"Belle says we are in hell right now and there isn't a God who would make men and women wanting what they want and then stick them in a hell after they've done it."
I think that Le Sueur is trying to get across the idea that that the people in her story are living an extremely hard life. The context of this sentance has Belle talking about how rough her life is:
["Belle says this is a rotten stinking world and for women it is worse, and with your insides rotting out of you and men at you day and night and the welfare workers following you and people having to live off each other like rats. It's covered with slime, she says."]
and how fearfull she is of how her lifestyle is a reflection of her "bad" morality. I think that what Le Sueur is really trying to get across here is that the women of her story are really struggling. They are having to deal with very hard lives, and society is frowning on them for doing things that they need to do to get by. All of this speaks to the reader because I think that anyone who has contemplated religion has had a similar thought. Is it wrong to do whatever it takes to get by? Haven't most of us done things that are not technically acceptable according to the tennets of a given faith? Why would we be given these desires to do things and then be told that we will be punished for having them? I think that most readers can relate to all of these questions.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Sunday, September 20, 2009
The Importance of Knowledge
“why sure Clara says, knowledge is power, the early bird gets the worm.” Pg. 3
This quote is very important because it is stressing the importance of knowledge. Especially because it is something that cannot be taken away from you..Or so it was thought to be that way. It was made very important by the many things that Clara always tells the Girl how to do things. Since the girl is meek and mild Clara helps her learn the tricks of the trade to get her acclimated into this society, a society that the girl’s mother most definitely does not approve of. Which is another thing that I find interesting, Clara I feel like sees herself in this girl. She left home when she was young and came to the big city. She feels that it is almost necessary to help the girl out. Another quote that goes along with this is “Something was in her so sure as if she knew everything I would never know.” (2) This goes along more with knowledge and the importance that it has.
Knowledge is a very powerful thing. Without this key tool it would be very difficult to succeed in life. The girl is realizing that although she had much knowledge about where she came from she no longer has this same luxury. She is forced to become something else and change the ways she once was if she wants to succeed. Clara on the other hand seems to have it all figured out, and the reason she does is because she has lived through enough and has had to figure it all out on her own. Without the knowledge that she has today she wouldn’t be in the place she is now. I felt that LeSueuer did a good job of stressing the importance of Clara and the built up knowledge that she has compared to the girl.
This quote is very important because it is stressing the importance of knowledge. Especially because it is something that cannot be taken away from you..Or so it was thought to be that way. It was made very important by the many things that Clara always tells the Girl how to do things. Since the girl is meek and mild Clara helps her learn the tricks of the trade to get her acclimated into this society, a society that the girl’s mother most definitely does not approve of. Which is another thing that I find interesting, Clara I feel like sees herself in this girl. She left home when she was young and came to the big city. She feels that it is almost necessary to help the girl out. Another quote that goes along with this is “Something was in her so sure as if she knew everything I would never know.” (2) This goes along more with knowledge and the importance that it has.
Knowledge is a very powerful thing. Without this key tool it would be very difficult to succeed in life. The girl is realizing that although she had much knowledge about where she came from she no longer has this same luxury. She is forced to become something else and change the ways she once was if she wants to succeed. Clara on the other hand seems to have it all figured out, and the reason she does is because she has lived through enough and has had to figure it all out on her own. Without the knowledge that she has today she wouldn’t be in the place she is now. I felt that LeSueuer did a good job of stressing the importance of Clara and the built up knowledge that she has compared to the girl.
Three Cheers for Language
“Hurray, three cheers and down the hatch for birth, Bill and Butch poured out the moon into the whiskey glasses, held up and downed and held again.” pg 8, The Girl
Language is very particular in Le Sueur’s The Girl. There is an abundance of punctuation, stop and go paragraphs, and sentences that mend and meld together, as well as dialogue. I think this helps to make the thoughts and actions of The Girl interact with the dialogue in way that presents the text as one long inner monologue. It’s interesting because of the way that you might not know when the actual dialogue beings and the narration ends. It makes you pay attention to the text more than if you know who is talking and when.
I also think that an especially important factor in Le Sueur’s writing, represented in this quote, is the type of slang and the very unorthodox vernacular she uses often. Sometimes it is even difficult to keep up with the words used by each character when talking. It can be almost compared to “teen speak” which has parents and teachers confused on a daily basis. But to teens, and the characters in The Girl, the language makes complete sense to them. They know what moon is, what the birth symbolizes to them: a bet to be made, money to be won. It may seem stupid to us, but it makes entirely too much sense to them. And to us, the reader, we want to understand what they’re saying and tend to pay particular attention to words and phrases that we have no sense of. It makes the text, like Aristotle says, something distinct and stylish that can be separated for normal dialect.
The language by Le Sueur also brings about this feeling of rush or hurriedness. The text is replete with run-ons and has very few pauses where the reader can get there bearing on what the timeline is or how fast paced the story actually is. Most of the events take place very quickly, and with no introduction or explanation. The girl’s relationship with Buck, her work at the bar; everything is very quickly formed and executed. Without realizing it, we as readers, have become fully engrossed in her day to day dealings without ever being told these are actual day to day events.
