This year in Review

         As this is my last blog as an AP lit student, I would like to discuss some of my favorite experiences in out class. First though, I must say that the skills and writing experience that I have acquired through taking AP lit are things that I know will come in handy in college. Following my junior year, I had thought that the level fo my writing had peaked especially concerning writing about literature. From sophomore year to junior year, I received consistent A's on my writing and thought that i had reached a level of writing that I was stuck at. However, from my first writing assignment in AP lit (I think this was the Frankenstein open question time writing) I quickly realized that I had a lot to learn and needed to improve a lot. I have found that before I was in AP lit that I was not able to read at the level an AP lit student needs to in order to write intellectual and academic papers on these novel that we have read. However, gradually, through the intensive writing processes and demand that we read closely, I feel so confident in my reading skills now. I notice now that when I read, I pay so much attention to every aspect and symbol and allusion. It gives me a lot of satisfaction that I notice so many different themes and motifs when reading now that I would have not even recognized a year before now. This is one of the many great things about AP lit. I think what many students misunderstand is the purpose of the intensity of this course. Through all the wirting and readinig assignment we have, I think many students can't see the forest through the trees. A lot of times, when bogged down with a lot of work, lit assignments can lose their purpose. However, I think that once everyone has gotten to the end of the year, I truly feel that I have acquired so many skills in writing and reading and have advanced my level of analysis in my writing and reading over the course of this year. It is kind of funny that just like Mrs. Clinch said at the beginning of the year, I cannot help but apply literary analysis to so many aspects fo my everyday life. I find now that as I watch Grey's Anatomy, I am also trying to pin point to meaning of the mug that sits on Derek's desk and why it is half empty versus full! I even think that my vocabulary has advanced substantially from all of the reading we have done. All in all, now that I have basically reached the end of my term in this course, I do not regret in the least bit taking this class despite warnings from previous seniors about the work load. For someone who usually does not read for fun, I am glad that I have been exposed to so many great works of literature through this course.

"I Will Wade Out" E.E. Cummings commentary

    I Will Wade Out

i will wade out
                        till my thighs are steeped in burning flowers
I will take the sun in my mouth
and leap into the ripe air
                                       Alive
                                                 with closed eyes
to dash against darkness
                                       in the sleeping curves of my body
Shall enter fingers of smooth mastery
with chasteness of sea-girls
                                            Will i complete the mystery
                                            of my flesh
I will rise
               After a thousand years
lipping
flowers
             And set my teeth in the silver of the moon

          I believe Cummings's poem is a lot about deciding what type of person and what type of life one wants to live. To the speaker this life is one of spontaneity that follows the movement of nature. If you take a look at the physical structure of the poem, the lines are indented in and out like the waves of the ocean. This type of spontaneous and random motion follows that of another one of Cummings's poems "O Sweet Spontaneous" and "Lets Live Without Thinking" (cool right?). The type of living that the speaker describes is very intense.

          E.E. Cummings had transcendental influences thus, I get from the poem a lot about retreating into nature to become aware of self. Flowers, the sun, the moon, all objects of nature with profound presence and meaning. The sun is symbolic of  death and rebirth, evolution, and divine. The moon is described as a timepiece, personified as a deity, in some cultures associated with insanity and irrationality. Furthermore, the moon represents a feminine symbol, a middle ground between the light of sun and darkness, the realm between conscious and unconscious, a symbol of the soul, and determines a subjects capacity for reflection and adaptation.In some way, shape or form, all of these representations could be connected with the evolution of self and of one's soul.

          There are a few instances of very visual and oxymoronic objects. For instance, "burning flowers" and "sleeping curves". The burning of flowers seems to be like destroying beauty. A flower is a very delicate and gentle object;however, burning is a very violent, strong, and destructive action. Furthermore, curves connote movement, action, winding, and instability while sleeping is non active, without movement. this could be an overstatement but i feel that this juxtaposition goes along with the sense of uncertainty in wading and wavering and possibly not knowing what you want out of life.

            Even with all of this asserting of what the speaker will do, There is still an underlying sense of insecurity in their assertions. After all the poem is titled "I Will Wade Out". Of the many definitions of "wading", one is "to make one's way slowly or laboriously". Thus, the speaker seems to emote uncertainty in his actions and decision about the future. Wading is uncertainty by not having enough confidence to go all in. Wading is almost synonymous with wavering, going back and forth. The words that Cumming's uses connote the same idea: leap, curves, dash.
          What I can take from this poem is about self-actualization even f it is not Cummings's intent. Interpretations and analysis are entirely the readers' though right? Ether way, i understand the pseaker to be expressing that he is reclaiming himself.

