Summer Reading

1. A Tree Grows in Brooklyn (Theresa)
2. Cry, the Beloved Country
3. Everything Is Illuminated (Fatima)
4. Reading Lolita in Tehran
5. Little Women (Anisha)
6. In Plain Truth
7. Red Storm Rising (Albert)
8. Bird's Eye View
9. Moneyball (Dan)
10. The Stand
11. About a Boy (Liz)
12. A Long Way Gone
13. Mountains Beyond Mountains (Kelsie)
14. Bel Canto
15. The Road (Laz)
16. Life of Pi

Read and enjoy! Let's keep the blog going over the summer to talk about any books we read off of this list (or any others). And a book club meeting/AP4 reunion is definitely in order before we all head off to college.

Fight Club

I like this book alot. Here are some things I have been pondering...

Fight Club seems to glorify masculinity. Men go into bar basement and beat the crap out of each other for a good time. I read an article which suggested that consumerism and the absence of external threats, such as World War II, has placed men in the roles of women. There is no evil dragon to fight, and women are pushing equality in all aspects of society. Fight Club represents a nostalgia for violence and purpose. However, the narrator/Tyler kills himself, a most unglorious ending for a hero of war. He doesn't defeat the enemy, which is consumerism. Instead, he just changes it. Whcih brings me to my next point...

Tyler is strongly anti-consumerism. He and the narrator are disgusted by the idea that chains like Denny's might claim and corrupt newly discovered planets. So, Tyler engineers Project Mayham to overthrow the system. Project Mayham, though, is set up exactly like a modern corporation. Many outgrowths of Mayham exist in cities across the country. No one "employee" knows the overall purpose of his job, but he mindlessly submits to the chain of command that ends with Tyler. Each faction has its own task that is supposed to serve the greater purpose. If Tyler hates corporate America, why does he promote corporate behavior with Mayham? His goals are ultimately barbaric, to return mankind to a caveman existance, but his methods follow the society into which he was born, the one that is organized into corporations. Even after Tyler dies, the project continues with success. What is our good friend Chuck (I wish) trying to say here?

I am also really interested by the idea that the relationship between Tyler, Marla, and the narrator is a love triangle. The narrator suggests that Tyler was created because some part of him wanted to have Marla. Clearly, this becomes more than just sex. Why does Tyler love Marla? And the narrator loves Tyler. Many suggest this is homoerotic. I think that it is more accurately interpreted as the narrator loving the ability to control his fate, to lead men, and to make history. He loves the power Tyler has and the admiration he achieves. He loves the complete lack of concern with any consequences. I don't see this love as having anything to do with physical attraction because Tyler and the narrator are the same person.

Floor's open, folks, and the year's not over just yet!

Interview With a Vamire

OK, so I have pasta and cupcakes. If anybody wants to bring salad/appetizer/drinks/another desert, that would be great. When you are on Main Street headed towards Centerton, you pass Stanwick on the left. On the right, you'll pass a green street sign that says East Madison Ave. My garage is the second house past that (it is brown with a red door, 444 East Main Street). You can park on the street. The house is down the hill facing sideways. If you get lost call the house phone or my cell (856-234-2688 or 856-889-5843).

Letter-Story

Dear Mildred,

You asked me to write to you as soon as I was settled out in the "real world" again. Sorry it's taken a few weeks, but I've been trying to get used to my new life. Its been twenty-five years since I've been free and I'm happy to finally be out.
As soon as I got out, I found my old apartment building and tried to lease another apartment. They won't let me! Even though I'm on medicine now, they're convinced I'm going to kill someone again. I kept telling them : It wasn't my fault the first time. If he hadn't been trying to eat me, my brother would still be alive today. I thought self-defense was legal in this country!
I have to tell you, though, Mildred - I don't think my medication is working properly. I think I'm seeing things that aren't really there again. The other day, I walked into a library, and I saw a bunch of big, bulkie square boxes. They look kind of like televisions, except when you press buttons, magic things happen. Some lady pushed a button, and the thing actually spoke. It said something like "You've got hail". I think I'm going even crazier than I was before.
I would keep writing, but I want to go read. I found a copy of a new book in the library - something the asylum didn't have - Beowulf. I think it's in another language, but I'll figure it out soon enough.
I hope all is well. Say hello to all the not-actually-crazies for me!

Love from Rosie

story stuff

I'm thinkin we can stick with the horror genre a little bit and base our story around the abominable snowman.
The pitch:
A team of scientists travel to the Himalayas to try and either prove the existence of or find the abominable snowman. They record their thoughts in personal journals and on online blogs that are meant to be viewed by other scientists and the general public.

Go ahead and share your ideas :)

Marxism in Frankenstein

I just wanted to head-start our discussion on Marxism in Frankenstein. I tried to find internet research on the topic. Most of what I found was that there were lots of Marxism interpretation of Frankenstein - if you were willing to put a credit card for an essay of it.

The only thing I could find was about the class distinctions mentioned in the book. Victor and Henry come from rich, upper class families. They have priveledge, the ability to travel, and money to attend university. The peasant family mentioned later, though, is the exact opposite. They're very poor and barely have enough. Marxists would probably say the peasants are being pushed down by the other classes.

I was trying to figure out what Marxists would take from Frankenstein's creation. I found this,

"For existentialism the universe is irrational; for Marxism it is lawful. The propositions of existentialist metaphysics are set in a context of cataclysmic personal experience. They all flow from the agonising discovery that the world into which we are thrown has no sufficient or necessary reason for existence, no rational order. It is simply there and must be taken as we find it. Being is utterly contingent, totally without meaning, and superfluous."

I'm not sure if this means that Victor was right to go and "find" Frankenstein - if it was just a lead up of rational thought which lead to this. On the other hand, its possible that Marxists would say that this situation should never have happend. Victor wasn't being productive to the human race by building this monster. He was a "lazy" member of the upper class. A Marxist could say that this is what happens when the upper class doesn't have to work - idle hands are the devils play.

Feminist Interpretation of Frankenstein

For those of you who were on the funsics field trip today, you missed a lot! We talked about heroin, orange lipstick, and playboy, among other things. We held off on talking about feminism, since we figured it'd be much less fun without Theresa there to counter everything I say. Here's a brief summary of what I found on the feminist criticism of Frankenstein.

Shelley's examination of science in Frankenstein may be read as a warning that man, as the father of science, had a responsibility to control scientific and technological development. Also, it is evident in this novel that women, since they are confined to domestic tasks, are not given the opportunity to pursue the same scientific and intellectual ideas and opportunities as men. In Frankenstein, many of the female characters were murdered. Some speculate that this was done to illustrate that the female role model of an independent, intelligent, kind woman, as described in Mary Wollstonecraft's Vindication of the Rights of Women, did not exist in 19th century society. Additionally, this novel is an exploration of male fear of female sexuality. Two pieces of evidence to support this claim are that all females in Frankenstein are sexless, and that Frankenstein destroys his female monster because he could not control her ability to reproduce. This is a commentary on men using technology to control women and to control their sexuality.

The men in Frankenstein are also guilty of objectifying women. Victor Frankenstein states, "I...looked upon Elizabeth as mine--mine to protect, love, and cherish. All praises bestowed on her I received as made to a possession of my own." A possession?!

