ohh Archer

Archer Newland Analysis

Let us take a journey back to Newland's first introduction in Age of Innocence. The paragraph that starts out "The second reason for his delay...." (2) talks about Archer's pleasure. It says that Archer experiences pleasure as that of delicate, rare, and exquisite. I mean, what kind of man thinks like that...? Archer is so dramatic and overtly sensitive. To analyze why he is, we can look at his background and time period. He grew up in the richest family and was taught to think, feel, and act a certain way. Therefore, everything "seemed as natural to Newland Archer as all the other conventions on which his life was moulded..." (2). His conduct and belief were products of society, and he behaved like every other men in his circle. Towards May, he is like a child who is excited by a new toy, "he contemplated her absorbed young face with a thrill of possessorship..." (3). May represents the ideal woman who he wants to marry due to her purity, innocence, and beauty. Because she is who she is, Archer does not question or contemplate the progression of his engagement and marriage to May. He continues his feelings even after meeting Ellen who "he hated to think of May Welland's being exposed to the influence of a young woman so careless of the dictates of Taste" (9). Ellen contrasts as a foil to May, and she is seen initially as a mere trivial deterrent in Archer's road to happiness "...he was definitely afraid that the Mingotts might be going too far..." (13). Archer also cherishes May because of her simplicity and the fact that "she was always going to understand; she was always going to say the right thing" (15). We know that Archer progressively starts hating the fact that she is like a machine who says the right things at the right time. Therefore, what sparks the change? Also when Archer says "...he thanked heaven that he was a New Yorker, and about to ally himself with one of his own kind" (20). In just a span of one chapter, chapter 5, Archer is in the library defending Ellen's freedom in a flurry of passion to Mr. Sillerton Jackson. After he announces his thought, he immediately alter his view on May as well, and for the first time, he calls May a 'stranger'. In chapter 6, Archer is having an enlightenment where he observes his society as one where "...all lived in a kind of hieroglyphic world, where the real thing was never said or done " (29). Then, he blames his change in ideology on Ellen Olenska by saying, "'Hang Ellen Olenska!'" (29). I think up to this part is the book's beginning, which is proceeded by a dull and tedious thoughts of Archer, who is consumed by the overwhelming presence of Ellen, until chapter 25. In chapter 25, the story picks up pace as the mystery of Ellen unravels, Archer's feelings for Ellen is suspected by family, and May's behavior adds to the sense of frustration and hope. However, every desire for Ellen and my wishful expectation comes crumbling down by the last sentence of 34, when May cunningly gets rid of Ellen and ties Archer back to her side by the news of her pregnancy. Archer's hope and wantings for Ellen become something that is so unattainable as he matures into his later years. Although Ellen's sudden appearance in the novel prompts Archer to question his society, beliefs, and morals, he unfailingly submits back to society's ways and expectations because (this is my favorite quote) he says "There was good in the new order too" (226). He finds a balance in the force of old society and new evolving society, which shows his maturity.

I felt a Funeral, in my Brain

I felt a Funeral, in my Brain, (340)

BY EMILY DICKINSON

I felt a Funeral, in my Brain,

And Mourners to and fro

Kept treading - treading - till it seemed

That Sense was breaking through -

And when they all were seated,

A Service, like a Drum -

Kept beating - beating - till I thought

My mind was going numb -

And then I heard them lift a Box

And creak across my Soul

With those same Boots of Lead, again,

Then Space - began to toll,

As all the Heavens were a Bell,

And Being, but an Ear,

And I, and Silence, some strange Race,

Wrecked, solitary, here -

And then a Plank in Reason, broke,

And I dropped down, and down -

And hit a World, at every plunge,

And Finished knowing - then -

I am going to try and analyze this poem without any background knowledge expect the little recollection of Emily Dickinson from 8th grade. Emily Dickinson as I remember was a loner and wrote hundreds of poems in her room. I think she hid them all over her house and whatnot. The most memorable poem of hers that I remember reading is "Nobody" because it parallels so much with her actual life. Also, I remember that Dickinson never titled her poems, which is why the titles we give them are just the first line of the poem. With that limited knowledge, "I felt a Funeral, in my Brain" by Emily Dickinson starts off with a peculiar image. The command center of one's body, and in this case the speaker's, feels a Funeral. What could that mean? How does one feel a commemoration ceremony of death inside the brain? I thought that maybe the speaker is saying that her source of connection with others, route to memories, and road to thinking process were shut off. The third line "Kept treading - treading - till it seemed..." emphasizes the monotony and strong meaninglessness as the Mourners paced back and forth without purpose. The speaker's life could resemble the Funeral procession and how the life was spent in futility. I don't quite understand the second stanza because the mourners finally "were seated" but instead of the mourners, the Service takes the place of the stagnation with its dull and rhythmic beating. The two stanzas stresses how something always "Kept treading" and stresses it by capitalizing it and repeating the line. Therefore, it is during that futile progression that the mysterious 'them' lift the coffin and look into the depth of the speaker's Soul. The third line of the third stanza is very interesting, "With those same Boots of Lead, a gain,... began to toll". The "Boots of Lead", capitalized, signify a slowing and perhaps reluctant walking towards an unknown Space. In that space, the speaker identifies her/himself as one that belongs to "some strange Race", marking that even the speaker does not know or realize what he/she is. The speaker is all alone in that stagnant monotonous Space. The mourners are all gone and it is only the speaker that is present. A peculiar syntax with the phrase "a Plank in Reason" evokes that the plank is justified for breaking, letting or forcing the speaker to an unforeseeable bottom. I have to keep in mind that the speaker is still a soul that has been let out of the coffin in the third stanza. Therefore, by dropping, the speaker hits 'a World', another seemingly foreign place, either still as a soul or human being. The last line is significant because it shows how the journey out of the coffin was in essence a quest for knowledge and experience. I am not quite sure what to make of this poem because the tone is very depressing from start to finish. Even the mention of Heaven did not lift the dreary mood at all. Also, the speaker leaves his or her own funeral without consent and only leaves because the mourners lift the box. Although I may have analyzed completely different from Dickinson's intention, I can't help but believe that the poem illustrates the tedious journey for light that will always perpetuate in a cycle. 

