Why in the world are we still in October? Its really May, right? 'Cause, I'm done. School? Eh, whatever. Work? Get your own stinking ice cream people(I work at an ice cream shop...joy)! Of course, I'm kidding. There's no place I'd rather be than at school and my place of work. Every day.
But, the focus right now is really about literature. Poetry. Yeah! So, I'm thinking we've been working on analyzing poetry for some time now. A lot, right? I mean, I'm not complaining. Noooooo. I enjoy a good stanza every now and then. I especially loved our reading of "Promises Like Pie Crust" by Christina Rossetti. The message folks, PROMISES suck.Don't ever ever promise anyone anything. They'll have thoughts about you...evil thoughts.Ha! Okay, that was highly intelligent of me, but no, promises are empty and they are meant to be broken. Pie crust- for those of you who have failed to notice-crumbles on your plate on purpose, just to piss you off...at least thats how the pie crust explained it to me. Ummm... what?
Well, analyzing poetry has been a new experience for me. I know, what have my teachers been teaching me? At least I have Ms.Holmes now. In the past I've read a poem and thought, Gosh, where's the nearest bar of chocolate? I guess that would be my own fault, reading depression inducing poems, that is. But, what I'm trying to say is that I noticed rhyme, alliteration, imagery, and many other techniques(DIDLS), yet I failed to isolate each one from the other. I guess, err, I know then that I would be able to analyze how one particular technique worked to add meaning before considering how they all function to establish whatever message found within the poem. Although it is not wrong to think of a poem on a more emotional one-sided level, it is also better to derive an understanding of how each line or word works to create the effects that I'm seeing. I'm slightly peeved I'm now acknowledging this because I write poetry of my own. I know what I want my readers to feel. I know where I want to kill them with a line or lead them to question a word. I'm the author using techniques for a reason.
In between our analysis of poetry we watched a MOVIE. Thank God! I needed the break, sorry Holmes. But, I still enjoyed Death of A Salesman. After all it is our second reading after The American Dream and so, still educational. Annotating it was a....yeah, and the characters stand on their own. Each one has a little hate department in my brain. Willy, man, carpe diem, not for you. I feel for you only because no one liked you and you tried and never gained. Linda, backbone girl. I hate how you let Willy treat you. You should have walked away ages ago. Biff. Biff. Oh, Biff. I'm sorry your dad blew you up with compliments. Why did you have to give up though? The world was not meant to hand you favors.It's all you, pal. Happy, your unwillingness to sympathize and save your dad, ugh, annoying. And you treat girls like crap. Therefore you are a crappy character( although you do add humor to the play).
Cruel, yes. Tragic, in a sense. I appreciate Miller's evaluation of the lower class's struggle to climb the social pyramid, but honestly, my mood darkens whenever I think about this play. I know that dreams, like promises, fall through. What does that make the world, a terrible place to be? How is it that some people are able to succeed and others are not? Willy, as evidence indicates in the play, tries real hard. He works himself to a death that he thinks will benefit all. Although I don't agree with his cowardliness and selfish end, I pity his fall. Could he have tried harder? Maybe. But then we wouldn't question his choices. Despite my opinions, I feel led to defend him because of Richard J. Foster's bias opinion that Willy is: "a childish and stupid human being..." Alright, sir, calm down. Willy is overworked. He is tired. He does not finish with a job until the job is finished. Yeah, that makes him stupid and childish. You try being a salesperson, Foster. Tell me how you feel then. I for one, hang up when they call my house. They're relentless. Props for Willy. I without regret, would have said, "See ya!" and fled to Alaska. The man who stays is what? Lazy? Stupid? No.Crazy. But, also worth sympathizing for.Ah, what am I saying?
Wouldn't be surprised if I started to like Willy in the next couple of days.I'll start to rally for all he represents by making t-shirts and posters. Yelling until I'm hoarse. The common man. My peers will most likely say some profound thing that will cause me to change sides,also. Then again, maybe not. I'll ride along and see. Until next time...
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Sunday, October 20, 2013
Prompt On The Mind
AP English Literature 2004 Responses
Question 3
Sample 1:
From the first sentence this student had me. Captured. From there the writer introduced his/her thesis statement analyzing Candide and the significance of the young Candide on his quest to answer the question "Is this the best of all possible worlds?" He/she accomplishes the task of providing details and a sense of the plot for those readers who are unaware of the literary work. This writer includes questions to consider, "Why would God create a world that is not the best possible?" and then works to support the question with an answer through the actions that the character Candide pursues as he tries to determine if such a perfect world exists. Organization and transitions flow smoothly through this well written essay as the writer progresses through Candide's journey to El Dorado and later to his love Lady Conagal, noting expertly the changes Candide undergoes in both situations. The first body paragraph consists in summary form followed by a second well thought out analysis of the question. The writer seems to have grasped the meaning of the question and argues Candide's final answer to the question "we must tend our garden" with his/her own interpretation(of Candide's response) that those who want the best possible world must strive/work together to achieve the ultimate Utopia.
Sample 2:
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and the question "What does it mean to be free?" Yes, what does it mean? Enlighten me...or try to. I'm not even sure this student knows for sure if there is an exact answer.You would think the definition would be as simple as freedom: having no chains/restrictions(voices, laws, nature, etc) holding you back. You are free to be. But, there has to be a limit, life is so cliche in its saying that life is not fair, that I am not surprised that this student concluded that freedom is freeing and limiting in his/her argument. In this essay, the student writer analyzes Mark Twain's consideration of this question in light of how slavery and civilization affect Huck and Jim. He/she compares the two characters and remarks on how they are similarly restricted in some way, by the color of one's skin(Jim) and relationship with a parental figure(Huck). Together they break down barriers and establish a bond that goes beyond what society would dictate and are free in their relationship together. The writer unfortunately tells this, and is not very specific/detailed in providing support. Also, noted when the writer later indicates that in society Huck and Finn must remain apart because of their skin differences even after their masters die(Jim's owner, Huck's dad). In ending in this way, the writer weakly concludes that freedom is limiting. How do we make it so it is not limiting? Is there no hope?