Language is very particular in Le Sueur’s The Girl. There is an abundance of punctuation, stop and go paragraphs, and sentences that mend and meld together, as well as dialogue. I think this helps to make the thoughts and actions of The Girl interact with the dialogue in way that presents the text as one long inner monologue. It’s interesting because of the way that you might not know when the actual dialogue beings and the narration ends. It makes you pay attention to the text more than if you know who is talking and when.
I also think that an especially important factor in Le Sueur’s writing, represented in this quote, is the type of slang and the very unorthodox vernacular she uses often. Sometimes it is even difficult to keep up with the words used by each character when talking. It can be almost compared to “teen speak” which has parents and teachers confused on a daily basis. But to teens, and the characters in The Girl, the language makes complete sense to them. They know what moon is, what the birth symbolizes to them: a bet to be made, money to be won. It may seem stupid to us, but it makes entirely too much sense to them. And to us, the reader, we want to understand what they’re saying and tend to pay particular attention to words and phrases that we have no sense of. It makes the text, like Aristotle says, something distinct and stylish that can be separated for normal dialect.
The language by Le Sueur also brings about this feeling of rush or hurriedness. The text is replete with run-ons and has very few pauses where the reader can get there bearing on what the timeline is or how fast paced the story actually is. Most of the events take place very quickly, and with no introduction or explanation. The girl’s relationship with Buck, her work at the bar; everything is very quickly formed and executed. Without realizing it, we as readers, have become fully engrossed in her day to day dealings without ever being told these are actual day to day events.
Give and Receive- p.11
“He just beat us because he saw what we wanted and couldn’t give (11).”
This quote occurs in the story as the narrator is describing her family to Clara. In terms of content, it serves as a way to highlight the power relationship that exists between her father and the other members of her family. The father is seen as the breadwinner, and his inability to provide for his family is used as justification for his actions.
While providing a specific example of familial relations and traditional male roles in one instance, it is likely that Le Sueur intended to also use the narrator’s father as an example of male-female relations in society. That is, to use the specific situation to shed light on what appears to be an extremely patriarchal society.
Structurally, the sentence reinforces this power relationship by including only two subjects: he and us. The narrator never elaborates on who the other members of the family are, and it does not matter because there is only the father and everyone else.
In addition, Le Sueur does not include the word ‘us’ at the end of the sentence, which serves as a further illustration of the role of the father in the family. By not including ‘us,’ the author seeks to make the point that it does not matter who the recipient (or if there is a recipient) of the father’s giving is, but only that he is able to give. When he is unable, he cannot fulfill his social role, and takes this humiliation out on his family by beating them in an effort to maintain his dominance.
The usage of the word ‘just’ also serves as a way to naturalize the father’s actions against the family. That is, he beat them because he could not fulfill his natural role as a provider, which elicited a natural, physical response.
This quote occurs in the story as the narrator is describing her family to Clara. In terms of content, it serves as a way to highlight the power relationship that exists between her father and the other members of her family. The father is seen as the breadwinner, and his inability to provide for his family is used as justification for his actions.
While providing a specific example of familial relations and traditional male roles in one instance, it is likely that Le Sueur intended to also use the narrator’s father as an example of male-female relations in society. That is, to use the specific situation to shed light on what appears to be an extremely patriarchal society.
Structurally, the sentence reinforces this power relationship by including only two subjects: he and us. The narrator never elaborates on who the other members of the family are, and it does not matter because there is only the father and everyone else.
In addition, Le Sueur does not include the word ‘us’ at the end of the sentence, which serves as a further illustration of the role of the father in the family. By not including ‘us,’ the author seeks to make the point that it does not matter who the recipient (or if there is a recipient) of the father’s giving is, but only that he is able to give. When he is unable, he cannot fulfill his social role, and takes this humiliation out on his family by beating them in an effort to maintain his dominance.
The usage of the word ‘just’ also serves as a way to naturalize the father’s actions against the family. That is, he beat them because he could not fulfill his natural role as a provider, which elicited a natural, physical response.
You did it on purpose...
She didn't mean anything! he said to the sky, Godalmighty, here I been hot as a hound for a week and trying to act nice to you because you are such a nice girl and then all of the sudden you egg me on.
Quote from the second page of chapter 8. Butch has just chased the girl down after she away from him tauntingly. She is trying to explain that her intentions were innocent and sorry as she was, she wouldn't lose her virginity in that field. The girl is terrified that her inexperience will scare Butch off and this sentence paints a vivid picture of the guilt Butch piles onto her fears of inadequacy.
Trying to act nice and being nice are two very different things. The word trying implies either that someone has failed or simply not yet succeeded in doing something. Use of the word act hints the behavior requires significant effort as it goes against natural inclinations. Butch is telling the girl in no uncertain terms that her actions are causing him serious discomfort. He is trying to be nice while she is purposefully being a tease, at least this is the impression Butch wants to give the girl.