Age of Innocence

I remember I told a friend, "I hate Age of Innocence" I suppose there is a reason as to why people say that hate is a strong word because I regret saying it. I didn't realize that there is so much more to Age of Innocence than I thought there was. Now, I can see why this book is one of Mrs. Clinch's favorite book. For this blog, I just want to point out a few of really interesting ideas I found.

To start, my opinion changed as I read the book's final third section, chapter 25 to the end. The first difference was the pacing of the book; it was much faster. The events started to escalate and the process of resolution kept me absorbed throughout the whole book. The incidence with M. Riviere and the conversation started off slow but quickened as we learned that he was the mysterious secretary Countess Olenska ran away with. An interesting point here is that May, when Archer asked her to if he could invite Riviere to dinner, she completely dismissed the idea. Therefore, the fact that Ellen trusted Riviere and trusted him even though he was from a lower class. The contrast again reiterates May's ignorance and Ellen's acceptance. The scene with M. Riviere also brings up how he is similar to the characters in Doll's House because he says,  "I returned to him, a few months ago, for reasons of private necessity such as may happen to any one who has persons ill and older persons, dependent on him" (Wharton 165). He did what he did (going back to Count Olenski's employment) because he had to. The circumstances of other people depending on him for survival caused him to take on a mission that he strongly wished to avoid. As I read this passage, I couldn't help thinking about Nora, Christine, and Krogstad. They, similar to M. Riviere, committed actions they preferably wouldn't have wanted to in order to survive. This comparison shows that people's sense of loyalty and love for others causes them to take a certain path that would be condemned by society.

Also, I thought this particular section mentioned the aspects of society more frequently than before. The most protruding line was, "After all, a young woman's place was under her husband's roof..." (169) This idea repeated itself several times and again, another similarity to Doll's House. As the family in Age of Innocence discussed Ellen's affairs, the idea of separate spheres was stressed, along with the importance of keeping to traditions and staying away from trends.

Nora = Archer; however, only in their pride and temper. Archer's scene in the library with Mr. Jackson so similarly connected with Nora's confrontation with Krogstad. Both of their ego won over and led them to dig their holes. Wharton's line perfectly lays out the situation, "... as if this were exactly the fact he had been laying a trap for" and "he had once more the feeling that it was exactly what Mr. Jackson had been waiting for" (171). Although Archer is consciously aware of Mr. Jackson's intention, his pride and temper gets the best of him, causing him to show a side of him that would have been better off not revealing. For both Nora and Archer, the things they say makes them suffer.

What I really loved about Age of Innocence was the last chapter. The epilogue was not only fascinating because of its 26 years fast forwarded plot but also because of Archer's changed view of society and life. New York's old family no longer stayed in the old fashioned world and advanced with the changing culture. Archer puts away Ellen as something that's just unobtainable and lives his life to the fullest, "starting the first school for crippled children, reorganizing the Museum of Art, founding the Grolier Club, inaugurating the new Library, or getting up a new society of chamber music" (225) Rather than keeping his view (gentlemen didn't work), he allowed himself to be occupied by meaningful work and did things for his society. This development shows how much Archer changed in the span of time. He is no longer a love-sick man who wished to get away from principles, rather, he changed to someone who found value in principles and of change.

William Blake's "Holy Thursday"

William Blake's "Holy Thursday"

There is no denying that William Black is an idiosyncratic figure in history and also, a man who's state of mind can be questionable. However, with all the queer characteristics aside, his poems are definitely a work of a genius. Specifically looking at Songs of Innocence and Experience and further into "Holy Thursday", his depth of perception and style of deliverance of his message leaves so much room for analysis and questions.

The innocence part of "Holy Thursday" at a glance is longer horizontally than typical poems, making it look like a book. The ending words demonstrate a AABB rhyme scheme, a very easy and paired-like. Reading the poem, we are exposed to children who are in pairs walking in sync behind their beadles. Once again showing Blake's like for pairs because it gives a sense of companionship like married couples. The different colors, red, blue, green, grey, and white are the protruding details of the first stanza. As innocence is oblivious to the 'black and white' version of the world, it can afford to cloth itself with bright colors and grey that dims the awful nature of black. As the children enter as "a multitude", the congregation perceives them as "flowers", "lambs", and radiant creatures. They "raise their innocent hands". This picture reminds me of priests offering their sacrifices; however, the irony is that the children who are referred to as lambs are raising their hands. That signifies that children are unaware of what they are: sacrifices for the adults. The adults view them and can forget for just a moment about the calamities that occur in their lives. Maybe the children are offering themselves to save the befallen adults from hell. Which means that the last stanza shows the sincerity of the children's songs as they are like "a mighty wind" and "harmonious thunderings". But I think the bigger idea is that Blake is showing the hypocrisy of the "aged men, wise guardians of  the poor" because the men are only trying to make themselves feel better about their atrocious behaviors. As I remember, there was few orphanage during the 18th century that had good living conditions because the head of the orphanages took the donations and used  the money for themselves, which makes the "Grey-headed beadles" hypocrites as well. Blake cloaks this irony behind the children and try to portray what society believes it is doing 'for' the children.