A Visit from the Goon Squad First Impressions

Thus far, I am enjoying the style and structure of writing than Jennifer Egan offers. I have never read a book that is not a mystery novel that still requires that I piece together information from each chapter to help understand the next one. It has become really fun to decide which minor characters from a previous chapter have become major characters and often key characters moving forward in the book. My literary circle actually was quite intersting adn delightfl ebcause we often had to back track to figure out which characters were who and who plays central roles in various parts of the novel.So far the book is becoming for me a kind of puzzle. I am having to weave relationships in and out of each chapter and often I am having to calculate years past and ages of character to find out who certain characters are from previous chapters. However, I am really enjoying the dynamic of the text because I have never read a text that is structured in the way Egan constructs this story into a series of intertwining short stories. In the opening chapter, I sense a mix of comedy and introspection Sasha is a classic kleptomaniac, unable to quell her impulses to steal. She has a therapist Coz and already is being shaped as an unstable and possibly volatile character. Coz is unique in herself for a therapist. She is eccentric and surprisingly dislikes eye contact. This detail stood out to me in particular. A therpaisst is an intimate figure, one who has to be able to connect with another’s life and identity in order to offer council. Yet, coz avoids this level of intimacy thorugh a lack of eye contact. Nevertheless, Coz offers advice to Sasha on her theft issues. The idea of Coz being a mentor figure for Sasha reminds me of that same dynamic in Invisible Man. I enjoy finding commonalities in every book we read even when these books are totally different genres. I have noticed most prominently; however, that authors tend to base their central characters around some eternal conflict that inhibits the procession to the climax of the novel. In Hamlet, it was a hesitation over how to avenge his father. In Invisible Man, the central internal conflict was that of the narrator and his struggle to balance between two parallel ideologies which inhibited his identification with himself. Similarly, in Winesburg, Ohio, George Williard had to discover an "ungrotesque" truth that allowed him to escape the small town of Winesburg. Oh and I just thought of this one! Grendel has to revel between two states of existence : meaninglessness and meaning in a world that he is not welcome and viewed as a monster. Unable to establish a human-like existence in the Anglo-Saxon world, Grendel has to decide whether to concede to meaninglessness or embody the role of the monster in order to find meaning in the people's world. I am finding that AP lit has opene my eyes to these types of connections. I do not think that if I would have not taken this class that I would be able to have a level of sophistication in my reading to draw parallels in novels written in totally different time periods and totally different genres.

Billy Collins poetry

Dear Reader

Baudelaire considers you his brother, and Fielding calls out to you every few paragraphs as if to make sure you have not closed the book, and now I am summoning you up again, attentive ghost, dark silent figure standing in the doorway of these words. 

Billy Collins

In theatre, the fourth wall refers to the audience. In this poem, Billy Collins breaks this barrier between the voice of the speaker and who he/she is addressing by directly referencing the audience, the reader as the title suggests. Collins seems to be commenting or maybe even mocking the conventions of how authors try to engage readers and how readers actually read books. This is ironic in and of itself because as the author of the poem, Billy Collins is mocking himself in a sense. In the first line, the speaker references Baudelaire. from a little research I found that Baudelaire contributed to the idea of modernity. Modernity states that to capture and epitomize the fast paced, fleeting life of urban and technological lifestyle, it is necessary for the artist (or the writer in this case) to portray and capture that experience. Thus, by saying that the reader is in some way connected to Baudelaire, the speaker suggests that the reader may have some connection to Baudelaire's philosophies. Possibly, the speaker suggests that the reader must be engaged or find some relation to the text in order for the text or piece of art to be successful. Next, the speaker mentions Fielding and  how he addresses the reader. Henry Fielding, a satirist would use wit to draw attention to or mock an underlying truth about society. Such type of literature requires that the author constantly engage the reader so that they understand the hidden message in their humor. Furthermore, the speaker then continues to say that he is "summoning you up again" referring to the reader, establishing the author as one that calls upon the reader for their voice or message to be heard. The speaker calls the reader an "attentive ghost". A ghost denotes a soul of a dead person, a disembodies spirit, vagueness, a shadow or semblance, or an evanescent form. thus, the speaker establishes the reader as an idea. this makes sense to me because as a author writes a work, he is not directly speaking to a person or audience but rather writing with the idea of the audience in mind. Thus, the reader becomes a disembodied spirit as they are not physically present for the author to address. The author can only form an idea of what the audience is and how they are characterized. Referring to the reader as dark and silent connote eeriness and an evil entity. Furthermore, the speaker describes the reader to be "standing in the doorway of these words".A person who stands in the doorway brings up an image of someone who is not in a room or out of a room. In the context of the poem, the room is the author's words. Thus, the speaker suggests that the reader is not entirely engulfed in he text nor removed from the text. It is kind of brilliant actually what billy Collins does in the poem. He basically calls out the reader which is ironic because the poem kind of suggests that the reader has to be able to relate to the poem or work according to Baudelaire. thus, Collins does this exactly by examining how the reader reads a poem as they literally read a poem. Like, woah...

