of their works, and they are easy to understand and have a good word flow.
As far as the authors themselves, I think that Emerson and Franklin were quite a bit alike. Both were writers, obviously. Both of them also wanted to make a difference in the world in their own unique ways and used their writing to try to accompllish that, though Franklin wanted political change and Emerson appears to have just wanted to create more beautiful things in the world.
I'm going to go with the obvious again and say that Emerson wrote more poetry than Franklin, who really only wrote his little aphorisms and essays and speeches. Emerson did not write very many political essays, especialy compared to Franklin. They were in different time periods, so it is understandalbe that they would be different.
Journal #20: Self-Reflection
It is important for me to break away from society and self-reflect often. If I don't get some time away from other people every so often, I get really depressed and angry. I need the time to recharge. People annoy me a lot, so breaking away from society is a good thing. Even if I can't literally break away from society, I have another place to retreat to. I always have a book with me, and use those to escape. When I read, I'm able to shut myself off completely from what is happening around me. I can become immersed in someone else's society for an hour or two.
I never really self-reflect. For one, I never really have time to take a good look at myself and the things that go on around me. Plus, I find self-reflection boring and often unnecessary. I want to forget the world, not ponder it.
To get away from society, I read like I mentioned above. I also ride my bike in the summer when it's hot outside. I live on a road with lots of hills, so it's a hard ride and really makes me focus on my bike instead of anything else around me. This doesn't really factor in the self-reflection part of this topic, but like I stated above, I really don't like to self-reflect. It's not that I'm afraid that I won't like what I see, I just know what I'll see-I don't change very often. I know myself, and I don't think I would need to look to see who I am very often.
As far as the part of self-reflection that involves thinking about the world and your place in it, I really don't do much of that either. If I do, it's mainly in the form of daydreams. I have a good imagination when it comes to my future. Other than the basics, I really don't think about those kinds of things at all.
I never really self-reflect. For one, I never really have time to take a good look at myself and the things that go on around me. Plus, I find self-reflection boring and often unnecessary. I want to forget the world, not ponder it.
To get away from society, I read like I mentioned above. I also ride my bike in the summer when it's hot outside. I live on a road with lots of hills, so it's a hard ride and really makes me focus on my bike instead of anything else around me. This doesn't really factor in the self-reflection part of this topic, but like I stated above, I really don't like to self-reflect. It's not that I'm afraid that I won't like what I see, I just know what I'll see-I don't change very often. I know myself, and I don't think I would need to look to see who I am very often.
As far as the part of self-reflection that involves thinking about the world and your place in it, I really don't do much of that either. If I do, it's mainly in the form of daydreams. I have a good imagination when it comes to my future. Other than the basics, I really don't think about those kinds of things at all.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Journal #19: In America
The ideal America obviously does not exist. It took some serious imagining on my part to come up with all the ideas that show up in this blog. In my ideal America, we obviously wouldn't be in an economic recession. Enough people would have enough jobs to have a home and keep the homeless shelters from overflowing. Also in my ideal America, people would be healthier. It's kind of embarrassing that America is one of the fattest countries, so in my America, obesity wouldn't be nearly as common as it is in the actual America. The government of America would also be different if I had my way. It wouldn't just be a popularity contest between two rich middle-aged men. I kind of like the idea of the "self-made man" rising to power like we're learning in history. It just seems like a more fair way of electing a president. In my ideal America, people would also be a lot more understanding of differences. I know that sounds totally cliche, but it would make things so much better if people would stop being stupid and hating other people without good reason. I really don't get why people are so prejudiced against groups like blacks, gays, foreigners, and other such groups. As long as they're not hurting anyone, I really don't see what the problem is. That brings me to another part of my ideal America. It would be so much better if people would just stop being stupid and doing stupid things. I know that's impossible, but the journal topic is about my ideal America, emphasis on ideal.
I think that my ideal America is different from others' because I think a lot of people would make their ideal Americas perfect and without any kind of pain of suffering. The only problem with that is that it's boring. Also, I wouldn't want to see my ideal America put into practice only to have it fall to ruin within the first year.
I have lots of ideas about my ideal world, too, but that's a story for another journal...
I think that my ideal America is different from others' because I think a lot of people would make their ideal Americas perfect and without any kind of pain of suffering. The only problem with that is that it's boring. Also, I wouldn't want to see my ideal America put into practice only to have it fall to ruin within the first year.
I have lots of ideas about my ideal world, too, but that's a story for another journal...
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Whittier Reflection
For this reflection, I chose "A Sea Dream" by John Greenleaf Whittier. I thought this poem was amazing. The poem is broken down into three parts to help with cohesion. The first part describes the scenery that the speaker sees. It is apparent that he is closely familiar with it, as the words give several indicators that the speaker has watched time pass there. The scene he describes begins to feel like a small village on a cliff that overlooks the ocean because the poet mentions that a "rail car brought its daily crowds" and that he hears a song but it's hard to make out over the noise of children and other voices.