Sample 3:
A short essay indeed. This student attempts to analyze the question "Does anything ever stay the same?" in Chineau Achebe's Thing's Fall Apart but he/she leaves an unsupported and unorganized/unfinished essay arguing the role of the character Okonkwo in his determination to maintain order within his village.The introductory paragraph is messy and quite confusing with all the ideas within it battling for center stage. The first and only body paragraph focuses on how certain events work to bring the story to a resolution. I get the sense that the paragraph is arguing that ideas and society will change over time no matter how one attempts to prevent the change. Cultures will change and traditions will evolve. But, I shouldn't need to get the sense of that. I would have preferred to have seen evidence to back this student's analysis of the question "Does anything ever stay the same?" The question alone is able to be answered in my mind with one word .Yes. This student's essay failed to be profound. No insight at all. Overall, it is a very vague and sad attempt. I don't even want to say it's an attempt.
Question 3
Sample 1:
From the first sentence this student had me. Captured. From there the writer introduced his/her thesis statement analyzing Candide and the significance of the young Candide on his quest to answer the question "Is this the best of all possible worlds?" He/she accomplishes the task of providing details and a sense of the plot for those readers who are unaware of the literary work. This writer includes questions to consider, "Why would God create a world that is not the best possible?" and then works to support the question with an answer through the actions that the character Candide pursues as he tries to determine if such a perfect world exists. Organization and transitions flow smoothly through this well written essay as the writer progresses through Candide's journey to El Dorado and later to his love Lady Conagal, noting expertly the changes Candide undergoes in both situations. The first body paragraph consists in summary form followed by a second well thought out analysis of the question. The writer seems to have grasped the meaning of the question and argues Candide's final answer to the question "we must tend our garden" with his/her own interpretation(of Candide's response) that those who want the best possible world must strive/work together to achieve the ultimate Utopia.
Sample 2:
The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and the question "What does it mean to be free?" Yes, what does it mean? Enlighten me...or try to. I'm not even sure this student knows for sure if there is an exact answer.You would think the definition would be as simple as freedom: having no chains/restrictions(voices, laws, nature, etc) holding you back. You are free to be. But, there has to be a limit, life is so cliche in its saying that life is not fair, that I am not surprised that this student concluded that freedom is freeing and limiting in his/her argument. In this essay, the student writer analyzes Mark Twain's consideration of this question in light of how slavery and civilization affect Huck and Jim. He/she compares the two characters and remarks on how they are similarly restricted in some way, by the color of one's skin(Jim) and relationship with a parental figure(Huck). Together they break down barriers and establish a bond that goes beyond what society would dictate and are free in their relationship together. The writer unfortunately tells this, and is not very specific/detailed in providing support. Also, noted when the writer later indicates that in society Huck and Finn must remain apart because of their skin differences even after their masters die(Jim's owner, Huck's dad). In ending in this way, the writer weakly concludes that freedom is limiting. How do we make it so it is not limiting? Is there no hope?
Sample 3:
A short essay indeed. This student attempts to analyze the question "Does anything ever stay the same?" in Chineau Achebe's Thing's Fall Apart but he/she leaves an unsupported and unorganized/unfinished essay arguing the role of the character Okonkwo in his determination to maintain order within his village.The introductory paragraph is messy and quite confusing with all the ideas within it battling for center stage. The first and only body paragraph focuses on how certain events work to bring the story to a resolution. I get the sense that the paragraph is arguing that ideas and society will change over time no matter how one attempts to prevent the change. Cultures will change and traditions will evolve. But, I shouldn't need to get the sense of that. I would have preferred to have seen evidence to back this student's analysis of the question "Does anything ever stay the same?" The question alone is able to be answered in my mind with one word .Yes. This student's essay failed to be profound. No insight at all. Overall, it is a very vague and sad attempt. I don't even want to say it's an attempt.
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
A play, A dream-The American Dream Summary Analysis
The American Dream
Written in 1960 by playwright Edward Albee. In this work and numerous others, Albee considers human ideals,socially and morally.He is well known for his works The Zoo Story, Three Tall Women, A Delicate Balance and The Sandbox, to name a few.
In this short play the setting remains relatively plain. The focus centers more on the conversation between the family members and their associates. There is a living room containing two chairs. Again, no detail is provided to emphasize the detail on these chairs. Other than the fact that they are facing each other...Beyond these chairs there resides a sofa, a door leading out of the apartment, and an archway allowing access to other rooms in the apartment( Albee 57).
Characters:
Mommy
Daddy
Grandma
Mrs. Barker
Young Man
The first page starts off with Mommy going on and on to Daddy about a "beige" hat that she bought. From there Grandma enters the scene with boxes. Mommy insults her to her face, how old she is "pioneer stock" and later complains about her to Daddy. Daddy, however, cares more for Grandma. Grandma exits, and Mommy and Daddy talk about how Mommy used to be poor and how she would give leave the food Grandma had packed for her in her lunch box for Grandma to eat later. This allowed Mommy to take the food from her classmates. Following this conversation, Mommy and Daddy have a sexual moment that fails terribly. No satisfaction occurs as Grandma interrupts. Mrs.Barker soon enter the scene after this. She doesn't know why she is at the apartment. The adults chatter and Grandma acts mysterious. Mommy threatens to have the Van Man take her away. Later Mommy and Daddy are gone from the living room, trying to find their way around the house. Grandma laughs about this. Grandma and Mrs.Barker are left alone to talk about the issues with the first bumble and they form a connection. The doorbell rings after some time and Grandma opens it to find the Young Man. She names him the American Dream. They converse about his life, how he is physically perfect but internally numb to emotion. Grandma plans in her head and with the help of Mrs. Barker, she is able to leave, as Mrs. Barker introduces Mommy and Daddy to their new bumble. Satisfaction achieved but not. They are unsatisfied with the wine. And Grandma ends with us. What will we choose?
Character dynamics- All names are simple. Allows for ambiguity. Mommy is authoritative and married Daddy for his money. Daddy appears meek and confused about his sexuality and allows Mommy to dominate him. She is more masculine while he is more feminine. Also, evident in Daddy's recent operation. Now emasculated. Grandma is wise, being the Old American Dream. Consider her as "pioneer stock". Only character that is able to interact with the audience. She leaves the materialistic environment as she "passes the torch" to the new dream, the Young Man. Fits ideal of perfection.Beauty. Physical god-like quality. He'll do anything. Mrs.Barker is part of many women's clubs and represents the Bye Bye Adoption Agency. She provided Mommy and Daddy with their first bundle. She has come to give them a new one, turns out Grandma helps Mrs.Barker accomplish this with the Young Man.
