Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Pride And Prejudice Notes For Paper

-Marriage

-The way people perceive marriage shows that marriage makes up the most important thing in life. Prejudice signifies a lot to people because that becomes a key aspect when choosing a partner to marry. According to Mrs. Bennet: "I am quite sorry, Lizzy, that you should be forced to have that disagreeable man all to yourself. But I hope you will not mind it: it is all for Jane's sake" (pg281). The prejudice of Mr. Darcy is so negative in Mrs. Bennet's mind that she sees the walk with him as a torture. On the other hand Lizzy would have a different opinion regarding the walk with Mr. Darcy.

-Money and social class also plays a big role in marriage. A perfect marriage would be considered the one where the people that are marrying are of similar social classes. The case of Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth is very different and the bond between them is expressed by Lady Catherine as "You will be censured, slighted, and despised, by everyone connected with him. Your alliance will be a disgrace; your name will never be mentioned by any of us" (pg266). The hate of Lady Catherine is very big and it is only because Elizabeth comes from a lower social class. The marriage between Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth exemplifies the marriage where they are joined together because of love, rather than money.

Monday, November 29, 2010

Pride And Prejudice Ideas For Paper

-Women's roles

-The main purpose of a woman in her life revolves around marriage. There are different ways that marriage can be looked for. Some characters want to marry because of love like Elizabeth and Jane, others because of pleasure like Wickham and Lydia, but Mrs. Bennet wants to marry her daughters for money. It doesn't matter which kind o marriage happens, a married woman is considered so much better than the rest of the women. Lydia's pride after being married has increases a lot and the way she treats her sisters as inferiors demonstrate this. According to Lydia: "But you know married women have never much time for writing. My sisters may write to me. They will have nothing else to do" (pg246). Lydia's arrogance has made her think herself superior, having something to do compared to her sisters.

-Having a son in that time was inevitably the most important thing. All the property and possessions of a father would be inherited by the son. In the case there was no son then all his possessions would go to another family member, leaving the family poor. That case is the case of the Bennets. This situation is described when according to Austen: "When first Mr. Bennet had married, economy was held to be perfectly useless; for, of course, they were to have a son" (pg229). The economical situation of a family would be perfect if a son was in the family because all the money would go to him. The woman was not considered such a powerful figure to be able to inherit the father's possessions, even though they belonged to their family.

Pride And Prejudice Ideas For Paper

-Mr. Darcy changes a lot in his attitude, especially towards Elizabeth. He is not considered to be as excessively arrogant and proud as before. Jane Austen describes Darcy's new attitude as "Never, even in the company of his friends at Netherfield, or his dignified relations at Rosings, has she seen him so desirous to please, so free from self-consequence" (pg195). Since he is in his house he has to live up to his prejudice or fame, therefore being far kinder than in other occasions. Another option is that he feels a lot more comfortable in his house to show his real self than in other situations. The general prejudice of Mr. Darcy in his house is very positive. Mrs. Reynolds's opinion regarding Darcy's marriage is described as "I do not know when that will be. I do not know who is good enough for him" (pg.183).

-Mrs. Bennet possesses several different qualities. She constantly wants the best for her daughters but will over control them. Her main goal is for them to marry and she will do anything she can to accomplish that. I would also describe her as very exaggerated and a pessimist. According to Mrs. Bennet: "Mr. Bennet gone away, and I know he will fight Wickham wherever he meets him, and then he will be killed, and what is to become of us all? The Collinses will turn us out before he is cold in his grave" (pg213). Mrs. Bennet is really exaggerating the situation as well as looking at the worst case scenario. I would also describe her as annoying because she gets too much into the problems of others like the ones of her daughters as well as the ones of the whole town.

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Pride And Prejudice Ideas For Paper

-Pride

-A characteristic of every character in the book is pride. Pride can be defined as the way a person thinks about himself. The level of pride also determines the attitude of the character. Mr. Darcy is described as having a great pride, leading to arrogance and dislike.

-Elizabeth's refusal of Mr. Darcy's marriage proposal must have been a hard hit in his pride. He was completely sure that Elizabeth would quickly accept. When he found out that there was a woman that had rejected his proposal his pride must have been destroyed. According to Jane: "His being so sure of succeeding was wrong, and certainly ought not to have appeared; but consider how much it would increase his disappointment" (Austen, pg.167).

-Prejudice

-Prejudice affects everyone in the book, being subjects to constant criticism. Prejudice is what others think about you. According to Elizabeth: "The general prejudice against Mr. Darcy is so violent that it would be the death of half the good people in Meryton to attempt to place him in an aimable light" (Austen, pg.169). The general prejudice of Mr. Darcy has already been established as so bad that it is impossible to show the real Mr. Darcy now.

-Criticism

-Criticizing seems like the favorite past time of the characters in Pride and Prejudice. The public opinion is very important and people can't bear having a negative prejudice against them.

Sunday, November 21, 2010

A Marriage Ruined By Mr. Darcy

Jane's marriage with Mr. Bingley displayed the perfect marriage. There existed only one problem in this encounter, Mr. Darcy. Mr. Darcy didn't see this marriage as the best for his friend. What did he see wrong about these two families joining together? Did he have better plans for Mr. Bingley? According to Mr. Darcy: "I have no wish of denying that I did everything in my power to separate my friend from your sister, or that I have rejoice in my success" (Austen, pg144). Mr. Darcy could have separated his friend from Jane for two reasons. One, Jane's family is very poor. Or two, he preferred that his dear friend married his sister instead of Jane. When Mr. Darcy describes his effects on the marriage as having "rejoice in my success," he must have something to gain in the separation. According to this I would have to say that the option that brings more happiness to him is the marrying with his sister. If Mr. Bingley marries his sister then that means that their friendship will be consolidated by joining the two families by marriage. If it were my case I wouldn't mind one of my best friends marrying with one of my cousins or my sister, because in that sense our friendship will be consolidated.

That explanation for his wanting to break up the marriage convinced me of his reasoning. I was surprised to be proved wrong when later, in the letter he wrote to Elizabeth, he gave other reasons for this breaking up. One of his reasons was "The situation of your mother's family, though objectionable, was nothing in comparison of that total want of propriety so frequently, so almost uniformly betrayed by herself, by your three younger sisters" (Austen, pg148). Mr. Darcy couldn't forget the economical part of Jane's family. He mentions the fact that the situation Jane's family is not the best. Also the fact that every daughter is looking for a man to marry, preferably with money conforms one of the reasons Mr. Darcy broke up the marriage. In other words, he was afraid that his friend marriage's main objective was money rather than love. The state of wealth in this family is the reason why Mr. Darcy disapproved this marriage.

The Clothes Of Wealth







There exists nothing that displays wealth better than clothes. Education and attitude do show in some aspects the wealth of a person, but clothing and the elegance of it just mirror wealth. Today examples of this are constantly seen. When people buy the brand new cleats or shoes everyone knows that they have certain amount of wealth. On the other hand, when people buy cheaper shoes their wealth is also shown. A person who can't afford the new shoes will certainly have to buy another brand of shoes. In other words clothes do vary depending on levels of wealth, in some way they classify people as wealthy or poor. As said by Mr. Collins "Lady Catherine is far from requiring that elegance of dress in us which becomes herself and daughter. I would advise you merely to put on whatever of your clothes is superior to the rest" (Austen, pg120). Elizabeth's clothes are not expected to be as good as Lady Catherine's. Lady Catherine has a lot of wealth compared to Elizabeth. In effect, their clothing differs greatly showing their differences of money. In other words, clothes are constantly showing the level of wealth a person has.


 


 

Wealthier people in Pride and Prejudice are seen as better and their opinion has a higher value. Lady Catherine constantly talks almost without letting anyone speak their opinion. The lower the wealth of person is the less he talks. This might be a clear distinction Austen wants to make of social class. According to Austen: "The two girls had the honour of assisting Mrs. Jenkinson to make up her party. Their table was superlatively stupid. Scarcely a syllable was uttered" (Austen, pg 125). Mrs. Jenkinson occupies the charge of a nurse. She is portrayed as the least wealthy person out of the whole party. Since she has less money than the rest her opinion doesn't value as much, making her a silent person in presence of wealthier people. The more money a person has, the more his opinion will value, and the amount he talks is affected by this.