The second part is the song the speaker hears from afar. This is my favorite stanza in the whole poem: "The waves are glad in breeze and sun; the rocks are fringed with foam; I walk once more a haunted shore, a stranger, yet at home, a land of dreams I roam." (Whittier). I love the imagery in this stanza. This whole section of the poem was really beautiful in my opinion. Its flow and word usage really embody Romanticism as far as the style go. The message also goes with Romanticism because it features a young person observing nature while reflecting on how his love made him feel.
The third part goes back to focusing on the speaker and how it made him feel. This also hints rather heavily at Romanticism. My second favorite stanza was definitely the last one: "No word betrayed the mystery fine, That trembled on the singer's tongue; He came and went, and left no sign Behind him save the song he sung." (Whittier). I took this to mean that even though the people in the town can't really remember the man singing, the song he sings is still with them throughout their day. This poem was fantastic in my opinion.
Whittier, John G. "A Sea Dream by John Greenleaf Whittier." PoemHunter.Com - Thousands of Poems and Poets.. Poetry Search Engine. Web. 03 Nov. 2010.
The second part is the song the speaker hears from afar. This is my favorite stanza in the whole poem: "The waves are glad in breeze and sun; the rocks are fringed with foam; I walk once more a haunted shore, a stranger, yet at home, a land of dreams I roam." (Whittier). I love the imagery in this stanza. This whole section of the poem was really beautiful in my opinion. Its flow and word usage really embody Romanticism as far as the style go. The message also goes with Romanticism because it features a young person observing nature while reflecting on how his love made him feel.
The third part goes back to focusing on the speaker and how it made him feel. This also hints rather heavily at Romanticism. My second favorite stanza was definitely the last one: "No word betrayed the mystery fine, That trembled on the singer's tongue; He came and went, and left no sign Behind him save the song he sung." (Whittier). I took this to mean that even though the people in the town can't really remember the man singing, the song he sings is still with them throughout their day. This poem was fantastic in my opinion.
Whittier, John G. "A Sea Dream by John Greenleaf Whittier." PoemHunter.Com - Thousands of Poems and Poets.. Poetry Search Engine. Web. 03 Nov. 2010.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Journal #18: Romanticism Poem
One good friend for another,
A wilting rose in a vase.
My feelings threaten to smother
me with their tight embrace.
To get away from all the noise in my mind
(my thoughts, my family, and you)
I close my eyes and find
myself in a field of midnight blue.
I am among the stars, and what I see
calms the turmoil as I explore.
I awake from my soothing fantasy
and find myself at your door.
You know why I've come- it's in your eyes.
And as you walk away, it's myself I despise.
A wilting rose in a vase.
My feelings threaten to smother
me with their tight embrace.
To get away from all the noise in my mind
(my thoughts, my family, and you)
I close my eyes and find
myself in a field of midnight blue.
I am among the stars, and what I see
calms the turmoil as I explore.
I awake from my soothing fantasy
and find myself at your door.
You know why I've come- it's in your eyes.
And as you walk away, it's myself I despise.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Thanatopsis Reflection
In true Romanticism style, I will start out this reflection by stating how this poem made me feel and the general impressions that I formed while reading it. I liked this poem. It made me feel kind of "Zen" while I read it because, to me, it was saying that everything and everyone must die at some point but that it's okay because its a natural occurrence in the grand scheme of things. Literally speaking, this poem was written for people who followed the Romanticism school of thought. It begins by stating "To him who in the love of Nature holds communion with her visible forms" (Bryant), so you know that he is addressing the Romantics who loved Nature. Then he goes on to say how noble it is to die when it's your time because he says that you return to the earth and help it grow even as your body decays. While that is kind of gruesome, he states it in such a way that the words themselves sound pretty, even if the literal meaning leaves something to be desired in that department. Bryant's use of imagery to evoke emotion in his readers is one of the most common poetic devices that he uses in "Thanatopsis". He uses it very often and effectively. My favorite use of imagery was when he was describing the celestial bodies and how they watch over the earth and the dead that lie in it. He also uses personification to make Nature posses human qualities. My favorite part of this poem was in the ending stanza. "The innumerable caravan which moves to that mysterious realm" (Bryant) sounded really cool to me, and I really liked how Bryant put together his words, not just in that part, but throughout the whole poem.
Bryant, William. "16. Thanatopsis. William Cullen Bryant. Yale Book of American Verse." Bartleby.com: Great Books Online -- Quotes, Poems, Novels, Classics and Hundreds More. Web. 01 Nov. 2010..
Bryant, William. "16. Thanatopsis. William Cullen Bryant. Yale Book of American Verse." Bartleby.com: Great Books Online -- Quotes, Poems, Novels, Classics and Hundreds More. Web. 01 Nov. 2010.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)