What's going on with Invisible Man?

For the past week, out class has been holding seminars for various sections of the novel the Invisible Man. However, unlike most times where these seminars are enlightening and often help me reach some aha! moment in the text, I am left by the end of them wanting more.... whether discussing Lucius Brockway's encounter with the narrator or the riots that close the novel, discussions seem to be trapped in a cyclical bout of racism or just smiply black and white. This an be frustrating because eliminating the black versus white lens opens up the book to so much more meaning that I believe Ellison intended. Maybe I am just too critical. I myself could offer even more to the conversations but i do feel like our class discussion emphasize too much surface level commentary and not enough genuine analysis that comes with really reading a book. I understadn second semester senior syndrome which I myself have become infected with but i really want our class to become more interested (and maybe live up to second period haha). On a side note, out seminar today bothere dme in particular because I feel certain people were being ganged up on  during seminar which takes more away from our class discussion as a whole rather than make themselves seem more intelligent. The atmosphere created by the students in out classroom kind of makes it difficult for me to contribute all of the time for fear of being "judged". Not implicating all students in class but I do feel like a few do not always contribute to the open and nonjudemntal atmosphere that an ap lit open discussion is supposed to yield. I digress, but I think my point has been made. I know that each and eveyr person in the class in intelligent and interested in literature (hopefully at this point) so I just wish that people's intelligence reflected in their efforts in the class. Today I wanted so badly to talk about how Clifton's exit from the brotherhood was not just white people casting off blacks again but how he figuratively falls from a idea of "grace" so that he can be free. And also when the narrator is dreaming at the end and he hears Barbee and brother jack ask him how does it feel to be free and the narrator responds that it is PAINFUL and EMPTY.

Angels versus Demons

If one missed the abundance of light versus dark or black versus white or snow versus soot or sunny versus cloudy or etc., etc. I would have to assume that they had not read Invisible man. Other than an obvious interpretation of these images and symbols as being related to race (i.e. white society versus black society, I think these images offer a unique look into religious entities. The abundance of light v dark and black v white connotate evil versus goodness, a motif that pervades the conflict between angles and demons. I did like how in some of the seminars we introduced the idea of demonic or evil forces in the book. For, instance Brother Jack, Bledsoe, and even Ras the Destroyer. for me, all of these characters made me question what actually constitutes being demonic or simply evil for that matter. Each character construes some image of evil in a unique way. Jack is pointed out to have stolen the identity or soul of the narrator, catapulting him on what one can claim to be a journey to enlightenment or to willful ignorance. Bledsoe betrays the narrator for threat of the narrator exposing his obedience to whites and falseness as a true black man. Finally, Ras the Destroyer is portrayed as a violent figure, clashing against black "brothers" int the brotherhood. I think that these evil figures contrast with characters like Mary, Clifton, and the narrator's grandfather who are almost like holy or Christ like figures, angels. The contrast between angelic and demonic figures throughout the text offers a reading of the book through a religious or worshiping lens. In any religion, the conflict we see between different characters could be a disparity in the ideologies that they believe in and worship. When the narrator becomes wrapped up in the brotherhood, he becomes a worshiper of another religion in which the deity becomes the members of the brotherhood. He pays tribute to the brotherhood through his spread of the brotherhood doctrine, science to the people of Harlem.A sharp contrast to the "religion" that the narrator begins to follow int eh north. In the south, there exists a parallel ideology to that of the northern "religion" of the brotherhood. The southern doctrine is one that idolizes the "white man" as a higher, superior being. This "religion" is so controversial because it is divisive playing blacks against whites. The role of blacks to obey and be polite towards the white people is their form of worship but it is belittling. The fulfillment that the narrator gets from "worshiping" the brotherhood comes from the idea that it embraces the equality of black and white. Whereas the southern doctrine is so absolute in its divisions, the northern doctrine hides behind images of totality and oneness. Looking at the text in this way, the narrator's development could be interpreted as a test of faith. He must decide whether he should stay true to the backwards ideologies of the south or come to learn if the northern religion is even more perverted than the southern doctrine.