"Holy Thursday (Songs of Experience)" reveals the irony with comparing the actual situation with that in heaven. The first line starts off by asking "Is this a holy thing to see...?" In other terms, "Is making children sing for us really a holy thing in the beautiful cathedral even though in reality the very children are suffering from sickness, disease, and maltreatment in the orphanages?" That's how I perceived the first stanza. Blake is pointing out the sickening hypocrisy of the wealthy upper class for trying to cover up their real intention of 'donating' to the orphanages, to lessen their guilt and sins. Therefore, the songs that the children are singing are far from "song of joy" because they toil under the very hypocrisy that the wealthy are feeding off of. The children as they grow older realize what they have suffered and their sun can never shine because the light has been smudged by the upper class. Their world will be ""eternal winter" because they will fail to find warmth or hope in the sinful world. When I was reading the last stanza, I immediately thought of heaven, but that means that the place where "Babe can never hunger" is not existent anywhere on earth. The grim view that only death can release the children into an eternal salvation of hope and dream shows how Blake perceives the world.

I don't know how well I analyzed Blake's poem, but I know that as I reread the poem over and over again, I was realizing various elements and relations that tied together. .

“Mr. Z” by M. Carl Holman

“Mr. Z” by M. Carl Holman

1              Taught early that his mother’s skin was the sign of error,

            He dressed and spoke the perfect part of honor;

            Won scholarships, attended the best schools,

            Disclaimed kinship with jazz and spirituals;

5          Chose prudent, raceless views of each situation,

            Or when he could not cleanly skirt dissension,

            Faced up to the dilemma, firmly seized

            Whatever ground was Anglo-Saxonized.

            In diet, too, his practice was exemplary:

10         Of pork in its profane forms he was wary;

            Expert in vintage wines, sauces and salads,

            His palate shrank from cornbread, yams and collards.

            He was as careful whom he chose to kiss:

            His bride had somewhere lost her Jewishness,

15         But kept her blue eyes; an Episcopalian

            Prelate proclaimed them matched chameleon.

            Choosing the right addresses, here, abroad,

            They shunned those places where they might be barred;

            Even less anxious to be asked to dine

20         Where hosts catered to kosher accent or exotic skin.

            And so he climbed, unclogged by ethnic weights,

            An airborne plant, flourishing without roots.

            Not one false note was struck—until he died:

            His subtly grieving widow could have flayed

25         The obit writers, ringing crude changes on a clumsy phrase:

            “One of the most distinguished members of his race.”

If Mr. Z is the subject of this poem, then Mr. Z tried to live the perfect life by trying to cover up his heritage. The first line of this poem suggests that he is from a non-white family and probably that his mother was black, therefore, "his mother's skin was the sign of error." Also, it can be inferred that Mr. Z is from a mixed heritage, since it is only his mother that has African American roots. By trying to set himself above the stereotypical African American descendants, Mr. Z accepted everything of the upper white class norms and dejected the African American culture of food, style, and people. 

The irony is that the poet of this poem M. Carl Holman dedicated his life to end segregation but he wrote a poem about a half black man who disdains his culture. Although I am not definitely sure about what the poet's message is, I feel like the essence of this poem is to reveal that one shouldn't try to avert his or her background. The tone of the poem emphasizes the meticulous action of Mr. Z and the great attention he gives in trying to avoid anything that was not "exemplary". The picture perfectness of the poem also places a rigidness of the conformed life Mr. Z leads. It (life) seems like a duty and a presentation rather than one that is filled with spontaneity and surprises. He follows a formula in order to cover up any criticism or prejudice from society. By "choosing the right addresses, here, abroad", Mr. Z makes sure that he is in control of his own life. His formulaic approach allows him to die with "not one false note" being struck. However, the irony comes in on the last line, "One of the most distinguished members of his race" Um... "race" <-- the way I viewed this word is that all his way of life was futile at the end. Society still cast him as a different race than the normal, let's say, white population. Am I alright to assume this? What I am trying to say is that I think the poet, in writing the last line, tried to convey the message of "embrace your heritage and don't try to live by society's standards" After all, Mr. Z failed even though he was so perfect in all he did. Tying this back to the irony I mentioned in the beginning of the paragraph, I think Holman wrote this poem as a Civil Rights activist to share the message with the fellow African Americans who were trying to assimilate with the white population. (This is all my assumption) For Civil Rights movement, it was important for the African Americans to accept their identity as proud blacks in America. Their culture, heritage, and traditions shouldn't be distasteful, no matter what the white people tried to say. Their way of life was/is beautiful, and no one should try to take it away. Therefore, Holman illustrates the message that no matter how hard you try to cover up your heritage, it is a pointless act because white people are never going to accept an African American descendant as one of their own, so it's better to live by embracing the African American culture. 

Grendel's Mind = Craziness

Grendel's mental state of mind

After reading chapters 11 and 12 over the weekend, I have an urge to write about Grendel's mentality. Grendel's description of Beowulf was definitely a shocker and an eye opener because of the very high possibility of 'Grendel = CRAZY'.