Tomorrow in class we might want to delve into the implications of Nature being personified as female. Shelley first personifies Nature as female when Victor says that the studies of Isaac Newton "partially unveiled the face of Nature, but her immortal lineaments were still a wonder and a mystery." In this story, science, typically characterized as masculine, is able to conquer nature, characterized as feminine. Is this meant to symbolize male dominance over females?

Sorry if this post doesn't make sense. It was interrupted by multiple phone calls... Do your best to piece it together and we'll talk about it in class tomorrow!

Analysis of Characters in Frankenstein

To continue our class discussion on the characters in Frankenstein, I figured I would blog a brief analysis of each main character, and we can use this post to further discuss and analyze Victor, Walton, and the Monster.

Victor Frankenstein- A good place to start with this character is an analysis of his name. The name Victor is thought to be derived from Milton's "Paradise Lost," which was influential on Shelley's work. Throughout the poem, Milton refers to God as "The Victor," which coincides with the idea that Victor Frankenstein is playing God by creating a monster and giving it life. Victor is also, interestingly enough, a pen name used by Mary Shelley's husband, the English Romantic poet Percy Shelley. Some say Mary may have based Victor's character off of Percy, as Percy was said to have "experimented with electricity and magnetism as well as with gunpowder and numerous chemical reactions." Mary Shelley claims that the name Frankenstein came to her in a "dream-vision," however, in his book In Search of Frankenstein, Radu Florescu asserts that prior to writing her novel, Mary Shelley visited the Castle Frankenstein on the Rhine, where the alchemist Konrad Dippel had experimented with human bodies.

Frankenstein's Monster- Frankenstein's complete rejection of his creation is evidenced by the fact that the creature is not named, which gives it a lack of identity. Frankenstein's creation is referred to as "monster," "creature," "deamon," "fiend," and even addressed by Frankenstein as "devil," "vile insect," and "abhorred monster." Shelley's portrayal of Frankenstein's monster also borrows from Milton's "Paradise Lost." After reading Milton's poem, the Monster states, "Like Adam, I was created apparently united by no link to any other being in existence; but his state was far different from mine in every other respect. He had come forth from the hands of God a perfect creature, happy and prosperous, guarded by the special care of his Creator; he was allowed to converse with, and acquire knowledge from beings of a superior nature: but I was wretched, helpless, and alone. Many times I considered Satan as the fitter emblem of my condition; for often, like him, when I viewed the bliss of my protectors, the bitter gall of envy rose within me." In this way, the Monster shares many similarities with Satan, and even says that he sympathizes with Satan's role in "Paradise Lost."

Robert Walton- Walton's primary role in the story is to be the medium through which the reader hears Victor Frankenstein's story. However, his character also parallels that of Victor Frankenstein in that both men are explorers (literally and figuratively). Walton ultimately serves as a foil to Frankenstein's character (AHH BAD MEMORIES FROM THE AP TEST!!) because he terminates his pursuit, because, unlike Frankenstein, he is not obsessive enough to risk his life and not courageous enough to allow his passions to drive him.

Kubla khan

I have to admit: Today in class, I had no idea who Kubla Khan was, so I went home and researched him.

Turns out, his name is Kublai Khan, and he was an emperor of the Mongol Empire. His grandfather, Genghis Khan, had united the nomadic tribes in Asia around 1200. Kublai became a ruler around the late 1200's, and was the founder of the Yuan Dynasty in China. He's famous for entering a new kind of rule, creating a court in the Beijing area, adn improving agriculture. He also met Marco Polo! The only reason he is famous, however, is the poem we read today.
I'd have to ask why Coleridge used his name to immortalize instead of any other?

Von Trapps

It was bothering me, so I figured I'd post this.
The Von Trapp Children are :

Liesl
Louisa
Friedrich
Kurt
Brigitta
Marta
Gretl

No one needs to post on this post. I just found it necessary.

Pantoum for Chinese Women

I tried to do some research on this poem, only to find that there really isn't that much information about it online.

I did, however, find that Shirley Geok-lin Lim is a Chinese Malaysian woman, born in Malaysia in 1944. She earned a BA in English at the University of Malaya, then, at age 24, came to America to study at Brandeis University on a Fulbright scholarship. After earning her PhD in English and American Literature in 1973, Lim taught at several universities in Asia, including the University of Hong Kong, where she was a Chair Professor of the English department. Lim is now a professor at UC Santa Barbara.

Lim was born to a peranakan mother (a member of the community of assimilated, Malay-speaking Chinese who had lived in the Malay peninsula since the 16th century) and a Hokkien father. As a young child, Lim witnessed the hostility directed toward her mother and other peranakans. The British-declared State of Emergency against the Malayan Chinese Communist insurgents that forced ethnic Chinese to carry identity cards, her experience as an ethnic Chinese in the newly independent (since 1957) state of Malaya, and the May 1969 anti-Chinese riots all profoundly affected Lim. Because of these events and experiences, much of Lim's writing examines her cultural heritage and ethnic identity, while maintaining a strong feminist consciousness.

When looking for information on her poem "Pantoum for Chinese Women," I found the following quote, which is meant to accompany the reading of this poem:

"At present, the phenomena of butchering, drowning, and leaving to die female infants have been very serious."
(The People's Daily, Peking, March 3rd, 1983)

The Solitary Reaper

Okay so here's what I think/found:

First of all, Wordsworth visited the Scottish Highlands in 1803 and it's said that solitary reapers were not very uncommon. Also, in an essay that I read about Wordsworth, it said that he said that he tried to write in 'simply' so people of all classes could understand and get the point behind his poetry.

This poem was pretty straight forward. It is also in first person present tense. In the first stanza, he orders the reader to draw their attention to the girl who is singing as she reaps on the Scottish Highlands. He immediately tells us about the setting. He orders the reader to listen to her 'melancholy' sounds.

In the second stanza, he compares the girl's voice to a Nightingale's. In fact, he thinks hers is better. He says that her voice is so wonderful and powerful that it can be heard from far away (obviously an exaggeration since at the end he doesn't physically hear it when he moves away).

In the third stanza, he admits that he doesn't really understand what the words of her songs mean. He starts hypothesizing about their meaning. Maybe she's singing about old battles or about her pains or things going on in other places.

In the fourth stanza, he stops hypothesizing and pays attention once again to the song. He says that it doesn't matter what she's singing about since it's so beautiful. Even though he likes listening to her, he doesn't linger any longer than he has to. He moves on with her memory in his heart. He clearly doesn't make a strong emotional connection with her. He just treats her as something to pass the time with. Her voice is a type of entertainment for him. I'm not saying that he's mean or anythings but to me, he just seemed like a tourist (which he was) who got pleasure out of her voice and wanted to remember it.

Ferrara

I did a bit of research about Ferrara on Friday, and here's what I found.

The poem takes place during the Italian Renissance in the city of Ferrara (we can see this from the Duke's name). The second man in the poem is another Duke who's working to marry his daughter of to the Duke of Ferrara. They come to a picture of the old Duchess of Ferrara, and the Duke talks a bit about her. We found out that she was a flirt ("She thanked men, - good! but thanked Somehow - I know not how). He later alludes to the fact that he had her killed (This grew; I gave commands; Then all smiles stopped altogether.)
The grammatical structure, or lack there of, is called enjambment. Grammar does not end on one line - the sentence keeps going on to the next line. This gives the poem less of a sense of closure, which is what the poet wanted.
My question is whether or not the Duke of Ferrara is speaking allowed when he suggests he killed his wife. The obvios answer would be no - but the grammar seems to suggest otherwise. If you're trying to marry someone else's daughter, would you tell the father you killed your last wife? Unless its a show of masculinity - that the Duke of Ferrara is in charge of the household no matter what? The latter of these two I don't really beleive.
A good debate about feminism could be held here. Here's a girl who died for being a flirt, and another about to be "sold" into marriage by her father. Any thoughts, Kelsie?

