Journal #12- Antigone

I think the most thought-provoking conflict Anouilh presents is the internal conflict of Creon, that being loyalty to family and loyalty to power. In a sense, Creon is caught in a situation in which by hurting his family, his power will be undermined and by helping his family his power will be undermined. This situation comes about because by killing Antigone, he ends up looking bad as a leader, but by allowing her to live (which is the option he prefers), he undermines his power because he is not standing up to opposition against his authority. This is why he formulates the plan to have Antigone be quiet and have her marry his son. Whereas, when Antigone chooses to die, she ends up having more power over Creon because he will end up looking like the dictator-type leader he is. However, there can be some level of sympathy for Creon. It is understandable that he wants to keep his power and stand up against any opposition, because he says that it is necessary for the people of Thebes's protection and security of self. In any case, both characters loose a lot of power, because either Antigone loses her life or her dignity and in any situation Creon loses his dignity. Anouilh seems to be doing this for a few reasons. The main reason is to show the power struggle in the truest sense of a tragedy. In order for a play to be categorized as such, there needs to be not only a downfall for the main character, but also an unavoidable downfall paired with both sides losing out on gaining the greatest possible outcome. The other main reason why I see Anouilh doing this is because of the political ties the play has. I think that he has a critical viewpoint of WWII and sees the reasoning for why the Axis Powers didn't want to end their occupation in France and that losing for them would also mean great sacrifices. And this would be especially hard for the Vichy government, because they have to kill people of their own kind (the French) in order to maintain power in the government.

Journal #11- Antigone

In the first part of the play, the chorus was there to give background to the story so that the audience could understand what Anouilh was going to do plot-wise. Now, this has shifted to the chorus being used for Anouilh's expression of his philosophy on plays. This can be shown in the style of the author's writing. In the intro, the chorus has more action-oriented sentences whereas on page 23, Anouilh highlights, "That is what is so convenient in tragedy. The least little turn of the wrist will do the job".  Anouilh's ideal of tragedy is shown in the second part because he talks not only about tragedy, but he speaks of it in this poetic, flowery way. The chorus helps highlight the more tragic aspects of the play because it tells of what tragedy is. The author pens that "he who kills is as innocent as he who gets killed: it's all a matter of what part you are playing" (24), which to me means that the most tragic thing about a tragedy isn't just that it's sad, but that those who kill still have merit and reason to do so. This I think foreshadows how we eventually will feel about Creon. Yes, he is cruel towards his nephew when he doesn't give Polynices a proper burial, but then again we must remember that he must try to main the power that he has fought for and can't be seen as being weak towards Polynices and his bringing in foreign armies to defeat Eteocles. Overall, the chorus is used for Anouilh's advantage to show his philosophical viewpoint in this scene.

Journal #10- Antigone

In the days before Antigone is caught sneaking out, the following occurs: Polynices and Eteocles have died at the hands of each other because the brothers fought over rule of Thebes. Since Eteocles did not live up to his word that he'd give the rule over to Polynices after one year, Polynices brought in foreign armies in order to get his power back. Now, Creon is king and he won't let Polynices have a proper burial because of his betrayal. Also, Antigone has been proposed to by Creon's son Haemon. Also, the very night before the scene with the nurse, Antigone has gone out an buried her brother. I think that this array Anouilh presents for the audience an interesting viewpoint of the play. First off, this is all told by the Chorus. I feel that Anouilh decides to do this because he wants to stay true to the Greek play writing tradition, but this also allows him to not have to retell the story in terms of having the players act out the previous events (which would take an enormous amount of time). Also, with complex stories such as this one, it is easier to just come out and tell what's happening to get to the meat of the story rather than dispersing it out.   One of the reasons why great authors of tragedy come out from the beginning about a character's death or downfall is that the audience isn't anticipating what is going to happen to a character and misread the plot line, but instead look at the details of the play to be able to understand its intricacies. In novels, it is usually ok to disperse back story throughout the book, but it is harder to do that in terms of plays.  It was only after reading the play a few times that I realized the chronology of events in a somewhat uniform matter. I think that Anouilh may also be showing how story telling is often hard to do in terms of sequences and actions because usually more than one event is going on. Finally, I believe that the play is trying to show confusion when showing the truth of the matter, because all too often how the truth comes out of a faulty human memory shows how the truth is blurred a bit from one perspective.

Topic Sentence

After discussing the deaths of her son and husband, Mother talks about females and objects associated with females in order to comfort herself with the peaceful conception she has of them.

Journal #9- Blood Wedding

The 3 major themes that I see in Blood Wedding are as follows:

1. Control/ Power
The number one character that I see portraying this theme is the mother. She lost control over her ability to keep her husband and son alive and henceforth she wants control over her son the groom. She also treats his marriage as a business transaction in order to gain what she wants. Also, the father seems to want control over his daughter and realizes that he does not have this power when she runs off with Leonardo and he believes that his daughter could not do so.

2.Where one's true allegiance lies
The bride admits at the end of the play that she felt the groom was the best man for her, however she  runs off with Leonardo because she is so entranced by him. Also, the mother is constantly questioning if the daughter is a good, loyal woman even from the first scene. Leonardo's wife also seems to show that she questions her husband's true faithfulness to her because of her awkward transitions in Act 1 Scene 2 where she seems to know that Leonardo is up to something but isn't questioning it.

3. Gender roles
It seems that Lorca is heavily criticizing stereotypical gender roles because of how these roles end up hurting the characters in the play. The mother tries to tell her son that he needs to be a true man with his wife and tries to encourage strict female conduct with the bride, however this constraint ultimately leads to the bride's escape with Leonardo. Also, the wife is trapped by her domestic domain and eventually loses her husband. The mother may be considered a good wife because she has this reverence for her husband and about how he was an amazing man, but this doesn't allow her to break free and move on with her life.

