A Gun Battle Worth Fighting
People with guns can only kill with guns if they have guns in the first place. That's what the author of the editorial, "A Gun Battle Worth Fighting," tries to send in the fiery choice of words. Like a coach giving a pep talk just before a big game, he (or she) points out the most encouraging details and a promising way of action. Using powerful syntax he boosts the spirits of the anti-gun readers, edging them to fight harder for their ideals.
The very first word in the article is an accident by no means. The author wishes to rally the anti-gun enthusiasts together with a sense of community, to give them power through unison, to tell them they are not alone. All this he wraps up in a single word: we. "WE don't have to cower..." "WE don't have to murmur..." "WE don't have to tiptoe..." He reminds his readers that, if banded together, no person is weak. Then, to give a sense of solidity, he uses short, simple words like "take on" and "a long, hard slog." Our minds are wired like engineers. We all prefer simplicity for its lack of glitches. By using simple words, the author gives the reader the feeling of a known direction and a promise to move forwards if they but stand.
While the diction gives the feeling of an unstoppable force, the author keeps his facts realistic, though not discouraging. He knows that his cause has not been on the winning side, but he also knows that more and more, problems are building for his opponents. More guns, he says, has not been keeping people safe as the gun supporters promise, and that will be their downfall.
Finally, syntax. The use of the number three in the article's syntax has profound effects on the message. Three has a feeling of completion and finality, and the author uses it to his advantage. For example, to start the article, he gives three "we don't have to"s about recent occurrences. Then he ends it with the word "No." The three paragraphs about weakness build on each other, making it seem as though the weakness shown by the given situations is final, then the author topples the whole feeling down in one word, allowing hope to blossom in the anti-gun group.
Sunday, December 16, 2012
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Open Prompt Practice (Dec. 9)
1992. In a novel or play, a
confidant (male) or a confidante (female) is a character, often a
friend or relative of the hero or heroine, whose role is to be
present when the hero or heroine needs a sympathetic listener to
confide in. Frequently the result is, as Henry James remarked, that
the confidant or confidante can be as much "the reader's friend
as the protagonist's." However, the author sometimes uses this
character for other purposes as well. Choose a confidant or
confidante from a novel or play of recognized literary merit and
write an essay in which you discuss the various ways this character
functions in the work. You may write your essay on one of the
following novels or plays or on another of comparable quality. Do not
write on a poem or short story.
Since the beginning of Shakespeare's play Hamlet, Horatio was Hamlet's loyal companion. The two had gone to school in Wittenberg together, becoming close friends, able to share even the most confidential of secrets. All throughout the play, even in the strangest situations, Horatio kept the secret of Hamlet's alleged madness and acted as his confidant when no one was around. He was the outsider, the only one left untainted by the deception that prevailed in the castle Elsinore.
Everyone trusted Horatio. At the start of the play, he was the first person the guards went to for advice about the ghost they had seen, even before Hamlet was notified. Being a scholar of philosophy, he was well respected by all. He acted not only as Hamlet's counselor and companion, but also as an adviser to the queen about Ophelia and even as Ophelia's caretaker. Even Fortinbras, without ever once meeting Horatio in the past, chose to speak with him rather than with any one of the nobles in the room when he arrived. Horatio was the voice of truth, telling things as they were and not as was most convenient for himself.
Time elapsed: 45 minutes
Time elapsed: 45 minutes
Monday, December 3, 2012
Summary & Analysis of The Death of a Salesman
The Death of a Salesman by Arthur Miller was, in short, a story of both the conflict between the dreams of a father and son and between man and society. Willy is a salesman who had high hopes about his future, aspiring to be a rich man simply by being "well liked." Needless to say, he was rather unsuccessful in his efforts due to his faulty philosophy. His failure leads him to look to his firstborn son, Biff, for his redemption. He insists that Biff take up his dream where he left off, to become a salesman and strive for wealth on the basis of being well liked. However, after a scandal is unearthed between Willy and another woman, the trust between Biff and Willy is broken, and Biff leaves to find himself in the West.
Arguably, Biff succeeds in discovering what he wants, to work with his hands, but Biff is too engrained with his father's desire for instant, painless gratification, resulting in a desperate frustration with both himself and his father. His return, the start of the play, began a period where old scabs were opened to bleed. Biff tries to explain to his father that their dream was incompatible, but Willy will have none of it, accusing Biff of ruining himself out of spite. After a climatic clash of wills, Willy realizes that Biff loved him all along, even after the incident between Willy and the whore. Enthralled, Willy comes up with a scheme to give Biff the money he needed to get started in the world. He figures he is worth nothing while alive, but his death was worth twenty thousand dollars in life insurance, and minutes later, he commits suicide.
It is very important to note that the play is from Willy's point of view. Willy is the only one reminiscing about the past and imagining his brother Ben. While driving, he thinks he is enjoying scenery that isn't there. While playing cards with Charlie, he speaks with his brother Ben, leaving Charlie confused. By writing from Willy's perspective, Miller is able to show the audience both Willy's unrealistically "perfect" dream he lived in his mind and the resulting reality to which he was bound. Willy was obsessed with a notion of being well liked, but that, rather than being the cause of the success he saw around him, was merely a side effect of being wealthy.
Miller creates a very tangible tone of despair in this play through multiple flashbacks where Willy is transported into the past where he once had hope, yet was living a lie that only just began to backlash on him. His flashbacks brought hope, but as Bane says to Batman, hope is the seed of despair. He continued to lie to himself, believing he was better than he really was, well known, and successful. However, every time he glimpsed a spark of hope--when his sons describe their idealized business plan to him, for example--it is instantly battered down again by yet another reminder of his failure, and he falls back into his pit of self pity.
Being a play, much of the imagery comes from director's decisions. However, on occasion, when Miller finds imagery important, he works it into the dialogue. For example, when Willy is bemusing the expansion of the city, he describes the loss of the elm trees where he had wished to hang a hammock, describes the apartment buildings that crowded out the sun, and describes the garden that he could never plant as a result. Otherwise, much of the imagery is left to the director.
One of the most important pieces of symbolism in The Death of a Salesman is that Willy himself represents us, the people living in a society where possessions are the mark of a successful person. Willy has fallen prey to this trap, even compromising relationships in an effort to maintain his perceptive status in the social order. Ironically, Willy seems to believe in the opposite end of the spectrum: that it is one's relationships with those around him that make him successful.