Elizabeth Bishop's "Sestina"

So I just read the stupidest comment when I was researching this poem. Someone said that he did not get how the title of this poem related to what was happening in the poem. He knew that a sestina was a type of poem with a lot of repetition, but obviously could not put two and two together.

Anyways, moving on...

Sestinas are probably the most confusing literary thing that I have ever come across. It is easy to see how a poet could become bogged down in the form and not even convey the message he or she wants to send. However, Elizabeth Bishop was able to transcend the form and write something with some depth, which I found pretty amazing. The first few times I read this poem, I didn't really get it because I was so distracted by the form. But by the third time (and after some research) I was finally able to look past the form and see what Elizabeth Bishop is actually trying to say.

I really loved the imagery that she used in this poem, especially the many different ways she used the word "tears." Each time the word "tears" was used, it was part of a very different, very vivid image. I could clearly picture all of these images in my mind. And even though the tears were not always human tears, Bishop brought it back to the sadness that the grandmother felt. Bishop's mastery of the imagery created very strong emotions.

Add anything else that you found/think is worth discussing!

Book Festival!

Philadelphia Free Library Book Festival
May 17 - 18 (Sat and Sun)
http://libwww.freelibrary.org/bookfestival/program.cfm

I looked through them and I really wanted to see Tamala Edwards and many of the other authors :) Anyone else interested?

Elegy for Jane

Just some information that I found on this poem and the poet. This elegy was written 40 years after Jane's death (I'm pretty sure-need to double check). It's said that her death wasn't the only thing that influenced Roethke. Many critics say that Roethke loved her (as in lover) and they base that on the fact that he had married another former student. However, there are others who say that this wasn't the case with Jane. There's a very interesting debate about the question of boundaries, especially in an educator's career.

Personally, I don't agree with the critics and the pedophile talk. The last line of the peom makes it clear enough for me. Roethke is saying that he neither loved her as a father nor as a lover. He also talks about having the right to mourn her before that line. I think he's saying that in society's eyes, he doesn't have the right to mourn her death like he does because only fathers and lovers can do that for a girl. This is a special relationship of a teacher and a student. I think that it's natural for teachers to have respect and admiration for certain students. It doesn't have to be perverted like society thinks in most cases. I think that the guy just cared and there's nothing wrong with that. In fact, it's beautiful that a sort of stranger shows respect for another person and feels the hurt when something aweful happens.

Ode on a Grecian Urn

Okay so I really like this one! It sounds really pretty. Anyways, I was looking around and found some really interesting information. Basically, what you could probably get just by reading is that Keats is talking about art (an urn's design!). He does mention what's on it: musicians and lovers and a really beautiful setting. However, as we read it, we don't really get a sense of what these people are doing exactly. Keats uses what is called Negative Capability (readers don't know who, what or where exactly). All we know is that the figures on the urn are literally frozen in time. Even though they are loving each other, they can never advance that love. They can never consummate or move on. Same with the musicians. They are playing music but nobody can hear it. That's when the picture doesn't seem so perfect and beautiful anymore. Keats goes on to make his point. He says that even though the urn seems beautiful and perfect, it's not real. Here, he makes a contrast between art and life. In a way, he criticizes the urn after supposedly praising it. To me, the point was (Anisha!) that Keats is trying to confuse the reader, but at the same time forcing him or her to think. By saying the last two lines, Keats makes the reader think that beauty is the ultimate reality, but in fact, he's saying the opposite.

Lucille Clifton at the FLP

As Laz mentioned today, Lucille Clifton is coming to the Free Library of Philadelphia. She'll be there this Thursday, May 1st at 8 pm. Tickets can be bought online at http://libwww.freelibrary.org/calendar/calbydate.cfm?ID=18107&type=2. I know Laz had said it was free for students, but it appears to be $7 for students (discounted from the general admission price of $14). There is still auditorium seating left, so that's good. A little blurb about Lucille Clifton, courtesy of the FLP website (since I had never heard of her before I assume others hadn't either):

"Lucille Clifton is the author of 12 poetry collections, including the National Book Award-winning Blessing the Boats: New and Selected Poems 1988–2000, as well as several children’s books and a memoir. The 2007 recipient of the Ruth Lilly Poetry Prize—one of the most prestigious literary awards for American poets—Clifton is a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and has served as a chancellor of the Academy of American Poets."

I'm free on Thursday night...anyone else able to go?

The Shawl

For anyone who read "The Shawl" already, you may be interested to know that Cythia Ozick wrote a second part to that story, which takes place some thirty years later. The second story is called "Rosa" , and basically talks about the mental-state of a Holocaust victim and how she mourns for her deceased baby daughter. I didn't read it, but I saw a couple of summaries on it. In that story, apparently Rosa isn't a very sympathetic charactor. Her surviving niece, Stella, seems to be more sympathetic.

Everyday Use

I really, really liked this story. I thought it brought out some interesting points about the "Back to Africa" movement, and what it really means to respect your heritage.The story talks about how two girls represent two different ways of trying to honor African heritage. Dee seems to be doing it in more a display, museum-esque respect of her culture. Maggie is respecting her family by carrying on family traditions.

I was reading an article which talked about how Walker beleived that denying the slave and American parts of African-American culture were unreasonable and disrespectful. I think this can be seen with Dee's change of names. Dee wants an African name. She picks one which has no specific meaning to her, but culturally agrees with the "Back to Africa" movement. Her original name, she argues, was given to her by white people (generations back). However, the narrorator explains that Dee's name comes from her family, which carries more personal heritage for her.

Gimpel the Fool

I wasn't sure if I understood this story or not, so I'm just going to blog a couple of points which I found interesting.
I loved the way this story began. It was such a direct beginning, and really jumped right into the problem of the story "I am Gimpel the fool. I don't think myself a fool." This is kind of the overall theme of the story... the fact that Gimpel beleives everything.
I was really confused as to what the "point" of the story was. Part of me wants to say the story is a hit at religion. Gimpel beleives everything, but in particular, he believes things which have religious references. In the third paragraph, it mentions "In the first place, everything is possible, as written in the Wisdom of the Fathers". He also beleives that the Messaih has come, and later on, beleives the schoolmaster later when he says that Adam and Eve had a premature baby. Later, the rabbi's daughter tricks him as well. Although the entire town makes a fool out of him, many of the specific examples trace back to religion. Is this just because the town is very religion-focused? Or is this a smack at religion itself, and how religious beleifs make people into fools.
Another question I had was about his wife. She's obviously the model for a bad wife , but there seems to be more too it. When Gimsel asks her to marry, and to give him a dowry, she answers back tells him not to bargain - either say yes or no. Is this saying that women should never talk back?
When I began this story, I felt bad for Gimsel. By the end, though, I think I came to beleive that this was really his fault. As Liz pointed out in class today, he knew that people were fooling around with him, and he still let it happen. He knew that his wife was cheating on him, etc, but let other people convince him otherwise. This happens multiple times, so I'd say this was his fault.