Invisible Man...WTF

I can see why Invisible Man is the perfect to use on any AP lit free response ...it is absolutely ambiguous! As I was reading the book I picked up on so many allusions, symbols, etc. From researching Gestalt theory, the three blind mice story, and black nationalism I am still not completely sure of the central "so what?" of the book.. First of all,I cannot choose if the narrator should be considered an antagonist or protagonist. Is this a story about an unfortunate life or redemption. Is the narrator a vicinity of society or just himself. What makes answering these questions so hard is because amid them is the band rip of the polarizing social amps ogre that pervades the entire text. I often wondered while reading it if I could negate the issue of race relations in the understanding of the text but honestly I am not sure. I believe that the narrator's concept of him being an invisible man is due to being a black man. We see at the beginning of the text that he starts off in an underground space where he lives the. E tells the story. At the epilogue we find out that he is back on this hole of a home. Obviously this is symbolic because EVERYTHING in this book has some meaning we just have to find it. But at the same time I feel like the text is referencing race just as much as it is referencing knowledge, power, consciousness, and gender issues. Either way, it is not as surface as just race I know that. The book would have been so much easier to read if that had been the case. Instead I have a chaotic image of fire, riots, and a man retreating back into a weird under ground quarter leaving me questioning, "like ...what?". I know looking at the title is kind of basic surface level stuff but I think Ellison really did title the book emphasizing the invisible man to make the reader take race color out of the picture when reading it. This in and of itself seems like an ironic commentary on race. Maybe as I read the book, the inability of me to look past the narrator's conflicts through a color lens signify me being racist or at least narrow minded in a way. Possibly, if the reader is able to exclude race form their interpretations of the text, the true meaning (whatever that may be) of Ellison's work will come out. I found that I saw significant allusions to songs and African folktale that I am definitely going to look more into. the book offers so much on allusions from Brer Rabbit to Gestalt theory to Louis Armstrong blues songs that I just tried to catalog as much as I could for future reference. Going forward with this book, I do not think that it would be a bad idea to try and read it for a second time and see how my understanding shifts. Maybe , I could find that I know much more about the narrator than what his invisibility suggests.

Hamlet as a philosopher...

In class this last week , my group discussed Hamlet as a philosopher. His "to be, or not to be" soliloquy reveals Hamlet's role as a philosopher and yields well to an existential reading. Existentialism describes the philosophy which includes confusion in an "absurd" world. Also, philosophers like Fichte and early Schelling believe that human existence is action.

Two quotes that we brought up were the following along with explanations:

"To be, or not to be, that is the question"(3.1.56)

Hamlet could literally be questioning "to act or not to act" which connects to the philosophies of Fichte and Schelling. In this soliloquy, Hamlet questions his own existence seeming very suicidal. It is possible that he feels that since he has lacked action or progress in the plot to avenge the murder of his father, he lacks existence because existence is action. if he is no acting then he is not existing. Nevertheless, I believe Hamlet does not fully grasp what the essence of his existence is. Back in act 1, we see that he is deeply frustrated that his fate holds the revenge of his father on its shoulders. Thus, Hamlet might be expressing here that he is not in control of his own fate, his actions. i also think that Hamlet misinterprets the definition of acting that is existence. We see that he wants to put on a play to "catch" the conscience of the king , Claudius. Also, it is not known whether Hamlet acts mad or truly is mad. Thus, I believe that Hamlet's interpretation of action is putting on a performance or pretending to be something that he is not in order to mask his own true intentions. I think he tries to get rid of his own confusion over the calamitous state of Denmark and his own responsibilities that he tries to distract himself by trying to unmask other men. He tries to get rid of their appearances to show their true nature.

"To sleep, perchance to dream, ay there’s the rub, for in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil must give us pause-there's the respect that makes calamity of so long life..." (3.1.65-69)

Hamlet acts as a philosopher her as well as he weighs the pros and cons of death. Earlier in the soliloquy Hamlet questions his own physical existence asking if it be better to stand the hardships of life or end one's own life to escape them . However, Hamlet is halted at his seemingly suicidal thoughts by the fact that there is even more uncertainty in death. Hamlet seems to believe that it is man's fear of death that makes him stand living. Why is Hamlet questioning dying though? We agreed that this seems cowardly. He would be giving up on himself and his father. Furthermore, Hamlet considers death yet still finds no hope in his own death. I think Hamlet is unsure of two things here (1) his own fate and (2) the fate of the kingdom

 