Journal #8- Blood Wedding

The set changes from a supposedly happy wedding scene with some drama, to that of an eerie and intense scene in the woods. I think that Lorca could be using this for two reasons. First off, in terms of plot this happens because it shows the contrast between the ideal wedding and the increasing intensity between that will lead up to the final scene where you find out the lovers have killed each other. But I also see the woods as a place for Lorca to show how natural elements- such as innate attraction and death- come to play in a real world unfettered by societal standards. This gives the atmospheric shift from the facade of happiness to a place where the Bride and Leonardo can show how they both truly feel naturally, while still building up the intensity of the play. Also, I see that what comes along with the woods (aka the woodcutters, moon and beggar woman) are better represented in the woods than at the scene of the wedding. Henceforth, these more dramatic characters give better light to what happens to people when put in their natural element. Overall, this atmosphere (especially at the end) gives way for the reader to understand how the author highlights the immensity of the killings at the end of the act.

Journal #7 Blood Wedding

The first character that I see being very miserable is the mother. She is miserable not only because of her husband and son's deaths, but because her new daughter in law has ran off with Leonardo, of the Felix family who killed her loved ones. Expresses this anger by violent break outs where she talks about how knives and men are bad, and instead look towards the future of having female grandchild has her coping mechanism for dealing with this stress. I think one of the biggest reasons why she is miserable is because she has no control over her life and the way she wants to live it because so many people have interfered with her pursuit of happiness. The father is also miserable because he wants grandsons to take care of his land and is very excited when his daughter gets married because he wants her to have many kids. However, he becomes miserable when she runs away with Leonardo because his dream will never come true now that this has occurred. He expresses this in a state of denial, because at first he cannot believe that his daughter could do such a thing as run away from her husband. The bride is also miserable because she is forced into a marriage she does not want to be in. She expresses this with her dislike of the wedding and her emotion-less feel towards her husband. The only way that she can escape this is through follow Leonardo's charm and being with him instead of her husband. Finally, the wife is also miserable because her husband has run off. It's obvious that she's frustrated because the bride is another woman, but I also think that there is a deeper context. Leonardo runs off with a rich woman who is the wife's cousin- I think that can hit her hard because she probably feels worthless because of her husband's infidelity because she is not this young, rich woman. And to add more fuel to the fire, she is also the mother of his child and is pregnant with another baby. All of this added up? I'd probably be frustrated as well! It is clear as to why all of these above characters are definitely miserable.

Journal #6- Blood Wedding

Youth plays a big role in this scene. With the Bride, her youth is slipping away as she is about to marry the groom. One of the guests made a comment "Today a maiden, tomorrow a woman" This helps us understand why the Bride is frustrated with her being forced into the institution of marriage, because she will lose her youth in the process. This can tie into the theme of time in the play, because it is running out at the same time that she is losing her youth. Also, I see youth in the guests and other characters in this play. They pretend to act as the bride and groom around the Bride, almost intensifying the loss of youth in this scene. Finally, the Maid shows youthful tones in her poems and songs. There are references to flowers especially, which also link into the theme of fertility because the Bride (who is suppose to have children soon) is still young, but no longer will be as youthful as she wishes because she'll be tied down in her marriage to her groom. It is almost as if Lorca is secretly saying that youth is wasted when one gets married because the Bride is no longer care-free, but instead must be tied down to duty and obligation.

Journal #5- Blood Wedding

I feel that Lorca does use many archetypes in seemingly conventional ways. First off, let's look at metals. With reference to Leonardo and his family, there is mention of copper and other common, industrial metals. This is in contrast to the Bridegroom's home where he wears a gold chain. Lorca contrasts these two to show the difference in wealth of the 2 families- which is also clearly shown in the way Leonardo's Mother-In-Law talks about how the Bridegroom has lots to spend. Also, Lorca conventionally uses flowers in these scenes as well. The rose is often used as a a symbol of beauty in both scenes. But what's more interesting is the use of this flower in the song versus when the mother talks about the child. She sings to him as 'my rose', but then she tells her husband he's been a bit more of a dahlia that day. Dahlia flowers were introduced to Spain because of the conquistadors who discovered them in the new world. I am guessing that Lorca is using this reference that the child seems foreign or distant- because he is also sick. Also, flowers are used in a somewhat non-traditional way in differentiating class. The Bridegroom's house has 'large pink flowers', whereas Leonardo has 'everyday flowers'. I think that this key difference shows how the two contrast financially. Finally, there is this idea of presents in Scene 3. Usually, getting a present is a good thing. However, for the Bride the presents of her coming marriage bother her. Here, Lorca uses the twist of an archetype in a conventional way. The presents act as a Trojan Horse in her case, because they seem to bring good pleasure, but on this inside they bring nothing but trouble for her because they do not give her what truly makes her happy. (Which would be Leonardo's touch in this case.) Overall, the symbols are generally used in a conventional matter, just in different ways in this section.

EDIT: So I didn't understand exactly what Mrs. Wecker meant by 'archetype' specifically for this journal. So, now that I understand this is, let's look at the characters' archetypes.

As far as the archetypes in Act 1 Scene 2, the Wife and Mother-In-Law closely follow what is usually described as being a caring mom or grandmother. Also, Leonardo seems to be a regular man taking care of his family. I feel that Lorca uses this simplicity to make the Wife and Mother-In-Law feel comfortable with their position in the family. It is so then they do not expect Leonardo to run off with the Bride at the wedding, so they suspect nothing of going to the wedding. In Scene 3, The Bride definitely does not follow the archetype of a bride- being blushing, beautiful and ready for marriage. Instead, she seems timid then tied-down by this institution. This definitely hints towards her escape with Leonardo and the rationale behind her runaway bride attitude. The way the Mother and Father act is also very stereotypical of parents who treat marriage like a business transaction. For this reason, it is understandable as to why they get frustrated when the bride runs away. Also, the Father seems to be one of those dads who always believes the best in his daughter. However, this archetype shows how he is blinded by his delusion of his daughter's loyalty.