Fame And Pride

Fame consists mainly of the public opinion about a person. How others see this person affects greatly their fame. Jane Austen's seems to think that fame is very important. Being famous in Pride and Prejudice signifies a lot because vanity is very high as well as prejudice. According to Austen: "It is very often nothing but our own vanity that deceives us. Women fancy admiration means more than it does" (Austen, pg102). At first, I didn't understand how vanity could deceive a woman, but I do know how pride can deceive a person. Pride can make a person think excessively good of himself and when reality hits this person he will be disappointed that his actual self didn't stand up to his pride. Also having a very low pride makes a person feel bad about himself and have self esteem problems. However, vanity can affect pride, also having an effect on the person. Vanity could be described as the level of importance the prejudice of others has in a person. If vanity is very high, which is the case in the book, then the prejudice of others could greatly affect pride. The way "Women fancy admiration" is nothing more than their vanity, wanting to be admired.

As a matter of fact public opinion has a great effect in pride of people. A person who is always talked about as good and honorable would have a high pride. Since everyone thinks well of him, he will most likely think good of him as well. If this public opinion is the contrary the pride of the person could also go down. Mrs. Bennet's pride went down a lot when the marriage vents happened. According to Austen: "Mrs. Bennet had many grievances to relate, and much to complain of. […] Two of her girls had been on the point of marriage, and after all there was nothing" (pg. 105). The main objective of Mrs. Bennet is to marry her daughters and preferably to a wealthy man. In this case she was very close to achieving this two times but had failed at the end. This event was a direct hit to her pride. Prejudice about how her two daughters were so close to marriage and in the end nothing happened could have appeared, being obstacles of Mrs. Bennet's objective.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Benefits Of Marriage

Marriage characterizes the ideal life. This ideal life imposed by society consists of money, friends, and a wife. Marriage becomes a vital event in a person's life if he wants success. This doesn't differ when compared to the standards of marriage in Pride and Prejudice. Every character in the book seeks for a husband or wife, desiring marriage. No one is exempt from this standard that society imposes on them. Mr. Collins, when talking to Elizabeth, proposes the following reason for him to marry "First, I think it a right thing for every clergyman in easy circumstances to set the example of matrimony in his parish" (Austen, pg 80). Mr. Collins sees marriage as setting an example for his community. Setting an example means that a person wants to show others how things are done, but at the same time he makes himself superior to the others by making them follow his example. A way of gaining power and public respect is by marriage. In the ideal life, marriage will also bring friends along with it.

In Pride and Prejudice marriage also involves the gain of wealth. People marry for many different reasons including money. According to Mrs. Bennet: "She is a very headstrong foolish girl, and does not know her own interest; but I will make her know it" (Austen, pg 84). Mrs. Bennet wants to marry her daughter Elizabeth to Mr. Collins because of money. Mr. Collins is a wealthy and powerful man but he lacks an attitude that pleases Elizabeth. Mrs. Bennet will not make Elizabeth know her own interest but rather she will teach her the family's interest. The Bennet family will gain prestige if their daughters marry wealthy men, bringing the family name to a better status. Elizabeth doesn't like Mr. Collins but the only thing needed to wed is money. Mr. Collins's wealth has instantly won Mrs. Bennet's help

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Mr. Pride

Pride, as used in Pride and Prejudice, means the self judgment of one self. The way a person thinks about himself is pride. Pride has also many levels. There are levels where the pride from a person can be tolerated but pride can reach some extents where it becomes annoying. When a person thinks that he surpasses all the rest and that others don't matter, he has reached that level of pride.

Mr. Darcy exemplifies this level of pride. His pride is too great to even talk with people of lower wealth. According to Austen: "Can such abominable pride as his have ever done him good" (pg.61)? Mr. Darcy has a pride so great that he doesn't care who he hurts and thinks himself as superior to the rest. People that have these characteristics are not normally the kindest people. They will constantly be reminding you of their superiority as well as their abundant precious possessions. Even though these kinds of people are annoying, they do posses a characteristic that many people lack. No matter what other people say or think about them, they will never change. The standards set by society will not hurt these individuals in any way because they consider themselves superior to any opinion from others.

Everyone in the book avoids being criticized. They always look to evade criticism done to them but are quick in criticizing others. It is also used as a punishment. According to Elizabeth: "This is quite shocking!- He deserves to be publicly disgraced" (pg. 60). Prejudice is how others think about you and everyone in the book is constantly avoiding bad prejudice. Elizabeth in this case thinks that Mr. Darcy should be criticized for his bad actions, but I don't think this would work. Negative criticism will only affect a person that cares about what others think about them. Elizabeth wants to criticize Mr. Darcy but Mr. Darcy has a pride so big that the criticism will not affect him in any way.

Monday, November 15, 2010

Criticizing Criticism

Criticism constantly appears in the book, making it important. Sitting in a house and criticizing persons for a whole afternoon looks like the past time. The criticizing is mostly done by the women who criticize every aspect of the other person. Man also criticize and in some way are very negative. According to Mr. Darcy: "There is, I believe, in every disposition a tendency to some particular evil, a natural defect, which not even the best education can overcome" (pg 43). I see Mr. Darcy as a very pessimist man finding a defect in every person in the world. I do agree that everyone has their own defects but I do not agree that every defect has to be criticized. Every defect found in a person shouldn't affect so much as to say that there is some evil inside every person, subject to criticism. The idea of the defect is the weak spot of the person, which people will criticize.

Austen also agrees with the idea that there is a defect for every person in the world. All her characters have at least one defect. According to Austen: "Miss de Borough is far superior to the handsomest of her sex, because there is that in her features which marks the young woman of distinguished birth. She is unfortunately of a sickly constitution" (pg 50). Even though Miss de Borough prevails in beauty over the rest, her sickness prevents her from accomplishing more. I don't really agree with Austen that for every human there has to be a defect, in fact I think that the biggest defect of all is criticizing the defects of others.

The Power Of Money Over Love

Love has many elements that compose it, starting with liking the other person. It is clear that there has to exist certain like between these two persons for love to exist. The desire to be with the other person has to exist. There are other components of love that don't directly affect love but have a great deal of influence in them. Money and power are things that even though people say don't matter they do. According to Austen: "But with such a father and mother, and such low connections, I am afraid there is no chance of it" (pg 26). In this case they are referring to people who have a lower level of power as well as less money than them. This fact brings up criticism from the family and friends of Mr. Bingley. I don't think that a person should be judged for their money and power in that way, but in that time it was normal to marry with a person with similar wealth and power.

People may say that today love has changed in many ways. It is true that now the strictness of marriage became more flexible but money still plays a major role. People say that the marrying for money and power doesn't exist anymore, but I am sure that a father will not let his daughter marry a man who will not be able to provide financial stability to her.

In Pride and Prejudice another kind of love appears. The love where the money matters less appears when according to Austen: "They could talk of nothing but officers; and Mr. Bingley's large fortune, the mention of which gave animation to their mother, was worthless in their eyes when opposed to the regimentals of an ensign" (pg. 20). The love expressed by Austen in this quotation differs to the other love in many ways. This love doesn't need money for it to exist. This love relies only on the want to be with another person. Money can't replace the ensigns of the soldiers in these girls' minds, showing true love.