Point of view is told through each character by their words. Imagery is minor, thus the reason for why dialogue dominates the play. It is a play. Minimal directions are provided for the characters. Other than the imagery of the mutilation of the first bumble by the hands of Mommy and Daddy. You can imagine the cutting off of body parts,but in no way do the five senses work hard in this play. Diction is the dominating technique. Somewhere between colloquial and informal. Conversation is common/everyday like, but occasionally slang is used. Concerning the tone, feels foolish, perhaps even light.I get no sense of darkness from the dialogue because the characters interact in such a humorous, mainly ridiculous way. This foolish/childish tone allows Albee to poke fun of the American Dream of achieving satisfaction through materialistic ways and he plays with it well as he allows his characters to interact with one another. Even when the tone is harsh(instigator=Mommy), the tone doesn't stray far from humorous.
Symbolism is present in Grandma representing the Old American Dream. She embodies old values that center around the family and hard work. The Young Man symbolizes the new American Dream of perfection. The idea is to buy and to seek satisfaction in the ways of material belongings. Another symbol is the destruction of traditional family values in the death of Mommy and Daddy's first nameless bumble. The twin of the new American Dream. Instead of loving their child and forming a relationship with him, they determine together that he is not enough. They do not love him enough. He is not the perfection that they were seeking. So, materialistically they got rid of the object that they bought after it lost its appeal, without any remorse..
Quotes
Mommy says, "Well, I got satisfaction"(Albee 61). Satisfaction is always at work. The characters in this play always seem to be wanting it. Everything must satisfy. If it doesn't, then go out and buy something that does. The American Dream is not about togetherness. There is individualism in this sentence as Mommy considers what she alone got. Nothing else matters, except her satisfaction.
Grandma says, "My sacks are empty, the fluid in my eyeballs is all caked on the inside edges, my spine is made of sugar candy"(Albee 82).The Old American Dream is dying. What used to be valuable has now ceased to be so. Ideas/ideals have changed and these new conditions dominate the old ones. The Old American Dream has to pass on to make way for the next age of materialistic ideals.
Theme
Displaying the criticism of American morals, Edward Albee's The American Dream generates a concern for how the current American generation lacks regard for the old American values by fabricating new values to replace the old ones , thus allowing for a materialistic individual, who, as a result, is fixated on acquiring unattainable satisfaction, but this does not mean that change is inevitable..
Through the work's title, The American Dream the basis for the entire play and theme is set. The definition of the American Dream is, in my opinion, the worldly focus everyone establishes as they follow the explicit rules of their time(necessary for satisfaction). By titling his play as so, Albee accentuates the desire of the people and his disfavor toward it. To follow the American Dream. It is not a dream set by one person, but by a large body. By inferring from the title, I believe that to follow the American Dream, one has to follow the crowd.Buy what everyone else is buying If you don't, where's the satisfaction? It can be exhausting, and materialism does not complete an individual. Grandma indicates materialism when she says to Mrs. Barker, "You weren't here, exactly, because we've moved around a lot, from one apartment to another, up and down the social ladder like mice..."(Albee 95).
The plot(along with symbolism) does not merely dabble with old American values vs. the new American values. The play is centered around the theme. Old American values are dying away as Grandma leaves, and the characters, for example, Mommy has no respect for Grandma's views. Mommy always judges her and tears her down for her views.Daddy does at times too. The characters complain about not getting satisfaction all the time and especially for Mommy, she never stops looking for satisfaction. In her masculine position in the house. In her beige hat. In the type of bumble she has. She buys for satisfaction. "I can always go shopping," she says(Albee 62). She owns objects for satisfaction. With the new American Dream symbolizing society's new set of values, Mommy welcomes him gladly because he is what she wants.They fit perfectly. And therefore, the American Dream fits with Daddy too, because he submissively obeys Mommy.While the old American Dream promotes hard work, the new set of values reject this "ridiculous" ideal. The new values aren't willing to work. They would rather have it all right in front of them for quick satisfaction.And it continues. Buy. Satisfaction. Buy. Satisfaction. They bought their own child for satisfaction. And by destroying the first twin, they removed themselves from the old traditional values of family. Connection. Mommy and Daddy wanted a little bumble of their own. He wasn't good enough. Wait. Buy again. New American Dream.
Grandma turns to the audience in the end of the play indicating that she isn't leaving. She's on the edges peering in occasionally, but she is not gone. We, the next generation, have the power to choose. Despite the early generation of Mommy and Daddy creating a selfish America, their decisions do not make us.We can work hard. We can decide what comes next.
Written in 1960 by playwright Edward Albee. In this work and numerous others, Albee considers human ideals,socially and morally.He is well known for his works The Zoo Story, Three Tall Women, A Delicate Balance and The Sandbox, to name a few.
In this short play the setting remains relatively plain. The focus centers more on the conversation between the family members and their associates. There is a living room containing two chairs. Again, no detail is provided to emphasize the detail on these chairs. Other than the fact that they are facing each other...Beyond these chairs there resides a sofa, a door leading out of the apartment, and an archway allowing access to other rooms in the apartment( Albee 57).
Characters:
Mommy
Daddy
Grandma
Mrs. Barker
Young Man
The first page starts off with Mommy going on and on to Daddy about a "beige" hat that she bought. From there Grandma enters the scene with boxes. Mommy insults her to her face, how old she is "pioneer stock" and later complains about her to Daddy. Daddy, however, cares more for Grandma. Grandma exits, and Mommy and Daddy talk about how Mommy used to be poor and how she would give leave the food Grandma had packed for her in her lunch box for Grandma to eat later. This allowed Mommy to take the food from her classmates. Following this conversation, Mommy and Daddy have a sexual moment that fails terribly. No satisfaction occurs as Grandma interrupts. Mrs.Barker soon enter the scene after this. She doesn't know why she is at the apartment. The adults chatter and Grandma acts mysterious. Mommy threatens to have the Van Man take her away. Later Mommy and Daddy are gone from the living room, trying to find their way around the house. Grandma laughs about this. Grandma and Mrs.Barker are left alone to talk about the issues with the first bumble and they form a connection. The doorbell rings after some time and Grandma opens it to find the Young Man. She names him the American Dream. They converse about his life, how he is physically perfect but internally numb to emotion. Grandma plans in her head and with the help of Mrs. Barker, she is able to leave, as Mrs. Barker introduces Mommy and Daddy to their new bumble. Satisfaction achieved but not. They are unsatisfied with the wine. And Grandma ends with us. What will we choose?