Journal #4- Blood Wedding

Two symbols that I saw emerge in Act 1 Scene 1were flowers and knives and how they represent life and death. I saw Lorca using this almost exclusively with the Bridegroom's Mother. The first reference to flowers comes as she is ranting on about knives, and says that her husband was a beautiful man, with life like a flower in his mouth (pg 6). I thought this was an interesting phrasing of words, so I looked up the phrase 'like a flower in his mouth'. Turns out this comes from a play from an Italian writer called The Man with a Flower in His Mouth, and in this play, a man is reminiscing about his life as he is about to die. This can extend easily back to Blood Wedding because of the Mother's belief that her husband lived this great life worth of reminiscing about and then it was ended by a knife, aka relating to death. I also found Lorca's use of having flowers describe males fascinating. Mother is constantly describing her late husband and son as various kinds of flowers, but then again she wishes that the Bridegroom was female. Females are more generally linked to flowers because of fertility. So by this, I see that the Mother is struggling with female identity in a sense that she wants her world to become more feminine even though she longs for the lost men in her life. As far as knives go, I find this to be interesting as well. The knife represents death obviously, but I also find that after this conversation about the knife in the first lines of the play, Mother resorts to talking about how she wishes that her son was female and she gets excited when talking about lace stockings for her soon to be daughter in law. I find this to suit well with this previous observation about how the mother deals with gender. She seeks talking about the comforts of femininity and overall wishing things in her life to be more female. I even see this relating to the end of the novel when she makes up an argument for letting the Bride not have to die. It is as if Lorca is suggesting something about the female connection to life and death that makes women seek out other women even in lamenting men.  

The Wild Duck Journal #3

I don't think that the question 'who is at fault?' for Hedvig's death is 100% valid. Gregers definitely didn't expose the truth so that a child would die. The biggest problem with this whole ordeal is that no one considered the most important puzzle piece in this mystery- being Hedvig herself. None of the characters explain to her about her past nor would it (most likely) be told in the right way. I would say though that Gregers should be mindful of his actions though. Essentially, if he had minded his own business, maybe Hedvig would actually be alive. I could see the truth unfolding correctly only in 2 scenarios in terms of what was best for Hedvig. Either Gina and Werle should have been honest from day one or it should have just been a secret. I think that it is the fault of all of the charcters who knew though to keep quite and mind their own business. The only character who I could realistically see being without fault would be Old Ekdal, considering that he is somewhat delusional and can't always tell what's going on in his surroundings. I think that the biggest person to blame would be Relling in the end- because he sees what Gregers is trying to do and does nothing to stop him from meddling into another's affairs. Also, I'd partially blame Hjalmar and the way he treated Hedvig when he came into the house again, because I think that was the final straw for her and not feeling loved. Overall, none of the characters truly take any responsibility because they don't stop Gregers from exposing the truth and Hjalmar is very much at fault for his rude interactions with Hedvig in the moments before she killed herself. 

The Wild Duck Journal #2

I feel the main point of this motif of disease is to show weakness in humanity- but represented in a physical form. On page 133, Werle talks for the first time about how his eyesight is leaving him and how he can't see clearly. At the same time, Gregers 'sight' of the situation involving Werle's love child Hedvig becomes clearer. However, this metaphor clearly extends to page 135, when he then talks about how Gregers sees him though 'his mothers eyes- which were clouded at times'. It is as if Gregers has figured him out, and Werle is trying to say that Gregers's vision is clouded, except for the fact that it's Werle's perception that truly is clouded because he cannot see that his secret is being figured out. Also, I feel that with this parallel in Hedvig's vision, Ibsen is trying to say that without the truth, Hedvig's life only becomes more complicated as she is not exposed to the truth. On page 178, after a heated discussion about morals, Hedvig says 'this is all so strange to me'. She appears to be innocent, however in her mind there is no clouded perception. This becomes an issue later on when she does not understand why her father does not love her, and ends up shooting herself- she does this because she thinks she has a clear perspective on a situation, however in reality Hedvig does not. Also at the end of Act 3, Relling talks about the moralist fever, which I understand to be Ibsen's idea that those who try to meddle in others affairs have a disease. I think that Ibsen is trying to highlight that truth is good, it is also destructive when the wrong person exposes the truth of a situation. They have this disease where they always want to show the most moral decision of a situation, however they are the wrong person to do so.

The Wild Duck Journal #1

The one character that really stands out to me in terms of boundaries is Hedvig. She is bound by her youth/ perceived innocence and by her gender. I think that Ibsen points out something significant about childhood through her character though. Yes, Hedvig doesn't know the entirety of her story (in reference to her being an illegitimate child) which hinders her perception of how the adults view her. She feels as if it is her fault that her father is angered by her in the end of the novel and ends up shooting herself because she feels that there is a new boundary formed between her and her father. I think that this can be key in society in general- many people fear of telling children about life situations, however by keeping it a secret they may also be doing them a disfavor. Also, there are boundaries in general with Hedvig's perceived father Hjalmar. Her dad always seems so busy with his photography/ invention that he does not even help teach her at home. This separation I think helps Hedvig identify with her mother and become a servant to her father in turn.

This servant-like mentality I also see with all three females in the play. It's almost expected of them to be submissive, as they all act as if the men are somewhat breakable and are always ready to help. I think this can show a gender boundary  of the time period, that women are suppose to aid men in their endeavors and the men are suppose to lead. However, Hjalmar goes against this because Gina ends up doing most of the photography work for Hjalmar while still being a housewife and mom. Ibsen's use of boundaries is fascinating in that sense.

Dystopian Journal #3- Brave New World

A motif that is prevalent early in the novel but now really comes to life in this last 3rd of BNW is that of Shakespeare, especially in chapter 17 when John is talking with the Controller. It was difficult for me to understand a lot of these references because I hadn't read a lot of Shakespeare, but I think that's Huxley's point to a certain degree. I think he's trying to show that those who aren't as educated in Shakespeare in a rather educated society are already doing themselves a disfavor because we (and ultimately I) allow this BNW scenario to eventually happen because of our (and my) ignorance. Many people today would probably go see a movie, go out shopping or eat at a nice restaurant rather than sit down an read literature and John was semi-forced to do (having no other friends or options for entertainment really). But then again this motif of Shakespeare references can ultimately link back to what Huxley is saying for this chapter, and for the entirety of the novel. The World State makes everything in life quite comfy in order to have people not rebel against the state. However, this doesn't allow for the people to grow as human beings or truly be challenged. John says on page 238 "You got rid of them. (He's talking about mosquitoes in reference to a story he's just told.)Yes, that's just like you. Getting rid of everything unpleasant instead of learning to put up with it." By getting rid of the obstacles, everyone in the society lives this overly cushy life. Even with VPS, the citizens of the world state are still being cushioned, while losing the values which have made human society what it is today.