Charlie, Willy's foil, is the embodiment of the ideal businessman. He says little, is well respected, and is successful in life. He believes the opposite of Willy's "well-liked" philosophy--that one must be successful to be well liked, even bringing up an example: "Who liked J. P. Morgan? Was he impressive? In a Turkish bath he’d look like a butcher. But with his pockets on he was very well liked" (Miller n.p.). Being well liked is not as important to one's monetary success as Willy makes it out to be. However, Charlie has something wrong as well. One does not simply become well liked when he "puts on his pockets." The friends gained because of the money are really friends with the money and not the person.
"The only thing you got in this world is what you can sell" (Miller n.p.). There are two extremes in this respect. On one side, you have Charlie's view--a strict capitalistic perspective where possessions are everything. On the other hand Willy's point of view is that relationships are everything. Willy's perspective, however, is incompatible with the society he lives in, but he continues to try to jam it in and make it fit, trying to believe relationships result in possessions.
Arguably, Biff succeeds in discovering what he wants, to work with his hands, but Biff is too engrained with his father's desire for instant, painless gratification, resulting in a desperate frustration with both himself and his father. His return, the start of the play, began a period where old scabs were opened to bleed. Biff tries to explain to his father that their dream was incompatible, but Willy will have none of it, accusing Biff of ruining himself out of spite. After a climatic clash of wills, Willy realizes that Biff loved him all along, even after the incident between Willy and the whore. Enthralled, Willy comes up with a scheme to give Biff the money he needed to get started in the world. He figures he is worth nothing while alive, but his death was worth twenty thousand dollars in life insurance, and minutes later, he commits suicide.
It is very important to note that the play is from Willy's point of view. Willy is the only one reminiscing about the past and imagining his brother Ben. While driving, he thinks he is enjoying scenery that isn't there. While playing cards with Charlie, he speaks with his brother Ben, leaving Charlie confused. By writing from Willy's perspective, Miller is able to show the audience both Willy's unrealistically "perfect" dream he lived in his mind and the resulting reality to which he was bound. Willy was obsessed with a notion of being well liked, but that, rather than being the cause of the success he saw around him, was merely a side effect of being wealthy.
Miller creates a very tangible tone of despair in this play through multiple flashbacks where Willy is transported into the past where he once had hope, yet was living a lie that only just began to backlash on him. His flashbacks brought hope, but as Bane says to Batman, hope is the seed of despair. He continued to lie to himself, believing he was better than he really was, well known, and successful. However, every time he glimpsed a spark of hope--when his sons describe their idealized business plan to him, for example--it is instantly battered down again by yet another reminder of his failure, and he falls back into his pit of self pity.
Being a play, much of the imagery comes from director's decisions. However, on occasion, when Miller finds imagery important, he works it into the dialogue. For example, when Willy is bemusing the expansion of the city, he describes the loss of the elm trees where he had wished to hang a hammock, describes the apartment buildings that crowded out the sun, and describes the garden that he could never plant as a result. Otherwise, much of the imagery is left to the director.
One of the most important pieces of symbolism in The Death of a Salesman is that Willy himself represents us, the people living in a society where possessions are the mark of a successful person. Willy has fallen prey to this trap, even compromising relationships in an effort to maintain his perceptive status in the social order. Ironically, Willy seems to believe in the opposite end of the spectrum: that it is one's relationships with those around him that make him successful.
Charlie, Willy's foil, is the embodiment of the ideal businessman. He says little, is well respected, and is successful in life. He believes the opposite of Willy's "well-liked" philosophy--that one must be successful to be well liked, even bringing up an example: "Who liked J. P. Morgan? Was he impressive? In a Turkish bath he’d look like a butcher. But with his pockets on he was very well liked" (Miller n.p.). Being well liked is not as important to one's monetary success as Willy makes it out to be. However, Charlie has something wrong as well. One does not simply become well liked when he "puts on his pockets." The friends gained because of the money are really friends with the money and not the person.
"The only thing you got in this world is what you can sell" (Miller n.p.). There are two extremes in this respect. On one side, you have Charlie's view--a strict capitalistic perspective where possessions are everything. On the other hand Willy's point of view is that relationships are everything. Willy's perspective, however, is incompatible with the society he lives in, but he continues to try to jam it in and make it fit, trying to believe relationships result in possessions.
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Response to Course Material (Dec. 2)
This time around, things went a whole lot more smoothly. For one, The Death of a Salesman was a lot less abstract than theater of the absurd. Nobody was stripping just for the sake of stripping, and nobody was hiding a blind dog in a box. Perhaps the most helpful thing for me was that we followed the movie in our copies of the play. When I read on my own, I have the attention span of a goldfish with ADHD. After about fifteen minutes of careful reading, I get impatient and skim through the rest, missing all the symbolism and picking up only the overarching plot. Following the movie really helped me hold a steady pace and see all the details.
We've started our first read of Hamlet. Reading it through kindle has been quite helpful to me (you can get Hamlet for free on gutenberg.org). Being able to conveniently double-click words to see definitions helps a lot. Otherwise, I'd never bother searching the dictionary and would end up making shaky guesses off of context. Besides...free is cheaper than a six dollar paperback plus shipping.
We've started our first read of Hamlet. Reading it through kindle has been quite helpful to me (you can get Hamlet for free on gutenberg.org). Being able to conveniently double-click words to see definitions helps a lot. Otherwise, I'd never bother searching the dictionary and would end up making shaky guesses off of context. Besides...free is cheaper than a six dollar paperback plus shipping.
Sunday, November 18, 2012
Close Reading (Nov. 18)
To Slow Warming, Tax Carbon
Most people agree that the natural environment around the world is steadily on the decline. Often, however, our goals are set too far out of reach, and we give up long before we begin. The high consumption of gas in the US is often looked down upon by environmentalists, but an oft-ignored fact, as noted by Dieter Helm, is that gas is a much cleaner source of energy than coal. Citing various details and applying diction and syntax, Helm makes his point--that companies around the world should be taxed on carbon emissions--to his audience with remarkable clarity.
Rather than getting distracted by all the facts bloated to disproportion by environmentalists, Helm exposes important details to his readers, returning things to their proper perspectives. For example, he reveals that, "between 1990 and 2005, Britain’s carbon production fell by about 15 percent — but its carbon consumption rose by 19 percent, when imports were counted." By the common standard, Britain has reduced its carbon production significantly, but Helm points out that, in reality, Britain has not only failed to reduce the overall carbon emissions, but increased its contributions to the problem. Another important detail is that, though Europe has "spent lots of money on wind farms and rooftop solar panels," the global environmental situation has experienced little to no change, even growing worse as a result.