Invisible Man

Invisible Man....hmmm where to start? I still do not have a complete grasp on this text yet. It is robust with allusions and meaning which makes it even harder to completely understadn the protagnist and the plot at times. So far;however, I have kept trak of a few motifs and conflicts that I am seeing play out in the text. First off, I think there is an important parallel between educated and noneducated blacks. At the Golden Day, the veterans refer to the protagonist as "school boy". I think this is supposed to be derogatory towards him. It is as if they resenthim because he is trying to get an education. Something to think about further into the book.The next interesting relationship I have noticed is that between the anonymous protagonist (or should I say antagonist???  I will just refer to him as the protagonist for now.) I am not quite sure at the moment) and Mr. Norton, a successful white male that the protagonist is chauffering at the moment. I think the protagonist wants to believe that Mr. norton is different than other white people in society;however, I believe that he holds the same prejudices as the majority of the white class during this time.The protagonist really irks me I have recently discovered. You expect that in a seemingly repressive, racially conscious society that the protagonist would connect more with his own race. However, he is so so so ancious over making himself appealing to the "white man" and pleasing them. He is concerned with this so much so that any blaack person that he meets, he expresses almost a deep rooted animosity or disapporval to them if they conduct themselves in a way that he deems unpleasant in the company of 'white folk". For instance, Mr. Norton meets Trueblood, and really wants to hear his story which he tells very candidly. However, the protagonist is so worried about what he will think when he finds out that Trueblood raped his own daughter.He tries to rush him syaing theat they better get back to campis but Mr. Norton waves his hand away in annoyance. There is a situation of dramatic irony in which the protagonist is aware of Trueblood's story but Mr. norton is blindly unaware of his indiscretions. Teh protagonist possibly does not want black people to look lowly or uncivilized in teh eyes of the white class. Because in this society whites hold teh power, I believe the protagonist feels he has to abide by a certain standard in order to be accepted by them. He is perturbed that people like Trueblood and others at the Golden Day do not seem to censor their conduct in front of white people. thus, I asked my self, why does he seem to be the only black person thus far who is so concerned with being accepted by a class that does not accept him? He says in the porlogue that people do not see him. I interpreted this to mean that "him" is referred to hjis conscious or soul. Thus, he  is overlooked for teh sake of his outward skin color. Maybe he is just trying to better himself in a society where blacks can only hope to rise out of their condition (if even a little bit) by serving the white, superior class. I see his waiting on Mr. Norton and being so concerned with every move he makes in front of him as a form of slavery in itself. He is sacrificing his true self for teh sake of someone else's pleasure (at least I assume he does not wish to do this kind of work ideally).

Poetry

 

When I came last to Ludlow by A.E. Housman When I came last to Ludlow Amidst the moonlight pale, Two friends kept step beside me, Two honest lads and hale. Now Dick lies long in the churchyard, And Ned lies long in jail, And I come home to Ludlow Amidst the moonlight pale. The speaker the poem reflects on when they "came last to Ludlow" suggesting that he is there currently. Ludlow is a town in England. On his last visit to Ludlow the speaker reveals that they were "amidst the moonlight pale". The moon is a feminine symbol. It represents the rhythm of time. Also, the moon reflects inner knowledge and the phases of man's condition on earth. It is the middle ground between the light of the sun and the darkness of night and represents the realsm between the conscious and unconsious, the soul. The speaker refers to the moon as "pale"  connoting that the light of the moon lacks intensity and brilliance. This connection possible suggests that the speaker cannot see clearly or lacking in knowledge. The speaker continues to state that two freinds accompany him, poeple he considers to be "honest lads and hale". They describe that the friends "kept step beside me" suggesting that these people are not only close in proximity but have a close relationship with the speaker. Their characterization of being honest connotes many descriptions including honorable in principles, truthful, and respectable. The speaker also goes on to state that their two friends are "hale" meaning free from disease or infirmity, robust, or vigorous. It is intersting that the speaker references their friends helath. I also think that their may be significance that the speaker walks with two friends. The number two is indicative of duality, opposites, and antithesis. It is also associated with the two natures of Christ, human and divine. If in fact these friends represent duality, this emphasizes their relationship to the speaker. I am not sure how this could relate to the ideas in this poem;however, there is an ABAB rhyme scheme present as well in both stanzas.The transition to the following and concluding stanza can be interperted as a shift. The speaker expressed in the first stanza that his friends were in good health; however, presently "Dick lies lon in the churchyard" and "Ned lies long in jail". Of his two friends, one has passed and the other imprisoned. It is possibel that the speaker is trying to reveal that he is lonely wiht both of his friends gone . He states, "And I come home to Ludlow / Amids the moonlight pale". I beileve their is an emphasis on I in this line as the speaker is now alone. There was once a time whenhis friends wlaked beside him; however, now he continues alone at light suggesting a somber tone. The repetition of the concluding lines with the introduction lines stresses the speakers state of mind as somber and melancholy. However, upon second thought this may not be because of the loss fo his two friends. He expresses the same town before his friends' death adn incarceration as he does after. This revelation suggests that the speaker was not affected by the loss of his friends. Is he twisted? Maybe  I am reading too much into this or perhaps not enough...

Hamlet...