A Party With Pride and Prejudice

Mrs. Bennet has a clear objective, marrying one of her daughters with Mr. Bingley. Mr. Bingley is as "sensible, good-humoured, lively; and I never saw such happy manners" (pg 9). According to all the girls present in the ball he was very handsome and most pleasing to everyone. Most certainly a very big competition for the liking of Mr. Bingley grew at the ball. If this situation happened in a modern day party, it would be very different. All the girls in Pride and Prejudice waited for Mr. Bingley to ask them for a dance. Today, all the girls would be dancing around Mr. Bingley without him even asking them to dance with him, trying to impress him before any other competitor does. With time the way a woman is attracts a man has changed. In Pride and Prejudice a kind and beautiful women had to wait for her turn to be taken out by Mr. Bingley, and she would be considered normal. If she had acted like a woman acts today, she would be looked at as different by not waiting for the man to engage her, but approaching the man. On the other hand, if a woman acted as women acted in Pride and Prejudice today, she would be considered strange. If a girl stays seated, waiting for a man to talk to her, and not interacting in any way with others she would be considered weird and anti social, instead of likeable as in the party of the book.

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

Hamlet Act V: Afterlife

Every person in the world will at one point die. People view death in different ways, some view it as a horrible thing and others are grateful of this event. Personally, I view death as a bad event but I am aware of its inevitability, in some way accepting death. After death, the afterlife starts. In the afterlife, according to the Roman Catholic religion which I am part of, one goes to heaven if one has acted accordingly to God's commandments in earth. There are many other theories of the afterlife, a very common one being that death is just the end and nothing else will follow. In Hamlet both ideals of death are presented.

Shakespeare reflects the Roman Catholic theory of afterlife by saying "Her death was doubtful,/ And, but that great command o'ersways the order,/ She should in ground unsanctified been lodged/ Till the last trumpet" (Act V sc i ln 234-237). Suicide, being the doubtful element in Ophelia's death, excluded her from entering into heaven. God decides when a person should die, making suicide an obstruction of his plans for this person's life. This obstruction in God's plans forces Ophelia's soul to lie in the tomb without being able to be sanctified and admitted into heaven, until the end of the world. The last trumpet symbolizes the apocalypse, condemning Ophelia to remain there until everything is gone. On the contrary, if murder would have ended Ophelia's life, she would go to heaven. Strictness characterizes this religion because if one commits suicide or isn't baptized in his life, no matter how good you acted in life you wouldn't be admitted into heaven because you lack the initiation in the church of God.

The other theory is the circle of life. A person is born from nature and he will end up as nature. According to Shakespeare: "Alexander died, Alexander was buried, Alex-/ ander returneth to dust; the dust is earth" (Act V sc i ln 216-217). The earth, being the one that feeds and nurtures the human, makes it inevitable for humans. At the end the human will return everything to the earth when he dies. I personally don't believe this theory because after death something must happen, but I do understand the cycle of life where everything returns to its original place. Seeing this theory in another way, our dead body and soul will serve as the food for a new body and soul. This could be the afterlife in this theory, living in another person and helping this individual survive. I think my religion has greatly shaped me in my idea of afterlife but regardless of that I firmly believe there exists something after you die.

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Hamlet’s Relationship With Women


 


 


 

Every story reflects the author's idea about a specific subject, being able to infer some characteristics of the author's life. In the article Hamlet and His Problems, T.S.Eliot focuses on the problems Shakespeare had, especially with making Hamlet. According to Eliot: "So far from being Shakespeare's masterpiece, the play is most certainly an artistic failure. In several ways the play is puzzling, and disquieting as is none of the others" (Hamlet and His Problems, Eliot). It is true that the rhyme and verses are not as perfect as in most of his other plays, but I don't think Shakespeare did a mistake. With this strange structure and puzzling events he created an environment of confusion in the reader, reflecting the state of Hamlet's mind. The constant confusion is present in Hamlet's mind and specifically in his relationship with women. He doesn't know whether his mother is in his side, supporting him like a mom is expected to, or in his uncle's side and being the accomplice of his father's death. If I was Hamlet in this case it would be very difficult for me to trust my mom. I know that she is my mom, but what I don't know is how much she prefers Claudius over me. It would be very confusing to be Hamlet, not being able to know who is in which side and ultimately who can he trust his secrets and be sure that they wouldn't be revealed to Claudius.









In this play
there are only two women that constantly appear, Ophelia and Gertrude, and the way he interacts with them varies a lot. Hamlet when he talks to Ophelia he is in a constant tone change, talking smoothly to her about his problems and being kind to her, but rapidly shifting to an aggressive tone. While watching the documentary Discovering Hamlet,
the body language and tone the actors displayed when enacting certain roles, emphasized on their mood.


 

The way the tone changed in the scene of Hamlet's soliloquy towards Ophelia was extreme. Starting by crying about his problems to her with a soft and gentle tone and rapidly changing by pushing her to the ground and shifting into an accusing tone. I don't really think that Hamlet should have pushed Ophelia to the ground because that is definitely not the way to treat a woman, but I do understand Hamlet's feelings. He has nobody to trust and just when he thinks that he has found that person, reality shows him that Ophelia is the daughter of Polonius, one of the followers of his uncle. While facing his mother, he wields a dagger in his hand, making strong aggressive movements towards her as well as strong verbal attacks. In both occasions Hamlet has been blinded by anger and has simply forgotten that they are women, making him become more aggressive and menacing. On the other hand this could have been the natural way that Hamlet treated women, showing them his strength over them and making them obey his orders. Hamlet's actions towards women are not clear, but generally they could be described as aggressive and scarcely tolerant. If Ophelia wasn't the daughter of Polonius Hamlet's attitude towards her would be different because by the tone and corporal language he uses to talk to her, we can see that there is still some love towards her. The tone he uses towards Gertrude is very different, always aggressive and reproaching her actions.





We already
know Hamlet's relationship with women, but how about Shakespeare's. If I were to predict Shakespeare's relationship with women I would say it would be troubled and a lot like Hamlet's. According to the article
The Material And Sources Of Dreams : "this as proof that he wishes any of them dead now. The theory of dreams does not go as far as to require this; it is satisfied with concluding that the dreamer has wished them dead at some time or other during his childhood
" (The Material And Sources Of Dreams). According
to this theory, at any moment that one hates someone and wishes this person's death, this event could become reality but in a dream. Hamlet's relationship with death in the story is clearly directed towards Claudius. I wonder if at any moment he dreamed of his mother's death. Maybe Shakespeare had these kinds of dreams with his mother and didn't have a good relationship with women, expressing his relationship with his mother and women through Hamlet's relationship with Gertrude and Ophelia. After reading this article, there was a question that was left unanswered. Are there any cases where someone has killed a person, and prior to that dreamed about this killing? Did Claudius dream about killing his brother? The fighting of brothers is also expressed by saying "Let us first of all consider the relation of children to their brothers and sisters. I do not know why we presuppose that it must be a loving one, since examples of enmity among adult brothers and sisters are frequent in everyone's experience" (The Material And Sources Of Dreams). I think that this fact may answer my question, meaning that Claudius and Hamlet's father probably had fights in their childhood, wishing the death of the other. The difference in this case with most of the cases in the world is that Claudius did end up killing his brother. In fact I have experienced small fights with my sister when I was little, and a while ago I dreamed that one night that a tornado came destroying my house and taking my whole family with it. It is not a current wish I have but probably in my childhood I was mad one day at my whole family and that dream was born from that instant of anger.


 


 


 


 


 


 



 


 


 


 

Venturesome


 


 


 






 


 

Paranoia


 


 





Piety


 


 





Sporadic


 


 





Intractability


 




 

Bafflement

Monday, October 18, 2010

Act III: Thinking Before Acting Or Acting Before Thinking

There are people that just don't think before they act, making their decisions with little thinking time and letting themselves be guided by emotions rather than reason. If there would be enough time to be able to think thoroughly the outcomes of each decision, many wrong decisions could be avoided. The more thinking and analyzing the better because in that way the amount of regret that a person will have after seeing the consequences will decrease, because he already knew that was going to happen an chose that to happen. Claudius is a clear example of a person that doesn't think before acting, killing his brother to get the kingdom and his wife. According to Claudius: "Of those effects for which I did the murder: my crown, mine own ambition, and my queen. May one be pardoned and retain th' offense" (Act III sc iii ln58). The kingdom, his ambition, and his brother's wife were clearly what motivated Claudius into killing Hamlet's dad. Once he did this he obtained all his desired goals, but after a while he is repenting this action. The second part of the maxim is asking God whether a person who has committed that crime can be forgiven and accepted into heaven, finding a negative response. Claudius is clearly regretting what he has done and wants to return to the state he was at before doing that, before killing his brother, which means that he didn't analyze thoroughly the outcomes before committing the crime, therefore acting before thinking.