Good Country People

I found the charactors in this story really interesting. I did a little research, and found out that the charactors are supposed to symbolize personality traits in people.

For example, the Bible-selling boy in the story is supposed to symbolize deception. He pretends to be a "good country boy", but tricks and steals from Hulga/Joy. Even at the end of the story, he comes out looking like the good guy. Mrs. Freeman and Hopewell beleive he's coming back from selling Bibles to the Negros, not fooling around and stealing from one of their daughters.

There was one line I didn't understand well. At the end fo the story, the boy says something like "I hope you don't think I beleive in that crap! I may sell Bibles but I know which end is up and I wasn't born yesterday and I know where I'm going". I feel like this is important and symbolic, but I don't really understand whta it means. Anyone care to explain?

I like Mrs. Freeman. She seems like the empitomy of an annoying charactor. She thinks she knows everything, but she really knows nothing. I think the wordplay between Mrs. Freeman and Hopewell is very simple and generic. It kind of reflects their cookie-cutter personalities. They both see the world very simply, and stick to their lines. They try to fit the world into their mold, and explain things by their philosophies.

Welty's "A Worn Path"

At first I didn't really get what this story was about; it was an interesting enough story, but there didn't really seem to be much going on with it. But then I read it again and did some research and it began to take on a deeper meaning. I thought it was really cool that Welty's style seemed so simple and uncomplicated at first, but then upon further reading, you realize that it is actually quite complex.

Anyway... so some stuff I found...

Phoenix's journey to the city was basically an allegory for the journey of life, especially life for blacks after the Civil War. The landscape is described as both harsh and beautiful, representing both the rough spots and the happy portions of life. Phoenix must battle through the countryside and its obstacles on her journey to care for her grandson. She spends much of the time alone, battling nature all by herself. But when she does encounter other humans (all of them being white), the experiences have some similarities. All the people she meets are patronizing and call her "Granny" or "Grandma." The hunter jokes saying that colored people "wouldn't miss going to town to see Santa Claus," which implies that he thinks they are all child-like. The attendant and the nurse also treat Phoenix like she is dumb, yelling at her when she does not immediately respond and calling her case a "charity case" (which I suppose it is, but nevertheless this is kind of demeaning to say it to her face).

Another thing that is important is the meaning behind the main character's name, Phoenix. Phoenixes are mythical birds that are reborn from their own ashes after they go up in flames. Phoenix herself is a symbol of stamina, strength, and perseverance, as evidenced by the journey that she makes. Her name shows her ability to rise up over her own adversity in order to provide for her grandson, the only person she has left.

So I found a website with a pretty good analysis of certain aspects of the story:
http://www.enotes.com/short-story-criticism/worn-path-welty-eudora

One question that I had...
I didn't get the importance/significance of having Phoenix forget why she made the journey once she got to the town. Any ideas as to why Welty would include this?

Barn Burning

This story really REALLY confused me. I had issues with all the "he's" at first - I had no idea who was talking about what. THEN I got confused every time the author said "he would have thought this... if he was older". Once again, I think I missed the deeper meaning to this story. Obvioulsy the father has issues (post-stress disorder?), but I'm trying to understand what the boy comes out with in this story. His battle of family versus justice ultimately leads him to warn the guy that his burn is going to burn down. Does this mean that in the end, to serve justice you have to lose whats important?

Something else I noticed about this story was the lack of an innocent party. Obviously the father wasn't amazing for burning down a barn, but the rich man is not portrayed as a nice person either.

Ernest Hemingway: "In Another Country"

"In the fall the war was always there, but we did not go to it."

Summary

This short story deals with Nick Adams, a reoccurring character in Hemingway's stories, and his time in an Italian hospital, where he tried to rehabilitate his leg. During this time, he meets others injured in war. Most brag about the medals they received; Nick, however, feels that he cannot really associate with them in that way because he got his metal more so because he was an American (as he was injured in an accident). On the other hand, there is the Major, who has three medals but does not brag about them, as the Hunting Hawks do. He displays a kind of "code hero" that contrasts with Nick's newbiness. He stresses discipline, coming to the clinic every day and attempting to teach Nick the proper Italian grammar. At the end of the story, we find out that the Major's lashing out at Nick's thoughts of marriage stemmed from the fact that his fiance had recently died: This left a sort of depressing effect of Nick.

Analysis

I guess the relationship between the Major and Nick could parallel that of the mythic heroic archetype in that the Major appears to be guiding Nick; this, however, is not fully clear in this portion of the progression of Nick Adams' life. The great attention to detail and his feelings of the medal he received seems to create this depressed mood. He sees the medal as more of a handout than something he earned. This could be from the fact that the title is "In Another Country" as Nick was American fighting in Italy.

Questions to Consider

• Who's story is it: Nick's or the Major's?
• Who do the character's represent?
• Is society bounded by the use of machines, as they are necessary for war and medicine/rehabilitation?

Reoccurring Ideas

• Bravery
• "Code Hero"
• Wound
• Death
• Medals/Honor

Achebe at the Library

Here's some space for tonight's attendees to chat. Glad 4 of you were able to make it--but disappointed that only Daniel and I stuck around for the book signing!

For those who could not attend--and for those who would like to relive the moment, or who couldn't write fast enough to keep up with everything he was saying, keep checking the Library website--they will certainly put up a podcast of the interview.

And finally--Andy Kahan is the author events program director for the Library--we did our grad work together at Rutgers (actually, we also shared an office for a year!) As we chatted tonight, he regretfully mentioned that they had hosted an afternoon gathering for around 400 Phila high school students to talk with Achebe. He has promised to let me know if similar opportunities arise (normally, such events are only promoted to Phila schools).

Again, glad 4 of you made it--and sorry I didn't get to see 3 of you!

Enjoy the rest of break!

LAZ

Poisonwood Bible

I know Fatima created a post for all three books, but I figured we could talk about them seperately since they're three different books? Please tell me if I'm being obnoxious.

Heart of Darkness brings up an interesting point about human nature and coping for survival. Someone in class mentioned how Rachel's way of survival was to create her own little world. She's the one who suffers the least , emotionally, from this Congo adventure. She is not grieving and I feel like she has less troubles than her sisters and mother. Yet, we still see her as the bad charactor. Does this mean that in order to be a good person, you have to suffer, and in this case, suffer all your life?

Apocalyto Now

Hi everyone,
Just wanted to start a post so we can figure out when over spring break we want to see the movie. I haven't been to Blockbuster in a while, so I don't know if we can rent it or not. Either way, post when we're available. My house is open for a movie party if we want ;)

Tickets for Things Fall Apart

http://libwww.freelibrary.org/calendar/calbydate.cfm?DiaryDate2=%7Bts%20%272008%2D03%2D27%2000%3A00%3A00%27%7D&DiaryDate=%7Bts%20%272008%2D03%2D01%2000%3A00%3A00%27%7D

I don't know if someone else blogged this or not , but just in case I will. If I get seven yes'es tonight, I'm going to go ahead and buy the tickets. Its seven dollars a person, so if you guys are up, tell me.

The event is March 27th at the Free Library in Philadelphia at 8 p.m.

There's one yes for me :)!