Grendel's mentality has indicated that it has been deteriorating in subtle and obvious ways. The most prominent example is on page 92 where the poem that Grendel writes explicitly says, ""Grendel is crazy" (92). I mean, he's talking to himself, dances like a ballerina, and completely shifts his chain of thought. There are many different explanations as to why Grendel is digressing.
First, Grendel finds out from the glorious Shaper that he is a descendant of a hatred lineage, making him a total reject in Hrothgar's world. Then, the fact that even with the awareness, he cannot totally ignore Shaper's influence of beauty, unity, and patterness causes, essentially, his soul to become harrowed with conflicting thoughts. His mind wants him to embrace the beautiful elements, but his subconscious (dragon) steers him away from becoming assimilated into the men's society. Therefore, the Shaper has a profound impact on Grendel's conflicted view, causing him to 'overuse', for the lack of a better word, his brain.
As if the Shaper's influence was not enough, Wealtheow comes into the novel as "innocent as dawn on winter hills" (100). Her presence is enough to tear Grendel "apart". The image that Wealtheow symbolizes is so pure and absolutely stunning that Grendel becomes enchanted and enamored by Wealtheow. She acts as a protective force around the mead hall from both Grendel and the men's animal like behavior. Grendel, in his idleness, again suffers and becomes frustrated with his own inadequacies and lacking. I think at the end when Grendel decides to basically rape Wealtheow, he shocks himself again as he stares into "the ugliness between her legs" (110). This action wakes him up to go back to the dragon's side. Therefore, the shift again taxes his brain and mentality.
Also, another interesting point is that Grendel gradually starts laughing and laughs more and more, especially in not even funny situations. That can be seen as a sign of a mentally ill person, or in this case, a monster.
The sadness of the Shaper's death also contributes to the digression of Grendel's mentality. The man who embodied beauty and intellect is no longer present to give Grendel things to think about. Therefore, the Shaper and Wealtheow unknowingly succeeds in tearing Grendel's mind apart by the things that they embody, such as beauty, unity, pattern, etc.
I don't know if this is going on a tangent line, but I also wanted to mention how Grendel seems to believe that he is the center of the universe. Therefore, after Grendel attacks the meadhall and sees that the people build pyres to give offerings to the gods, he gets mad because he feels as if he should be worshiped. Does this make sense? For example, in chapter 1, it says, "The song swells, pushes through woods and sky, and they're singing now as if by some lunatic theory they had won" (14). Then, the most important quote comes up, "I shake with rage" (14). I think in some way, Grendel wants the humans to start worshiping him, he craves for his godliness to be accepted, causing him to become infuriated when he sees the humans worshiping other gods. Because he believes his periodic raids are beneficial to the humans, I think he is expecting some kind of reverence. However, because he doesn't get it, he "shakes with rage", which causes his mental state to deteriorate even further. 

Confession

Confession

On Friday Mrs. Clinch allowed us to work with our groups. My group (Chapter 10) decided what we were going to be in charge of but... (This is the confession part) none of us read the book :( I was still trying to make sense of what had happened in chapter seven and why & how the previous chapters connected with each other, I did not have time to read 8, 9 and 10. I mean let's be honest; Grendel is probably ten times harder than Winesburg, Ohio due to the whole existentialism and the nihilist ideas. So, back to the point, before Mrs. Clinch came over to talk to us about the things she wanted us to focus and what the major elements were, I skimmed the book and realized that the Shaper dies, the woman (I assumed Wealtheow) feels sad, etc. So, when Mrs. Clinch did come and said, "You know I have always wondered who the woman in the Shaper's room is?", I immediately said, "Isn't it Wealtheow? Because of..." Now that I have actually read the chapter, I can't help but feel so embarrassed by the answer I gave her. 

The above paragraph marks the end of the confession, and I wish to write about what I thought about the mysterious woman, Wealtheow, Grendel's mother, and the old monster woman. I have marked in the novel the strangeness about how whenever Wealtheow appears, Grendel will talk about his mother (not in relation to Wealtheow). Therefore, I thought that this must be an intentional juxtaposition by John Gardner to contrast the markedly different nature of these two creatures. Wealtheow represents the beauty, compassion, truth, and harmony, while Grendel's mother is the epitome of gruesomeness, lies, disconnectedness, etc. So when I read about the mysterious woman in the Shaper's room, I immediately though of Wealtheow, then Grendel's mother appear as Grendel "slink back home" (145). Grendel's mother is now described as one that "no longer shows any sign of sanity" (145). There is so much contrast! It seems as if as Wealtheow grows in prominence and is accepted by the men, Grendel’s mother is deteriorating in her state of mentality and physical appearance. Like the Shaper and Wealtheow were the only figures in Grendel who symbolized knowledge, happiness, and joy, but when Shaper dies, Wealtheow inherits the position all to herself. She is left alone to be in charge of unifying the men and bringing harmony in the mead hall. Then what’s the whole deal with the “I am not the only monster on these moors. I met an old woman as wild as the wind” (149); I mean, why a woman in particular? Monster vs. woman….? Oh, and the layout of the passage where the quote comes from is different than the previous ones. WHY?!! And why does Grendel say, “I know there is nothing to expect” (149) even though the old monster is out there?

I just reread the passage and maybe the old woman is actually Wealtheow. On page 100, it says, “Her smooth long hair was as red as fire and soft as the ruddy sheen on dragon’s gold” (100). The fire is like the wildness of the old woman, and the dragon appears in here and with the old woman. This is an idea I will have to come back to.

Warning by Jenny Joseph

When I am an old woman I shall wear purple
With a red hat which doesn't go, and doesn't suit me.
And I shall spend my pension on brandy and summer gloves
And satin sandals, and say we've no money for butter.
I shall sit down on the pavement when I'm tired
And gobble up samples in shops and press alarm bells
And run my stick along the public railings
And make up for the sobriety of my youth.
I shall go out in my slippers in the rain
And pick flowers in other people's gardens
And learn to spit.

You can wear terrible shirts and grow more fat
And eat three pounds of sausages at a go
Or only bread and pickle for a week
And hoard pens and pencils and beermats and things in boxes.

But now we must have clothes that keep us dry
And pay our rent and not swear in the street
And set a good example for the children.
We must have friends to dinner and read the papers.

But maybe I ought to practice a little now?
So people who know me are not too shocked and surprised
When suddenly I am old, and start to wear purple.