Doom and gloom aside, Mr. Helm is very careful to pick his words carefully to reflect his tone and perspective in the article. His use of diction is most clearly seen in the first two paragraphs. In an effort to appear politically neutral, Helm unearths uncommon words like "lauded" and "faulted" to describe the presidential candidates, avoiding positive and negative connotation as best possible. When he does wish to reveal his standpoint, however, he describes the cries of the environmentalist groups with the word "lamented" which comes across as "overly exaggerated wailing." Helm wants the reader to understand that, though the US doesn't spend mountains of money on under-developed, inefficient, "clean" energy, it is the small step from coal to gas that has made all the difference no matter what the environmentalists claim.
To top it all, Helm uses excellent syntax techniques--most prominently, the em dash--to draw the reader's attention to punch lines and important ideas. For example, to start his discussion on causes of increasing carbon emissions, he writes, "The main reason emissions have been going up is the rise of coal — in China, in particular." By separating the last phrase with an em dash, he causes the reader to save it for later use while he finishes his thoughts about coal consumption. This gives the idea time to mill about in the reader's mind as he or she comes slowly to the realization that, as a result of Europe's deindustrialization, coal-consuming companies are moving to China, not finding alternative, clean energy like we had hoped.
Helm makes it abundantly clear that the US, in fact, is not as far behind Europe in the effort to reduce carbon emissions after all. The result of the taxes on coal in Europe have been more harmful than beneficial. By drawing the reader to details and using specialized words to make his point, Helm shows that, in order for any plan to "save the environment" to work, every country must work together, not apart from one another. A plan to benefit the whole earth must be agreed upon and followed through as one unified body.
Most people agree that the natural environment around the world is steadily on the decline. Often, however, our goals are set too far out of reach, and we give up long before we begin. The high consumption of gas in the US is often looked down upon by environmentalists, but an oft-ignored fact, as noted by Dieter Helm, is that gas is a much cleaner source of energy than coal. Citing various details and applying diction and syntax, Helm makes his point--that companies around the world should be taxed on carbon emissions--to his audience with remarkable clarity.
Rather than getting distracted by all the facts bloated to disproportion by environmentalists, Helm exposes important details to his readers, returning things to their proper perspectives. For example, he reveals that, "between 1990 and 2005, Britain’s carbon production fell by about 15 percent — but its carbon consumption rose by 19 percent, when imports were counted." By the common standard, Britain has reduced its carbon production significantly, but Helm points out that, in reality, Britain has not only failed to reduce the overall carbon emissions, but increased its contributions to the problem. Another important detail is that, though Europe has "spent lots of money on wind farms and rooftop solar panels," the global environmental situation has experienced little to no change, even growing worse as a result.
Doom and gloom aside, Mr. Helm is very careful to pick his words carefully to reflect his tone and perspective in the article. His use of diction is most clearly seen in the first two paragraphs. In an effort to appear politically neutral, Helm unearths uncommon words like "lauded" and "faulted" to describe the presidential candidates, avoiding positive and negative connotation as best possible. When he does wish to reveal his standpoint, however, he describes the cries of the environmentalist groups with the word "lamented" which comes across as "overly exaggerated wailing." Helm wants the reader to understand that, though the US doesn't spend mountains of money on under-developed, inefficient, "clean" energy, it is the small step from coal to gas that has made all the difference no matter what the environmentalists claim.
To top it all, Helm uses excellent syntax techniques--most prominently, the em dash--to draw the reader's attention to punch lines and important ideas. For example, to start his discussion on causes of increasing carbon emissions, he writes, "The main reason emissions have been going up is the rise of coal — in China, in particular." By separating the last phrase with an em dash, he causes the reader to save it for later use while he finishes his thoughts about coal consumption. This gives the idea time to mill about in the reader's mind as he or she comes slowly to the realization that, as a result of Europe's deindustrialization, coal-consuming companies are moving to China, not finding alternative, clean energy like we had hoped.
Helm makes it abundantly clear that the US, in fact, is not as far behind Europe in the effort to reduce carbon emissions after all. The result of the taxes on coal in Europe have been more harmful than beneficial. By drawing the reader to details and using specialized words to make his point, Helm shows that, in order for any plan to "save the environment" to work, every country must work together, not apart from one another. A plan to benefit the whole earth must be agreed upon and followed through as one unified body.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Open Prompt Practice (Nov. 11)
2009. A symbol is an object,
action, or event that represents something or that creates a range of
associations beyond itself. In literary works a symbol can express an
idea, clarify meaning, or enlarge literal meaning. Select a novel or
play and, focusing on one symbol, write an essay analyzing how that
symbol functions in the work and what it reveals about the characters
or themes of the work as a whole. Do not merely summarize the plot.
Sometimes, perhaps more often than not, a person's most prized possession is not the most costly, but the one with the most sentimental value--the one that holds the most meaning. In Tennessee Williams' play, The Glass Menagerie, Laura Wingfield has an clear attachment to her set of glass creatures, especially a unicorn which loses its horn later in the story. As the story progresses, it becomes apparent that the unicorn is meant to represent Laura, and the fragile zoo is her connection with the outside world. She, being the unicorn, feels singled out for her differences in a world of "normal" creatures.
After the Wingfield family is introduced, Laura is seen polishing her glass figurines. She, though shy, fantasizes about the outside world, creating an idealized picture of her interactions. However, she lacks the confidence to step out of her sphere and shrinks from opportunities her mother brings to her because she feels crippled by her slight deformity in her leg. Hoping to avoid further disappointment in her failure to connect with the world, she hides her true desire, to become a part of society--represented by the glass menagerie--under the table as her mother steps in.
Later, Laura's brother Tom, after a heated discussion with their mother about his job, throws his coat across the room, breaking some of Laura's glass figures. Tom worked in a factory to pay the bills, but he had been visiting bars at night and risked being fired. Without his income, the family would be unable to support itself and, as represented by the broken glass, Laura's chance to connect with the world would be shattered. Somewhat regretful of how he impacted his sister, Tom picks up the pieces and promises to himself that he would try to help her reach her goal.
Some time later, Tom invites one of his friends, Jim, to dinner, intending to hook him up with Laura. At first, Laura is traumatized and separates herself from the others, preferring the company of the record player; but soon, she peeks out of her shell and shares her glass menagerie with Jim, effectively showing she has gained confidence in herself in making her first connection. In their interactions, the unicorn takes a fall and loses its horn, to which Laura says the unicorn has become just a normal horse. She has forgotten her differences in the moment and understands she can be accepted into the world even if she is a little different from everyone else.