Hamlet, in the other hand, could be described as a person who thinks before he acts. He doesn't like what destiny set up for him, but he will not regret his actions because the revenge that his father has asked him to do, is his father's will. Hamlet thinks a lot more in comparison to his uncle when faced with killing someone, shown by the amount of thinking done by him of all the outcomes that could happen. In fact most of the play is Hamlet doubting whether to kill his uncle or not to kill him, to be or not to be. It can be most clearly seen when Hamlet says: "And so am I revenged. That would be scanned: A villain kills my father, and for that, I , his sole son, do this same villain send to heaven" (Act III sc iii ln 80). Hamlet's objective is to kill his uncle in revenge, which would be accomplished if he kills him now. He then realizes that if he were to kill him now, his revenge will be satisfied, but his uncle, a killer, would be sent to heaven because he was killed while praying. After having analyzed these outcomes he didn't kill him and decided to wait for an opportunity where he would be sent to hell instead of heaven. The analysis that went through Hamlet's mind before deciding to kill him or not shows that he thinks a lot about his actions before acting, deciding on a critical issue which is killing. Hamlet, using the analysis of the outcomes, will not regret his decision and see that if he had acted, Claudius would be in heaven. Claudius in the other hand would have acted immediately and killed him sending him to heaven. This shows the difference in ways of thinking between Claudius and Hamlet, making Hamlet regret less because he thinks better before acting.

Hamlet Act III: Hamlet’s Good Friend Horatio

Hamlet's tone and way of talking to everyone is different than the way he talks to Horatio. Horatio is his loyal friend, who has never left his side, in other words the only person Hamlet still trusts. His way of speaking to everyone in the play and even when he speaks to the public, sounds as hiding a deep sense of anger and revenge, something that he doesn't show when talking to his dear friend. Horatio, being the only person trusted by Hamlet, is given by Hamlet the task to observe Claudius's reaction to the play they are about to see. He asks his favor by saying "I prithee, when thou seest that act afoot, even with the very comment of thy soul observe my uncle" (Act III Sc ii ln 83). First Hamlet is asking a favor to Horatio by starting with "I prithee", being a rare word used by him throughout the play. Hamlet doesn't ask a lot of favors throughout the play, rather he addresses the other characters more aggressively and with direct orders being more like commands. Shakespeare uses this difference in tone of speech to show the affection he has towards Horatio, being the last person he has left and his accomplice in his final act.

Horatio's task is to observe Claudius while the act is being put on, with the comment of his soul. The word soul is used to refer to the way he must see the king's reaction. Soul is a word that evokes truth being that the soul is pure, therefore unable to lie. Hamlet is asking his loyal friend to do everything according to his soul, to do what is right, to help out his friend. The word soul could have also been used in this part meaning with meticulous care and being aware of every detail. In the end the reaction of the kings wasn't as secret, standing up and walking away from the play. Hamlet also talks to Horatio by saying "This realm dismantled was […] and now reigns here a very very- pajock" (Act III sc ii ln 307). The way Hamlet speaks to Horatio wouldn't be the same way he would speak to any character, including his mother. The realm being dismantled is the uncovering of the crime. In these two lines Hamlet summarizes the outcomes of the plan they carried out, observing Claudius's reaction to the play which was to run away, reconfirming the fact that the ghost had said. A pajock is a peacock, which in the time of Shakespeare meant a lustful and cruel person. When Hamlet said this he is saying that of the king. He is actually insulting the king in his kingdom, but again he is saying that to his good friend Horatio knowing that he is in his side.

Monday, October 11, 2010

Hamlet Act III: To Live Or To Sleep

The soliloquy through which Hamlet first talks in Act III, is the most known soliloquy of the book, which starts with the questioning of "To be or not to be" (Act III, Sc i, ln 64). This questioning is the basic idea of life, in making decisions there is always the outcomes of doing an action as well as the ones of not doing it. The verb in this fragment could be replaced by many things and still have the same effect. The two main purposes are to show the contrary of choosing one or the other and the decision Hamlet has to do regarding killing. Another way the fragment could be said is, to be a killer or not to be a killer or, as his father would have liked it to be seen, to avenge his father's death or not to do it. This, being the introduction to the soliloquy I suspected that Hamlet throughout his lines will propose the two outcomes of the options he is being proposed, to avenge his father's death by killing his uncle or do nothing to accomplish his father's wish.

Hamlet then proposes an idea that I would have never expected which is for him to die, when he says: "To die, to sleep-No more- and by a sleep to say we end the heartache and the thousand natural shocks […] Must give us pause. There's the respect" (Act III, Sc i, ln: 68-76). There are many words in this fragment of the soliloquy showing the contrast between life and death, as the contrast was shown previously between doing something and not doing it. The first two words which are die and sleep, show similar ideas, dying is the same as sleeping forever because no real life events happen anymore. When you sleep time freezes and it only seems to continue its natural going when you wake up, and if you happen to never wake up then reality is lost forever. To sleep no more is to be back in reality making the comparison between sleeping forever or dying, or never sleeping and being in reality for ever. The heart ache and the natural shocks are the beating of the heart and the pulse a person has, which are vital to life. Hamlet emphasizes sleep by mentioning it for the second time as the key to end those vital signs, suggesting that sleep is death. In those lines Hamlet is contrasting the things in real life to death and clearly emphasizes that the failing of the vital signs will be achieved by sleeping. The last two important words capture the essence of the fragment because Hamlet wants this pause which will lead to respect. The pause is sleeping and the final goal after life is respect according to him. Therefore, it can be concluded that Hamlet sees that eternal sleep is the only true way to stop the vital signs, ceasing to exist and achieving what is most important which is respect.

This American Life Act V: Kill Or Not To Kill?

To kill or not to kill is a dilemma, which all the prisoners of the Missouri Eastern Correctional Institute have felt in certain moment in life, specifically in the action that made them end up in this high security jail. In the moment of the action, when each person made up their mind and found no rest until killing, there were such intense emotions of revenge and of thirst of blood, that not even the consequences would stop these individuals. After they have successfully done their act, these criminals had a lot of after thoughts and many say they feel bad, bad because they didn't really think thoroughly their decision. They felt so bad about their actions, even to the point where one of the criminals calls himself and includes all the inmates in this statement, cowards because they killed with an unfair advantage. Drawing out a gun or weapon and assaulting a person without this gives them an unfair advantage, one that according to him only cowards use. The motivations for these acts of violence are many, but that doesn't mean that it justifies the action, and there is the case where one inmate became a criminal because where he came from, that was the way to be famous in the neighborhood and be the best.

In Hamlet, the situation is not as different as the situation each criminal must have faced before committing the crime, in fact I think it is the most similar example that can be found in life. Hamlet's father asks him, through his appearance as a ghost, that he must avenge his murder by becoming a killer slaying his uncle. His father is asking him to become a killer by slaying a killer. I don't think that the motivation, regardless of whatever it is, is enough to end in a murder, but I say this because I haven't been faced with the situation where the incident provokes me so much, that I would be motivated to kill. I hope that in that moment I would be able to choose wisely, but there must be a special bond that the criminals must feel while interpreting Hamlet, which most people can't feel. As described by Mellow Johnson, who plays Hamlet, says "that he draws upon the idea of wanting to hurt someone, which has been experienced by him when he shot two people" (This American Life ACT V 08:05). Wanting to hurt someone is a feeling that Hamlet feels when he discovered that his father was killed by his uncle, similar to the feeling Johnson felt when he wanted to hurt someone, even to the death of the person. My experience when reading Hamlet wouldn't be as real as the one felt by the criminals. I haven't really felt the anger to the extent where I will only be satisfied when a person id killed, but I have been angry and felt the need to hurt someone. I have pondered long hours about what I am going to do, looking at the consequences if I do it or not, but I don't end up killing a person. I understand Hamlet's position while I read the book, but not to that extent as it is done by the inmates of the Missouri Eastern Correctional Institute, which in the end did what Hamlet's father is asking him to do, kill.