In mid sentence Butch switches from yelling at God, to directly addressing the girl. He wants the girl to know that her naiveté is driving him to insanity, to the point that he would yell at the sky in the middle of a field. The exclamation point used in mid sentence after anything highlights the anger he uses to frighten the girl into submission. The combination of guilt and fear solidify Butch's hold over the girl.
Lastly Butch compares himself to a hound invoking images of canine nature. He uses the word egg to describe the girls behavior. These two images in combination allude to the stories of the fox/wolf and the chicken playing to primal ideas of predator and prey. Butch is the archetypal wolf in a sheep's fur.
Quote from pg. 1
"She made the hollowness of my flesh fill with people and she believed in love and everything comes to those who wait, kid - you would get anything you hankered for, she said, if you'd believe and keep it in the mind's eye"
This quote stuck out of the ordinary to me for quite a few different reasons. In the beginning of the chapter we are shown how much Clara means to her and how everything Clara says she's motivated by. With this quote it seems to show that Clara has experienced so much in life and knows that there is so much more to life then the bootleg bar they are working in and that she just needs to keep her eyes open for the opportunity to come along.
This quote specifically stuck out to me because of how she states what Clara does for her and how what she said is so important to her not only for the importance behind the saying, but because it is coming from Clara. I like how she states how she filled the "hollowness of her flesh with people," which to me means that Clara made her feel warmed, loved, and cared for not only by herself but from other random people also.
And then I liked how she states that Clara "believes in love and everything comes to those who wait." It made me think that there is this girl who is doing this grungy job that she probably does not want to do at all and has this amazing attitude of not only making other people keep there head's up, but also showing that she still believes in life's little miracles and that eventually, if someone works hard and waits patientally, something great will come to them. This girl makes not only everyone around her, but the reader's (such as myself) think that we do honestly get what we deserve and that we just have to keep our eyes open and keep believing (as corny as that might sound), it is completely true and I think we get frustrated and forget that so often.
And finally, it goes along with everything I have been stating as the quote comes to an end by saying "you would get anything you hankered for... if you'd believe and keep it in the mind's eye." Basically saying to me that, honestly, anything you long for will eventually come to you, if you just believe and keep thinking that it will come true (by keeping it in the mind's eye (which is a very creative way of saying it)).
This quote stuck out of the ordinary to me for quite a few different reasons. In the beginning of the chapter we are shown how much Clara means to her and how everything Clara says she's motivated by. With this quote it seems to show that Clara has experienced so much in life and knows that there is so much more to life then the bootleg bar they are working in and that she just needs to keep her eyes open for the opportunity to come along.
This quote specifically stuck out to me because of how she states what Clara does for her and how what she said is so important to her not only for the importance behind the saying, but because it is coming from Clara. I like how she states how she filled the "hollowness of her flesh with people," which to me means that Clara made her feel warmed, loved, and cared for not only by herself but from other random people also.
And then I liked how she states that Clara "believes in love and everything comes to those who wait." It made me think that there is this girl who is doing this grungy job that she probably does not want to do at all and has this amazing attitude of not only making other people keep there head's up, but also showing that she still believes in life's little miracles and that eventually, if someone works hard and waits patientally, something great will come to them. This girl makes not only everyone around her, but the reader's (such as myself) think that we do honestly get what we deserve and that we just have to keep our eyes open and keep believing (as corny as that might sound), it is completely true and I think we get frustrated and forget that so often.
And finally, it goes along with everything I have been stating as the quote comes to an end by saying "you would get anything you hankered for... if you'd believe and keep it in the mind's eye." Basically saying to me that, honestly, anything you long for will eventually come to you, if you just believe and keep thinking that it will come true (by keeping it in the mind's eye (which is a very creative way of saying it)).
page 33...
"i looked at him and saw how they both looked alike with those lean narrow heads, and that sharp nose like on a scent, and the high bones. I was afraid and started to go out and he followed and we got in the car and began to drive fast to the country and it was early Autumn"
As i was reading this passage I thought about the way that Meridel Le Sueur was describing the similarities between Bill (who had just been killed) and Butch. The way she describes the look about the two fascinated me. "narrow heads, and that sharp nose like on a scent, and the high bones." The words she uses are almost like she is comparing two people who are still alive.
I read this and i was picturing this scene in my head and for a second, i saw Le Sueur's face and had a brief feeling of what she must have been feeling at that point. and i pictured the way Butch looked and pictured myself looking at him while he was looking down at Bill. To me it seems like Le Sueur almost wants Butch to be the man Bill was because of the way she was describing them.
i also think the way she describes Bill and Butch together is very important in that she sees them as the same person or sees the same person coming out in Butch. With Le Sueurs' words here, she creates almost a new character and makes the reader see that Butch is almost a different person or will become a different person as the book continues....
As i was reading this passage I thought about the way that Meridel Le Sueur was describing the similarities between Bill (who had just been killed) and Butch. The way she describes the look about the two fascinated me. "narrow heads, and that sharp nose like on a scent, and the high bones." The words she uses are almost like she is comparing two people who are still alive.