Being a "unicorn" is not an especially easy task in a world of normal creatures. Laura hid her menagerie from her mother, herself from the world, because she feared she would be judged for her differences. When her brother was on the boarder of losing his job, her fragile connection with society was nearly shattered completely. With his assistance, however, she was able to pick up the pieces and share her menagerie. Unfortunately, the relationship was fleeting, as Jim was already engaged, but with bolstered confidence, she was able to, at least temporarily, step out of the glass walls she built around herself and become a part of the world she lived in.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Response to Course Materials (Nov. 4)
This has been the single most stressful, discouraging class of my life. Who knew that many things could go wrong in two weeks? If only Literature were like math where there are definite answers. In math, you don't add numbers because they are not given, you just label them as unknown and move on. Here in Lit, however, if something doesn't look like it is supposed to mean anything, it probably means something and you have to make your best guess based on the comma in the last sentence (ok, I'm exaggerating a little bit...).
For example, I had a completely different interpretation of Mommy's relationship with Daddy The American Dream from everyone else. Instead of Mommy emasculating Daddy, I read all of Daddy's lines as if he were bored or annoyed with Mommy. I thought he found Mommy to be ridiculously petty and he made fun of her lack of common sense. The whole thing with the "tubes instead of tracts" went way over my head. How does that imply Daddy had his manhood replaced with a lady-part? Tubes may occasionally be used as a euphemism for the ladies, but tract? I've only ever heard that used for internal organs, specifically the digestive tract. Everyone agreed about both of those points, though, so I don't know if I'm simply doing something wrong, or if people just agree with the first thing they hear. Or maybe it doesn't matter and I can have whatever interpretation I want as long as I have a good reason for it. Either way, I'm thoroughly befused and confuddled as well as frustrated.
The Death Of a Salesman was quite a relief after my bout with the Theater of the Absurd. At least something happened in the story, so I have something to work with. I'm actually ready for it this time, too, so hopefully, I'll have time to sleep at night this time around.
The vocab quiz was disconcerting. Somehow, I ended up with a lower grade than the first time around, correcting some of the errors I made last time and second-guessing myself on a whole bunch that I had right. Luckily, it appears Mrs. Holmes has made adjustments to the quiz grades, so I don't have a 60% in the grade book. I almost beat the adjusted grade my first try...what a great way to end the quarter.
For example, I had a completely different interpretation of Mommy's relationship with Daddy The American Dream from everyone else. Instead of Mommy emasculating Daddy, I read all of Daddy's lines as if he were bored or annoyed with Mommy. I thought he found Mommy to be ridiculously petty and he made fun of her lack of common sense. The whole thing with the "tubes instead of tracts" went way over my head. How does that imply Daddy had his manhood replaced with a lady-part? Tubes may occasionally be used as a euphemism for the ladies, but tract? I've only ever heard that used for internal organs, specifically the digestive tract. Everyone agreed about both of those points, though, so I don't know if I'm simply doing something wrong, or if people just agree with the first thing they hear. Or maybe it doesn't matter and I can have whatever interpretation I want as long as I have a good reason for it. Either way, I'm thoroughly befused and confuddled as well as frustrated.
The Death Of a Salesman was quite a relief after my bout with the Theater of the Absurd. At least something happened in the story, so I have something to work with. I'm actually ready for it this time, too, so hopefully, I'll have time to sleep at night this time around.
The vocab quiz was disconcerting. Somehow, I ended up with a lower grade than the first time around, correcting some of the errors I made last time and second-guessing myself on a whole bunch that I had right. Luckily, it appears Mrs. Holmes has made adjustments to the quiz grades, so I don't have a 60% in the grade book. I almost beat the adjusted grade my first try...what a great way to end the quarter.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Close Reading (Oct 21)
Obama Will Do a Better Job
In this article, the author (unknown) attempts to prove to the reader that Obama is the better presidential candidate between him and Romney. The author's first task is to reveal the faults of the Republican candidate, bringing up details about the previous Republican president and the economic crisis that occurred during his presidential term. He continues by taking note of Obama's weak points and redirecting the attacks towards the Republican candidate, choosing his words carefully to best support his perspective. Then, with a vivid metaphor about Romney, he slams the Republican challenger one last time, "sealing the deal," so to speak, in Obama's favor.In any argumentative discussion, it is important to include ample detailed evidence supporting one's argument. Accordingly, the author of the article provides two long lists of evidence, one against the Republican party and one for Obama. The details he provides are catered specifically for the audience he hopes to persuade. For example, one of the major objects of political debates is the unemployment rate. In an effort to show that the Republicans will not do any better than Obama has, he makes reference to "the nation losing 500,000 jobs in one month" as well as several other negative economic statistics from the period during Republican administration. As far as details about Obama's achievements go, the author only goes in-depth about the positive, brushing off the evidence against the president by saying it is only a matter of time before his policies kick in or shifting the blame onto the "obstinate Republicans in Congress."
The article's author, like any good writer, keeps careful track of word connotation, being sure to apply it in ways that support his position. For example, when talking about the disappointing rate of gain in economic health, he says, "The recovery is slow, but its speed has been hampered by obstinate Republicans in Congress dead set on opposing any program that might boost Obama's reelection." Words like "hampered," "obstinate," "dead set," and "opposing," are used to describe the opposition and all carry, to some degree, negative connotation. Positive words like "recovery" and "boost," however, are used when talking about Obama.
At the climax of the entire article are four words: "No Etch A Sketch." This metaphor is used to criticize Romney's tendency to conform to his audience, changing his image to please the masses. The author carefully picked this comparison both to make Romney out to be what some call "attention whores," and to bring out the audience's childhood frustrations with a toy that claimed to bend to the will of the user, yet always created a distorted image, crushing the imagination in a fit of discouragement. Romney, he says, claims to be the answer to the problems to gain favor, but is unable to give what he promises.
With a strong metaphor, some bolstering diction, and a generous sprinkle of evidence, the author of the article constructs a convincing argument in Obama's favor. Obama may not be the perfect candidate, but he believes that, when compared with the other option, Romney, Obama is most definitely the better choice.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Open Prompt Practice (Oct. 14)
1987. Some novels and plays seem
to advocate changes in social or political attitudes or in
traditions. Choose such a novel or play and note briefly the
particular attitudes or traditions that the author apparently wishes
to modify. Then analyze the techniques the author uses to influence
the reader's or audience's views. Avoid plot summary.
In "An Inspector Calls," by J. B. Priestley, the audience is forced to reconsider the British capitalistic ideals of the time. The aristocratic family on display is slowly revealed to have, through the thoughtless, self-rewarding actions encouraged in a capitalistic society, driven a girl, who's name is unsure, to her miserable death. Through the use of all three pillars of argument--pathos, ethos, and logos--embodied within the characters of the play, Priestley attempts to show the reader the fallacies behind the capitalistic system and that each person's decisions ultimately affects everyone around him.