Parable of Talents and more Milton

Okay, since apparently none of us know this Bible allusion, here it is, the Parable of Talents:

"The parable tells of a master who was leaving his home to travel, and before going gave his three servants different amounts of money. On returning from his travels, the master asked his servants for an account of the money given to them. The first servant reported that he was given five talents, and he had made five talents more. The master praised the servant as being good and faithful, gave him more responsibility because of his faithfulness, and invited the servant to be joyful together with him.

The second servant said that he had received two talents, and he had made two talents more. The master praised this servant in the same way as being good and faithful, giving him more responsibility and inviting the servant to be joyful together with him.

The last servant who had received one talent reported that knowing his master was a hard man, he buried his talent in the ground for safekeeping, and therefore returned the original amount to his master. The master called him a wicked and lazy servant, saying that he should have placed the money in the bank to generate interest. The master commanded that the one talent be taken away from that servant, and given to the servant with ten talents, because everyone that has much will be given more, and whoever that has a little, even the little that he has will be taken away. And the master ordered the servant to be thrown outside into the darkness where there is 'weeping and gnashing of teeth.'"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_Talents

(Okay I know Wikipedia is not a "valid source," but it gets the job done.)

This parable is fitting for Milton's poem. Milton is saying that he must have faith in God's plan and not despair. He originally sees his blindness as a curse and nearly goes over the edge, but he then realizes that God must have taken away his sight for a reason. Milton had two ways of responding to this misfortune. He could be like the servant who only received one talent: bury his talent rather than invest it (in faith) and be cast out by God. Or he could be like the other two servants who invested their talents, strengthened their winnings, and were thus accepted and praised by God. In the turn, Milton decides to follow in the footsteps of the first two talents and accept God's plan.

Also, we can use this post to discuss Paradise Lost... I haven't finished it yet, but go ahead and discuss!

Heart of Darkness

Hey all.

I thought that it would be a good idea to start to discuss the books we're reading along with class discussions in the future. This way, if we have some questions (because the books can get confusing) we can ask them here. I do have questions and will be posting them soon.

Wittenberg Tickets!

Hey guys! I just bought the tickets for Wittenberg, and there are a few things you should know:

First, I was unable to get us 7 seats together. I tried to get 4 and 3, but I couldn't even get four together, so I got 3, 2, and 2. I hope this isn't a problem.

Second, I bought everyone a teen ticket, so we all have to pretend to be 17 or under (well, some of us don't have to pretend, but you know what I mean...). Tickets were $18, but there was a $4.50 handling fee, so everyone owes me $22.50.

I will pick up the tickets when we get to the theater. When I bought the tickets there was a note that said "All college students must present valid ID to pick up the discounted tickets at the box office," which makes me think that I'll have to present ID proving that I'm 17. That's no issue, I'm just hoping they don't ask all of you to show ID proving that you're all 17 too. In that case, maybe those of you who are 18 should bring student IDs and claim to be 16 or unlicensed?

Okay, well hopefully this'll all work out and we'll get some extra credit (God knows I'll need it after Laz grades my Italian sonnet...). See you tomorrow!

wooo feminism

As a follow up to our rousing discussion on feminism, I shall start this post :D

Kelsie was saying after class that women (subconsciously?) are more sexual in order to gain advantages in a male dominated environment (we used the examples of debate and corporate settings). Women, feeling somehow disadvantaged to men, want to use their sexuality in order to gain favors. Men don't really have that option. Kelsie felt that it shouldn't be that way because it's unfair to men and some women who don't do that. This group of people essentially have to work twice as hard as women "flaunting it" (thanks Fatima) in order for them to be considered.
I agree with this notion. While it is resourceful, a quality that shouldn't be inherently bad, wearing provocative clothing isn't as great a quality as, say, hard work, integrity, etc... If women want to prove themselves as humans rather than objects, they really should start acting that way.
I don't believe in feminism in its connotative sense, but rather, as Laz is, I believe in equality. Men and women should be considered on a level playing field. I think it'd be unfair if Hilary Clinton was elected and people said, "Oh, it's because she's a woman." Why couldn't we say she won because she has better ideas? Shouldn't we compare what our candidates are saying and proposing rather than looking at who they are on a superficial level? You know, like how we're supposed to?
And Kelsie brought up the interesting point of how racism is greatly frowned upon while sexism... not so much. I can't really give an answer as to why that occurs but I think it all really boils down to the individual. Personally, I don't feel too offended when someone makes fun of my race. I'll laugh at the Asian jokes because that's what they are, jokes. Someone else, however, might get grossly offended. We just hear about the people who get offended because they feel that they need to do something about it. The other half, people who aren't really offended, just don't really care enough to say anything. Same thing goes with feminist jokes. People can either laugh at it or get offended by it. It really depends on what kind of sense of humor the person has. In my opinion, people who get offended by those kinds of jokes need to lighten up a bit. Sure, it might be embarrassing for a little bit, but it's just a joke. It's relatively minor compared to, say, being excluded from something (promotion, raise, an organization) because of your race, gender, creed etc.

Concerning make up, vanity and such...
Men aren't necessarily at fault. Sure we are the ones benefiting from it, but that doesn't necessarily mean we're the cause of it. It's more of a societal thing vs gender. Society makes us think we're ugly and that we need to make ourselves look prettier in order to please other people. Also, don't think that men don't feel the same pressures. We do. How do you think an out of shape ugly looking guy feels when he sees a movie where a strong muscular guy always gets the girl? There are two possibilities. One, he's really insecure about his body image and hates himself for being fat and ugly. Two, he accepts himself as who he is and doesn't really care. It really all comes down to whether you accept who you see in the mirror or not. Societal pressures may force you to think one way or the other but it all boils down to that individual decision of acceptance.

My overriding philosophy about this is that it's up to the individual to make something out of himself (I'm using the masculine pronoun just for simplicity). He can't expect free handouts if he wants to make something of himself in life. He has to work hard for it. That kind of determination is what should be judged, not race, gender, attractiveness or any other superficial quality. It sounds corny, but it's really what's inside that counts.

I hope I didn't say anything too controversial... I think I didn't. We'll see.

Herbert and Donne

Hi guys,
I was doing some research on George Herbert and I came upon this website: http://win.laent.it/apprendimento~ricerca~in~classe/metaphisical%20poetry%20front%20page/Analysis%20Easter%20wings%20%20Herbert.htm

It compares Easter-Wings to other works by Herbert, and addresses Donne as a poet as well. It also suggested something interseting about the shape of the poem. It says that the hourglass shape (Theresa!) is representative of the spiritual tension towards a man's soul. I'm not a hundred percent sure I understand or agree with that analysis, but I wanted to put it up for anyone to ponder.
:)
Anisha

Ros & Guil Are Dead at MFS

Hey guys! So, Moorestown Friends is doing Ros & Guil Are Dead on Friday Feb 29 and Saturday March 1. Both performances are at 7:30 pm. I can't go to the one on Saturday, so who wants to go on Friday with me? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? :) Since it's a high school show tickets are cheap (probably under $10). Just wanted to post the info. so we can figure out when we can go/see if anyone else can go on Friday...

Parameters of a Laz Paper

Hey guys,
Can someone give me the parameters for a Laz Paper? What inch lengths are each of the margins, and is there anything else I should remember? Also, does anyone know if the quote should be double spaced or not? I won't be in class tomorrow, so I couldn't ask then. If anyone would get back to me, that would be great.
Thanks guys!
Anisha

oh milton!