Character dynamics- All names are simple. Allows for ambiguity. Mommy is authoritative and married Daddy for his money. Daddy appears meek and confused about his sexuality and allows Mommy to dominate him. She is more masculine while he is more feminine. Also, evident in Daddy's recent operation. Now emasculated. Grandma is wise, being the Old American Dream. Consider her as "pioneer stock". Only character that is able to interact with the audience. She leaves the materialistic environment as she "passes the torch" to the new dream, the Young Man. Fits ideal of perfection.Beauty. Physical god-like quality. He'll do anything. Mrs.Barker is part of many women's clubs and represents the Bye Bye Adoption Agency. She provided Mommy and Daddy with their first bundle. She has come to give them a new one, turns out Grandma helps Mrs.Barker accomplish this with the Young Man.
Point of view is told through each character by their words. Imagery is minor, thus the reason for why dialogue dominates the play. It is a play. Minimal directions are provided for the characters. Other than the imagery of the mutilation of the first bumble by the hands of Mommy and Daddy. You can imagine the cutting off of body parts,but in no way do the five senses work hard in this play. Diction is the dominating technique. Somewhere between colloquial and informal. Conversation is common/everyday like, but occasionally slang is used. Concerning the tone, feels foolish, perhaps even light.I get no sense of darkness from the dialogue because the characters interact in such a humorous, mainly ridiculous way. This foolish/childish tone allows Albee to poke fun of the American Dream of achieving satisfaction through materialistic ways and he plays with it well as he allows his characters to interact with one another. Even when the tone is harsh(instigator=Mommy), the tone doesn't stray far from humorous.
Symbolism is present in Grandma representing the Old American Dream. She embodies old values that center around the family and hard work. The Young Man symbolizes the new American Dream of perfection. The idea is to buy and to seek satisfaction in the ways of material belongings. Another symbol is the destruction of traditional family values in the death of Mommy and Daddy's first nameless bumble. The twin of the new American Dream. Instead of loving their child and forming a relationship with him, they determine together that he is not enough. They do not love him enough. He is not the perfection that they were seeking. So, materialistically they got rid of the object that they bought after it lost its appeal, without any remorse..
Quotes
Mommy says, "Well, I got satisfaction"(Albee 61). Satisfaction is always at work. The characters in this play always seem to be wanting it. Everything must satisfy. If it doesn't, then go out and buy something that does. The American Dream is not about togetherness. There is individualism in this sentence as Mommy considers what she alone got. Nothing else matters, except her satisfaction.
Grandma says, "My sacks are empty, the fluid in my eyeballs is all caked on the inside edges, my spine is made of sugar candy"(Albee 82).The Old American Dream is dying. What used to be valuable has now ceased to be so. Ideas/ideals have changed and these new conditions dominate the old ones. The Old American Dream has to pass on to make way for the next age of materialistic ideals.
Theme
Displaying the criticism of American morals, Edward Albee's The American Dream generates a concern for how the current American generation lacks regard for the old American values by fabricating new values to replace the old ones , thus allowing for a materialistic individual, who, as a result, is fixated on acquiring unattainable satisfaction, but this does not mean that change is inevitable..
Through the work's title, The American Dream the basis for the entire play and theme is set. The definition of the American Dream is, in my opinion, the worldly focus everyone establishes as they follow the explicit rules of their time(necessary for satisfaction). By titling his play as so, Albee accentuates the desire of the people and his disfavor toward it. To follow the American Dream. It is not a dream set by one person, but by a large body. By inferring from the title, I believe that to follow the American Dream, one has to follow the crowd.Buy what everyone else is buying If you don't, where's the satisfaction? It can be exhausting, and materialism does not complete an individual. Grandma indicates materialism when she says to Mrs. Barker, "You weren't here, exactly, because we've moved around a lot, from one apartment to another, up and down the social ladder like mice..."(Albee 95).
The plot(along with symbolism) does not merely dabble with old American values vs. the new American values. The play is centered around the theme. Old American values are dying away as Grandma leaves, and the characters, for example, Mommy has no respect for Grandma's views. Mommy always judges her and tears her down for her views.Daddy does at times too. The characters complain about not getting satisfaction all the time and especially for Mommy, she never stops looking for satisfaction. In her masculine position in the house. In her beige hat. In the type of bumble she has. She buys for satisfaction. "I can always go shopping," she says(Albee 62). She owns objects for satisfaction. With the new American Dream symbolizing society's new set of values, Mommy welcomes him gladly because he is what she wants.They fit perfectly. And therefore, the American Dream fits with Daddy too, because he submissively obeys Mommy.While the old American Dream promotes hard work, the new set of values reject this "ridiculous" ideal. The new values aren't willing to work. They would rather have it all right in front of them for quick satisfaction.And it continues. Buy. Satisfaction. Buy. Satisfaction. They bought their own child for satisfaction. And by destroying the first twin, they removed themselves from the old traditional values of family. Connection. Mommy and Daddy wanted a little bumble of their own. He wasn't good enough. Wait. Buy again. New American Dream.
Grandma turns to the audience in the end of the play indicating that she isn't leaving. She's on the edges peering in occasionally, but she is not gone. We, the next generation, have the power to choose. Despite the early generation of Mommy and Daddy creating a selfish America, their decisions do not make us.We can work hard. We can decide what comes next.
Sunday, October 13, 2013
"Review-The Fault in Our Stars by John Green" Close Reading
Link*
The tears fell.The sadness chilled my blood and I sat in my own orbit of misery and momentary pain. The last word was read and I knew I had to close the book for the last time before I impulsively decided to burn it for it's achievement in sending me to silly tears.Cancer sucks. But, was I reacting to the characters or the dooming reality of cancer taking me out too? I honestly never thought to question the quality of this book. I read it. It made me cry. Therefore, in my mind, it must be a great book. Wrong. I'm probably just another cry baby, and yet, I can't say that I'm ashamed of this fact though, because it was through Steph Sinclair's humorous, yet honest review of John Green's The Fault in Our Stars where she shares her opinions through the use of diction, language, and syntax, that allowed me, the now not so firm believer in cry first-save analysis for waaaay later girl- to consider past my initial emotions.