Throughout the play, Sheila Birling acts as Priestley's voice of pathos, the emotional argument. She got the girl fired because the girl's superior appearance hurt her pride. However, she feels remorseful about what she has done, vows never to treat anyone like that again, and encourages the others to do the same. Priestley uses her emotional reaction to show the emotional damage caused by the inconsiderate behavior of the Birling family.
Eric Birling, Sheila's brother, the drunkard, is the representative for Priestley's moral argument. Eric's immoral exploits with the girl are intended to disgust the audience. The girl he knew as Daisy, though in a poor and vulnerable situation, maintained her sense of morality as depicted by her refusal to accept the stolen money. Meanwhile, Eric, born into a rich family, takes advantage of her and does the unspeakable--he impregnates and abandons her in her dismal state. The audience realizes, then, that the people in the upper class of society are not there because they are better in any way than the lower class. In fact, the upper class is often more immoral than those below them because they have more tools with which they can cause destruction and chaos. Therefore, Priestley believes they hold more responsibility and should be held responsible for their actions more so than others.
Finally, Inspector Goole is both Priestley's representative in the story and the courier of logic. He pieces together the story of the girl's death, allowing his audience, both in and out of the story, to see the effects of what the Birlings had done. He brings everyone to the final point Priestley wishes to make: that everyone lives in this world together, and how we act changes the lives around us as well.
J. B. Priestley was a major advocate for socialism and his play, "An Inspector Calls," was designed to illustrate the dangers of a highly capitalistic society. Through the characters of the play, he uses all three pillars of argument to push the audience to the understanding that every decision should be made carefully because somehow, somewhere, each action we make will affect someone, and whether it is in a positive or negative way is up to us to decide.
Summary & Analysis of The American Dream
The American Dream, by Edward Albee, starts with a seemingly typical conversation between a couple named Mommy and Daddy. They had an issue with their plumbing and had called someone to come fix it, but "they" were late. After a short discussion on how "people think they can get away with anything," Mommy suddenly changes topics to a new hat she bought, immediately losing Daddy's interest, though she constantly makes sure he is listening. She ends her story about her shopping when Daddy says, "That's just the way things are today; you just can't get satisfaction; you just try."
This statement by Daddy is quite characteristic of modern materialistic values. He seems to believe that "satisfaction" is an object he can obtain from what the world has to offer, though in reality, satisfaction is a state of mind where one feels that he no longer needs more. Albee satirizes this ludicrous behavior through Daddy's statement because, as we learn from both Mommy and Grandma, Daddy is quite a rich person, to the point where he was even looking to become the governor, yet satisfaction is beyond his reach. As a result, he adopts a tone of dejected frustration, and even submission to the fact that he can no longer get what he wants. Interestingly, Mommy follows his statement by saying she "got satisfaction," though her actions later prove her wrong.
Then, Grandma is introduced as a grouchy old lady and seems to be the only character with any sense of reason. Undoubtedly, then, she acts as Albee's spokesperson throughout the play, telling us what Albee wants us to think.
The conversation continues in a circular pattern, adding very little and coming back to the same topics repeatedly. Mrs. Barker, chaiman of the woman's club, arrives and nobody can remember why she was called, so the circular pattern of conversation continues.
All this circular, repetitive conversation is what makes this play classifiable as Theater of the Absurd. The characters can get almost nowhere with their talk and at times, make no sense. However, Albee breaks this pattern once he gives Grandma a chance to speak, bringing sense to the story and tying things together.
Eventually, once Grandma can get some time alone with Mrs. Barker, she explains that she was here because Mommy and Daddy, after a past experience with an adoption, wanted another child because they had killed the first one. Mrs. Barker leaves to find a glass of water and a young man, whom Grandma describes as "the American Dream," arrives looking for work. Grandma convinces him to help her move out of the house, and essentially out of the play, while setting him up for adoption into Mommy and Daddy's family through Mrs. Barker.
Finally, Albee has given us something serious to ponder aside from the petty absurdity of the lives of the modern family. The young man, the American Dream, is good looking on the outside, but has no talent or emotions on the inside. Albee uses his lack of usefulness to criticize the focus on outward appearance in society that ignores the inner being. In contrast, Grandma looks almost gender neutral because of her age, nothing pleasant to look at, yet she has much character and wit to share. She symbolizes the old American Dream, coming from a time when outward appearance wasn't everything.
Grandma ends the play with a short speech to the audience, saying, "let's leave things as they are right now...while everybody's happy...while everybody's got what he wants...or everybody's got what he thinks he wants. Good night, dears."
Grandma's final statement is almost a warning to the audience. By saying that, she implies that the new American Dream, the young man, can only give short-term satisfaction--the theme of the play.
One cannot gain satisfaction through selfish, materialistic means. Like Daddy said early in the play, these days, when everyone is driven by a strong sense of materialism, one simply cannot get satisfaction. Any feeling of content that comes from possessions is fleeting and meaningless.
This statement by Daddy is quite characteristic of modern materialistic values. He seems to believe that "satisfaction" is an object he can obtain from what the world has to offer, though in reality, satisfaction is a state of mind where one feels that he no longer needs more. Albee satirizes this ludicrous behavior through Daddy's statement because, as we learn from both Mommy and Grandma, Daddy is quite a rich person, to the point where he was even looking to become the governor, yet satisfaction is beyond his reach. As a result, he adopts a tone of dejected frustration, and even submission to the fact that he can no longer get what he wants. Interestingly, Mommy follows his statement by saying she "got satisfaction," though her actions later prove her wrong.
Then, Grandma is introduced as a grouchy old lady and seems to be the only character with any sense of reason. Undoubtedly, then, she acts as Albee's spokesperson throughout the play, telling us what Albee wants us to think.
The conversation continues in a circular pattern, adding very little and coming back to the same topics repeatedly. Mrs. Barker, chaiman of the woman's club, arrives and nobody can remember why she was called, so the circular pattern of conversation continues.
All this circular, repetitive conversation is what makes this play classifiable as Theater of the Absurd. The characters can get almost nowhere with their talk and at times, make no sense. However, Albee breaks this pattern once he gives Grandma a chance to speak, bringing sense to the story and tying things together.
Eventually, once Grandma can get some time alone with Mrs. Barker, she explains that she was here because Mommy and Daddy, after a past experience with an adoption, wanted another child because they had killed the first one. Mrs. Barker leaves to find a glass of water and a young man, whom Grandma describes as "the American Dream," arrives looking for work. Grandma convinces him to help her move out of the house, and essentially out of the play, while setting him up for adoption into Mommy and Daddy's family through Mrs. Barker.