I read this and i was picturing this scene in my head and for a second, i saw Le Sueur's face and had a brief feeling of what she must have been feeling at that point. and i pictured the way Butch looked and pictured myself looking at him while he was looking down at Bill. To me it seems like Le Sueur almost wants Butch to be the man Bill was because of the way she was describing them.
i also think the way she describes Bill and Butch together is very important in that she sees them as the same person or sees the same person coming out in Butch. With Le Sueurs' words here, she creates almost a new character and makes the reader see that Butch is almost a different person or will become a different person as the book continues....
page 62
"I wouldn't see us a flat anymore but great burning balls of fire turning into eachother, piercing, breaking, howling, singing, melting together and tearing apart."
I feel like I've read enough books where two of the characters have sex, but I've never read one where the author uses such descriptive words and metaphors to describe a character's emotions like in Chapter 14. I think this sentence is full of directly related language and content.
The first part, "I wouldn't see us a flat anymore", is so simple but I think it really means a lot to the girl's relationship with Butch. Flat, is such an easy concept, and I think that's where they were in their relationship. The feelings and the want were there and that was the "flat" part, but once they acted on those feelings things became more complex.
I find the part where she references them as "great burning balls of fire" to be so intense. Then the descriptive words after that definitely confirm that feeling. I think that Meridel Le Suer used commas in between the words piercing, breaking, howling, and singing to describe all of the emotions she was feeling simutaneously while together with butch. Adjoing that with the phrase "melting and tearing apart" shows that each of those words represent different emotions the girl feels at different times towards Butch, but when she is with him they all are welded together.
After I had read this line, I thought about it for a little bit. I picture these burning balls of fire that Le Suer references to and I think about stars, since they literally are burning balls of fire. I feel like by saying they crash together it's like saying the stars are alligning, like maybe the girl had realized she's in love with Butch.
I feel like I've read enough books where two of the characters have sex, but I've never read one where the author uses such descriptive words and metaphors to describe a character's emotions like in Chapter 14. I think this sentence is full of directly related language and content.
The first part, "I wouldn't see us a flat anymore", is so simple but I think it really means a lot to the girl's relationship with Butch. Flat, is such an easy concept, and I think that's where they were in their relationship. The feelings and the want were there and that was the "flat" part, but once they acted on those feelings things became more complex.
I find the part where she references them as "great burning balls of fire" to be so intense. Then the descriptive words after that definitely confirm that feeling. I think that Meridel Le Suer used commas in between the words piercing, breaking, howling, and singing to describe all of the emotions she was feeling simutaneously while together with butch. Adjoing that with the phrase "melting and tearing apart" shows that each of those words represent different emotions the girl feels at different times towards Butch, but when she is with him they all are welded together.
After I had read this line, I thought about it for a little bit. I picture these burning balls of fire that Le Suer references to and I think about stars, since they literally are burning balls of fire. I feel like by saying they crash together it's like saying the stars are alligning, like maybe the girl had realized she's in love with Butch.
Crippled and hurt society
“It seems like my family was crippled and hurt as much as if their flesh had been riddled by bullets and their limbs were apart.
Meridel Le Sueur uses this specific type of figurative speech for several different reasons. Her (Le Sueur’s) “girl” came from the poor working class, where people had to make many difficult and most of the time dangerous choices in order to support their living. There were no job security, choices for poor people in regards to jobs were limited, and the jobs that they (poor people) could get were dangerous, which means people could get killed or crippled for the rest of their lives.
Besides, they were all living in violent society, where most poor people would get drunk, get involved in a fight, and get shot. And their flesh can get riddled by bullets and their limbs can be torn apart.
So, in her language, she (Le Sueur) not just trying to deliver the pain of parents “loosing the children one way or another”, which telling us about fate of children of most poor families of that time, she is also trying to deliver to a reader pain, struggle, and vulnerability of poor people of that time.
I find Le Sueur’s language somewhat revolutionary. “No he was good. Something was against him, all his working didn’t make no difference”. From this I can understand that opportunities for people of that time were very limited regardless of how hard they worked, and how hard they tried. They all had common fate awaiting for all of them – getting crippled, hurt, and riddled by bullets.
When she uses this sentence about this very family she is also compares it with a human body. When people lose some organs of their bodies they become crippled and nothing ever would make their bodies whole and complete. In this very sentence we can understand that every member of that family is needed, loved, and necessary, and losing any member of the family would feel like losing a part of the body. Without having all members of the family together this family is destined to be crippled and hurt.
Meridel Le Sueur uses this specific type of figurative speech for several different reasons. Her (Le Sueur’s) “girl” came from the poor working class, where people had to make many difficult and most of the time dangerous choices in order to support their living. There were no job security, choices for poor people in regards to jobs were limited, and the jobs that they (poor people) could get were dangerous, which means people could get killed or crippled for the rest of their lives.
Besides, they were all living in violent society, where most poor people would get drunk, get involved in a fight, and get shot. And their flesh can get riddled by bullets and their limbs can be torn apart.