I found that through the colloquial like use of diction,Sinclair writes conversationally for her readers to create a casual display to support her review of Green's book. She does not overly attack her readers with a wordy vocabulary. She addresses herself in such a relaxed way that you feel as if she is right there with you, at a coffee shop, getting to know one another. And to support this breezy everyday like word choice, she comforts her writing with words like;grim, impending, subtly, convenient,utter, conflicted, morbid, and jar etc, to highlight her personal disfavor and favor of Green's novel. This method of hers leads me, as the reader, to feel comfortable, safe. I want to know what else she thinks about The Fault In Our Stars, which then allows me to reconsider my own opinions for how well the book worked to establish it's main characters Hazel and Augustus.
Sinclair then embarks on a journey with figurative language to also impact her readers in her review. She doesn't slam John Green's work, but quietly considers the lengthy process that led her to reject reading The Fault in Our Stars to the point where she had to allow herself to face the pages. She uses figurative phrases that are familiar to help create a connecting line between her and her readers. For me, as I read through the line: "I usually tackle things head on, showing no fear, but with this book I had to approach things differently due to its subject matter," I understood her qualms about not wanting to read this popular work. I was hesitant at first too. I new that she literally didn't force her body to tackle substance less matters, and I appreciated her use of this phrase because it allowed me to relate and understand her better through her ordeal since I do the same thing...at times. And she didn't stop there. As you read on, she continues with figurative language with: "And I’m so happy someone finally pushed me to read this book because it did not disappoint." This figurative sentence highlights her removal from being unsteady in her decision to being content because she had someone there to push her to read it.
And then in her use of syntax, Sinclair plays with short sentences to create a more meaningful review, with no need for calculated interpretation. In the sentence: "The plot was simply “ok” for me, never wowing me or keeping me on the edge of my seat," the manageable sentence length allowed me to pick out her opinion of the book.The sentence is not long with phrases branching off of one another. It doesn't create anxiety when determining which details are the important ones to remember. The intent is there. That being that Sinclair wasn't astounded by the quality of depth/meaning within The Fault in Our Stars. Also present when she writes, "It was because cancer sucks." Sinclair then works with punctuation to emphasize her points through dashes and commas. For example when she writes: "But it was like he sat down and created mini-Despicable-Me-minion-like John Greens for this novel. They are all witty, super intelligent and too pretentious for their own good." This obvious disapproval of Green's characters Hazel and Augustus, allows for pauses in reading to create Sinclair's attitude against Green's characterizations. I find these sentences to be humorous as Sinclair lightly pokes fun of two characters(who I initially thought to be very real) in a way that brings about her true emotions and the cold hard facts. She wasn't able to make a connection with Hazel and Augustus, the disease-ridden teenagers. But now the question is, did I? I read The Fault in Our Stars over two years ago. Would I share the same opinions of Sinclair if I were to read it again(even though I swore to never touch it)? Will the book change in meaning/creativity? Hmm, I'm almost too afraid to find out.
Sunday, September 29, 2013
So Far There's Material
To the world I say, I joined a literature class. An AP course, of course. Yep, I'm already overwhelmed. Who knew there could be so much to writing? Not me, and I'm the one who wants to be the writer.Ha! I figured this year would be dedicated to reading the classics, you know like: The Great Gatsby, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Tom Sawyer,Pygmalion...I could go on forever and ever and well ever. And I'm sure we'll get to the classics but I sure didn't realize that I was going to become a scientist. Everything we touch and read and see becomes dissected .Words are not merely words. I was ignorant, but now I'll grudgingly admit that by diving deeper into to literary works, I'm learning to ignore the simple explanations in favor for the more detailed ones.
Remember the paintings we discussed earlier in the month? The ones with Mary and baby Jesus? For me, when my eyes first landed on both depictions of Mary and baby Jesus, I didn't get it. I saw paintings and ignored the little voice in my mind that was telling me that there was something more to them. For example, the positioning of the nobility and the clergy in regards to the positioning of Mary and baby Jesus. What? Why? I didn't think those details mattered. But, as Ms. Holmes urged us, we needed to focus on the details, then it would all make sense. Fortunately, my knowledge of history allowed me to. That day, for me, served as a future challenge. A challenge to see beyond the first viewing, to look specifically at the objects and details as one unit then secondly, as a whole.
DIDLS. Diction. Imagery. Details.Language. Syntax. The literary techniques that turn a blank page into a work plentiful with words and meaning. Oh, boy. I'm familiar with the terms but I admit, I don't usually stop to consider them. Oh yeah, this work is soooo elevated. No. More like, Where is my dictionary . Or if there's a lot of imagery I think, Darn this author for being so good. Why can't I write like that? I mean, I know they all have their own purposes but frankly, sometimes I get confused. Sometimes I start talking about diction when what I'm really discussing is imagery. I'm just not used to spending time identifying each literary technique. But what proved helpful to me were the "Discussing Diction", "Metamorphosis" , and "Syntax as Style" assignments, especially because they involved partners. When I'm working in a group, I feel that in order to do my share, I try and think harder. Suddenly, diction only became about word choice. Imagery became the senses. And syntax evolved into a whole lot of stuff that I didn't even know was considered to be a part of syntax. Well in truth, before this school year I didn't even know what syntax was.
So DIDLS is helpful. When close reading, DIDLS is your pal because instead of commenting on what you think the work means, you can now comment on how DIDLS adds meaning to the work and for you as the reader. By dissecting each paragraph,or maybe even one word/phrase, your knowledge of the story expands because you are able to make connections on how the literary techniques fail or succeed in bringing the work to life. When we read the passages from Hemingway, Morrison, and Hawthorne, I was a bit confused. We were provided with very brief passages from each author and we were expected to use our knowledge of DIDLS to figure out their meanings. A lot of thoughts were going around in mind and I kind of wanted to throw a fit because I didn't think we were intelligent enough to figure it out. But we did. The passages were considerably different. One was more elevated. Another colloquial. One had a party with imagery. One worked to be vague. And from there we gathered up all the information and interpreted the passages( with a little help from Ms. Holmes). It was like the exhausted mountain climber straining and reaching for the ledge that takes him to the top of the mountain.Sigh. A success. Maybe, I'm exaggerating, I am, but we worked together and to be simple, it was cool.