Finally, Albee has given us something serious to ponder aside from the petty absurdity of the lives of the modern family. The young man, the American Dream, is good looking on the outside, but has no talent or emotions on the inside. Albee uses his lack of usefulness to criticize the focus on outward appearance in society that ignores the inner being. In contrast, Grandma looks almost gender neutral because of her age, nothing pleasant to look at, yet she has much character and wit to share. She symbolizes the old American Dream, coming from a time when outward appearance wasn't everything.
Grandma ends the play with a short speech to the audience, saying, "let's leave things as they are right now...while everybody's happy...while everybody's got what he wants...or everybody's got what he thinks he wants. Good night, dears."
Grandma's final statement is almost a warning to the audience. By saying that, she implies that the new American Dream, the young man, can only give short-term satisfaction--the theme of the play.
One cannot gain satisfaction through selfish, materialistic means. Like Daddy said early in the play, these days, when everyone is driven by a strong sense of materialism, one simply cannot get satisfaction. Any feeling of content that comes from possessions is fleeting and meaningless.
Sunday, October 7, 2012
Response to Course Material (Oct. 7)
So far, this class has been fairly challenging, though it isn't (yet) as much of an overload of material as I had previously expected. The number of terms to remember is horrendous, but with two classes dedicated to making students memorize loads of terms, I'm getting accustomed to it rather quickly.
Things are looking up in this class. As I stated in my post on poetry study goals, I have to use what I learn, otherwise I'll quickly forget it. It has barely been a month since school started and we are already looking for applications of what we have learned within texts, which my brain detects as an acceptable use of information, resulting in proper storage of the material.
DIDLS was a new concept for me. It had never occurred to me that literary techniques could be summed up in a single acronym, so I had always thought literary techniques were complicated and annoying; but with just five letters, techniques have been made manageable. It almost makes me want to go back and rewrite a few essays where I could have used DIDLS to make things easier for me. Almost.
After some thought, I have realized that many comedies have an elements of "theater of the absurd" in them. Any time you come across a running gag, it is a reflection on how theater of the absurd has affected modern literature. Humans are so circular that they can laugh at the same thing multiple times. It's all so pointless, yet we laugh. Additionally, some jokes are intended to make you think, "What in the heck of a world did I just watch?" The best example I've seen of this phenomenon is the video, Monty Python and the Holy Grail. The entire movie is a horrific mess of running gags like skipping 3 and 4 while counting, riding invisible horses, airspeed velocities of unladen swallows, etc. and the viewer has no idea what will happen next because it is all nonsense. In the end, the knights have made a massive circle back to the French castle where they started, only to be taken away by the police before they begin their invasion. The whole thing turns out to be pointless and, to put it simply, absurd.
After the timeline activity, I started thinking about the trends we noticed. Literature has, over time, moved from discussing people as a group under the rule of gods to smaller and smaller institutions until it becomes "all about me." The human race has decided life is short and pointless, so while we're here, we should do anything we can to benefit ourselves. Gods, monarchs, and upper-class groups have fallen out of favor because, in order to provide for the lower classes, they require large contributions in return--something individuals don't like to do if they feel they are the center of the universe. Instead of a large community, the human race has split into selfish individuals, desperate to grab all the personal gain possible before they die. We as humans have become exceedingly like animals, without a sense of morality because we are so self-centered we no longer care about each other.
There was so much more we learned, but these were the ones I wasn't already familiar with or hadn't thought about much in the past. This has been a rather interesting semester so far, and, honestly, I'm interested to see what things will interest me in the near future as well.
Things are looking up in this class. As I stated in my post on poetry study goals, I have to use what I learn, otherwise I'll quickly forget it. It has barely been a month since school started and we are already looking for applications of what we have learned within texts, which my brain detects as an acceptable use of information, resulting in proper storage of the material.
DIDLS was a new concept for me. It had never occurred to me that literary techniques could be summed up in a single acronym, so I had always thought literary techniques were complicated and annoying; but with just five letters, techniques have been made manageable. It almost makes me want to go back and rewrite a few essays where I could have used DIDLS to make things easier for me. Almost.
After some thought, I have realized that many comedies have an elements of "theater of the absurd" in them. Any time you come across a running gag, it is a reflection on how theater of the absurd has affected modern literature. Humans are so circular that they can laugh at the same thing multiple times. It's all so pointless, yet we laugh. Additionally, some jokes are intended to make you think, "What in the heck of a world did I just watch?" The best example I've seen of this phenomenon is the video, Monty Python and the Holy Grail. The entire movie is a horrific mess of running gags like skipping 3 and 4 while counting, riding invisible horses, airspeed velocities of unladen swallows, etc. and the viewer has no idea what will happen next because it is all nonsense. In the end, the knights have made a massive circle back to the French castle where they started, only to be taken away by the police before they begin their invasion. The whole thing turns out to be pointless and, to put it simply, absurd.
After the timeline activity, I started thinking about the trends we noticed. Literature has, over time, moved from discussing people as a group under the rule of gods to smaller and smaller institutions until it becomes "all about me." The human race has decided life is short and pointless, so while we're here, we should do anything we can to benefit ourselves. Gods, monarchs, and upper-class groups have fallen out of favor because, in order to provide for the lower classes, they require large contributions in return--something individuals don't like to do if they feel they are the center of the universe. Instead of a large community, the human race has split into selfish individuals, desperate to grab all the personal gain possible before they die. We as humans have become exceedingly like animals, without a sense of morality because we are so self-centered we no longer care about each other.
There was so much more we learned, but these were the ones I wasn't already familiar with or hadn't thought about much in the past. This has been a rather interesting semester so far, and, honestly, I'm interested to see what things will interest me in the near future as well.
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Close Reading (Sept. 23)
Rethinking Sleep
In "Rethinking Sleep," David Randall attempts to form and connect ideas that break the reader away from preconceived notions about sleep. Today, it is widely accepted that the average person must sleep, uninterrupted, through an eight-hour night in order to receive the necessary amount of rest essential to living out the remainder of the day. However, taking advantage of detailed data, opening conjunctions, and word connotation, Randall makes an effort to cause the reader to accept the idea that, perhaps, an interrupted session of sleep is not so bad after all.
Details are arguably the very foundation of Randall's essay. Rather than trying to reason with the reader, he does what so many grammar instructors try to get their students to do: show, don't tell. Immediately after personalizing the essay in the first paragraph, he causes the reader to understand the magnitude and importance of the issue through the use of statistics, saying "roughly 41 million people in the United States...get six hours or fewer of sleep at night." With the problem well established, he can spend the rest of the article discussing solutions.