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are cast areas mirrors of one another. They both pledge by heaven to fulfill King Claudius’s request to determine the root of Lord Hamlet’s madness. In this proclamation, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s loyalty and trustworthiness as true companions to Hamlet is to be questioned. Both so readily give up themselves freely to King Claudius’s demands with no concern it seems that the subject of their spying is a friend, Hamlet. Both “sweet talk” Hamlet as “My honoured lord!” and “My most dear lord!” (2.224-25). However, their readiness to act against Hamlet’s behalf only magnifies the falsehood of their claims of honor toeards Lord Hamlet. Both characters play an more major significance in elucidating the sciope of the corruption that has resulted from claudious’s murderous ascent o the Elsinore throne. Hamlet has since learned that Claudius’s hands were  the root of his own father’s death and thus the kingdom that was once a garden is now full of weeds. Hamlet feels as if Claudius has corrupted his family, forming an incestuous marriage with his mother and ousting his father. Thus, it is possible that Claudius is corrupting Hamlet’s other relationships as well, this includes Guildenstern and Rosencrantz. When Hamlet asks as to the reasons fo their presence at Elsinore, both lie saying that they are just visititing. However, it seems as if Hamlet is suspiscious of their true motivations questioning, “were you not sent for? Is it your own inclining” (2.2.77-78). They eventually give in revewling that they were sent for. Their willingness to lieto a close friend on behalf o fteh King discredits their trustworthiness in the scope fo the play. Furthermore, it emphasizes that no one is to really be trusted with Claudius in power as he seems to have a influence on everyone that Hamlet is involved with.Gertrude as well seems to be losing trustworthiness for Hamlet. Her actions and thoughts are tainted by King Cluasius, her now husband. Everything she says is in compliance or extension fo King Claudius’s statements. She only thus far speaks when following Clausius’s statement or directing people. The only time in this scene that reveals Gertrudes hint of remaining concern over her son Hamlet is when she states, “I doubt it is no other but the main, his father’s death and our o’erhasty marriage” that has caused Hamlet to act out of sorts (2.2. 55-56). She is coming to his defense for once since her misguided marriage to Claudius. Thus, there could still be hope for Hamlet to restore the order, the garden that flourished when his Hyperios father was King. Gertrude is not all corrupted by Claudius and shows that she still has some understanding and empathy for her son.

Initial Takeaway from the Invisible Man...

From brief summary on back of book I know that the book will eventually reveal itself to be about racial prejudices. It tells of a story that faces the perils of the great racial divide and also narrates the ignorance of society towards race. The effects of racial prejudice are revealed thorugh the perspectives of the people made victim anf those who inflicted prejudice on others. So ,what does the title have ot tell us. Unlike some titles, I believe the “invisible man” will be telling in my understanding of this text. From the firstline of the prologue which states, “I am an invisible man”, I know the protagonist to be the subject of Ellison's title. I will be looking into how his feeling of invisibility plays into his character development.There are a couple of motifs that I have already noticed just in the prologue. As the title suggests, there is reiteration of the idea of being invisible. The main character, whose name is not known yet, even opens the prologue with "I am an invisible man".Since this book is not science fiction, I presume the protagonist’s “invisibility” is completely metaphorical. But, in what sense? Invisibility, is one looks at its denotations, mean 1)not visible; not perceptible by the eye 2) withdrawn from or out of sight; hidden 3) not perceptible or discernible by the mind 4)not ordinariliy found in financial statements or reflected in statistics or a listing 5) concealed from public knowledge.The second motif is that of eyes which is frequently mentioned even throughout the first few pages. It seems that the protagonist’s feeling of invisibility is one that is 1) not visible; not perceptible to the eye. The man states, “I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me”. This is such a telling and profound statement. It is to me a direct commentary on what prejudice and ignorance is, refusing to see what is right in front of you. This type of ignorance is what which causes racism. Furthermore, the nameless protagonists is the victim in this story and generally society is the victimizer. The protagonist speaks of the eyes of people he witnesses. In just the first page, there is mention of the “eyes “ motif four times which seemed to me to represent an idea that could pervay throughout the novel. Eyes are regarded as windows to the soul or as a barometer of emotions. More simply eyes represent focus, clarity, vision, perception, observation. This is ironic as the pople he encounters do not see him . The source of his invisibility is the inability of pople (presumably “society”) to see him. As an African American man, the protagonist is most generally probably speaking of the case between blacks and whites in America. Much of the unrest and turmoil that ensued was dues to a refusal by some to reject social bias and injustice. It will be interesting to see how the speaker copes with his reality even though society perceives a different reality.

 

"Time and Eternity" Emily Dickinson

F I should die,

And you should live,

And time should gurgle on,

And morn should beam,

And noon should burn,

As it has usual done;

If birds should build as early,

And bees as bustling go,--

One might depart at option

From enterprise below!

'Tis sweet to know that stocks will stand

When we with daisies lie,

That commerce will continue,

And trades as briskly fly.

It make the parting tranquil

And keeps the soul serene,

That gentlemen so sprightly

Conduct the pleasing scene!