The Park Lane Hospital for the Dying is a new setting that helps show John how corrupt and vulgar the society really is for him and his enlightened mind. The fact that people bring in children to condition them for death, the fact that this society wants those who aren't perfect to be eradicated is repulsive to John. And the fact that everyone who works at the hospital takes soma and lives as "children" of the state is also frightening to John as he does not live in a new world of goodness, but of wickedness. This event, along with the experience with the controller, allows John to want to get out the World State and live on his own again, which may seem odd. He'd lived his whole life in isolation, and now he's choosing to be alone. I think this is significant of the author's ideals though. John would rather live in isolation as he did before because of the problems with the World State. Also, the fact that he only has two places to live- the Reservation or the World State, also drives John to a form of madness where he hurts himself. I think that the setting of the hospital and the setting of the Savage camp, and ultimately the World State as a whole and the Reservation all show as to where John fits in this new world. In either society, John is either an outsider because of the way he looks or because he doesn't follow the customs of the society/ doesn't agree with the values system. At the end of the day, John- as enlightened as he may be, is an outsider even in pursuit of what he really wants. However, what he really wants (poetry, art, God sin, real love) is all meant to be shared with another person, and because he can't have that in any setting, he is doomed for a downfall.

The language Huxley uses in this last part in BNW shows a frightening portrayal of those in pursuit of a story or money. In the last chapter as John sets up his isolationist camp, reporters from around the area begin to hear and see what's going on with John. As the reporters try to talk with him, John responds back in Zuni phrases. This language of agitation helps show how frustrated John is, but also how logical he is compared to those in the society. At one point, a reporter tries to convince John to take soma because "Pain's a delusion" (pg 251). But then when John threatens him by attempting to throw a rock at him, the reporter from the Fordian Science Monitor (clever Huxley, clever) runs back into his helicopter. I think that with this set-up in another's outrageous thinking  Huxley does show how crazy  people in the society really are. And it's only when logic comes up against them that they try to escape the pain they think doesn't exist. At the very end of the novel, after John has partaken in the orgy and has woken from his soma induced coma, the only words he utters are "Oh, my, God, my God!" (pg 259) and then in the next few paragraphs it's shown how he's killed himself. I think that this language tries to show how shocked the society must have been. In their minds, someone must be mad if they are unhappy taking soma and partaking in an orgy. However, now they see someone be ruined by this, they start running as the novel describes in the end, in scattered directions, as if this Savage has confused their paradigm of thinking. I think the language John uses and the language used to describe how John dies helps show how the people in the society are confused, and possibly disturbed by this other way of thinking.

Dystopian Journal #2- Brave New World

Another big motif that comes through more in this second part is the way everyone from the World State says 'Our Ford'. Even though religion ceases to exist, I see the society still  worshiping at the alter of Ford and his innovations. I think that this reoccurance can say something about  how human beings always worship something as a power, even if it is subconscious/ not actually thinking of someone as 'God' per se. And they way they mention the name 'Ford' is as if he is to be revered or honored. This idea of how humans worship can show Huxley's idea of us worshiping innovation or technology. This can be prevalent as humans start to believe more and more in science and technological innovations versus having a faith in religion or God. This idea of worship also leads itself to pleasure. The people of the state aren't just pleasure seekers; they worship at the alter of pleasure and (from my observations) seem to be addicted to this. Soma is said to have no side effects, but this can rage the debate of whether or not just being addicted to a substance that keeps you under the authority of the state is ethical or not. When Lenina can't seem to get John to sleep with her, she just takes more of the drug, and so does everyone else in the novel. Both with Ford and soma can I see how Huxley not only shows how humans worship, but how state governments can exploit this through indoctrination to keep people in their world.

The setting of the Reservation is quite interesting in comparison to the World State. But what's even more fascinating is how Huxley uses contrast in how John reacts to the World State and how Lenina and Bernard act to the Reservation. Lenina is repulsed by this society where woman breastfeed children and all look so old in her eyes. She almost seems as if she looks down on them for the most part because of their culture being different from hers. ( Which is understandable considering how this society goes against her indoctrinated beliefs.) Then when John comes to the World State, he is not baffled and doesn't seem to be in love the with culture, like many expect him to be. He has heard a lot from his mother about the WS, which shows how he probably isn't surprised, but we must remember how people expect him to be surprised because of their society and how they are shocked when he doesn't care for it. This could show how people of industrialized cultures look down upon other's beliefs and values' systems while in some ways, having messed up moral codes of their own. (Which makes sense considering the time before Huxley wrote this was the time of imperialism.) The elitest mindset can show how industrialized cultures expect others to automatically fall in love with their way of life, however this isn't always the case as shown with John.

The language in one specific part of this third is disturbing. On page 177- Mond doesn't want to biology paper he'd just read published for fear that others will believe in that instead of the state. I see this being a paradox in the state's thinking. They seem to worship at the alter of improvement, however don't want too much improvement that the people go against them. (Hence why they have feelies, soma, etc, to keep the people physically happy and unquestioning.) I could see this in society today. People in the US seem to believe more and more about evolution over creationism, we're becoming an agnostic nation and this would seem to lead us into a state of increased knowledge and critical thinking. Whereas, today we relax and spend our money on pleasures for ourselves. I think Huxley has a frighteningly accurate prediction for future and how society seems to be moving into an enlightened age, but instead actually regresses. This can show how governments try to show that people are better in morals (see above paragraph) or in knowledge, but the citizens of the state don't know for themselves about this, just the authority knows. By this, government has more control, and people believe in the facade that they are actually intelligent, whereas this is a fake intelligence.

Dystopian Journal #1- Brave New World

The biggest motif I have discovered so far is this idea of massiveness and newness. Making masses amount of people from one ovary, the massive consumption, the massive amount of sex people have. Along with this massiveness is newness. People always want to have new things, they die fairly early (by US standards) and overall this leads into this consumerist society. I think that this key to understanding the World State and the way it ends up viewing morality- whatever is new and massive is best. This can ad up to the idea of how disposable life itself is in this culture. That life isn't value the way that we perceive it to be valued in our culture. This idea that life is also about maximizing pleasure in the grotesque way is disgusting to me as well because of how in this pursuit people de-sensitize and sanitize the society by making it unclean with these strange practices of consumption and pleasure.