Using data in this way causes the readers to question the system in which they live. Why, if we know all these things, do we continue to operate in damaging ways? Particularly effective is Randall's reference to research in historical sleep practices. "Segmented sleep," as he calls it, was normal even back when Chaucer wrote the "Canterbury Tales." As a counterbalance so that we cannot push that evidence aside as outdated ancient practices, Randall later provides evidence that such sleeping methods are being used even now with beneficial results. With such unmistakeable data, the reader has no choice but to accept that current sleep methods are unsatisfactory.
Plain data, however, would be completely ineffective if it were merely jumbled together with no connections through syntax to organize the thoughts. Though conjunctions as sentence openers are often frowned upon in formal writing, Randall uses them to emphasize connections, making the article flow. For example, after telling us the current solution to the sleep problem, his next sentence says, "But this directive may be part of the problem." By starting a sentence with a conjunction, Randall gives the reader a whole period's worth of time to think about the previous sentence before he destroys it with the word "but." He uses this technique multiple times throughout the article, each time stating the reader's current way of thinking, then providing a conjunction opener, magnifying the statement that follows to create better contrast.
Lastly, Randall chooses his words carefully to gain the support of his readers. Most notably, when he writes about "doctors who peddle sleep aid products" and what causes people to "reach for sleeping pills," he takes advantage of the negative connotation to portray the pharmacists as a sort of drug dealer, providing sleep-addicted customers with pills. Though he writes that the doctors are "unintentionally reinforcing" a potentially damaging idea, the connotation behind the words infer some horrific plot behind sleep aids.
Using these rhetorical techniques, David Randall shows his audience the misconceptions in today's ideas about sleep. Sleep is most certainly one of the most important factors of our lives. But our ideas about the "ideal sleeping session" may be far off the mark. Millions of people in the US are sleep deprived because they misunderstand the fact that waking up in the night is not an indicator of a stressed mind.
In "Rethinking Sleep," David Randall attempts to form and connect ideas that break the reader away from preconceived notions about sleep. Today, it is widely accepted that the average person must sleep, uninterrupted, through an eight-hour night in order to receive the necessary amount of rest essential to living out the remainder of the day. However, taking advantage of detailed data, opening conjunctions, and word connotation, Randall makes an effort to cause the reader to accept the idea that, perhaps, an interrupted session of sleep is not so bad after all.
Details are arguably the very foundation of Randall's essay. Rather than trying to reason with the reader, he does what so many grammar instructors try to get their students to do: show, don't tell. Immediately after personalizing the essay in the first paragraph, he causes the reader to understand the magnitude and importance of the issue through the use of statistics, saying "roughly 41 million people in the United States...get six hours or fewer of sleep at night." With the problem well established, he can spend the rest of the article discussing solutions.
Using data in this way causes the readers to question the system in which they live. Why, if we know all these things, do we continue to operate in damaging ways? Particularly effective is Randall's reference to research in historical sleep practices. "Segmented sleep," as he calls it, was normal even back when Chaucer wrote the "Canterbury Tales." As a counterbalance so that we cannot push that evidence aside as outdated ancient practices, Randall later provides evidence that such sleeping methods are being used even now with beneficial results. With such unmistakeable data, the reader has no choice but to accept that current sleep methods are unsatisfactory.
Plain data, however, would be completely ineffective if it were merely jumbled together with no connections through syntax to organize the thoughts. Though conjunctions as sentence openers are often frowned upon in formal writing, Randall uses them to emphasize connections, making the article flow. For example, after telling us the current solution to the sleep problem, his next sentence says, "But this directive may be part of the problem." By starting a sentence with a conjunction, Randall gives the reader a whole period's worth of time to think about the previous sentence before he destroys it with the word "but." He uses this technique multiple times throughout the article, each time stating the reader's current way of thinking, then providing a conjunction opener, magnifying the statement that follows to create better contrast.
Lastly, Randall chooses his words carefully to gain the support of his readers. Most notably, when he writes about "doctors who peddle sleep aid products" and what causes people to "reach for sleeping pills," he takes advantage of the negative connotation to portray the pharmacists as a sort of drug dealer, providing sleep-addicted customers with pills. Though he writes that the doctors are "unintentionally reinforcing" a potentially damaging idea, the connotation behind the words infer some horrific plot behind sleep aids.
Using these rhetorical techniques, David Randall shows his audience the misconceptions in today's ideas about sleep. Sleep is most certainly one of the most important factors of our lives. But our ideas about the "ideal sleeping session" may be far off the mark. Millions of people in the US are sleep deprived because they misunderstand the fact that waking up in the night is not an indicator of a stressed mind.
Sunday, September 16, 2012
Open Prompt Practice (Sept. 16)
2010, Form B. “You can leave
home all you want, but home will never leave you.” —Sonsyrea Tate
Sonsyrea Tate’s statement suggests
that “home” may be conceived of as a dwelling, a place, or a
state of mind. It may have positive or negative associations, but in
either case, it may have a considerable influence on an individual.
Choose a novel or play in which a central character leaves home yet
finds that home remains significant. Write a well-developed essay in
which you analyze the importance of “home” to this character and
the reasons for its continuing influence. Explain how the character’s
idea of home illuminates the larger meaning of the work. Do not
merely summarize the plot.
For a small individual, home often means security, comfort, and predictability. Without these, he feels out of place, exposed to the dangers of the outside world. No doubt, this was how Bilbo Baggins felt as he was carried away from home to begin Tolkein's novel, The Hobbit. Not even a day's journey from his house, he already began wishing for his handkerchief. Utilizing Bilbo's original fear of leaving his "comfort zone," Tolkein emphasizes his message for us that, insignificant as we may appear, each of us has the capacity to use the skills learned inside our own fields to greatly affect the world beyond.
To start the novel, Tolkein immediately describes Bilbo's character, explaining that he comes from a land where the inhabitants ostracize, and even despise, adventurous people. He likes to think of himself as a typical hobbit, avoiding all unexpected conflict. Later, this aspect of Bilbo becomes his most influencing characteristic. Realizing the dwarves intended to wage war on the very people who helped them, he becomes the key individual pushing for peace between the groups.
Time Elapsed: 40 minutes (cut off at where I got within 40 minute period)
Sunday, September 9, 2012
Response to Course Material (Sept. 9)
Until now, I had always been taught to use complex sentences and use "descriptive" (a.k.a. long) words in my writing. The more complicated the writing was, the better. It had never occurred to me that, perhaps, the whole purpose of writing is to communicate, as explained in presentation, "The Rhetoric Situation." Rather than spending my time trying to spew out as many twenty-cent words as possible in one paragraph, it is much more valuable to make sure I am understood. It is true that descriptive words are valuable as well, but there is a fine line between "description" and what The Nuts and Bolts of College Writing describes as "pompous writing.
