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!