This setting is very interesting in the way that this new world reproduces and therefore affects the rest of society. By introducing reproduction in a sense that this is horrible outside of this futuristic AI system and by removing pregnancy from pleasure, there is this quite disturbing way that sex is perceived in the society. Even having little kids get ready to have sex at such a young age can be kind of revolting and shows how close within our nature because those reading the book have such a strong tie to sex being linked to pregnancy and a part of our morality... it's kind of gross to read. Also, the way that classes are reveled almost seems as if society has progressed backwards and yet forwards. Yes, for the upper caste there is improvement, but for the lower classes it seems as if it doesn't matter what happens to them. And yet, we have supposedly reached this lovely utopia?

The language of the book is almost charmingly twisted because of its British tone. The way that people passively talk about children's sexual play, the reproduction processes, how people are classed into the caste system, all sounds lovely when they are speaking. However, there is this apparent and frightening undertone of how scary this would actually be to have this be real in the world. This cavalier way of talking of such subjects helps show how they have truly lost emotions outwardly, but then again still live with shame if people do have children/ live outside of the WS's idea of living.

Journal #5- The Stranger

My Philosophy- Jesus Plus Nothing
This comes out of my life's pursuit of God, and I find that my personal relationship with Christ is so intertwined in my own life, it must become a part of my own philosophical views.
1. Do not worry: This comes from my own experiences with spending time worrying about consequences that may or may not happen in the future. Matthew 6:34 talks about how we should not worry about anything, because today has enough troubles of its own. Ultimately, God has a destiny for all people, and we should never worry about what is coming next for us.
2. Never judge, ever: The idea of judgement is saying that you believe that someone is determining their own self worth about your own because they believe they are better than you. This also leads to the deadly path of comparison. However, no two people are made the same nor are two experiences ever parallel. Therefore, one can never tell another that they are below them, and instead we all should care for one another.
3. Pride be gone!: The best way to prevent the second guiding principle is to never have vanity or pride-fullness  within one's self. No one gets into Heaven by works, so that no one can boast. The only thing I should ever boast about is the work of the Lord.
4. Be upfront with others: Gossip and lies are common within our culture. Because there is damage others feel from this (which I have wrongfully inflicted upon others and others have inflicted upon me), it is best to come and be out front with others if you have a problem with an individual. However, in all decisions, you shouldn't violate the next guiding principle.
5. Go to God first: Whenever I have problems, it is easy for me and many others to want to talk to a friend or counselor about an issue. However, it is better to come to the Father first. Even when in a moment of rejoicing, it is best to go to Him before others.
6. Have accountability: Even though we must go to God first, we aren't meant to live alone. Human beings are meant to live in community with one another, and we should all have others which we can confide in. That can hold us accountable to our actions and will help get you get through anything.
7. In everything, Rejoice: Even in the worst of circumstances, choose to be joyful and not be tied down to the emotions of humanity. We all have a reason to rejoice just by being saved! This is also so that people don't feel bogged down by feelings of ungratefulness.
8. Admit you are broken: This ties in with guiding principle 2 and 3. Admit that you are not a perfect person and that you are nothing without Christ.
9. Live La Vida Genrosa: Be generous! Do not hoard or store up your treasures on Earth, because you'll be leaving soon. Give to others, and help them become strong on their own with God.
10. Have a Personal Relationship with God: In pursuing a relationship with Christ, you must put Him first above all. But not like the pagans do, following rules and regulations, but instead for all of the other principles to come into place.

Yes, this may be a bit controversial for many reading this post. And I regret not following these everyday and there are probably dozens of more principles that I could write about on this topic (in fact, there's a whole book on it). I do not write these with anger in my heart to make you all like me, but rather to show you all a bit of my own faith, which guides the rest of my life.

Journal #4- The Stranger

At the end of the novel, Mersualt comes to the conclusion that everyone dies, so it doesn't matter when it happens to him. That this life doesn't really matter, and that he wasted his time on either thinking of absurd things and it almost seems as if he has slipped into an emotion-less state, where he has no ties to anything within the natural world anymore. I think that Camus wants us to observe Mersault's life as an example of absurdism. He himself admits that he considers himself absurdist more than existentialist. What can be shown through this is that Mersault though almost gets to a point of rational irrationality. That he gets so into being outside the world that he creates this insane world in his own head.  I think that absurdist ideals are applicable in this case because the rest of the world around him tries to make sense of the world and fails, and he wants them to see their failure in trying to describe the world around them. I think that Camus wants us to come to our own conclusions in the true spirit of the philosophy of the time. He isn't trying to push his own moral agenda on anyone, he's just trying to show a story of an absurdist philosophy is all.

Journal #3 The Stranger

I think that the obvious plot- related reason for splitting The Stranger into 2 parts is to show Mersault before being accused in his normal life and afterwards as he is convicted. I think that the contextual clues help show the deeper reason as to why this novel is split into 2 parts. First off, the way the story is written. The first part of the story is more action oriented, whereas the second digs deeper into Mersault's personal thoughts. The theme of freedom is expressed in the second part in the second chapter, where Mersault reflects on how jail serves as a place to take away freedom, the greatest punishment. However, because Mersault is free from responsibility he once had in the real world, it is almost more emancipating than being 'free' in the world. For example, he talks about how he wants to sleep in Part 1 all the time, and then in Part 2 he finally gets this sleep. Also, because he becomes accustomed to living without cigarettes, he is able to find himself comfortable in his life in prison. But what's more than that is I think that Camus is really saying something about the absurd and rationality in general. In the beginning, Mersault just exists, and in prison he just exists, in both situations not really reflecting the world around him. In the focus of WWII time period, I think this is significant because it's almost as if Camus is saying that those who lived a life before the war were doing the same thing as after- existing, just now closer to death. However, it's how you view the situation that gets you through the time.

Journal #2- The Stranger

Camus's use of a 1st person POV for the writing of this story I find to be significant. In general when writing in 3rd person, the author tends to be more descriptive/ poetic about certain parts of life as a narrator, whereas with 1st person, the reader feels more of the action/ one character's thoughts that convey one big picture. Also, this is Mersault's story of how he wants to tell it, so it's natural that the author wants to have him tell this. With Mersault's personal account being told, I could also see this point that we can the story straight from the source, and we can see how a rational viewpoint like Mersault's changes the way the story is framed and to give an objective viewpoint versus the bias of a narrator.