In addition, I have never truly understood the scope of symbolism. After reading Foster's How To Read Literature Like a Professor, it seems everything in literature symbolizes or reflects something else. To make matters worse, Foster even says that it doesn't matter whether or not a symbol is intentional. Even if the author merely needed to kill a character and drowning was the most convenient method, it is a symbol. Symbols are integrated into our subconscious. Authors add symbols to their stories unintentionally as well as intentionally. To us humans, so many aspects of life have some sort of meaning to them, even if we know it or not, so we cannot help but integrate it in our writing. That said, instead of whining about how I think an author simply wanted to write a story and all these symbols are adding too much unintended meaning, I can no longer help but notice such symbols everywhere in the culture around me.
In addition, I have never truly understood the scope of symbolism. After reading Foster's How To Read Literature Like a Professor, it seems everything in literature symbolizes or reflects something else. To make matters worse, Foster even says that it doesn't matter whether or not a symbol is intentional. Even if the author merely needed to kill a character and drowning was the most convenient method, it is a symbol. Symbols are integrated into our subconscious. Authors add symbols to their stories unintentionally as well as intentionally. To us humans, so many aspects of life have some sort of meaning to them, even if we know it or not, so we cannot help but integrate it in our writing. That said, instead of whining about how I think an author simply wanted to write a story and all these symbols are adding too much unintended meaning, I can no longer help but notice such symbols everywhere in the culture around me.
Monday, September 3, 2012
"Me Talk Pretty One Day"
At first glance, David Sedaris's anecdote "Me Talk Pretty One Day" immediately breaks rule number one in The Nuts and Bolts of College Writing by Michael Harvey. Entertaining as the story was, the "pompous college writing" still proved to be a chore to wade through. However, though he could have been more concise, Sedaris exercised most of the applicable guidelines set in Harvey's book, resulting in a story that carries the reader all the way to the end.
To prevent a reader from getting stuck between paragraphs or sentences, linking words are used quite often in Sedaris's story. For example, he writes "After being singled out as a lazy kfdtinvfm..." (Sedaris 14), employing time as a link between the paragraph and the previous (Harvey n.p.). Without such links, the reader would be too distracted trying to make the jump between paragraphs to enjoy the story.
Now that readers can make it between paragraphs without stops, it is imperative that the paragraphs capture the readers' interest so readers have no wish to stop. For this purpose, Sedaris uses punch lines.
The teacher licked her lips, revealing a hint of the saucebox we would later
come to know. She crouched low for her attack, placed her hands on the young
woman’s desk, and leaned close, saying, “Oh yeah? And do you love your little war?”
(Sedaris 12)
Like the good comedians Harvey describes, Sedaris crouches low, coiling up the reader like a spring, drawing out the moment until, with an "oh yeah," he releases the pent-up energy with one little phrase, the punch line (Harvey n.p.).
Even with the help of the punch line, however, the entire anecdote would be rather boring if Sedaris had abused the passive voice. When he does use it, however, Harvey's general rule about passive voices--it "makes sense when you want to emphasize an action" and "don't care about the agent"--applies (Harvey n.p.). Take the passive tone in this sentence for example: "Vacations
were recounted, and questions were raised concerning mutual friends with names like
Kang and Vlatnya" (Sedaris 11). The narrator really doesn't care who these people are, particularly because he doesn't know yet. All that matters, then, is what they are doing, making the passive voice very appropriate.
It is rather unfortunate that the "pompous writing style" was so prominent throughout Sedaris's story. Otherwise, the story was quite captivating, flowing with linking words through punch lines and properly-used passive and active voices. If Sedaris doesn't already "talk pretty" in French, he certainly does in English writing.
To prevent a reader from getting stuck between paragraphs or sentences, linking words are used quite often in Sedaris's story. For example, he writes "After being singled out as a lazy kfdtinvfm..." (Sedaris 14), employing time as a link between the paragraph and the previous (Harvey n.p.). Without such links, the reader would be too distracted trying to make the jump between paragraphs to enjoy the story.
Now that readers can make it between paragraphs without stops, it is imperative that the paragraphs capture the readers' interest so readers have no wish to stop. For this purpose, Sedaris uses punch lines.
The teacher licked her lips, revealing a hint of the saucebox we would later
come to know. She crouched low for her attack, placed her hands on the young
woman’s desk, and leaned close, saying, “Oh yeah? And do you love your little war?”
(Sedaris 12)
Like the good comedians Harvey describes, Sedaris crouches low, coiling up the reader like a spring, drawing out the moment until, with an "oh yeah," he releases the pent-up energy with one little phrase, the punch line (Harvey n.p.).
Even with the help of the punch line, however, the entire anecdote would be rather boring if Sedaris had abused the passive voice. When he does use it, however, Harvey's general rule about passive voices--it "makes sense when you want to emphasize an action" and "don't care about the agent"--applies (Harvey n.p.). Take the passive tone in this sentence for example: "Vacations
were recounted, and questions were raised concerning mutual friends with names like
Kang and Vlatnya" (Sedaris 11). The narrator really doesn't care who these people are, particularly because he doesn't know yet. All that matters, then, is what they are doing, making the passive voice very appropriate.
It is rather unfortunate that the "pompous writing style" was so prominent throughout Sedaris's story. Otherwise, the story was quite captivating, flowing with linking words through punch lines and properly-used passive and active voices. If Sedaris doesn't already "talk pretty" in French, he certainly does in English writing.
Sunday, September 2, 2012
Poetry Study Goals
- Be able to comfortably use poetry terms while talking
- Learn to look beyond the obvious to find the overarching meaning behind a poem
- Understand how different aspects of the poem can be used for the same purpose
- Learn to untangle poetically twisted sentences to form coherent phrases more quickly
- Be able to detect the tone of a poem accurately
- Stop typing "peom"
I have recently discovered that I have difficulty determining the tone of a passage, sort of like I have "literary autism." I might think a passage is happy when the rest of the class feels depressed after reading it; or I'll think it is angry when everyone else is saying it sounds sad.
As for the last goal...that really needs to stop.
Saturday, September 1, 2012
Diagnostic Test
As soon as I looked at the diagnostic test, I knew this was going to be the toughest class of my entire highschool career. The reading section of the ACT has always been my least favorite and this test looks rather similar, but with things to memorize like history, my second least favorite subject. I can't say I was surprised, though. Public schooling is so geared towards taking standardized tests that there's rarely anything to be surprised about when I get to one. As far as I can tell, this test is just AP World all over again with a different subject which, I suppose, should be an encouraging thought.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)