Hey everyone. After the Laz made us suffer through his genius writing prompt, we are forced to face the poets again. 17th Century/English Civil War poetry. I know we're all in the process of reading the oh so wonderfully put together packets by Laz but I just wanted to start this post-to help us answer each other's questions and discuss as we go on. : )

Roz and Guil Question

I was paging through Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead again, and I found something that I didn't understand. A few times they mention a man who awoke them. He was wearing gray and had a hat and a coat. Does anyone know who this is ?

Relationship Between Charactors

There's a lot to be said about this topic, so I figured I'd start some random thoughts before we begin discussing it in class tomorrow.

I read a couple of opinions on Waiting for Godot which suggest that the charactors have no meaningful relationships at all. The non-main charactors all forget about the main charactors once they are out of sight. Lucky, Pozzo, and the boy (messanger boy) don't remember interacting with the two main charactors the day before. It seems like only Estragon and Vladimir have any vague form of memory.

This kind of reminds me of Berenger in Rhino. I felt as if he was the last fighting force, the last person with a memory who remained. I could be totally on the wrong page with this (which I usually am- it's absurdism!), but it reminded me of the link between the loss of memory and the loss of identity.

I had a question about the importance of Pozzo and Lucky's relationship. I read somewhere that this relationship isn't as important as the men's reaction to it. They don't agree with the "slavery", but don't really do anything to stop it , showing the inaction of mankind?


I don't really know where this absurd post is going.

Ros and Guil

Hey guys.

I know we've started Ros and Guil Are Dead but we haven't really discussed it. I thought this would be a good start to further class discussions, putting up comments and clearing up some confusion.



Speaking of confusion, we see a lot of that in the play. Even at the beginning we get a sense that the characters themselves are confused about themselves and things around them. In fact this confusion, among with other ideas, occur throughout the play. Others include randomness, forgetfulness, references to Hamlet (the actual play), ignorance/stupidity, chance, question of identity, and reality vs. appearance.

The randomness starts right off the play with the random coin toss game. Between that, the question of probability occurs. Guil is the one asking the question. We see throughout the play that while Ros seems to be carefee and oblivious to the world around him, Guil on the other hand is the thinker and makes attempts to figure out the meaning of life. Ros is more 'random' than Guil. For example, he seems to know random facts (such as the nail and beard growing fact after death). He is more of the passive character compared to Guil.

Another thing that I read somewhere and didn't completely agree with was the hint of homosexuality. When the Tragedians come to Ros and Guil they offer to engage in sexual 'scenes' for an extra fee. Guil is the one who opposes this idea. But even in doing so, the reader can see his hesitation (seen a lot in these two characters). He's not even sure of himself-of what he wants. I think he was just trying to make a moral stand. The hesitation, in my opinion, was because he felt that there was something wrong and he was surprised and confused at himself that he saw that while others around him didn't. Remember, he's the one who tries to figure things out in his life. This was one of those 'aha!' moments.

Well, there's a lot more to talk about! Just wanted to open the floor for discussion.

art of performing

Hey everyone.
I was just looking up things related to what we did in class today and I found this really interesting book/article. It's called An Actor's Handbook: An Alphabetical Arrangement of Concise Statements on Aspects of Acting. It goes through things related to acting and that acting and performing consist of. I didn't want to paste it all here (duh) so hope the link works. I'll try to remember to bring it up in class because it breaks stuff down really well.
http://www.questia.com/library/book/an-actors-handbook-an-alphabetical-arrangement-of-concise-statements-on-aspects-of-acting-by-constantin-stanislavsky-elizabeth-reynolds-hapgood.jsp

King Lear/Literary Criticism stuff

Literary Criticism:
Psychoanalysis
- focuses on the mindset of the writer and the character.
Freudian stuff:
id - our innate primal instincts and desires no longer deemed acceptable by society
superego - awareness of social customs, norms, etc. suppresses the id.
ego - face we present to the world
Freud said that we should look at the characters as actual people
Lacan said we should view the characters as symptoms of the writer.

applied to Lear:
There is an absence of a mother figure in both Lear's family and Gloucester's family and it seems to be for the worse, considering Goneril, Regan, and Edmund's actions. We can say that the id takes over and the mother figure would've been the superego to prevent that.
Goneril and Regan shouldn't have taken what was theirs. Therefore, they led to their own destruction.
"Nothing comes of nothing" = nothing comes of womanhood.

Marxism:
- the doctrines taught by marxism all require faith and belief, therefore, if you don't believe in it, it's likely that you don't understand it.
**Social being determines consciousness**
**Marxism's aim is to change the world, vs philosophers who only interpret it**
Institutions built the culture
Focuses on flow of power
-people who have power tend to want to keep it
-people who don't tend to want to take it

Applied to Lear:
Since it was written in 1605, 2 years after King James took the throne, Lear was probably a reflection of the change of power from Elizabeth to James. Since Elizabeth had no male heir, it was uncertain who would rise up to take the throne. After all, someone must take the throne when it's vacated. The play shows this by having a struggle between all the characters to ascend to the throne after Lear goes mad.

Other Lear stuff:
Lear (the king) breaks traditional practice by dividing up and giving each daughter land. This symbolizes the breaking up of the kingdom, and possibly the family?
Edgar is the perfect character. He is the only one who can replace Lear.
The storm symbolizes Lear's internal struggle.
Edgar keeps his identity hidden from his father in order to prevent more damage. analogous to "if you tell your partner you're cheating, how will they ever trust you again?" idea.
Fisher King parallel:
If king cannot produce an heir, he is considered impotent and the land similarly cannot produce any crops. Therefore, the king = land. A thing to note is that land is feminine.

Sorry that my notes kinda... suck. I recommend going back to our previous blog posts for further study. They go into much more detail and do help to clear stuff up.

Midterm Review Session

I know we vaguely discussed this before, but did we have a final conclusion on when and if we're going to meet to review for Laz's midterm?
How is Monday at 11 for everyone? We can study for a couple hours, go home, and meet back again for the poetry slam at 5:30.
I'm offering up my house, but we can meet wherever everyone wants to.
I have the strangest feeling that no one is going to comment back on this.

I have another question. So far, I'm the only one whos posted my notes on the blog. I'm fine with posting the rest of mine, but I'm not going to go through the trouble if no one else is using them. So is it worth it? Should I type up the rest?

Ahem.

Rhino Notes

Reading back on my notes, I'm not even sure I understand all of them. Absurdism confused me to no end, especially with the meaning of life and trying to find it. Ask if you have quesitons on my notes...


RHINOSORAUS

Theatre of the Absurd
- developed in the 1920’s and 1930’s between WWI and WWII
- prohibition showed the hypocrisy of law (trying to raise civil, moral, ethical values) compared to standards)
- outlook that world has no real hope or meaning. We might as well drink and be marry because we don’t know what will happen next
- loss of values and focus
- sense that God is dead
- no longer having applicable values
- absurd to audiences different to absurd from writer (writers saw the world as illogical and this as the best way to express it)
- Logic not holding up in the real world
- “entrope” idea
o Everything moves from order to disorder
o Order cannot be maintained
o Society and individuals meant to move to more disorder
- ideas in play
o first one rhino comes soon, everything goes back to order. Next time, things don’t go back to order as equally, etc.
o Berdatte fits into the “Lost Generation” because he drowns himself in booze
o Conventionalized speech in play had no hidden meaning. It just showed the ridiculousness of every day conversation.