Journal #1- The Stranger

Three Characters:
1. The policeman: This man is of heavy authority in Mersault's society that smacks Raymond's face when he feels disrespected. Camus is most likely trying to show the respect of authority in the society, and that the people must listen to those they have given power.
2. Boss: Mersault's boss tries to tell him of a better life he'd have in Paris and that he could advance his life if he would just take the opportunity to care. He also calls Mersault 'unambitious'. Later, Mersault says that he stopped caring about school when he left. This can relate back to existentialism because Mersault  doesn't care about his advancement in life whereas everyone else does.
3. Lady in the restaurant: This woman moves with robot-like movements and is very meticulous and to the point. I think Camus is trying to say something about routine/ punctuality and how Mersault is fascinated by her, however forgets her soon after. This is similar to people in life, because we can be fascinated by people who seem to have it all together, however they are soon forgotten in the  perspective of the world.

Journal #8- Their Eyes Were Watching God

#1: I think the book is titled Their Eyes Were Watching God to show a very major and important theme in the novel about power. You see, in many cases there is always authority over people within the book. How people try to overcome and control others. But when the storm is approaching over the muck, their eyes were watching God because they have no control over their life anymore. This changes the way I see the book because it helps me as a reader recognize the central thematic element of power and how prevalent it is within the novel.
#2: An alternate title I'd give to the book would be The Eyes Overlooking All. This is because the book references God many times and is looking over the people, and that the people feel like they can have a taste of this power as well. This could also help show the perspective of God versus just the perspective of how the oppressed feel.
#3: My pastiche is titled "Time Was Running Out ". This is because the message about Time is prevalent in my piece and how it runs out during our lives, along with themes of power. Time in my pastiche works more like death in TEWWG. I feel this is the strongest because the end is about having time running out and my Janie-like character being the master of her own destiny- she realizes this at the end, and she comes to that revelation by understanding the time is running out for her.

Journal #7- Their Eyes Were Watching God Quotes

1. "Janie had robbed him of his illusion of irresistible maleness that all men cherish, which was terrible. The thing that Saul's daughter had done to David." (pg 79). This allusion shows how Joe felt a loss of power when Janie talks back in front of her. Later on, we discover that Joe beats her when she isn't perfect. This quotation here can show how badly Joe took the hit to his manhood, therefore falsely justifying the abuse of Janie. This links into the thematic element of power Hurston demonstrates in the book.
2. ""Been standing there before there was a where or a when or a then." (pg 84) The way Hurston uses parallel structure to portray Death shows also how powerful death is over the people of this time period. How powerless people are against something beyond their control.
3. The mention of Booker T. on page 142 shows Hurston's use of historical setting to show the effect of one man's decisions on an entire race of people. Because he is talked of in a 'submissive' manner, it shows how African Americans of the time felt even more powerless within their lives.

Journal #6- Their Eyes Were Watching God Pastiche Writing Process

I have now written the 3rd draft of my pastiche. The first one was just the main story, but then the 2nd draft was a complete re-write. At first, I just had the main character Jenna have three guys in her life that represented Logan, Jody and Tea Cake. However, then I decided that it was too similar to the story. I changed Janie's Grandma's wish to be married into Jenna's parents' wish for her to become a lawyer, then she becomes and attorney and wants a new career, so she becomes the local weather girl in Boston. Then finally, instead of marrying another man, she runs off with a lesbian friend (but they aren't a couple, although their friendship is just as scandalous) off to Greenwich Village in Manhattan. In my original draft, she was just going to run off with a man, but that's too blah and wasn't really as out there, and I really wanted to parallel with Hurston in the fact that the idea of running away w/ a Tea Cake character is suppose to be outrageous and unconventional.

One thing I still struggle with is dialect. My 3rd draft was mainly about dialect, and making sure that certain words and sounds were spelled the same way.

I am still struggling with dialect rules and length. The dialect rules take up over half a page and I am thinking of possibly joining the lawyer and weather girl aspect into one career, henceforth making it shorter, which is kind of what I need right now.

Journal #5 Their Eyes Were Watching God

Mini Pastiche, written as a new scene in The Handmaid's Tale 

It was then Offred thought of Life. Life, the simple trickster with outstanding omnipresence who resided in all who were worthy. Itself a fallacy for some, being contained in the beating heart of all, even when on of the all did not have a heart for it to be contained in. Why should Life be contained to which only had a heart, and what can truly stop her? She is overseeing all in who she in contained in. She waits patiently as she is watching for a sign to dive into a being and make it become her, and swiftly move out and be foul at the same time. She had been here all the time there was a time and a time to be told. Any moment now she would see a revelation of Life. She was sad for Janine though. Poor Janine! She should not have to give this life than have it stripped away from her. She tried to send in Ofglen to comfort her, but Janine said No. The Aunts were used to the Holy births, but they weren't used to a case like hers, if only they knew. Janine would be alright as soon as the Driver who did this was put to justice. She wasn't going to fail. At least that's what she thought. But Ofglen knew differently, so Offred knew differently. And if she hadn't, it would have been apparent by the gathering of all at the ritualistic Salvagings. People would soon look at her with a new face as no longer being the bearer of life, but the bearer of the Unbaby. They just had to sit around long enough until they could enter the gates of the dome. Anticipation, the savage sign of want, was now in the eyes of all at the Birth. 

This is suppose to be a dramatization of a birth in The Handmaid's Tale. Janine is about to give birth to a child declared an 'Unbaby' as the other Handmaids and Wives wait for the child to come. Life and Anticipation are the two abstract ideas. Life is a 'trickster' because the baby will soon be declared an Unbaby because of complications of birth. Life makes its move into a new child, only with the unknown messenger giving the right signal, then goes in and out to play a trick on the Republic of Gilead. This can relate to Death in the selected passage because it is what is about to come, but cause a great change in the society the characters live in. Then, Anticipation is spoken of as if it is the way we know we as humans want something at the core of our savage being. The Anticipation can be linked back here into the Wives' want for children (a selfish want in their case) and the Rumor in Their Eyes Were Watching God consumes the townspeople in the same way. 

Journal #4- Their Eyes Were Watching God

For this journal entry, I have picked the 1st paragraph on chapter 7, pg 76. I feel that this is a good passage to analyze Hurston's use of language manipulation.