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Hamlet Soliloquies: The Environment By The Objects And Corporal Expressions

The way an actor displays the emotions of the character has a huge impact on the way the scene is carried out. The actor in the case of Hamlet directed by Kenneth Branagh manages to display the character's emotions as well as its feelings through body language, also the way the actor interacts with his surroundings. The first frame we see a very huge ceiling with Hamlet, but the ratio of size is very different, the ceiling being about five times bigger than the actor. Branagh did this to show the impotence of Hamlet when facing the problems and also the feeling of being lost and inferior. Following this frame, Hamlet appears in a crouched position, facing the ground and kneeling on the chairs, showing him as troubled by something. The way his body is placed shows the viewer that Hamlet is sad about something because he is looking downwards, in addition by placing him with his weight supported by the chairs he is seen as weak. The soliloquy that Hamlet says, shows how he feels about the marriage between her mother and his uncle and the fact that his mother had so soon forgoten his father and replaced him with another man. The emotions portrayed by the actor are parallel to the words being spoken by him, both talking about sadness, the awful feeling of a loss as huge as a father, and the impotence of him having no power over his mother's decision.

The interpretation of Hamlet done by Tennant, Stewart, and Downie shows a different soliloquy than the one done by Branagh, but the same aspects to communicate the emotions of the characters to the audience are clear. The first action that the actor takes is to got to disable the camera, rushing quickly towards it, climbing up and damaging it. In the way this is done by this actor it shows the desperation to get this done because after doing this act he throws the camera away and procedes to sit down. This throwing of the object shows that there is anger present in Hamlet's heart in that moment, destroying the control over him done by the camera. There is also a moment later in the clip where the position of the body shows all that the character wants to express in this scene, which is vegeance. When he screams this word, the position of joining hands and pulling them up, more like a position of someone about to hit a persons head, shows the need to transmit this vengeance into acts. The words spoken throughout this soliloqoy are also defiant and he is talikng about a villan which he wants to take vengeance upon. The actions taken with the surroundings show how the villan is constantly looking upon Hamlet through the camera and his action of destroying it demostrates the audience the need to stop this villans acts as well as the striking pose taken upon the saying of the word vengeance. These visual effects used by the directors show the emotional side of the characters, but this environment created not only transmits the message to the viewer but it also draws him into wanting to see more of the piece.

The two clips of Hamlet I found to be very interesting because they managed to transmit the emotions of the character and the atmosphere they are in, hooking the reader to the clip in a very effective way. The opening scene of a clip or a movie is the most important part, or the part where the director tries to show an image that will most likely capture or cultivate the viewer's interest, making him thirsty for more of the movie. I am not a movie critic or have any license in films, but I know, like most of the public, that when a movie starts off in a bad way then it won't probably be the best movie. If I enter a comedy film then I expect moments when I laugh, after seeing fifteen to twenty minutes of it and not a single laugh of myself or the audience I start to doubt the quality of the movie. I hate movies that don't strive to grab the viewers attention because sometimes the effect is people walking out of the movie, doing it myself in occasions where the movie is incredibly boring.

Sunday, October 3, 2010

Krapp’s Last Tape: Altering Of Time In Memories

The immortalization of an event in time is something achieved only if there is a written, filmed or painted record of it, the importance and magnitude of the work of art affecting the time it will be remembered. Krapp through the use of recordings manages to save his memories for a long time, accessing that personal memory bank created in the boxes from where he extracts a reel or memory to be played in his mind. The time the memory will last would only be determined by Krapp, depending on the significance of the vent in his life it could change the time, but the most essential thing is that he can access whenever he desires his memories. After I saw Krapp do this I decided to do the same thing, remembering that I was forced to do a diary of my trip to Amazonas in Spanish class, thinking it would never be important for anything in my life, but proving contrary when I read it. I read all the things I experienced while I was there, the extreme humidity, the sounds of the jungle and the day we ventured in the jungle. While I read the diary all these images passed through my mind enacting a movie of my trip while I read, finding out that these diary was really useful to remember things that I thought I will never forget, but the time erased them from my memory.

This was a great experience and time changed its speed. The time I took actually reading the diary was 20 minutes, but it seemed as if had passed an hour or more. The time passed very slowly and almost like stopping at certain points, making me feel again in the trip where it was difficult to determine the time, since in the jungle the amount of light visible is the same throughout the day which is very little. Krapp must have had a similar experience when listening to his tape regarding time. Even though there were parts where he forwarded and rewinded the tape, the passing of time also changed because his mind was drawn back into his past and made him experience the event again. At the beginning of the play the narrator says: "Krapp remains a moment motionless, heaves a great sigh, looks at his watch, fumbles in his pockets, takes out an evelope, puts it back, fumbles" (Beckett). There are two words in this maxim that show time which are the watch and moment, making time an important factor in this line. This part was in the beginning of the play which suggests the reader that the time will be affected throughout the play, changing from fast to slow. These happens when Krapp forwards the tape and rewinds it, altering the natural time passage of his memory, something done on purpose to reach the desired part but losing the real meaning of a memory which is to re-live the experience.

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

Krapp’s Last Tape: Young Life Vs Old Life

The tape is Krapp's memory, where he records everything that happened that day, such as a diary. The tape's first saying is that today he turned thirty-nine and that he still felt good (Beckett). Upon reading this line, the main two ideas that came to my mind were age and the feeling of the person. Thirty-nine is not an old age but it isn't a young age either, it is more like approaching the middle of a person's life. When Krapp says that he still felt "sound as a bell" (Beckett), he was saying that even though he knew he had turned thirty-nine, he still felt young and good. The life that young people have, compared to the life of what old people have, has been an idea constantly searched when trying to demonstrate the vivid and joyful life of the young compared to the monotonous and solitary life of the old. This idea is similar to the idea presented in Coming Through Slaughter, where Buddy Bolden was a person who had a music and women filled young life, but as time elapsed his reality changed ending up in a asylum and his name forgotten by everyone in town. The fact that the first word of the tape is a number, brings up the idea that the age and the years that a person has in this story will be directly relevant to the feeling of the person about life. If I had to choose if I wanted to be young or old, without a doubt the former option would be chosen. I don't know if this will be the response of an old person with more experience in life, or maybe a young person where his present isn't as happy.

In the description of Krapp's life by Beckett, his young years didn't seem bad at all, doing what he liked in the winehouse and even having a relationship with the beautiful lady. I thought Krapp felt a sense of melancholy when he listened to these tapes, seeing his past and comparing it to the present, but I was surprised when he said: "Just been listening to that stupid bastard I took myself for thirty years ago, […]Thank God that's all done with anyway" (Beckett). From this saying of Krapp he must have disliked what he did in the past. Krapp is saying that at the state the person is at the advanced life, he is far more developed and mentally superior, than the foolish young him. Personally I am seventeen and I don't see how one can hate these years but I haven't been able to live and old life, which contrary to what society thinks, it could be more gratifying and better. A doubt that I have after reading this story is about Beckett's personal life. How were his young years? When did all his fame come? How much did he grow spiritually in his old years? The answers of those questions will vary depending on the person, therefore their point of view could be different whether they prefer the young life or old life.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

McCarthy And Fitzgerald

Last line of The Great Gatsby by McCarthy

Each day that passes we will be better. Until one day, we will cease to go forward

Last line of The Road by Fitzgerald

Always should wrong decisions prevail over right ones, their habitats inside the deep glens were infested with artifacts and ideas far more aged than man. A mysterious atmosphere constantly surrounding it made an endless humming of the unknown.