When I search for a poem to write a blog about, I like to read the first line and if it sounds interesting, I read on. "Warning" written by Jenny Joseph caught my eye with its first line. I couldn't help but smile as I read the poem, and when I started imagining my own grand mother wearing purple and learning to spit, a little chuckle escaped out of me. The obvious meaning of the poem can be that people are so entrapped and bound by the ways of society and  restrict their thoughts and behaviors to society's ideologies; therefore, losing the ability to express themselves. By using the words "purple" and "red", Joseph is able to allow the speaker to create a bit obscene picture of an elderly grandmother doing things that are viewed as unacceptable in society. The light tone of the speaker keeps the humor going through the first few stanzas. However, the poem starts to become gloomier and more dense towards the last stanza. The humor disappears and becomes bogged down by the responsibilities of the present. The speaker has to set an example for the children and be an informed citizen who is socially accepted. 

A question that can be asked is, 'why wait until we are old, and when do we become old?' The second question just sparked some interesting thoughts within me. If the speaker decides to do all those eccentric things when she becomes older, when exactly will that be? Does it mean that old age is when no body cares for you because they themselves are so invested in whatever society imposes upon them? When you have no one to be with, it liberates you to become free from people's judgments, ideas, and expectations. However, isn't during the time of youth when you can find your identity and live as you wish? Isn't that what other writers are writing or have written about? For example, Winesburg, Ohio implies that youth is what everyone craves for because hope is associated with it. I guess the speaker of "Warning" has the opposite view of youth, which is that youth is a hindrance to freewill. 

Actually, I really agree with the author's view because as a teenager, I am so engrossed in what other people have to say about me. Basically, I don't have my OWN view or stance, not really. I mean I like to think that I do but in actuality, I don't because the ideas are of others, and I am just adapting it to my way. The clothes I wear, how girls have to act in front of others are things I never even questioned because it seemed so natural. However, when you actually think about it, aren't I being conformed? therefore, losing my identity? Perhaps I will be like the speaker of the poem and start wearing purple and eat whatever I want when I grow really old. Until then, I don't think I will have the courage to go against the society's ways. I mean who can really say that they aren't conformed? Can you?

“The Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock” vs. Winesburg, Ohio

            As I pervade deeper into these two works, keeping in mind the possibilities of similarities and parallelism, I am beginning to see the comparison. When we were discussing the poem in class discussions, I kept thinking, ‘I still don’t understand this poem or how it relates to the work by Sherwood Anderson.’ The frustration and lack of connection slowly unveiled when I started to prepare for the rough draft. As I reread and re-annotated “The Book of the Grotesque”, I had a moment of epiphany, which really made me happy.

S’io credesse che mia risposta fosse
A persona che mai tornasse al mondo,
Questa fiamma staria senza piu scosse.
Ma perciocche giammai di questo fondo
Non torno vivo alcun, s’i’odo il vero,
Senza tema d’infamia ti rispondo.

Translation:

"If I but thought that my response were made

to one perhaps returning to the world,

this tongue of flame would cease to flicker.

But since, up from these depths, no one has yet

returned alive, if what I hear is true,

I answer without fear of being shamed.

The beginning of the poem by T.S. Elliot and eight to the last paragraph on the first chapter of Winesburg, Ohio has irrefutable parallelism. On page two of my book, the narrator, speaker, experiences something almost spiritual, “For an hour the procession of grotesques passed before the eyes of the old man, and then, although it was a painful thing to do, he crept out of bed and began to write, Some one of the grotesques had made a deep impression on his mind and he wanted to describe it” (2). Although this quotation is lengthy, I believe it is necessary in order for me to explain what I saw. At 2 AM in the morning, you either tend to imagine things or have moments of realization. The latter happened to me.  The speaker of the poem says that no one will hear his story, which is why he is narrating it to the listener. I believe that this symbolizes Anderson’s message about truth. Just as if the writer were to publish his book, he would become grotesque; the speaker realizes that he will also become a grotesque if his story were to be known to the world. Also, the writer is awoken by ghosts of grotesques who, in a way, persuade him to get up and write about their stories. “Some one of the grotesques”, the one who makes an impression on the old man, can be seen as the narrator of the poem. The narrator had once been a grotesque but the release from Earth allows him to realize the futility of truth and cause him to lament about his experience. Therefore, in my view, Elliot decided to write a personal perspective of a grotesque character by using Alfred Prufrock to parallel one of the stories in Winesburg, Ohio.

However, I am not going to think about which story the poem best fits because I think the poem has many similarities with a handful of the stories in Winesburg, Ohio. The ghostly images, windows, hands, and feeling of frustration are all ubiquitous in both literary works. Just as the characters in Winesburg, Ohio wish to retrieve their youthfulness, Prufrock also desires to keep his youth, not fully realizing that he has already lost it. In the end, he has to wake himself from a dream state of mind in order to face his fears and ultimately, await his death. 

The Lamb

The Lamb

BY WILLIAM BLAKE

Little Lamb who made thee 

         Dost thou know who made thee 

Gave thee life & bid thee feed. 

By the stream & o'er the mead;

Gave thee clothing of delight,

Softest clothing wooly bright;

Gave thee such a tender voice,

Making all the vales rejoice! 

         Little Lamb who made thee 

         Dost thou know who made thee 

         Little Lamb I'll tell thee,

         Little Lamb I'll tell thee!

He is called by thy name,

For he calls himself a Lamb: 

He is meek & he is mild, 

He became a little child: 

I a child & thou a lamb, 

We are called by his name.

         Little Lamb God bless thee. 

         Little Lamb God bless thee.

Before I read this poem, I wanted to learn a little background of the poet, William Blake, because I wanted to understand the life the poet led that induced him to write the poem. William Blake during his time was considered as a genius to some and an insane person to many others, such as Wordsworth. He lived in poverty most of his life with his wife and earned a meager wage as an engraver and illustrator. 