Traditional Theatre
- being able to relate to character
- process of movement (starts with normal situation, then conflict, then return to a (new) norm)
- plots have a beginning, middle, and end
- world obeys certain logic (even if it is not our logical, we can get into someone else’s world and find some logic in it).
- Consistency

Absurdist Theatre
- no norm for common understanding
- no connection between the characters and readers
- devoid of all sense of relation (no way to tell where you specifically- all landmarks are gone)
- nothing fully established, and characters do not have consistent personalities.
- Unreliable
- No sense of time, sense, or memory
o No narrative history
o Cant look back definitely and see what was known before.
o Without a memory, no identity.
- Protagonists find themselves in a world which they don’t understand. Audience can only relate to this lack of understanding
- Absence of factors allowing for meaning (Who am I? What am I doing here? )
- Identity becomes unclear
- Attempts by characters to deal with the world are futile

Absurdism idea
- you may want meaning in your life, but you are incapable and completely incapable of finding it.
- We must still look for meaning because if compels to find something of meaning

Hero in Absurdism -
· lacks confidence to change the world themselves
· lacks purpose, sense, or direction
· looks for others for meaning (looking for reassurance that life will be okay) , but this won’t happen
· temptation to become whatever everyone else is (e.g. Rhino’s destroy everything. Humans have a temptation to do this too, in their ID. If everyone else is doing it, why shouldn’t I?)

Focus of Absurdism
· How characters try to cope
· Wait for someone to tell them what to do, and this never comes
· Even if it does, meaning can never be made

Games in Absurdist Theatre
· not fun games, but something to do why they wait
· If there are no games, there would be silence. Silence leads to fear of the unknown
· Not genuine humor
· Laughs are an attempt to find meaning (?)
· Laughing because of our condition because we cannot solve problems (in absurdist theatre)
· No way to win game

Random notes about absurdist ideas
· absurdism focuses on the exaggeration of our own lives
· absurdism looks at any imposing order as laughable
· forces people to try to find true sense since right now we don’t have real meaning in our lives
· absurdist’s believe there is no way to find ultimate answer , but we may be able to glimpse into it
· universe is a big joke which we take too seriously
· Nothing in life really ends like a fairy tale
· We live our lives day by day waiting and looking for what it all means, and may/wont ever really find it
· Idea of being last one against the tide (Berenger) scares us
· Eventually, we will all be forced under

Nazi Parallelism
· Botard at first believes so strongly and then says we want to “change with times”
· Manipulation begins at one person, then small group, then many people do
· Collective phycosis - if you do things you don’t want to do normally, but everyone else is doing it, it becomes part of your values and system
· No memory as to a time before this
· Collective conscience occurred b/c people afraid to go against the tide
o We hate being alone
o Surround ourselves in identity as one of a group
· find a powerful person and latch on
o someone else will take care of us/the meaning of life
o we create artificial packs (like animals)
· Totalitarian governments don’t tolerate differences
o Every rhino (minus horns) looks exactly the same
o Will one-horn two-horn eventually be the main problem? People are so alike that this small of a difference makes them fight?

Marxism Ideas
· Everyone becomes a rhino (everyone equal). Iunesko doesn’t like this because it lowers people to become equally brutish and unintelligent.
· Yielding of power kept everyone else in line
· Toppling of power (rhino’s topple people) so that isn’t support of Marxism (authority should always have power)
· Marxists would agree that its inevitable that everyone become a rhino. Capitalists (Berenger) resist this change
· E.g.
o Daisy says love is her weakness. This is a Marxist belief. She changes into a rhino showing that the needs of the group are greater than that of the individual
o Jean says he never dreams. Shows control of all thought (Marxist) while Berenger doesn’t have this regiment in his head.

What is the point?
· Writer puts down his anger and frustration in people’s willingness to go along with fascism and allowing themselves to be brought under heal
· We don’t necessarily need WWII reference to agree with this.

Beowulf Midterm Review

Hi everyone,
Here are my notes for the Midterm Review. They aren't particularly well formatted. I just put down everything I had in my notes, figuring everything was important. If anyone has questions, go ahead and ask. Can everyone else put their notes up soon? I'll post my other notes later... these took me a while to type up.

BEOWULF NOTES

Theme: All things must come to an end
- rise and fall of the Danish nation
- nothing lasts forever (Heorat hall)
- great kings must die and be replaced by their sons
- greatness waxes and wanes

Other Ideas/Topics

Can’t be as good as God
- Horthgar believes that Denmark cannot be defeated, and then Grendal comes
- Beowulf believes he cannot be defeated, and then the dragon comes

Pride – Good or Bad?
- belief that you are better than god (bad)
- without certain belief in self, you won’t be able to be good/strong (good)
- Beowulf goes to Denmark with pride and talks about his accomplishments to sell himself (good)
- No humility in life or death (I don’t know what that refers to)

Family Lineage
- very important
- Danish king knew Beowulf’s father (gets to meet Hrothgar because he knew Beowulf’s dad)
- Grendal is an outcast because he is a descendent of Cain

Structure

Stories within Stories
- “popcorn” stories
- not essential points but because the story was told out loud, became part of story
e.g. Finns
* story told during a party
* not specifically about linear story but shows the value of the culture
- We like things beginning to end (linear)
- Unlimited number of directions these popcorn
- we only know one way

Origin of Beowulf
- at first there was no written language.
- Although this is the first version of Beowulf which is found, it was probably not the first written. This version is a combination of many other versions
- between 5th and 10th century, many versions were created
- sometimes story doesn’t match up (e.g. elders let him go at the beginning of story, but at the end, say they hadn’t believes in him) because this is a combination of many stories put together.

Other topics of discussion

Feminine Critique - Wealtherow has social power (tells her husband not to make Beowulf king)
- Men have physical power, women have social power
- Women must keep homes safe so that men have something real (other than fighting) to come back to. Home represents safety and civilization. Home represents what men are fighting to keep
- Grendal’s mother is like Eve -> she brings evil
- Women must be properly conditioned for their job, usually by their husbands. Otherwise, may become like Grendal’s mummy.
- Equality?
o Do we see Wealtheow and Hrothgar having an equal/fair relationship?

Pagan vs. Christian Ideas
- Poet was a Christian
- Beowulf originally a pagan
- Anglo-Saxon welcomed Christianity (bring new gods alongside pagan ones!) and paganism eventually faded out
- both Christianity and Paganism in stories (although slight condemnation of pagan ideas)
- monster real for Anglo-Saxton (refers to everything they don’t understand about the external world)
- Old Testament references (God will smite, not forgive)
- Bible still being written (no mass production/ printing press) so no one could really have had the Bible (only Old Testament)
- Swords are crosses upside down (fighting for Christ)
- Crucial element in Beowulf is faith

Faith
- sword fails when fighting dragon and Grendal’s mother
- Beowulf finds a sword in Grendal’s mother’s cave to kill her
- Hrothgar losses faith in Beowulf
o Greats stay because if Beowulf stays alive, they celebrate. If he dead, they have to avenge him
o Greats have faith in Beowulf during Grendal’s mom’s fight
o Beowulf returns to Hrothgar with Grendal’s mom’s head and the hilt of the metal sword. He shows Hrothgar that the evil is gone, and gives him back his faith (represented in the sword).
- During dragon scene, they run away. Most of them refuse to go into the cave (they don’t have faith). This leads to the downfall of the Greats (like the Danes)
- Death of Beowulf shows that faith must be accompanied by practicality. Beowulf is stupid for trying to kill the dragon by himself. God helps those who helps themselves, so he should have gotten some men/help.
- Wyrd shows that we should belief in faith, but that we have the power to change some things.