The American Dream. A comedic farce( I think thats what we determined it was). full of coincidences. The first day my hands held that book and I listened to the dialogue through the voice of my classmates, I thought with a very uneducated stream of phrases, This play is weird...Why are we reading this? And a lot of other things that should probably be best left unmentioned. I found though, that as we continued our reading and discussions, the play no longer remained a play with characters with the childish names of Mommy and Daddy. It became about society and the turning of the world into a more materialistic mind form.And as we read the packets on existentialism and the theatre of the absurd, I found that I could see features of both throughout the play. The play has meaning despite it's absurdest elements of repetition and the unusual methods of communication. Existentialist-Freewill. Man seeks what he/she wants. I found it enlightening to read the interpretations of The American Dream through the words of Ervin Beck and Phillip C. Kolin's. Every person is going to react differently to this work. While Beck focused more on Grandma and the allegory in Edward Albee's play, Kolin's compared the work to other works, and focused more on the sexual tension throughout the play. I respect both writers and their opinions of the play and I can even see how they are right in their opinions. I agree with Beck's when he writes: "My point is that it takes one( American Dream, old style) to know one(American Dream, new style)"(Beck 4). Exactly. The American Dream will never end. Humans will always want and seek for something more. We have the space beyond our Earth to look forward to now. The torch keeps passing on as Grandma passes it to The American Dream. For Kolin's I agree with his analysis of the sexual tension but I feel that none of his claims were really new to me because we discussed the role reversals and sexuality's (physical) of Mommy and Daddy.
And now the question of the interpretation of the play and the characters as plastic, lifeless barbies. I just don't know. Yes, the dialogue is childish. Yes, the characters(except Grandma) never seem to be able to find their way around their house. The idea of a child speaking so openly(and possibly innocently) is not surprising. Children will surprise you with what they know and see. I've been witness to it. But, I feel like our class discussion of the doll house went too far. I understand that those who are overly focused on gaining become nothing but a shell after a while. I do, but I feel like we lost sight of the play's message at certain points and introduced transparent claims that made my mind want to explode. Only a little.
I see I have some thinking to do...I think I just want to read an essay where someone proves it. Joy. Writing, you are more than I imagined.
Remember the paintings we discussed earlier in the month? The ones with Mary and baby Jesus? For me, when my eyes first landed on both depictions of Mary and baby Jesus, I didn't get it. I saw paintings and ignored the little voice in my mind that was telling me that there was something more to them. For example, the positioning of the nobility and the clergy in regards to the positioning of Mary and baby Jesus. What? Why? I didn't think those details mattered. But, as Ms. Holmes urged us, we needed to focus on the details, then it would all make sense. Fortunately, my knowledge of history allowed me to. That day, for me, served as a future challenge. A challenge to see beyond the first viewing, to look specifically at the objects and details as one unit then secondly, as a whole.
DIDLS. Diction. Imagery. Details.Language. Syntax. The literary techniques that turn a blank page into a work plentiful with words and meaning. Oh, boy. I'm familiar with the terms but I admit, I don't usually stop to consider them. Oh yeah, this work is soooo elevated. No. More like, Where is my dictionary . Or if there's a lot of imagery I think, Darn this author for being so good. Why can't I write like that? I mean, I know they all have their own purposes but frankly, sometimes I get confused. Sometimes I start talking about diction when what I'm really discussing is imagery. I'm just not used to spending time identifying each literary technique. But what proved helpful to me were the "Discussing Diction", "Metamorphosis" , and "Syntax as Style" assignments, especially because they involved partners. When I'm working in a group, I feel that in order to do my share, I try and think harder. Suddenly, diction only became about word choice. Imagery became the senses. And syntax evolved into a whole lot of stuff that I didn't even know was considered to be a part of syntax. Well in truth, before this school year I didn't even know what syntax was.
So DIDLS is helpful. When close reading, DIDLS is your pal because instead of commenting on what you think the work means, you can now comment on how DIDLS adds meaning to the work and for you as the reader. By dissecting each paragraph,or maybe even one word/phrase, your knowledge of the story expands because you are able to make connections on how the literary techniques fail or succeed in bringing the work to life. When we read the passages from Hemingway, Morrison, and Hawthorne, I was a bit confused. We were provided with very brief passages from each author and we were expected to use our knowledge of DIDLS to figure out their meanings. A lot of thoughts were going around in mind and I kind of wanted to throw a fit because I didn't think we were intelligent enough to figure it out. But we did. The passages were considerably different. One was more elevated. Another colloquial. One had a party with imagery. One worked to be vague. And from there we gathered up all the information and interpreted the passages( with a little help from Ms. Holmes). It was like the exhausted mountain climber straining and reaching for the ledge that takes him to the top of the mountain.Sigh. A success. Maybe, I'm exaggerating, I am, but we worked together and to be simple, it was cool.
The American Dream. A comedic farce( I think thats what we determined it was). full of coincidences. The first day my hands held that book and I listened to the dialogue through the voice of my classmates, I thought with a very uneducated stream of phrases, This play is weird...Why are we reading this? And a lot of other things that should probably be best left unmentioned. I found though, that as we continued our reading and discussions, the play no longer remained a play with characters with the childish names of Mommy and Daddy. It became about society and the turning of the world into a more materialistic mind form.And as we read the packets on existentialism and the theatre of the absurd, I found that I could see features of both throughout the play. The play has meaning despite it's absurdest elements of repetition and the unusual methods of communication. Existentialist-Freewill. Man seeks what he/she wants. I found it enlightening to read the interpretations of The American Dream through the words of Ervin Beck and Phillip C. Kolin's. Every person is going to react differently to this work. While Beck focused more on Grandma and the allegory in Edward Albee's play, Kolin's compared the work to other works, and focused more on the sexual tension throughout the play. I respect both writers and their opinions of the play and I can even see how they are right in their opinions. I agree with Beck's when he writes: "My point is that it takes one( American Dream, old style) to know one(American Dream, new style)"(Beck 4). Exactly. The American Dream will never end. Humans will always want and seek for something more. We have the space beyond our Earth to look forward to now. The torch keeps passing on as Grandma passes it to The American Dream. For Kolin's I agree with his analysis of the sexual tension but I feel that none of his claims were really new to me because we discussed the role reversals and sexuality's (physical) of Mommy and Daddy.