So, in her language, she (Le Sueur) not just trying to deliver the pain of parents “loosing the children one way or another”, which telling us about fate of children of most poor families of that time, she is also trying to deliver to a reader pain, struggle, and vulnerability of poor people of that time.
I find Le Sueur’s language somewhat revolutionary. “No he was good. Something was against him, all his working didn’t make no difference”. From this I can understand that opportunities for people of that time were very limited regardless of how hard they worked, and how hard they tried. They all had common fate awaiting for all of them – getting crippled, hurt, and riddled by bullets.
When she uses this sentence about this very family she is also compares it with a human body. When people lose some organs of their bodies they become crippled and nothing ever would make their bodies whole and complete. In this very sentence we can understand that every member of that family is needed, loved, and necessary, and losing any member of the family would feel like losing a part of the body. Without having all members of the family together this family is destined to be crippled and hurt.
"He only had to look at me..." (36)
“He only had to look at me to want to hit me good and plenty.” (36)
This quote comes from the beginning of chapter nine where the narrator first introduces the father as a character. Meridel Le Sueur makes it pretty clear in the few lines before that there is an uneasy relationship between the narrator’s family and the father, yet this quote is still used to show just how poor their relationship is. Her father mentions in his letter that he had sacrificed the best years of his life for the family and that he feels left behind. This quote on page 36 also seems to exemplify his feelings of betrayal from the family.
Later on in the same chapter, the narrator also mentions different ways in which she and her mother look down upon the father. An example of this includes the last few lines on page 38 where the narrator mocks her father’s intelligence and says, “He never went beyond sixth grade. He could yell at you like a terrible oath.” Another example of this is when the narrator looks back on the time when her father trades their nice home in the city for a farm in Wisconsin they know nothing about. The quote I have chosen on page 36 seems to fit into all of this because it shows that the uneasy feelings are mutual between the narrator and her father. The condescending attitude is not one sided as the narrator and her father both have some issues against each other.
Page 61 "Strange in the city..."
“Strange in the city to lie prone as if in a meadow along a line of sky, and feel each other near just as flesh as warmth as some kind of reaching into each other, on the other side of accidents and tearing apart and beating and collision and running into each other and blaming.”
I chose this quote because it created such a vivid image in my head. Along with that, I didn’t fully understand what every part of the sentence was trying to portray. I hadn’t experienced that before, such a strange combination of clarity and confusion.
Typically, sentences begin with words like “the,” “then,” or a pronoun. Meridel Le Sueur instantly intrigues the reader with an adjective. It wasn’t just another sentence in a novel; I immediately wanted to know “what is strange?”
The addition of the phrase “in the city” is necessary to prepare for the metaphor Le Sueur is about to reveal. It helps the reader recognize the drastic opposition between what she usually feels and what she is feeling at that moment.
“Meadow along a line of sky” creates an incredible image of relaxation. With this description and the use of the word "prone," I was able to imagine the main character lying almost in parallel with the sky. Also, there is nothing more calming than a clear image of nature. Instead of saying something like “a sunset on the horizon” she uses generalized terms so the reader can create their own soothing getaway.
Le Sueur continues on to explain the feeling of lying with a lover. Her descriptive words of “flesh,” “warmth,” and “reaching” make the reader feel those emotions, something simple, but so miraculous. “Reaching into each other” makes the reader feel connected with her lover.
She then explains the stress that she usually feels, from the bustle of the city. Her list format makes the reader feel more sympathy with every adjective or verb addition, splitting each one up with the repetition of "and." The city becomes more dirty, crowded, and ugly as she goes on. By placing “blaming” at the end, the reader can relate to the previous stories of her father blaming her and her family, leaving a strong image. This encompasses one of the main themes in the book, of incorrect blame and accusations being placed on females simply because of gender.
In the end, Le Sueur manages to present a glimmer of light and happiness beneath her cruel description of the city. Her impressive diction leads to a descriptive contrast.
Abusive Father
This quote comes from the narrator/main character of Meridel Le Sueur’s The Girl. “You never forget your father, I said, he is like dead eye sockets looking at you” (37).
I chose this quote because it captures many of the themes that are present throughout Le Sueur’s The Girl. First, this quote shows the male domination over females throughout the story. This male dominance is shown through multiple stories of verbal and physical violence towards women, including the relationship between the narrator and her father.
Second, the poor relationship between the father and the daughter might explain the narrator’s fearfulness, shyness, and innocence towards both men and the world around her. This helps Le Sueur tell the story in a very unique and creative way. The Girl takes place with a group of rough and rowdy patrons spending much of their time raising some sort of havoc in the legal and illegal nature. The author’s bullied, apprehensive state allows for the reader to explore the characters and the storyline from an interesting angle. The story would be much different if was told by someone such as Ganz, the brute, aggressive muscle of the book.
Lastly, this quote is important because the narrator’s relationship with her father is very much a product of the turbulent times she is living in. The story takes place in the middle of the depression. Jobs are scarce, people are on edge and angry. There is a desperation and meanness in the air. The story is filled with characters fighting off their pasts, attempting to deal with the present, while hoping for the future. It is clear that the main character, the relationships she builds, are a by-product of her environment.