Response To Hamlet By Kenneth Branagh

After seeing this introduction I am expecting to be a movie where Branagh has tried to make a representation of the characters as close to the real Hamlet characters as he can. He says in a part that he wanted the best actors he could get, insisting the fact that they had to learn their own lines in Old English, being as close to the real play as possible in that sense. The setting of the play will also be very important therefore, choosing it to be a castle full of mirrors to help the audience visualize each character's reflections and soliloquies. Since he mentioned that he chose the filming to take place in a snowy and cold place, I am intrigued if the cold and surroundings have any significance in the story. Branagh stated that Shakespeare used it first but then it became everyday language and everybody is using it, and I am intrigued to know some specific examples of this fact

Monday, September 20, 2010

The Teacher’s Tale


Today my story shall be known to all,
There will not be adventures or any brawls,
But there will be an unexpected discovery
Which will leave some teachers very crazy.


I woke today to go to school,
Where I will hope to not become a fool.
I walked to school avoiding the cold,
While I fixed my clothes and looked all bold,
And running fast while the bell rang
I rushed past a tough and fierce gang.


To my room five minutes after the bell
Had sounded I arrived running like hell,
But everything was going very well
Until I hit the bottom of the well.

A chemical bottle fell off my hands, Landing next to the radioactive stands.
The bottle broke and liquid poured out the glass, While running and pushing came the next class.
Alexander came in with a football,
Threw it hitting the stand making it fall.

The giant clash of the glass and the ground Made a great and incredible loud sound.
I forced Alexander to clean it up,
But he placed the mixture into a cup
Carefully wrapping it and home taking it,
Before I noticed gone he was in a bit.

That night in the news he appeared with
The ooze stolen from my class. Saying the myth
That it was his with no mention to me,
And that it worked to grow quickly a tree.
I instantly tried to sue him by the law,
In the process I didn't get any paw.
The story ends me living in a ditch,
While Alexander stole and became rich.

The Road: To Trust Or Not To Trust In The Road

Trust is the most important factor in the building of relationships with anyone in the world. Depending on the trust there is with that person that bond between those two people can be taken more seriously. If a person is one that you can't trust a lot then you have to be able to determine how long the bond will be with that person and how deep the level of trust will be with that person. I like to think that trust is also a reversibility factor in the relations with other people. If someone is not trusted very much then you wouldn't trust with them some of your most important secrets and neither will they trust you with their secrets. I like to see it as if one person trusts a lot of things in you then you would most probably trust them the same back. In the case of The Road there is a very special relationship of trust built between the father and the boy because they are the only two persons they can trust. There is also the fact that they are not around many people they want to trust but there is a relationship not only of trust with each other, but also dependency. They trust their life in the others hand therefore they become dependent in the other person. If something happens to the father then the kid wouldn't be able to survive and the same thing happens vice versa, making them care for the others' life as much as their own. The degree of trust can be seen when the narrator says: "He wiped the boy's mouth with his hand. I'm sorry, the boy said. Shh. You didn't do anything wrong" (pg.247). When the boy is very sick his life basically depends on his father's ability to take care of him while surviving. McCarthy said the part where the boy felt sorry to show the reader that he fears for his life but more for his father's life because he will be more troubled and maybe because of his fault the bad guys could capture them. He is also apologizing to his father for the inconvenience produced and the possibility that they will run out of food while he is recovering.

The other kind of trust produced in this book is the exact opposite. The fear of trusting any other person in the road is clear because they are not able to know whether a person is bad or good. One clear example of the distrust environment with other people is when they meet the old man and he says: "I couldn't trust you with it. To do something with it. […] I think in times like these the less said the better" (pg.171). The level of distrust this old man has is very high because he avoids talking to them for the fear they are the bad guys and would do something to him. I don't blame him because in the position he is at I would probably do the same. Therefore since there wasn't any trust between these two parties there wasn't any bond made and only a sharing of food happened.

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

The Great Gatsby Revisited: Practice Makes Perfect

Many times in my life I have heard the lesson practice makes perfect and I really do think this is true. I play tennis a lot and in national tournaments I always see that people who train the most amount of time normally win. This isn't just luck, it is a skill they have been practicing a lot and finally they have come to master it. I think the same thing happens with literature, the more you read and analyze texts the better you get at it. Sonya Chung states that she agrees with this idea when she says: "I admire people who reread books over and over again.   Some writers I know reread certain books annually; it works something like a "checkup," a scheduled nourishing of that ineffable, particularized magic that is creative inspiration." Each time you read the book you will have better understanding of it and you will enjoy the reading more. I really do admire as well people that tend to reread books on a regular basis because it isn't always easy to read the same book. I think the main problem with this is that people before rereading the book come with the mindset of having already read and that they will learn nothing from it or not find anything new. Each day we grow as persons and that is what changes, and since we change the way we see the book will also change. That change is described by Chung when she states: "And yes: with great literature, the experience is deeper and richer with each successive reading." Each new reading you will give to the book will help you get more meaning out of it. Only the ones that reread books constantly are able to master the lessons and the real meaning of the book, making their understanding perfect by constant practice.

Monday, September 13, 2010

The Road: The Making Of Decisions

We have to face decisions all the time. Normally taking a decision isn't a life changing event but there are cases where a single decision can affect the whole course of your life. When I am faced with an important decision I tend to think thoroughly of all the outcomes and balance it out to see with which one I will get the most benefit from. We constantly by making decisions we shape the road of our life but in the book The Road it is the environment and the pressure that affects the decisions. Decisions have to be taken measuring all the positive outcomes and negative outcomes but there are cases when the decision has to be taken in less time and the analysis step is skipped. The father made a bad decision and the narrator describes this by saying: "He walked back and sat beside the boy. It was desperation that had led him to such carelessness and he knew that he could not do that again. No matter what." (pg.117) The decision the father had to make in this case had to be done and fast because they couldn't waste any time analyzing the outcomes. The need of food was the engine that pushed the father into making a desperate decision that almost cost his life. If I were the father I probably would have risked my life for finding food because my son was very hungry and he needed that energy to survive. If he wouldn't have gone into the house in his mind there would always be the doubt if whether or not there was food inside. In the situation of the book I think that both decisions would have been negative because if they went in they risked capture but if they didn't go in they risked dying from hunger. If the father had analyzed these outcomes he would probably chose to save their lives and not enter but the instinct and the hunger drove him into a desperate decision.

There are also other factors that affect the person's decision taking ability. When you have somebody you love near you, you might want what is best for them. The father knowing that the best thing for his son was to get food he went inside. The boy just before his father entered the house said: "I'm not hungry, Papa. I'm not,"(pg.108) when he really was starving. In this moment the father knew that the kid was saying a lie to prevent that his father risked his life for food. I think that that lie motivated his father more because he loved his kid so much that he didn't mind risking his life to make him happy. Also I saw this part as a foreshadowing that something bad was going to happen. The repetition of the kid trying to make his dad back off the idea of entering made me predict that something bad had to happen. It was almost as if the kid jinxed the going into the house and his worst fears happened. Sometimes that happens for example when you play tennis and there is a very important point you have to win. If fear starts taking over you and you think that maybe you will hit the ball out, it will most likely happen because you are focusing your mind on the negative and therefore making the mistake.

The Road: Are Memories Good Or Bad?