And now the question of the interpretation of the play and the characters as plastic, lifeless barbies. I just don't know. Yes, the dialogue is childish. Yes, the characters(except Grandma) never seem to be able to find their way around their house. The idea of a child speaking so openly(and possibly innocently) is not surprising. Children will surprise you with what they know and see. I've been witness to it. But, I feel like our class discussion of the doll house went too far. I understand that those who are overly focused on gaining become nothing but a shell after a while. I do, but I feel like we lost sight of the play's message at certain points and introduced transparent claims that made my mind want to explode. Only a little.
I see I have some thinking to do...I think I just want to read an essay where someone proves it. Joy. Writing, you are more than I imagined.
Saturday, September 21, 2013
The Reality of a Prompt
AP English Literature and Composition 2009
Question Three( Symbol)
Open Prompt-Select a novel or play in which you analyze one symbol and explain how the symbol functions to establish meaning/revelations in characters or theme.
Critique One: Student 3A
Introductory paragraph reads much like any old introductory paragraph. The student briefly underlines the importance of a symbol and then transitions into a somewhat barely there thesis statement arguing the importance of a wild duck in Henrik Ibsen's The Wild Duck.The student manages to identify the importance of this symbol through the development of characters and events within the thesis, but a more original approach would have been appreciated other than ending with "...leaving his audience with an interesting sentiment." What sentiment?
He/She then transitions into a first body paragraph that provides a background of information considering the family of characters he/she is analyzing through the symbolic wild duck. The student then capitulates that the significance of this wild duck serves as a representation of the family's "tranquility and happiness". From there the student considers the importance of one of the characters as a major instigator in birthing the presence of this symbol through Greggors(the character), in The Wild Duck. The commentators responded to this observation by writing "exceptionally insightful".
Despite the weak thesis, the essay remains well organized and provides in depth/articulated arguments and details to support the function of the wild duck. Although I have never read The Wild Duck this student didn't cause my mind to wander. Through his/her organization and focus I followed along quite nicely and his/her hard work paid off. A score of 9. Wow.
Critique Two: Student 3B
No flowery intro for this student. Nope, straight to the symbol.Obvious. A lampshade. Although this student vaguely/simply writes a thesis of Tennessee William's play "A Streetcar Named Desire" regarding how lampshades serve as a symbol for hiding/covering the truth, the student later expands( my thoughts plus commentators) further in later paragraphs about this symbol's importance in revealing the reality of character in that of Blanche Dubois. He/she argues briefly that Blanche Dubois' obsession with the lampshade is more than a measure used to hide her aging image. Unfortunately for me, I became quickly unsatisfied after finishing my read of this essay because although the writer has notable points, he/she provides surface discussion that don't always leave the reader astounded;wanting to know more.By analyzing more than one character I believe that the student may have received a better score than a 6 to express her knowledge of how the lampshade impacted characters throughout the play.Yes, the student expresses his/her ideas clearly, but he/she begins the argument really in the last paragraph where she addresses the fact that Blanche's obsession with the lampshade stems from the need to cover the bitter loss of her husband, a loss she herself played a part in by revealing one of his "dark" secrets.
Critique Three: Student 3C
The first sentence kills me."Things Fall Apart was a novel based on pride and strength and power" Anything else you want to add in there? And trust and friendship and blah blah blah...alright, so I'm making some of that up. Soo? The use of "and" forces the intelligence of the paper to lower many levels and read like that of a choppy first grader's attempt at answering "What do you like to eat for fun and why?" That is ONE of my problems with this essay.But the more serious problem in the introductory paragraph concerns the use of the past tense. This novel still is so no need to write that it was.From there the writer writes, "...in my opinion" Oh, NO! I hate the use of "I" in an analytically driven essay. It sounds elementary.
And the essay continued to sound as such. Even though this student tried to prove the impact of the machete in Things Fall Apart through the character Okonkwo, the essay's lack of structure and support screamed POORLY WRITTEN. The student's responses were either poorly displayed or not even there at all. For example, "The machete is used for defense purposes" No duh. How does that make the machete symbolic of power? He/she doesn't even address the importance of the machete as a symbol in this paragraph. Instead he/she writes, "Okonkwo needed that machete. He needed it to survive. He needed it to fight dangers" Symbolism? No wonder he/she received a 4. The commentators and I agreed about his claims They needed more support and meaning to allow for an improved score.
Question Three( Symbol)
Open Prompt-Select a novel or play in which you analyze one symbol and explain how the symbol functions to establish meaning/revelations in characters or theme.
Critique One: Student 3A
Introductory paragraph reads much like any old introductory paragraph. The student briefly underlines the importance of a symbol and then transitions into a somewhat barely there thesis statement arguing the importance of a wild duck in Henrik Ibsen's The Wild Duck.The student manages to identify the importance of this symbol through the development of characters and events within the thesis, but a more original approach would have been appreciated other than ending with "...leaving his audience with an interesting sentiment." What sentiment?
He/She then transitions into a first body paragraph that provides a background of information considering the family of characters he/she is analyzing through the symbolic wild duck. The student then capitulates that the significance of this wild duck serves as a representation of the family's "tranquility and happiness". From there the student considers the importance of one of the characters as a major instigator in birthing the presence of this symbol through Greggors(the character), in The Wild Duck. The commentators responded to this observation by writing "exceptionally insightful".
Despite the weak thesis, the essay remains well organized and provides in depth/articulated arguments and details to support the function of the wild duck. Although I have never read The Wild Duck this student didn't cause my mind to wander. Through his/her organization and focus I followed along quite nicely and his/her hard work paid off. A score of 9. Wow.
Critique Two: Student 3B
No flowery intro for this student. Nope, straight to the symbol.Obvious. A lampshade. Although this student vaguely/simply writes a thesis of Tennessee William's play "A Streetcar Named Desire" regarding how lampshades serve as a symbol for hiding/covering the truth, the student later expands( my thoughts plus commentators) further in later paragraphs about this symbol's importance in revealing the reality of character in that of Blanche Dubois. He/she argues briefly that Blanche Dubois' obsession with the lampshade is more than a measure used to hide her aging image. Unfortunately for me, I became quickly unsatisfied after finishing my read of this essay because although the writer has notable points, he/she provides surface discussion that don't always leave the reader astounded;wanting to know more.By analyzing more than one character I believe that the student may have received a better score than a 6 to express her knowledge of how the lampshade impacted characters throughout the play.Yes, the student expresses his/her ideas clearly, but he/she begins the argument really in the last paragraph where she addresses the fact that Blanche's obsession with the lampshade stems from the need to cover the bitter loss of her husband, a loss she herself played a part in by revealing one of his "dark" secrets.