What's ironic about this poem is that the speaker addresses a certain person as "Little Lamb" as if the person's name is actually Little Lamb (I guess it could be). However, the speaker goes on to ask the person "Dost thou know who made thee". The irony is that Jesus is often referred to as lamb of sacrifice and the answer to the question should be 'lamb: Jesus', but the speaker addresses the person as "Little Lamb". Therefore, why would the speaker ask Little Lamb who made him because the answer should be Jesus? Jesus, due to his dying on the cross as the perfect sacrifice, is the lamb. Or could it be that the speaker is addressing Jesus directly and the entity "called by thy name" is God because of the Holy Trinity? Because Christians believe that God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are essentially one same entity, it could be that the speaker is using the trinity definition in the poem. 

            The tone of this poem is rather very soothing and excited at the same time. The speaker in the first stanza tells the person all the grace God or Jesus bestows on His creation. God “Gave thee life & bid thee feed” and did many other things for us. I interpret this stanza as a song of praise to glorify God and to recognize the love of God or Jesus. The second stanza continues the tone of praise while also becoming more assertive. The second line, “Little Lamb I’ll tell thee!” emphasizes the eagerness to which the speaker wishes to share the name of the benefactor.  The stanza stresses the sacrifice Jesus made even though He himself was pure and like a “little child”. The befuddling line is when the speaker says “I a child & thou a lamb”. Why would the speaker refer to the person as the lamb if the speaker is trying to convey a message about God and Jesus?

            I picked this poem because as a Christian, I thought that I will be able to decipher the poem more in depth. However, because I have a set image and ideology about the belief behind Christianity, it was actually harder to analyze the poem due to the preconceived ideas. Just as when you learn and adapt to certain ideas, it is very difficult to change the perception when it is so firmly ingrained inside of you. I think the speaker is trying to relay a message about God and Jesus but the subject is still very ambiguous to me.

Works Cited: 

"William Blake." Poets.org. Academy of American Poets, n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2013.

The Seasons of Winesburg, Ohio

The Seasons of Winesburg, Ohio

Preparing for the mini seminar for last Thursday really helped me see the patterns of seasons, weather, and just the whole interrelation of the characters in Winesburg, Ohio. My story assigned to me was 'Paper Pills'. I never knew there was so much correlation with one story to another until I read 'Paper Pills' over and over again.

Doctor Reefy meets the tall dark girl on a summer afternoon. She and the doctor connect in a way where the doctor is able to share his truths with the girl, and she in return, can understand him. The connection is like the apples Doctor Reefy talks about. He knows the sweetness of the twisted apples, and the tall dark girl is able to realize the beauty in the disfigurement as well. However, the girl dies the following spring, taking Doctor Reefy's happiness with her. "During the winter he read to her all of the odds and ends of thoughts he had scribbled on the bits of paper" (12); this action infers that the reminiscence of his wife has taken away any joy of life. The point I wish to make is that the doctor reads the truths during the winter, and that "he formed a truth that arose gigantic in his mind. The truth clouded the world. It became terrible and then faded away and the little thoughts began again" (11). The word cloud can infer a coming of a storm, rain, or snow. Although it comes, it cannot stay, which is why the truths shrink back into small thoughts.

If you look at the later parts of the novel, Reverend Curtis Hartman sits "One night in January when it was bitter cold and snow lay deep on the streets of Winesburg..." (90) to peep on Kate Swift. However, it is on that very night that the reverend experiences the moment of truth which sends him running the street to proclaim the message of truth. I feel like the reason Reverend Hartman is able to have the realization is because of Doctor Reefy. The fact that Doctor Reefy reads the truths during the winter and the truths cloud the world connect with how the truth is instilled inside of the reverend in the snowy night of January. Doctor Reefy sends and reveals the truths one by one and the characters in the novel experience the moment of truth.

In "Adventure", Alice, during her depressed reflection about growing old all alone, "For a moment she stood by the window hearing the rain beat against the glass and then a strange desire took possession of her... Not for years had she felt so full of youth and courage" (67). The truth takes hold of Alice and sends her running out in the rain naked. Although Alice is able to realize the truth, she cannot keep it because "it became terrible and then faded away..." (11). She is not strong enough to live in youth because another truth already possesses her.

            Kate Swift also becomes young during the winter night of a storm. “Alone in the night in the winter streets she was lovely” (95). The harsh and sharp features of her figure becomes beautiful and “were as the features of a tiny goddess on a pedestal in a garden in the dim light of a summer evening” (95). Summer indicates liveliness, youth, and passion, in which Kate is a beautiful youth. She doesn’t become fatigued even after hours of walking in the cold. The passion that takes hold of her sends her to George Willard, but because George does not realize the truth, Kate is snapped back into reality. She cries in her room after the truth leaves her.

            The moments of truth touch the character in different ways. However, the truth of youth, sent by Doctor Reefy, cannot dwell in the hearts of the characters for long because they have already become grotesque.

Youth vs. Aged

Youth vs. Aged

I don't think I will ever be able to anticipate the mind-blowing moments in AP Lit, no matter how many discussions I go through. Friday, after taking the reading quiz, my mind was completely blown away, literally. I read and annotated Winesburg, Ohio pretty decently but wasn’t able to draw any connections or realize any of Sherwood Anderson’s brilliance. Here are examples of my take away from some of the chapters when I read on my own: Hands= a lonely pedophile with weird hands, Mother: poor woman who cannot find comfort from anyone, and The Strength of God: a really creepy pastor who creeps on a woman. What my point is that when I was reading this book, I was just confused and puzzled as to how the stories connected together and how it can be one of Mrs. Clinch’s favorite books. But, after Friday, I had a major realization and know that that magical discussion was only a small scratch in analyzing Winesburg, Ohio.