Memory by definition is: the power or process of reproducing or recalling what has been learned and retained especially through associative mechanisms (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/memory), but it is also a lot more. Memories are the most important things in your mind because the memories are events that have happened in your life and by their importance you will remember them forever. Memories can also kill a person or make their life have some importance. A memory that could kill a person is the image of a loved person dying but a memory that can make a person's life be better is a happy moment with friends. In The Road both types of memories appear constantly in the father's life. Agreeing with the definition most memories are triggered by another event or object. One example of a memory is when the character's wife says: "A person who had no one would be well advised to cobble together some passable ghost. As for me my only hope is for eternal nothingness and I hope it with all my heart." (pg.57) This memory of his wife was triggered because his son had said that he wished he was with mom. The memory in this case is shown to the character by the means of his dreams. This is a memory that the character must be hurt when he sees it. Fighting for the life of three persons is really hard and the worst thing you can hear from one of them is that they don't want to live anymore and make you feel that all your hard work has been for nothing. I haven't personally had this experience but an example would be that when you are in a soccer team and you are constantly giving it your all for the whole team to win and everybody else in the team isn't trying and showing to you that they don't want to win. What probably happens next is that you lose hope and the desire to fight because the team you are sweating for isn't returning you the same amount of sacrifice. I really think that in that moment the mother had to be in an extreme degree of desperation to even think of abandoning her kid. Mothers are willing to risk their own life for that of their kids and in this case she is just abandoning his life.

The other kinds of memories are the ones that keep you positive and always hoping for a better future and outcome. The other memory he has of his wife is a more positive one and it is shown by the object that reminds him of her. The narrator says in one moment: "He pitched the sweatblackened piece of leather into the woods and sat holding the photograph. Then he laid it down in the road also and then he stood and they went on." (pg.51) Normally when a person has another person's picture in his wallet it is because the picture reminds him of this person and this person gives him hope and power to keep on going. The memory of his wife could have kept him going for a while, when he looked her picture. The moment when he leaves the picture in the road two different meanings came to my mind. One is that he has completely lost hope of his life and he just wants to give up. I think this is rather unlikely because he still gets the motivation to keep on going from his son which is the thing he loves most. The second meaning is the wanting to forget a memory that brings him down. I think the second meaning is more likely is that he wants to completely forget about her so he can look into the future and stop lamenting his past.

Thursday, September 9, 2010

The Road: Surrounded By Hostile Environments.

There are days where simply things can't go any worse. That day everything happens to you and the more you try to make it better the more bad things happen to you. Some people say that it is only the way you look at the day that makes it feel like everything is bad but I say there are days where everything goes wrong. In these days you might fights with your parents, you might break up with your girlfriend, or you may have a very important competition or presentation and you will blow it. Fortunately this day is not very frequent and it doesn't last forever. Now imagine if that reality of having the worst possible things happening would never go away and will last for more than a simple day, and that situation is the situation in which the characters from The Road have to survive in. There has to be a moment where the pure desperation of nothing becoming better takes over the person's mind. One example of desperation is when the father says: "Will I see you at last? Have you have a neck by which to throttle you? Have you a heart? Damn you eternally have you a soul? Oh God." (pg. 12) This is a moment that by pure desperation of finding nothing to improve their lives the father screams for God and even starts questioning his heart and soul. This feeling of desperation and having nothing available to help you come out of the hole you are stuck in brings out the trust in God.

The Road is a book that since the beginning portrays the image of a world without hope and full of destruction. The first few lines say: "When he woke in the woods in the dark and the cold of the night he'd reach out to touch the child sleeping beside him. Nights dark beyond darkness and the days more gray each one than what had gone before." (pg. 3) Since the book is starting with this lines of darkness and no hope, I can predict that the book will be focused on how the world is brought to pieces and how hope with the passing of each day gets smaller and smaller. Also when the book mentions the part of the child I think that in that situation where no one else is around the father and son are two different persons but at the same time one. If one of these two persons happens to die then the other immediately will also die. If the kid dies then I think the father will most probably commit suicide because in all that desperation and solitude his motivation to keep going is to take his kid to a better place, but if he is gone then the father would think his life is worthless. The kid will also die without his father because he wouldn't know how to survive in this hostile environment. I don't really know what will happen in this book but seeing that it has been made a movie I am thinking that it will be and action filled book with a happy ending because movies most of the times have happy or at least endings where people survive.

The Religious Tales



Sunday, September 5, 2010

The Raven by Edgar Allen Poe: The Fear Of Death

This poem done by Edgar Allen Poe had a clear objective which was being scary and trying to scare the reader. But the composition of the poem is much more complex than just a scary story. In The Raven, Poe uses symbols to give the story different meanings. The raven clearly is an object inside the story but he represents a lot more. I think the raven is symbolizing the fear of death. The character is trapped inside a house and the raven is controlling his mind and thoughts. The character thinks this: "Clasp a rare and radiant maiden whom the angels name Lenore." Quoth the Raven "Nevermore." The fear of death is clearly shown in his thoughts because we can see how he wants to see angels and specially Lenore but the raven is saying to him never more. Lenore must have been a person that this character really loves and what he is trying to say is that he really more than anything wants to see her but the raven which is the fear of death says to him that if he dies he will nevermore see her again. This fear has controlled the character in such a way that he is vulnerable to the mind control of the raven when says: "And my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor Shall be lifted—nevermore!" When the character says this he is lost and will see life nevermore. The way the narration of this poem was done was very good because it managed to scare the reader. I really thought this poem was similar to Psycho because it kept on growing in intensity and when it reached the highest point the story ended and also because it was intended to scare the audience.

The Pardoner’s Tale: The Curse Of Gluttony

Food is the most elemental thing a human can have. Food is necessary for a person to survive but it is not good for a person to live for food. If a person eats and drinks all day without moderation it is considered gluttony. I think that gluttony is the moment when the food physically can't enter into the stomach because it is so full but the person still eats this because he wants. It is the feeling of never stopping. No matter how much you eat and how full you are you won't stop eating. Gluttony plays an important part in The Pardoner's Tale when it says: "O glotonye, ful of cursednesse! O cause first of oure confusioun! O original of oure dampnacioun, Til Crist hadde boght us with his blood agayn! Lo, how deere, shortly for to sayn, Aboght was thilke cursed vileynye! Corrupt was al this world for glotonye." (498-504) This act of eating in excess was considered a very important sin and even considered a curse. When the character mentions that it was a corruption that affected the entire world I thought if today there was the same problem. Actually if you think of it there are many people who are currently dying of hunger and thirst and they die because their body can't get enough energy to survive. I think that gluttony is certainly bad because you are eating the food that could be served to a person that needs that food more. In the other hand I think it is less bad than ordering large amounts of food and only eating a little because the rest gets thrown to the trash. The other subject that was addressed in this tale was the pardoner's role. When he says: "It is an honour to everich that is heer That ye mowe have a suffisant pardoner T' assoille yow in contree as ye ryde, For aventures whiche that may bityde. Paraventure ther may fallen oon or two Doun of his hors and breke his nekke atwo. Looke which a seuretee is it to yow alle That I am in youre felaweshipe yfalle," (931-938) This part I thought was very important because it showed a little about the church at the time. All throughout tale the pardoner had told about death and how it appeared out of nowhere came to the point where he said that in order for people to be safe and that death didn't get them they had to pay him and pay honors to his holy artifacts. This shows a lot to me how the church was in that time because it was a must to give them money to be safe and be able to go to heaven. I think that the main purpose of any religion is to guide you spiritually but most importantly to teach you how to be a good person. If you are a good person who harms no one and has a strong set of values then I think it is unnecessary to have to pay to the church because in that time the church was very corrupt and only wanted money.