In terms of syntax, I see that Hurston talks about the physical beating of Janie and the emotional beating of Janie. The first sentence talks about the physical aspect, then the second talks about the emotional side, and from there there is a chunk about the physical and a chunk about the emotional side. Hurston is probably saying with this that the physical beating leaves these emotional scars that Janie can't get rid of, and what's worse is that she is feeling less loved because of this. This beaten down tone can also be shown in the word choice of Hurston. There is clearly a central tone of being beaten down when she directly compares Janie to a rut in the road. "Plenty of life beneath the surface but it was kept down by the wheels." (pg 76) Hurston depicts, a clear representation of how Jody keeps her down by trying to control her. This can also be a reference to the physical abuse of Janie on page 72, where he beats her whenever she steps out of line. A sound device used is the phrase "But most she lived between her hat and her heels." (pg 76) The harsh 'H' sound used here can show how harshly treated Janie was, and even more so this is show through the previous word choice, says that Janie keeps to herself. 

Journal #3- Their Eyes Were Watching God

Hurston's Style:

1. "Dat woman don't want you. You gut tuh learn dat all de women in de world ain't been brought upon no teppentine still, and no saw-mill camp. There's some women dat jus' ain't for you tuh broach. You can't git her wid no fish sandwich" (pg 39)

In the section, the way the Cker talks about Janie is as if she is an object, talking about how to 'git' her, versus treating her as an equal. This leads to a prevalent feminist theme in the novel. Also, it helps show how men are allowed to speak of women during this time period. Not only this, but since Janie is perceived to be beautiful, it is as if the author is portraying that men in this time had to make grand gestures to beautiful women, but the 'normal' women didn't have to receive this kind of treatment, just a fish sandwich.

2. Janie full of that oldest human longing- self revelation (pg 7)

The sentence blatantly shows that Janie has a story to tell about what she has discovered about herself, and cleverly foreshadows the events ahead- basically that her life story is about to take place. It also helps tie into the themes of feminism within the text, showing Janie having these longings as all people do, showing women as not only people but equals.

3. "Ah wuz wid dem white chillun so much til Ah didn't know Ah wuzn't white til Ah was round six years old" (pg 8)

This can be a hint of a greater theme of power- because Janie was treated as a white child, she thought she was  one. Then, when she discovered she was black, she became a second-class citizen in her society- another example of oppression and having someone have power over yourself.

4. "Pheoby hurried on off with a covered bowl in her hands." (pg 4)

The phrase 'on off' is very interesting in terms of style, because the sentence could either use on or off separately, together or not at all and still have the same concept, even though on and off are technically opposities.

5. "Only dis one time, Nanny. Ah don't love him at all. Whut made me do it is- oh, Ah don't know"
"Thank yuh, Massa Jesus" (pg 15)

Even though Janie is agreeing to get married, if you look at her words carefully, it is apparent that she is basically saying 'Ok, I'll do this one time  for you Nanny.' Then, Janie's grandmother responds with a praise to Christ. However, saying I'll do this act this one time is almost a way of foreshadowing the future marriages of Janie and is almost mocking Christianity with Nanny's praising of God with this 'one time' agreement from Janie.

Journal #2- Their Eyes Were Watching God

Sarah Palin's Rules of Dialect:
1. Most common phrase; "Dontchaknow"
2. 2nd most common phrase "You betcha!"
3. 'air' sounds turn into 'ear'- aka american turns into 'amearican'
4. sound with an oo as in 'you' change into yah, except for in you betcha and dontchaknow where other forms of you are used
5. ing sounds become in' trying = tryin'
6. start nearly every sentence with 'oh' as in 'oh well dontchaknow'
7. sometimes the a on the word american will be dropped
8. our becomes are

French girl's Rules of Dialect:
1. 'th' sounds become 'z' sounds aka the becomes zee or other becomes ozer
2. pronounce 'is' as 'es' or 'est' in french- sounds like the e in egg and the s in is
3. drop the ending consonants- such as important becomes importan
4. 'for' becomes the french word 'pour'
5. As with rule 2, sometimes the french girl will put in little words of her own language, such as 'moi' 'toi'

Sarah Palin in a Boutique in France

Sarah: Bonjur, m'appelle is Sarah!

French Clerk: Zarah es your nem?

Sarah:P Oui oui. J'adore l'american!

French Clerk: O-key.....

Sarah: Oh well dontchaknow, 45 of those fancy Europeein'-dollers for just a little t-shirt? Oh well dontchaknow those darn socialists taking away your money in the government oh dontchaknow

French Clerk: I actually like zhee tax zyztem 'ear, pour I keen ge' zhee healthkear pour none of my money

Sarah: You betcha you youngin' folks like 'em until us heerd-workin' 'Merican foulks have to bust your bums outta the debt oh well dontchaknow!

French Clerk: So Mizz Zarah, may I asque a question?

Sarah: Oh well dontchaknow I does know the answer is naw, I don't regret doin' the show for TLC. I mean, obviously the True American Patriots will come and support me and my roguing spirit in twen-ty-six-teen. 

French Clerk: Oh, well I waz going to asque why you insiss on giving mee ah lecture about zhee taxing when you are in zhee America et I am here in France?

Sarah: Oh well dontchaknow all yah Europeein' foulks be suckin' up all of my country's economy and then we can't prosper as Amearicans and be all patriotical and for ourselves, oh well dontchaknow

French Clerk: Well zhen Zarah, zhen why does zhee Americans insiss on putting zhee militarie dans le countries zhat do not want zhem zhere? Does zhat not only drain your l'economy of zhee money even more?

Sarah: Oh well dontchaknow that's only for the good of the other peoples of the world- plus we want to show that America is tough and strong and rogue as ever!

French Clerk: Zhen aren't you being an imperialiss nation?

Sarah: Imperialisses? Oh well no you betcha not! That's only for those communists and freedom haters like the socialists that run are country

French Clerk: And where did you learn about zhese socialiss?

Sarah: Oh well dontchaknow, from my advisors and conservative blogposts about America

French Clerk: Zarah... pleaze leaves

Sarah: Oh fine! I don't belong here anyways. The only peoples who does this fancy Europeein' sight seeing is them liberals who dont give a cent to the 'Mericans they support!