It seems like everyone in Winesburg, Ohio is trying to teach George Willard and to force him to end their miseries by telling him about their experiences. For many of these characters, George Willard is still young, and therefore, has hope. They believe that if George heeds to their instructions, their agonies will be no more. For example, Wing Biddlebaum tells George, “You have the inclination to be alone and to dream and you are afraid of dreams… You must begin to dream” (Anderson 7). It’s not even a plea; it’s a command for George Willard to heed. Why does Wing demand this of George? Because he himself lost the ability to dream after the parents of the Pennsylvania town took away his joy and, basically, his life. For Wing, it is for George to continue the journey Wing never got to finish, but the demand only frightens George. I think a point Anderson may be trying to say is that people’s dreams are taken away by society’s rules and expectations, but for youth, there is still hope, it just depends on whether or not youth decides to listen and dream for their sake as well as for the older generation. However, Wing is not the only person who seeks to give advice to George, Doctor Parcival, Elizabeth Willard, and Kate Swift also desire for George to heed to their idea.

The conflict between youth and old age constantly appears in the novel. While the young people, just like the berry pickers in Hands, take risks and enjoy life, the older people stay confined to their environment, whether it be their home or job, and reminiscent about their past. It’s as if they are actually mentally and physically immobile from their environment. Therefore, ‘trees’, ‘fields’, ‘roads’, and ‘train’ are associated with the youth. I think this concept is still prevalent in today’s society. Many adults in a child’s life are trying to speak of their truth and to guide and instruct the child to follow their road. However, in doing so, the child may experience bewilderment and confusion because he or she is not given the chance to realize who he or she is before venturing out into the world. Finding one’s identity should occur before the adults try to force a way of life. 

Frankenstein and the Importance of “Tintern Abbey”

Frankenstein and the Importance of “Tintern Abbey”

The sounding cataract

Haunted me like a passion: the tall rock,

The mountain, and the deep and gloomy wood,

Their colours and their forms, were then to me

An appetite; a feeling and a love,

That had no need of a remoter charm,

By thought supplied, nor any interest

Unborrowed from the eye.

As history records, Mary Shelley’s writing was influenced by a wide range of great novelists, philosophers, and poets. Her father’s circle of friends included the famed poet: Samuel T. Coleridge, who collaborated alongside with Wordsworth during his lifetime. Therefore, it is only natural that Shelley’s most renowned novel, Frankenstein, embodies many characteristics used or works created by these people. Among many examples, the inclusion of the excerpt of Wordsworth’s famous poem: Tintern Abbey in Frankenstein not only is able to explicitly capture the significance of Victor and Henry’s roles as foils but also embody the supreme importance of nature.

               Henry and Victor are, in modern terms, best friends. They grow from being childhood playmates to companions as they age. However, even as children, their subjects of interests can be seen as complete opposites. Henry finds passion in, “the moral relations of things… the virtues of heroes, and the actions of men, were this theme…” (35). Whereas Victor says he is, “directed to the metaphysical, or, in its highest sense, the physical secrets of the world” (34). These two paths guide their future pursuits, and in Shelley’s view, Clerval towards good and Victor towards evil. Clerval’s quest for knowledge did not and could not pave his way for destruction because his pursuit is, in a way, to become one with nature. Victor on the other hand does everything in his power to be polarized from nature and to conquer it. Victor realizes this difference and quotes a section of “Tintern Abbey”, changing the pronoun ‘I’ to ‘him’ to idolize Henry in order to subconsciously recognize and admit to all of his own flaws and mistakes. Therefore, the contrast of Henry and Victor creates a strong emphasis on the negative consequences that befall on humans who parallel their lives with the course of nature. 

             I believe that Shelley respected Wordsworth and his philosophies to a point where she wanted to reiterate his message to the world through her novel. Frankenstein, the product of that desire, therefore, shares many similarities with “Tintern Abbey” in order to best illustrate Wordsworth’s message. Just as Wordsworth narrates the poem to Dorothy, Walton also has Margaret be the ultimate listener. Although the characters themselves do not correlate in a literal sense, the effect Shelley creates is essential to the novel. Margaret is who the story dedicates itself to and the most crucial figure because she has the final say in the outcome or opinion on Walton’s tale. Shelley, to even further point out “Tintern Abbey”, directly has Victor quote the poem. As I mentioned earlier, the poem serves to highlight and bring out Henry’s role as a foil to Victor. However, the quoted section of the poem also is one of Wordsworth’s most intimate confessions about his connection with nature. So I am convinced that Wordsworth plays the all the characters of Walton, Henry, and Nature at different points of the book. Similar to “Tintern Abbey”, these characters demonstrates how Wordsworth goes through the phase of appreciating external beauty, internal beauty, and aligning himself to become one with nature. Therefore, Walton relays the beginning of the phase, then Henry as the character to embody the internal realization, then Nature to communicate the alignment phase. 

             I may be making conclusions that are too far-fetched, but it is definitely interesting to think about and ponder why Shelley would connect the novel to the elements regarding “Tintern Abbey”. 

Truth

Truth

People tell lies everywhere they go, even to their closest friends, families, and themselves. I have a habit of lying when it comes to trying to explain a situation. It’s under those certain circumstances where I know it will take more than the necessary time to explain why I am at the store, how I am actually doing, or what I really feel. And most of the time people are really not interested in what you have to say, so to respect that, you tell a lie. But the weird occurrence is that even while I am telling a lie, I want to tell the truth. I have an urge to be ‘righteous’ and good, but the falsehood ends up dominating. Does that mean that humans innately search truth, but ultimately are consumed by immorality?