One more important thing about this quote is that it is exemplifies another abusive relationships that has begun to show up in many of our readings in this class. In A Report to an Academy it is Red Peter and his abusive supervisor/trainer. In Theatre of the Oppressed there is the story of the illiterate woman realizing she was holding onto love letters from her husband’s mistress instead of important documents. Conflict and abuse seem to be a major part of most of the stories we have read and this offers another example from a new perspective.
I chose this quote because it captures many of the themes that are present throughout Le Sueur’s The Girl. First, this quote shows the male domination over females throughout the story. This male dominance is shown through multiple stories of verbal and physical violence towards women, including the relationship between the narrator and her father.
Second, the poor relationship between the father and the daughter might explain the narrator’s fearfulness, shyness, and innocence towards both men and the world around her. This helps Le Sueur tell the story in a very unique and creative way. The Girl takes place with a group of rough and rowdy patrons spending much of their time raising some sort of havoc in the legal and illegal nature. The author’s bullied, apprehensive state allows for the reader to explore the characters and the storyline from an interesting angle. The story would be much different if was told by someone such as Ganz, the brute, aggressive muscle of the book.
Lastly, this quote is important because the narrator’s relationship with her father is very much a product of the turbulent times she is living in. The story takes place in the middle of the depression. Jobs are scarce, people are on edge and angry. There is a desperation and meanness in the air. The story is filled with characters fighting off their pasts, attempting to deal with the present, while hoping for the future. It is clear that the main character, the relationships she builds, are a by-product of her environment.
One more important thing about this quote is that it is exemplifies another abusive relationships that has begun to show up in many of our readings in this class. In A Report to an Academy it is Red Peter and his abusive supervisor/trainer. In Theatre of the Oppressed there is the story of the illiterate woman realizing she was holding onto love letters from her husband’s mistress instead of important documents. Conflict and abuse seem to be a major part of most of the stories we have read and this offers another example from a new perspective.
chickenhamporkcoffeemilkbuttermilklettucetomatohotbeef
"I read all the sandwich signs, american cheese, chickenham-porkcoffeemilkbuttermilklettucetomatohotbeef....They looked like signs like lovehatejealousymarriage" (Le Sueur, 58).
Preceding this quote, Butch flirts with The Girl and tells her (again) about the service station he wants to own. Once he's made something of himself then they can get married, but for now can they just get a room? The Girl protests, which launches Butch on a loud, public rant about the difficulty of women, how The Girl has her eye on every man in the bar, and that they should end their relationship here and now.
The author's artistic choices allow the reader to have a greater connection with The Girl. Sometimes her character is quiet and seems agreeable, but this text shows that she is capable of producing original thoughts. This fictional character becomes a little more human, and perhaps a little more trustworthy. After all, she is the narrator, and how reliable could an agreeable narrator be?
Specifically, by combining all the menu items into one monstrous word, Le Sueur shows that The Girl's attention is wandering from what Butch is saying. The Girl already knows Butch desires her and that he wants to make something of his life. She's honestly not trying to be difficult, nor is she pursuing other men! She's crazy about him, but hesitant to love him. He's overreacting! Just as Le Sueur's words blur on the page, so too do The Girl's thoughts. She thinks in run-on sentences, mixing emotionally charged words (lovehatejealousymarriage) with inanimate objects (chickenhamporkcoffeemilkbuttermilklettucetomatohotbeef). She's just trying to kill time until Butch stops talking!
I read this quote and thought, "This is so EXACTLY what happens to me!" I get stuck listening to someone rant on a topic I've heard many times before, and this is how I deal with it: 1) Find a random object (anything, like a sandwich sign) to occupy my mind with. 2) Study it as if my life depends on it (because believe me, my life depends on surviving that monologue). 3) Let the person's words blur and mix with my astute observations of said object. 4) Continue this thought process until the rant is over, at which point I'm left with a mumble jumble of key words from their monologue, softened by pleasant thoughts of...sandwiches.
Preceding this quote, Butch flirts with The Girl and tells her (again) about the service station he wants to own. Once he's made something of himself then they can get married, but for now can they just get a room? The Girl protests, which launches Butch on a loud, public rant about the difficulty of women, how The Girl has her eye on every man in the bar, and that they should end their relationship here and now.
The author's artistic choices allow the reader to have a greater connection with The Girl. Sometimes her character is quiet and seems agreeable, but this text shows that she is capable of producing original thoughts. This fictional character becomes a little more human, and perhaps a little more trustworthy. After all, she is the narrator, and how reliable could an agreeable narrator be?