Critique Three: Student 3C
The first sentence kills me."Things Fall Apart was a novel based on pride and strength and power" Anything else you want to add in there? And trust and friendship and blah blah blah...alright, so I'm making some of that up. Soo? The use of "and" forces the intelligence of the paper to lower many levels and read like that of a choppy first grader's attempt at answering "What do you like to eat for fun and why?" That is ONE of my problems with this essay.But the more serious problem in the introductory paragraph concerns the use of the past tense. This novel still is so no need to write that it was.From there the writer writes, "...in my opinion" Oh, NO! I hate the use of "I" in an analytically driven essay. It sounds elementary.
And the essay continued to sound as such. Even though this student tried to prove the impact of the machete in Things Fall Apart through the character Okonkwo, the essay's lack of structure and support screamed POORLY WRITTEN. The student's responses were either poorly displayed or not even there at all. For example, "The machete is used for defense purposes" No duh. How does that make the machete symbolic of power? He/she doesn't even address the importance of the machete as a symbol in this paragraph. Instead he/she writes, "Okonkwo needed that machete. He needed it to survive. He needed it to fight dangers" Symbolism? No wonder he/she received a 4. The commentators and I agreed about his claims They needed more support and meaning to allow for an improved score.
Saturday, September 14, 2013
"Editorial: Don't legalize pot just for the high of it"-Close Reading
*Link at the bottom
Though I may not be marijuana's top advocate, I still seek to educate myself on where the media and society stand on its legalization.Despite being a some-what impartial audience, I still find it important to investigate the opposing side because although they may have the minority opinion, the anti-marijuana legalization holders may have strong concerns for why the federal government should fail to pass it as legal. In saying this, I feel that if someone is in opposition of a law, their attempts at swaying the audience over to their side must be heart-felt, and above all, their argument must provide the critical information in a writing style that is both engaging and informational. All I want is to be moved. Move me.Simple enough, right? Although this USA Today editorial, "Don't legalize pot just for the high of it" is thought-provoking, I feel as if the relaxed display and the unequal use of diction, details and language, weakens the argument for why marijuana should not be legal.
Though I may not be marijuana's top advocate, I still seek to educate myself on where the media and society stand on its legalization.Despite being a some-what impartial audience, I still find it important to investigate the opposing side because although they may have the minority opinion, the anti-marijuana legalization holders may have strong concerns for why the federal government should fail to pass it as legal. In saying this, I feel that if someone is in opposition of a law, their attempts at swaying the audience over to their side must be heart-felt, and above all, their argument must provide the critical information in a writing style that is both engaging and informational. All I want is to be moved. Move me.Simple enough, right? Although this USA Today editorial, "Don't legalize pot just for the high of it" is thought-provoking, I feel as if the relaxed display and the unequal use of diction, details and language, weakens the argument for why marijuana should not be legal.
In providing strong diction, word choice shifts from strong to weak in the entirety of this article. Instead of a constant stream of intense wording, the article fails to promote a more emotional response for me because of it's at times plain word usage. For example, when addressing those individuals who produce marijuana, the article provides the information that: "Those who can grow or sell pot legally under state law can be, and have been, busted by the feds"("Don't legalize pot...") . "Busted"? "feds"? The sentence sounds silly. The words feel informal and lead me to think that I'm reading an article by a high school-er. I'm not focusing on the article's argument of the potential for marijuana to cause more problems. I'm stuck asking: "Did they really just use 'busted' and 'feds' in the same sentence?" This leads me to question the article's simple use of diction in this sentence, primarily because I feel that it takes away from the argument by sounding too informal.
However, despite my dissatisfaction and belief that some words in this article should be shot through with red ink, the article, at certain points remembers to focus by being creative in diction.I found that when the author(s) ups the ante, so to say, I considered his/her argument with more open-mindedness. With the editorials usage of the words "renaissance,emergence,compliance,litigation, benign and mayhem", as they were included in sentences throughout the article, I was able to comprehend their usefulness in the editorial's efforts to argue against marijuana for recreational use. This was because each word's more serious/sophisticated definitions served to remind me continuously that there is a growing issue over the legalization of marijuana. When informing the audience that: "Seventeen states and the nation's capital now allow the use of medical marijuana with a doctor's order, which in some places is ludicrously easy to get"("Don't legalize pot.."), I felt that the involvement of the word "ludicrously" succeeded in conveying the author's irritation over marijuana's easy access because of it's blatant position of disapproval in the sentence.
When considering the article's use of detail I felt a more in-depth approach to certain facts mentioned in the article could have been followed to win over more anti-marijuana believers. Despite it's many details concerning it's position against marijuana, certain bits of detail I felt, ended all too abruptly. Where the potential for a more detailed paragraph could have been , each detail seemed to consist of only a few sentences before transitioning onto the next.For me, an interesting detail regarded the effects of marijuana on adolescents.Apparently if a child constantly uses marijuana they "typically lose 8 IQ points and never get them back"("Don't legalize pot..."). I felt disappointed that this detail didn't get elaborated on . If marijuana can harm our children I'd like to read more about it, not question why you, the author, skimmed over it.
In consideration of language, it's use in this editorial bordered on the comical and the lacking. From the introductory sentence: "Legalize marijuana? The nation has flirted with the idea before..."( "Don't legalize pot..." ) to "...there's no sign that federal drug enforcers would wink at full-blown legalization"( "Don't legalize pot..." ), my opinion stands that the author(s) of this USA Today article should have put forth more of an effort to generate stronger figurative-bound sentences to impact the readers. To fire them up enough that they would rally up in opposition against marijuana.Honestly, I didn't feel like grabbing my war flag in a moment of inspiration. I laughed because I felt like the language wasn't strong enough to terrify me into becoming marijuana's biggest anti-advocate.
From the editorial "Don't legalize pot just for the high of it," the article works loosely with diction, details, and language to create a simple argument for why marijuana should continue to be criminalized. I understand it's message and position against marijuana. I do. Sure, the drug might create more problems. I'm a teenager and I know that the younger generations are voting in favor of it.People will do what they want to do.My only problem is that the diction, details, and language of this article weren't always provoking. I'd like to see your passion. Engage me. Expand and cover every detail.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)