 

Emily Dickinson poem

Death is to be feared. Its inevitability is daunting, challenging the ephemeral nature of human life. The most notable feature of Emily Dickinson’s “Time and Eternity” remains the tone of the poem, which conveys a unique optimism towards death as well as contentment in the afterlife. Dickinson expresses an objection to the characterization of death as marking an end. Impassive to the obligation to mourn death, the speaker rather espouses the feeling of peace and gratification that arises from one’s passing. The speaker in the poem abolishes angst that arises from the idea of death, reassured nonetheless by the constant cyclic nature of life even following death. Dickinson portrays that in death there can be happiness in the assurance that life will carry on. In the first two lines of the poem, the speaker establishes a contrast between life and death. The speaker’s consideration of “If I should die” conveys a dark and heavy tone that is parallel to “And you should live” which conveys a hope and optimism (1-2). The contrast between the speaker’s statements demonstrates morbidity and promise that qualify Dickinson’s characterization of death as forlorn yet hopeful. The speaker then discusses that “time should gurgle on” even in the wake of her death. The word “gurgle” connotes an irregular or broken flow. Thus, Dickinson acknowledges that time is endless and eternal but but not constant. The speaker parallels the inconsistency of life with the constancy found in death. In death, the speaker states that “morn should beam’ and “noon should burn “further elaborating that time carries on even after one’s death. The imagery of the morning sunshine and the afternoon sun represents that the days will continue “as it always has done “and time will go on after death. The final twelve lines of the poem diverge from the tone expressed in the first section. The speaker transitions from reiterating that time is unchanging and infinite in the wake of death to praise of the constancy of life after death. If the speaker is to pass, she describes that birds “build as early” and the bees “as bustling go” (7-8). Life continues undisturbed by her death instilling in the speaker so much content that she feels as if “one might depart at option from enterprise below!” (9-10). Instead of a mourning for life lost, the speaker that her death would have no impact on the continuation of life. She further expresses the comfort received from knowing that life is uninterrupted absent of her presence. “Commerce will continue” and the economy will prosper (13). “Stocks will stand” even with her death (11) . Nevertheless, the speaker’s apparent feeling of insignificance in the layout of life is not a disturbing thought yet one of joy. Assurance in the continued prosperity of life makes her “soul serene”. The speaker’s reference to her soul is reminiscent of transcendentalist ideals in which the soul is a part of a universal spirit that returns to that universal spirit upon death. Thus, the speaker seems to express a desire in a spiritual elevation in order to escape the constancy of an earthly life. However, the consistency that the speaker tries to escape is also what creates pleasure in the continuing of “gentlemen so sprightly” carrying on after her death. Furthermore, Dickinson structures the lines of the poem in a way that parallels the idea that life is constant in death. In the first seven lines of the poem, the speaker discusses that time is infinite and days never ending even after her death. To parallel this idea, these lines have no rhyme scheme, conveying the eternal yet unpredictable nature of time. On the contrary, the last twelve lines of the poem discuss the speaker’s pleasure and hope in the continuation of life following her death. These lines have an ABAB rhyme structure that portrays the cyclical nature of life and death. Also, The ABAB rhyme scheme demonstrates that life and death are a continual pattern. This pattern is what the speaker wishes to maintain. Emily Dickinson offers a unique outlook on life and death in her poem. The speaker establishes that life is tranquil in its eternal, cyclic continuation. The infinite nature of time seems to dwarf the speaker’s will to live. Throughout the poem, the speaker expresses that life and time will undoubtedly persist even if she does not. The speaker’s hopeful attitude towards death transforms a usually morbid and depressive occurrence into an opportunity to find peace. This peace is found once she departs from mortality to an eternal spirit. The speaker seems to be reassuring the “you” that she addresses in the beginning of the poem that her death is not a time to lament for a life perished. However, she offers comfort in a promise that in her death, life will continue on unscathed. Death is not to be feared nor mourned because life will go on and order will remain as the cycle of life and death continues. Thus, Dickinson conveys an alternative message that death should be appreciated for the peace it brings, not sadness. Death is not a tragedy.