Specifically, by combining all the menu items into one monstrous word, Le Sueur shows that The Girl's attention is wandering from what Butch is saying. The Girl already knows Butch desires her and that he wants to make something of his life. She's honestly not trying to be difficult, nor is she pursuing other men! She's crazy about him, but hesitant to love him. He's overreacting! Just as Le Sueur's words blur on the page, so too do The Girl's thoughts. She thinks in run-on sentences, mixing emotionally charged words (lovehatejealousymarriage) with inanimate objects (chickenhamporkcoffeemilkbuttermilklettucetomatohotbeef). She's just trying to kill time until Butch stops talking!
I read this quote and thought, "This is so EXACTLY what happens to me!" I get stuck listening to someone rant on a topic I've heard many times before, and this is how I deal with it: 1) Find a random object (anything, like a sandwich sign) to occupy my mind with. 2) Study it as if my life depends on it (because believe me, my life depends on surviving that monologue). 3) Let the person's words blur and mix with my astute observations of said object. 4) Continue this thought process until the rant is over, at which point I'm left with a mumble jumble of key words from their monologue, softened by pleasant thoughts of...sandwiches.
Last sentence on page 27
“And I heard Belle and Hoinck shouting and making love and crying all night.”
In this sentence, Le Sueur describes the relationship between Belle and Hoinck. It is a random relationship with emotions flying high and from all different directions. I also got the feeling that it was obvious and many people knew the relationship between Belle and Hoinck was unstable. She blended the sentence in with the entire page 27 although there is very little resemblance and relevance among the sentences. Page 27 describes and tells the reader all the confusion and thoughts that are running through her head while she is lying on the couch. How Le Sueur places that sentence tells me, the reader, that it is obvious that Belle and Hoinck have a very confusing yet intriguing relationship. Le Sueur mentions three big emotions that are on different ends of the spectrum. By doing that it gives me a sense that there relationship is going to play a role later in the story.
How Le Sueur words and structures this sentence is also interesting. Rather than naming the three different emotions and feelings off using commas in a list form, she uses “and” after the brief description of each emotion. By doing that it compelled me to believe that although those three emotions are woven together, they still are not combined. By using “and” twice instead of commas tells me that when Belle and Hoinck are happy they are only happy, when they are sad, they are only sad and when they are angry they are only angry. Just by using “and” instead of a comma can change the meaning of that sentence. When I first read the sentence I assumed they just had a complex relationship but after thinking about it, there relationship is not complex, it is simple.
Friday, September 18, 2009
Pg 45 -"You're all against me..."
"You're all against me, the hand of every man is against me, and he began to moan and cry."
This is the response of the girl's father when her mother tells him to quit hitting her son. I thought that this was interesting because of the way the sentence is constructed - there can be another meaning interpreted from it than just the context of which it is is.
First, it is ironic because throughout the book the father is portrayed as this failed being and it is evident that the narrator does not think highly of her father. It is also clear that the narrator thinks highly of her mother and that he mother also does not think highly of her husband. Yet, the husband is blaming the entire family for his failure. This sentance could also be a reflection of the narrators views of man - that they blame the rest of the world for their failures.
This sentence also suggests that "every man" which can be taken as society as a whole is against the father - or a male figure. This is interesting because it seems that this book could be going in the direction of a femanist type plot where the narrator may end up in fact being quite unreliable. Or the rest of the book could be a tale of the tragedy of women during the era - the ending is not known yet. However, up to this point in the reading it seems that the women in this book - at least as portrayed by the narrator - have much power even though they claim not too. There is also an interesting plot between "the man" or authority and "the man" as in the men of the society and even between the men of society.
This is the response of the girl's father when her mother tells him to quit hitting her son. I thought that this was interesting because of the way the sentence is constructed - there can be another meaning interpreted from it than just the context of which it is is.
First, it is ironic because throughout the book the father is portrayed as this failed being and it is evident that the narrator does not think highly of her father. It is also clear that the narrator thinks highly of her mother and that he mother also does not think highly of her husband. Yet, the husband is blaming the entire family for his failure. This sentance could also be a reflection of the narrators views of man - that they blame the rest of the world for their failures.
This sentence also suggests that "every man" which can be taken as society as a whole is against the father - or a male figure. This is interesting because it seems that this book could be going in the direction of a femanist type plot where the narrator may end up in fact being quite unreliable. Or the rest of the book could be a tale of the tragedy of women during the era - the ending is not known yet. However, up to this point in the reading it seems that the women in this book - at least as portrayed by the narrator - have much power even though they claim not too. There is also an interesting plot between "the man" or authority and "the man" as in the men of the society and even between the men of society.
aristotle's poetics...
One quote that really made me think is from a man named J.C. Watts who said, "Everyone tries to define this thing called Character. It's not hard. Character is doing what's right when nobody's looking." I think people try to hard to think about what good or bad character actually is. its not about doing good things for people or even doing something bad which would be bad character. it's plainly simple; Character is doing what is the right thing to do when no one is around to see you do it. it's the self-satisfaction that you get out of doing something good that you know is the right thing to do.
1) one passage i found is on page 5 where it says, "In respect of character there are four things to be aimed at. First, and most important, it must be good. this is true in the sense that character is a good thing if your doing it yourself and you know no one is there to see it but you know you are doing the right thing anyway.