Monstrosity in Women
- Grendal’s mom is everythying a women shouldn’t be
- Peace wavers (women) failed (everyone knew they would), but they didn’t use violence because they knew it was wrong/ unwomanly

Integrity
- Beowulf attacks Grendal on an equal foot (no weapons)

Grendal
- Opposite of all that is good
- Opposite of the perfect warrior (Beowulf)
- Attacks only at night
- When Beowulf grabs hold of him, he runs. He doesn’t fight.

Grendal’s Mum
- methodology opposite of other methods
- kills rather than uses peace to protect her son
- still a mother, though, protecting her son like Weatherow would.

Forgiveness
- Not part of Beowulf’s culture
- Do we really forgive now? Or do we just feel that a higher power will take care and serve justice for us?

Random Other points
· everything set up so world is trying to keep peace/ people living well
· Beowulf shows us that eventually everything must fall. At the end of the story, new leader says the Swedes will try to attack them.

Fruedian Method
My notes on this section are too messy to put up on the blog. If someone else would, that would really help.

Why does Beowulf still captivate us?
- entertainment value
- struggle between good and bad is still appreciated
- lessons still learned (moral value)
o relationships between faith and living (faith is important)
o you have to believe (sanctuary in the good and having faith)
o loyalty and family loyalty and revenge still important
§ blood vengeance still seen in sports
§ 9/11 used to avenge by going into Iraq
§ World Wars due to revenge
§ When law fails, we take things into our own hand and hand out punishments-vigilanty justice (I don’t know why this is important)
o Good masculine hero

Example of Quote Analysis

Pg 19 Line 260 (Identification moment between guard and Beowulf)
- Beowulf’s father carries weight because of family lineage
- Hygelac carries weight of Geats
- Beowulf doesn’t use his name because Coast Guard is a no one, reinforces that Coast Guard doesn’t have a right to know his name (reinforces ranks)
- Proof of honorable intent
- At the end of story, Beowulf gives him his sword. Shows Beowulf’s leadership qualities. Beowulf treats the Coast Guard well. The Coast guard has been faithful, honorable, and taken care of Beowulf’s ships.

Wittenberg

I'm not sure how much interest there is in going to see Wittenberg, but I thought I'd post the information here so we can decide and plan accordingly.

Arden Theatre Company
40 N. 2nd St., Philadelphia
215.922.1122

Synopsis:
"Set during late October of 1517, this smart, sprightly and audacious battle of wits features university colleagues Dr. Faustus (a man of appetites), Martin Luther (a man of faith), and their student Hamlet, Prince of Denmark (a youth struggling not only with his beliefs but also with his tennis game). Playwright David Davalos brings us the story behind the stories in a highly entertaining and accessible exploration of reason versus faith, starring Scott Greer as Faustus and Greg Wood as Luther." (http://www.ardentheatre.org/2008/wittenberg.html)

It is playing from January 17 - March 16, 2008. The pricing is a little steeper, but they do have some student and teen discounts. The cheapest shows are Sunday night at 7 pm, Tuesday night at 7 pm, Wednesday night at 6:30 pm, Thursday night at 8 pm, or Saturday afternoon at 2 pm. These shows usually cost $29 per person, but the student rate (valid student ID) is $27, and the teen rate (17 and under) is $18. (Could we just order the tickets online and all say that we are teens? Is that immoral?)

I know this is planning pretty far in advance since we probably won't be able to go until after midterms (end of Jan/beggining of Feb), but I just thought of it and figured it'd be good to have all of the info in one place.

Hamlet: A Question

So I don't really have much to say on Hamlet yet but I thought I would start some discussion (which I seriously doubt anyone will respond to tonight, but that's besides the point).

One thing that I really didn't get and that has been really bothering me is Act 2 Scene 1. At first I thought that the significance of this scene would manifest itself later, but once I finished the play, I realized Shakespeare never really developed the main plot line in this scene. Thus, why did Polonius ask his manservant, Reynaldo to go to France in order to spy on his son Laertes? And why did he ask Reynaldo to tell subtle untruths about Laertes in order to discredit the latter slightly? Maybe I just didn't read the play closely enough, but I just don't get the importance of, or even the need for, this scene. If someone could shed some light, that would be excellent!

Thanks.

Poetry Slam

I thought I would post some of the important info. on here so we can have a place to discuss and finalize the details.

Date: Monday, January 21 (MLK Day)
Time: 7 pm - 9 pm
Place: First Presbyterian Church's Fellowship Hall
Ticket Price: $5? (we should decide this together/ask Laz what it has been in years past)

The FPC is reserved for us from 6 pm - 9:30 pm, giving us ample time to set up/clean up.
Anisha made a flyer when she made the sign-up binder (which is in Laz's room), so we can probably just mass produce those and stick them up around the school. We should also decide who is going to talk to which English teachers. We also need to make a flyer to put up in businesses on Main Street, and then actually put them up.

Liz- you went and talked to SUDS before break, but maybe we should update them? How exactly do they want to be involved?

Albert is talking to Acme, and Anisha- you're talking to Starbucks, right?

Did you guys have a chance to check out the charity I mentioned? If you didn't, the website is http://www.herocampaign.org. Please check it out tonight. I want to e-mail the directors and see if we can get a representative from the charity to come to the event, but I don't want to do that until we're sure it's the charity we want to do. Let me know! :)

Fun Game! And by that I mean not.

Hi guys,
I woke up this morning with a brilliant (not) idea. Can we analyze one piece of poetry together before the quiz tomorrow? Basically, can we practice and see the different ways each of us analyze a piece of poetry?
If anyone thinks this is a stupid idea... sorry :( But I thought practice was always good.

I went on a Shakespearean sonnet site (http://poetry.eserver.org/sonnets/) and randomly clicked on the a link, so here's the poem I'm proposing we analyze. I'll analyze too (or maybe I'll be the only one), when I'm a little more awake.

Sonnet 153
Cupid laid by his brand and fell asleep,
A maid of Dian's this advantage found,
And his love-kindling fire did quickly steep
In a cold valley-fountain of that ground:
Which borrowed from this holy fire of Love,
A dateless lively heat still to endure,
And grew a seeting bath which yet men prove,
Against strange maladies a sovereign cure:
But at my mistress' eye Love's brand new-fired,
The boy for trial needs would touch my breast,
I sick withal the help of bath desired,
And thither hied a sad distempered guest.
But found no cure, the bath for my help lies,
Where Cupid got new fire; my mistress' eyes.

Midterm Exams

Hi guys,
I know Theresa brought this up earlier, but I think most of us were too caught up in college apps to really think about midterms. At least, I was. Anyway, I'm kind of getting nervous about this midterm, and wanted to know if we could divide up the work and make some review sheets.
I'm not sure if we need to review every book and such, or we should just focus on certain parts (like the questions from the Sir Gawain sheet). Either way, the things we've read so far are:

King Lear
Beowulf
Sir Gawain and the Green Knight
Sonnets

I think I have the whole list, although I might be wrong. But if anyone has any suggestions as to how to break this down, I'm very interested. Plus, I beleive two or three of you had Laz before, so you'd have a good idea of what we should be studying. Any thoughts?