Hamlet Act 1 Debrief

Angry ghosts, incest, murder, and a hesitant hero-to be? Hamlet already seems to be full of drama and a little bit of comedy.  The ghost of Hamlet's father and ex-King is active and haunting over this seemingly corrupted kingdom. Hamlet is wretched over his mother's distastefully hasty marriage and his uncle's suspicious assumption of the throne. In Act 1 Scene 2, the stage directions that Shakespeare provides hint that the state of Denmark is not as well as it appears. All gather in the castle's council chamber as Claudius prepares to deliver a speech regarding his brothers "death". However, Hamlet is described to be "in black, with downcast eyes". Unaffected by the fanfare of King Claudius, Hamlet is sulking and creepily keeps to himself. Is he angry, stricken with grief, ashamed, alone? Hamlet's responds to Claudius's speech is quite telling. He is almost disgusted by his mother's marriage so fast to his father's brother. Furthermore, he does not view Claudius as the "Hyperion" that his father was to him. Hamlet's familiar affairs are not the only ones that seem to be an "unweeded garden".In Scene 3, Laertes has a conversation with Ophelia, warning her against her relationship with lord Hamlet. He thinks "his will is not his own" and tells her not to give up her "chaste treasure" to Hamlet. Polonius, Ophelia's father also is not fond at all of Ophelia's "rendezvous" with her Hamlet. He believes her to be acting as a prostitute and forbids her from any further interactions with him to which she responds, "I shall obey, my lord". Thus, much can be said for the "state" of Hamlet's family and romantic lives. The kingdom of Denmark has been overtaken by a "serpent" that has seemingly invaded the garden that once prospered when King Hamlet was alive and well. In Scene 5, it is revealed from King Hamlet's ghost that Claudius, his own brother, poisoned and killed him while he was at rest in the garden. His ghost summons Hamlet to avenge his death leaving Hamlet feeling unhappy and pressured immensely by his sudden lofty fate. Thus, Claudius has broken Hamlet's connection with his father and taken his mother from him in marriage. Furthermore, Hamlet's relationship with Ophelia is broken as her brother and father disapprove of him and ban her from seeing him. Hamlet is alone. The only hope he has at reclaiming his father's life and love for Ophelia is by avenging his father which may bring the kingdom of Denmark back into sorts. All affairs seem to be headed south with all resolutions on poor hamlet's shoulders.Horatio and Marcellus are worried for Hamlet’s fate. Horatio believes that Hamlet’s listening to his father’s ghost could draw Hamlet into shear madness. Even though Hamlet promises his father’s spirit that he will fulfill a prophecy to avenge his death, he is not at all sure of himself. “O cursed spite, that ever I was born to set it right!” Hamlet exclaims. He is not excited over this “call to adventure” which may foreshadow Hamlet’s failure as a hero. After all, the archetypal hero is ready for his journey. So is Hamlet a tragic hero?

A Shakesperian Sonnet

To acquiesce my overwhelming anticipation to read Shakespeare's Hamlet, I am reading a few of the poet's sonnets. From over one hundred, I narrowed my broad selection down to sonnet 98. It reads as follows: 

From you have I been absent in the spring,

When proud pied April, dressed in all his trim,

Hath put a spirit of youth in every thing,

That heavy Saturn laughed and leapt with him.

Yet nor the lays of birds, nor the sweet smell

Of different flowers in odour and in hue,

Could make me any summer's story tell,

Or from their proud lap pluck them where they grew: 

Nor did I wonder at the lily's white,

Nor praise the deep vermilion in the rose;

They were but sweet, but figures of delight,

Drawn after you, you pattern of all those.

   Yet seemed it winter still, and you away,

   As with your shadow I with these did play.

 

After first reading, the speaker is expressed to be aloof to the changing seasons evoking a deepening sense of stagnation. This idea is reinforced the speaker's reactions to  the landscape and planets in the midst of this transition form winter to spring. The speaker is "absent" in the spring , expressing that there is a sense of preoccupation or lacking for them. Furthermore, Shakespeare describes Saturn's planetary movement with the seasons representing its rotations at different speeds. In purgatory, Saturn is representative of sloth.  Saturn is also representative of absolving the cardinal sin of sloth, do-nothingness, stagnation. the planetary motion of Saturn abdicates the stagnation of winter in which all planets and life cease to be active and die. It commences the season of spring in which the prosperity of flora and fauna is resumed. Despite the sprouting of lilies, rose and their striking brilliance of color, the speaker remains frigid to these displays of new life and beauty. Mere "figures of delight", the flowers are only figments of a happiness the speaker seems to yearn for their brilliance does not manifest in the rejuvenation of his spirit.In an environment engulfed by the resilience and vivacity of spring, the speaker seems to forbid the welcome of new breath. The speaker's inhibitions to the spring time are further expressed as Shakespeare writes, "yet seemed it winter still". Stuck in winter, it is almost as if time has escaped the speaker. So now, the poem seems to describe a lamentation of years lost. Thus, the speaker chooses to remain in the darkness for winter stating, "As with your shadow I with these did play". The darkness can be interpreted as the past. There is a comfort in the past that the speaker finds. Representative in the new light of spring is the youth that precedes and threatens to replace his existence. As much as the poem portrays the liveliness of spring, it can really be alternately viewed through an entirely polar lens, one of death. If taken from the speaker's point of view, he bemoans over his/her own life. Perhaps the speaker is elderly or regrets some part of their life...