I guess I have been thinking about the truth and the purpose of life ever since that Thursday. You know, when Mrs. Clinch mesmerized and blew our minds by reading Winesburg, Ohio. I started reading the book before, but the close-reading made me realize there are even more elements to look for and question. The particular section that blew me away once again was, “it was his notion that the moment one of the people took one of the truths to himself, called it his truth, and tried to live his life by it, he became a grotesque and the truth he embraced became a falsehood” (Anderson, 2). What does this possibly mean? Maybe human’s imperfections corrupt and disrupt the beautiful matters of life. Maybe humans have their own truth to live by but are blinded by the other truths of the world; therefore, committing themselves to live by something that is not their own. OR maybe there is no such thing as the ‘truth’ when humans come into the picture.

But what is ‘truth’? No, really think about it. Is it the same thing as a fact? Because when we tell the truth, it can be a different version to another. If truth is a perception of reality, then there is never one truth or even a universal truth. You can believe in the same ‘truth’ as another but it can’t be the same because it becomes personalized in different ways. What my mom may think is the truth may be different from what I believe. Dictionary.com has many definition but all of them gravitate to “conformity with fact or reality; verity”. Really? Is that really what truth is? I think there is a reason why truth cannot be the same as a fact because truth is diverse. When you watch a crime movie, the prosecutors are always saying, “Tell the truth” but shouldn’t they just be saying, “Tell us what happened” because with the word ‘truth’ there can be so many discrepancies.

I guess I have digressed and have jumped from asking about the convenience of truth to what truth really is. But writing about it really made me think about what truth might be. 

19th Century Society vs. 21st Century Society: Different or Same?

19^th Century Society vs. 21^st Century Society: Different or Same?

           Last Friday night, I was in a car accident with my parents (don’t worry, no one was hurt). The car behind us rear ended us at 10:30 PM when we were coming back from church for Friday night service. We pulled up to an empty parking lot when the police to came. The officer was irritated that we have been “blocking the road” for ten minutes and couldn't understand why we would even try to cause traffic (as if he told us to get off the road!). He decided to yell at my dad for “not getting off the road”, so I had to tell the raging officer that my dad doesn't speak English. Then he decided to walk back to the car saying, “I don’t know what is so hard about following SIMPLE directions”. The attitude of the officer is the kind my parents have to put up with everyday because their race and inability to speak English makes them inferior in the eyes of American society. Although you might think, ‘not everyone is like that and there are plenty of people who try to understand’, but the sad reality is you are wrong. People have no idea how hard the lives of non-English speaking immigrants are. The fact that they can’t speak English makes them second-rate and unable to enjoy the basic privilege such as receiving respect. This kind of discrimination exists in all shapes and form in society in all ages. From the minute you enter society, it matter what clothes, shoes, cars, house, and etc. you possess, and the groups are organized into monetary standings. Therefore, Frankenstein became very relatable especially when the creature began his tale. Not only did I feel the connection of being an outcast, but also the desperation he felt when he decided to learn the language in order to become accepted. When he bemoans, “Could they turn from their door one, however monstrous, who solicited their compassion and friendship?” (130), I knew exactly what he was feeling because I had been in the same situation. Although the inability to speak English might not seem as disastrous as having body formed of dead body parts, the struggle was real and genuine. The constant fear of thinking that people were judging me even when I learned to speak the language haunted me wherever I went. Maybe that is why I feel so much more at ease when I am with children and that’s why I love volunteering for children because they are less inclined to judge and I don’t have to mask any of myself from them. That is why it was really distressing when the creature couldn't find, not one, soul to find comfort from. At least I have my family and church children to care for and receive love from, but he had absolutely no one. Therefore, when I hear other students complaining about how the creature was in constant state of whining, I would think to myself, ‘you have no idea how deeply it hurts’. And the sad reality is that even if the creature were to be created again in the 21^st century, the society would still not accept its existence. 

Victor Frankenstein: Insane or Sane?

Victor Frankenstein: Insane or Sane?

Yesterday, during our small group discussion, a group member mentioned something very interesting and the thought has been on my mind for some time. So, I am going to blog about it. She said, "I think Frankenstein made the whole story up". When she said that I was at first, 'here's another girl who doesn't know what she is talking about. Why would we be talking about this book if everyone thought Victor was lying?' However, when I started to listen to what she had to say, I could see the her viewpoint. I mean, both Walton and Victor were two very passionate and goal driven people. And people who have strong desires and want to fulfill those desires sometimes are just overcome by their pursuits and can have the potential to go insane. Therefore, what if, just what if, Victor and Walton were making this story up? It said in the book, "For this (creating the creature) I had deprived myself of rest and health" (55). Victor was sleep deprived; he didn't eat when he had to; he didn't go outside for two years. How can a person living like that not go mentality crazed? Although Victor was intellectual, he was, in a way, taken over by his intellect. The knowledge and want of creating another creature and having the control over life and death made him immerse himself in years of research in a secluded place. And although he did attend college, the book does not mention any friendship being built. Victor voluntarily secludes himself from society and family. Maybe the story that he is telling Walton is just a fiction that he dreamed of because the trauma of creating the creature was too much to handle and damaged his brain. Also, Walton may be suffering from some kind of insanity as well and thought that he saw the monster on the ship. This preposition makes sense. After all, if Victor’s narration is false, then who other than Walton “saw” the monster? Walton also “voluntarily endured cold, famine, thirst, and want of sleep”. He was just like Victor in so many levels, so he could also suffer from the same mental failures as well. Also, perhaps Mary Shelley wanted to show that if an individual pursues a journey that goes against the natural ways of the world, it has the potential to ruin the person socially, morally, and physically. It took me a while to digest her preposition because the thought never occurred to me, and I had a firm belief in Victor’s sanity. However, once she spoke of the possibility of a fabricated story, I could not help myself from wondering and questioning whether I had perceived the story wrong. It is very fascinating how the book can be perceived and interpreted in so many various ways and levels. How one preposition can totally take me to another route in looking at the book is, in my opinion, the beauty of literature.