Wednesday, September 1, 2010

The Wife Of Bath’s Tale: Forget The Past And Accept The Present

The idea of the past or your ancestors doesn't matter and the only thing that really matters is the present is something that is present in this chapter. I have some opinions about this idea that support it but others that disapprove it. I think it is wrong to judge someone for his last name. I have seen cases when people say that a person must be annoying because his father or mother was annoying making him annoying. I do think that habits and ways of behaving are passed down through generations but I don't think it is correct to condemn a person by what I know about his family members. There is a part in The Wife Of Bath's Tale where the idea of forgetting the past and only accept the present is shown when the woman says: "That he is gentil that dooth gentil dedis. And therfore, leeve housbonde, I thus conclude: Al were it that myne auncestres were rude, Yet may the hye God, and so hope I, Grante me grace to lyven vertuously. Thanne am I gentil, whan that I bigynne To lyven vertuously and weyve synne." (1170-1176) In this part the woman is asking him to forget her past and accept her present which is good. If I were her husband I would forgive her of her past because the only thing that is important now is the way she is and behaves now and not the way her ancestors were. I agree that the past is an important key to figure out how each person is and learn his roots. Another way this idea was shown is when she says: "Possessioun that no wight wol chalenge. Poverte ful ofte, whan a man is lowe, Maketh his God and eek hymself to knowe. Poverte a spectacle is, as thynketh me, Thurgh which he may his verray freendes see." (1200-1204) Poverty is a state in which a person is born to. The person didn't make a wrong decision that affected his life he was just born into it and had nothing to do and change it. I really think it is bad to judge a person by his economical state because it isn't the money that counts in life, it is rather the values and moral composition of the person. When she says that in poverty one learns to look life through a different glass it must be true. When poverty exists there are many things that aren't good about it and the need for this person to overcome these problems probably sets a new vision of the world rather than a person that has gotten everything he wants in his life without having to work for it in any way. I would definitely agree with the idea that it doesn't matter if the roots and ancestors of one person are bad if this person is good.

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

The Wife Of Bath’s Prologue: Love The Weapon Of Mass Destruction

Love is a theme that will always play an important part in the life of any human. Love is a need for the human race rather than a want. In the three tales that I have read so far of The Canterbury Tales love is present in all of them. If all the tales have elements of love I might as well say that Chaucer was greatly influenced by love or has a strong opinion about love. We discussed a little about what Chaucer thought of love in class but we didn't reach a conclusion. In my opinion Chaucer thinks of love as a very powerful weapon but in most cases it is used to do damage rather than make people happy. It was the love of Emelye that separated the life time friends Arcite and Palamon, as well as the love for Alisoun made Nicholas and Absolon fight for her love. Neither in The Knight's Tale or in The Miller's Tale love has been shown as a happy thing. Before I started reading The Wife Of Bath's Prologue from the title I thought it would be a different story because in the title there was the word wife which I thought meant loyalty to the husband and happiness. As I started reading I found out that things were very different and I would say that it was the opposite. The woman in this story has married five times and is along the whole tale trying to justify why she married and backing it up with God's teachings. This woman didn't really love each husband because she said: "I governed hem so wel, after my lawe, That ech of hem ful blisful was and fawe To brynge me gaye thynges fro the fayre. They were ful glad whan I spak to hem faire, For, God it woot, I chidde hem spitously." (219-223) This woman doesn't sound like the loving wife who really cares about her husband, she sounds more like the wife that will marry for money and play with her husband so she would get what she wants. In this case the love shown by Chaucer isn't the ideal love that so many movies and books have illustrated. I think that the idea of the ideal love only will exist in movies or books because this is based on people with no defects. As we have seen each time we make a mistake, we humans are not perfect and sometimes make mistakes so therefore the perfect and ideal love will never be possible. In this tale there is also a case in which love is the major weapon used to destroy emotionally someone. The emotional destruction that a person may have when their loved one has cheated on them can be huge and when she said: "But certeinly, I made folk swich cheereThat in his owene grece I made hym frye For angre, and for verray jalousye. By God, in erthe I was his purgatorie," (486-489) her husband must have been devastated. After reading this part where the women makes her husband burn in jealousy I confirmed my theory that Chaucer thinks that love is a huge weapon. I also concluded that Chaucer doesn't see love as a good thing, rather he sees it as a horrible force that will separate friends and make many fights appear. There was also a giant war that happened between Argos and Troy because love had controlled Paris so much that he was drawn into taking Helena with him. I think that both writers would agree that love is a destructing force because in both books they make love have negative effects. Chaucer must have had a horrible marriage and relationships by the way he pictures love in his tales.

Monday, August 30, 2010

The Miller’s Tale: The Weird Middle Ages

There are many contradictions and things that are very exaggerated in The Miller's Tale. At first the characters do not seem like anything weird just a carpenter, a clerk, a wife, and a priest. When John the carpenter marries Alisoun he loves her a lot but I thought it was too overprotective. When the narrator says: "This carpenter hadde wedded newe a wyf, Which that he lovede moore than his lyf; Of eighteteene yeer she was of age. Jalous he was, and heeld hire narwe in cage, For she was wylde and yong, and he was old." (3221-3225) That could have been normal in the middle ages to confine the women to the house and never let her go out. I think that in those times that could have probably happened because the man was the supreme force of authority and whatever he said had to be done. In the present I think a relationship where the man told a woman to stay in the house and never go outside would be really difficult. In the present the woman has more freedom and is more self sufficient than it was before when she depended on the man to survive. The reason that the carpenter hid his wife was because he was old and she was young and wild, which meant that if she had the chance to go to the outside world she wouldn't come back. That could be also seen that Alisoun was in some way forced to marry John rather than by own choice. I still think it is really exaggerated to lock up a person in a house just because you have fear that you will lose him or her. There was another part that really brought to my mind contradiction and maybe a bit of satire. Absolon who is a priest is part of the Catholic Church which was the strongest institution in the middle ages. Absolon's activities were described like this: "In al the toun nas brewhous ne tavern That he ne visited with his solas, Ther any gaylard tappestere was. But sooth to seyn, he was somdeel squaymousOf fartyng, and of speche daungerous." (3334-3338) In this part we see that Absolon likes to goes to bars and drink with his friends the barmaids. He also went around flirting with Alisoun and trying to make her kiss him. I don't really think this is the idea of the perfect priest therefore in some way Chaucer could be writing this part to make fun of the Catholic Church and the contradiction being made of the perfect priest. After having read this part I did take it as someone making fun of the Catholic Church in the middle ages which brought a question to my mind. Did Chaucer publish this book during the middle ages? I went into Wikipedia and discovered that he published this book at the end of the 14th century. Didn't the church do something about the fact that he was making fun of them? Maybe Chaucer was just saying the truth and in this story he was criticizing the church and what its priests really did in the middle ages.

Sunday, August 29, 2010

The Knight's Tale Timeline


The Knight’s Tale Ch 3-4: Is Destiny Already Determined?

Is the destiny of a person's life already written? Or is it more a matter of each person writes his own destiny as he goes through life. This is a question that has wondered in my brain ever since I can remember. Probably the first time this question came to mind was when I was taking religion classes to be able to do the first communion. If I had to choose in this exact moment which answer I thought would be the best I would have a hard time but I would say that people come to the world for a specific reason so I think some parts of a person's life are already written. There are many books in which the characters are never influenced by any god of any kind in making decisions. In those books I think that the author would think that each person writes his own future. In The Knight's Tale I would say that the exact opposite happens because the gods have direct interaction with the characters. What made me actually remember this question was the part that said: "Depeynted was the slaughtre of Julius, Of grete Nero, and of Antonius; Al be that thilke tyme they were unborn, Yet was hir deth depeynted ther-biforn By manasynge of Mars, right by figure." (2031-2035) The fact that it is already known that these people that aren't even born have already been associated with Mars, makes me wonder if the life of these persons have already been written. As soon as I read this I stopped the audio and reading for a second and wondered what would be my destiny if it had already been written. I thought about it for like five minutes and realizing that I could go on thinking forever I decided to continue reading in search for other events in which the character's destiny is decided by the gods. This happened again when Arcite won and "Out of the ground a furie infernal sterte, From Pluto sent at requeste of Saturne, For which his hors for fere gan to turne, And leep aside, and foundred as he leep; And er that Arcite may taken keep, He pighte hym on the pomel of his heed, That in the place he lay as he were deed." (2684-2690) The gods in this case determined Arcite's destiny by making him fall and be mortally injured. Shortly after this he died making the gods responsible for his death. In this case the gods destroyed in some way Arcite's destiny because he had already won with his might and sacrifice the battle and Emelye, but the gods not being content with who had won had killed him. In this case and in The Knight's Tale the destiny of each person is already written. But is this the same for our life? Do we write as we go or do we go as it is written?