French Clerk: I am calling zhee police Zarah

Sarah: Oh well dontyouknow and you betcha you are awll doomed for not lovin' the 'merican rogue spirit! I will just be goin' back to the greatest place Alaska, and start a new perfume line... it's the only real option that I does have left

French Clerk: And we wills not be selling zhat 'ear.... au revoir Zarah!

Fin

Journal #1- Their Eyes Were Watching God

I perceive Janie from the text as being somewhat soft-spoken and overly misjudged. She is said to be incredibly beautiful, that of someone much younger (pg 2) and the narrator states ' Seeing the woman made them remember the envy they had stored up from other times.' (pg 2). There is obviously an unspoken jealousy against Janie for her beauty; it's almost as if she herself is so kind but the other women think she is being rude by showing off her beauty, but she is actually just being who she is. This apparent non-scurrilous manner is shown in the way she talks and confides within Phoeby as well. The first words that come out of her mouth are about how she wanted to wash her feet from walking so far (pg 4). However, this is not the only side to Janie. She also has a fierce side that understands how others judge her, and they she feels frustrated by this back talk against her. (pg 6)
The narrator I feel is the poet in Hurston, and sometimes goes off of tangents that are indirectly related to the plot. First off, the novel starts off with this idea of what how a man acts in relation to his dreams and how a woman goes for her dreams. Thus, I take the stance that the narrator has somewhat of a feminist viewpoint because it is almost as if the narrator is portraying men as either going in for something, or completely failing, whereas women know what they want and go get it.

Post 4 Response

Passages:
1. "The pen between my fingers is sensuous, alive almost, I can feel its power, the power of the words it contains. Pen Is Envy, Aunt Lydia would say, quoting another Center motto, warning us away from such subjects." The Handmaid's Tale pg 186
2. (When talking about Salamano and his dog) "They look as if they belong to the same species, and yet they hate each other. [...] You can see them in the rue de Lyon, the dog pulling the man along until old Salamano stumbles. Then he beats the dog and swears at it" The Stranger pg 27
3. "Ah'm just as stiff as you is stout." Their Eyes Were Watching God pg 26
4. In Fahrenheit 451, Clarisse is a ________ to Mildred
5. The __________ behind the boys' actions at their heightened state of savagery comes from a sense of having no rules with the absence of authority on the island.

Word Bank:
A. Foil
B. Motivation
C. Characterization
D. Allusion
E. Diction

Post 3 Response- Protagonist

Even though this may seem a bit of a 3rd grader lit term, I think there is something key to how authors use protagonists in novels. With Mersault, Janie and Offred, we as readers see that a story revolves around one person's life/ POV, or how a story changes in relation to one person. This is found a lot within literature and I personally believe causes problems with ego centrism in writing. As ego centrism is found within the western philosophy of individualism, this can limit writers from expanding their mindset because they feel they are stuck within this mind set that they have to write for audiences that will only like novels written from this viewpoint. This also limits how readers perceive books because much of the time we are not open to new kinds of stories. From when we are young, we are taught protagonist, antagonist, plot, rising action, climax, falling action, conflict, conflict resolution- this taught mindset in schools makes it so that it is harder for the western mind to break out of this mindset and to respond to stories that don't follow this pattern. The protagonist can be thought of as 'we are for this'- aka, usually within a story, the 'good' character is praised in the way the author writes about him/her/it, hence having the prefix 'pro' meaning 'in support of'. As the reader, we are suppose to sympathize or support the protagonist and detest the antagonist. Also, there is a bit of a paradox though with sympathizing with the character Mersault. As I understood the text, Mersault seems to be dealing with absurdism- aka the struggle between trying to find meaning in life and the inability to find any. The audience can sympathize with him as he is sentenced to be hanged, however he himself finds no meaning to his own life. Therefore our sympathy towards this character from Mersault's POV is probably meaningless. Crazy right?

Post 2- Foreshadowing

The reason why I picked foreshadowing is because in my personal opinion, authors can either completely hit the mark on this or completely miss it entirely. It is more obvious in books like Their Eyes Were Watching God(when Janie foreshadows the future events with TeaCake) - which to be honest annoys me and is why I prefer less obvious foreshadowing. When it's overly obvious, I as a reader feel that I tend to try to figure out the story too much, or that I feel that I can just tell what's going to happen in a story, which makes it super dull and not fun to read. My favorite example of this is in the movie 'We Bought A Zoo'- SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!- In the movie, the zookeeper Kelly asks Benjamin why he'd buy a torn down zoo and spend his life savings on it. He replies with a simple 'why not?'. Then at the end of the movie when Benjamin tells Dylan and Rosie about how he and his late wife met, he tells the story of how he met her in a cafe and he basically asked her why would a woman like her want to go out with a man like him and she replies 'why not?'- this phrase is used in both situations when Benjamin is taking a risk, but the audience doesn't know about this until the very end, and most people may not understand this subtle foreshadowing without a second viewing. My favorite way to remember foreshadowing is 'to shadow before'- it may not be a visual, but it's the way I have always remembered this helpful hint as to how an author hints at us, the readers. Overall, when used properly, I find that foreshadowing is a cool technique authors can use to help tie-in parts of a story towards the end and make it easier for the reader to understand the plot of a story.

Post 1 Response

1. The book I enjoyed the most was The Stranger. Not only is it french (j'adore le francais) but I like that it not bleeding with symbolism or meaning the first time through- I can read it for the sake of reading. But when one does dive deeper and looks at what it possibly means, it is not only challenging but quite interesting with the analysis one can find within the book itself.
2. I have to choose between my two least favorites?? To be honest, I am pretty sure I detest Their Eyes Were Watching God and The Handmaid's Tale equally, but I guess I will choose Their Eyes Were Watching God for now. Not only is this novel incredibly bland and I HATE the plot, but I am pretty sure a lot of analysis on the book will come from a feminist perspective, whereas I'd honestly like to see more of an analysis on Janie's 3 husbands.
3. The Handmaid's Tale obviously has themes of feminism, but as a Christ follower myself (if I were to write a more theological than literary essay) I would prefer to write and essay about how legalistic views destroy the meaning of God's original plan for humanity.

That's about it. By the way- if anyone could help me set up the About Me section, there may just be a delicious chocolate chip cookie in your future :)