2) page 6, "in general, the impossible must be justified by reference to artistic requirements, or to the higher reality, or to received opinion." having good character is not impossible or not as hard as people think. character is actually a very simple thing. everyone may have their own opinion that they are entitled to. but character is one of the most important things to have in a higher reality.
1) one passage i found is on page 5 where it says, "In respect of character there are four things to be aimed at. First, and most important, it must be good. this is true in the sense that character is a good thing if your doing it yourself and you know no one is there to see it but you know you are doing the right thing anyway.
2) page 6, "in general, the impossible must be justified by reference to artistic requirements, or to the higher reality, or to received opinion." having good character is not impossible or not as hard as people think. character is actually a very simple thing. everyone may have their own opinion that they are entitled to. but character is one of the most important things to have in a higher reality.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Posting Assignment #2 (due Sunday 9/20, 11:59 P.M.)
"Ariphrades ridiculed the tragedians for using phrases no one would employ in ordinary speech [...]. It is precisely because such phrases are not part of the current idiom that they give distinction to the style."
--Aristotle, Poetics
"I could write a novel about the children of the barrios along the river Rímac; but only photography, and no other language, could express the pain of that child's eyes, of those tears mixed with blood."
--Augusto Boal, Theatre of the Oppressed
In other words, language matters. Words and phrases and sentences are not mere vehicles for ideas: depending on how things are worded, they can take on completely different meanings. Meridel Le Sueur was very aware of this. The Girl, as you may have noticed, makes very intentional use of language in conveying characterization, plot, tone, and social/political issues to the reader.
YOUR ASSIGNMENT is to (1) choose ONE SENTENCE from Chapters 1-19 of The Girl, in which you find a strong connection between the language being used (word choice, sentence structure, figurative language, etc.) and the content you think Le Sueur is trying to communicate to the reader, and (2) post a CLOSE READING of that sentence, 300-400 words in length (as usual), in which you analyze it and demonstrate how Le Sueur uses language to put her thoughts, issues, and arguments accross to the reader.
Leave no word, phrase, or punctuation mark unturned! I encourage you to think about the terms and concepts we've introduced in class, and how they might help your analysis. And let's aim for a range of quotes from a range of places throughout the first half of the book -- it'll help us do a better analysis in class next week.
As usual, feel free to get in touch with any questions or issues.
--Aristotle, Poetics
"I could write a novel about the children of the barrios along the river Rímac; but only photography, and no other language, could express the pain of that child's eyes, of those tears mixed with blood."
--Augusto Boal, Theatre of the Oppressed
In other words, language matters. Words and phrases and sentences are not mere vehicles for ideas: depending on how things are worded, they can take on completely different meanings. Meridel Le Sueur was very aware of this. The Girl, as you may have noticed, makes very intentional use of language in conveying characterization, plot, tone, and social/political issues to the reader.
YOUR ASSIGNMENT is to (1) choose ONE SENTENCE from Chapters 1-19 of The Girl, in which you find a strong connection between the language being used (word choice, sentence structure, figurative language, etc.) and the content you think Le Sueur is trying to communicate to the reader, and (2) post a CLOSE READING of that sentence, 300-400 words in length (as usual), in which you analyze it and demonstrate how Le Sueur uses language to put her thoughts, issues, and arguments accross to the reader.
Leave no word, phrase, or punctuation mark unturned! I encourage you to think about the terms and concepts we've introduced in class, and how they might help your analysis. And let's aim for a range of quotes from a range of places throughout the first half of the book -- it'll help us do a better analysis in class next week.
As usual, feel free to get in touch with any questions or issues.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
Meaning of Life
One piece of text that particularly makes me think, is an excerpt from Lev Yilmaz's book, Sunny Side Down. This excerpt, titled "Meaning of Life", describes the author's view of what life truly is through short sentences that describe the path of what seems to be a typical human being. For example, the first few lines are as follows, "Be born. Go to school. Do well. Graduate. Look for a job. Find a job. Make some money. Make more money. Meet somebody. Go out with somebody. Marry somebody. Make more money" and eventually ends with, "Get kind of fat. Become a grandparent. Finish making money. Retire. Get old. Die."
Although Yilmaz's book is supposed to be humorous in sort of a twisted and depressing sense, it really makes me wonder about my own thoughts about the meaning and purposes of our life. This can relate to Aristotle's "Poetics" because Aristotle states that in a well constructed plot, "The change in fortune should be not from bad to good, but reversely, from good to bad. It should come about as the result not of vice, but of some great error or frailty, in a character either such as we have described, or better rather than worse." (pp. 4-5). In this case, it seems as if the people who live a similar life have failed to find some sort of meaningful purpose and choose to focus on making money and leading materialistic lives instead.
This excerpt also makes me think about how people are in control how their lives turn out through their actions. This is similar to what Aristotle believes as he states "Now character determines men's qualities, but it is by their actions that they are happy or reverse."(pp. 2)
Monday, September 14, 2009
Expressions of Tragic Poetry
|
| ||||
|
Imitation of Fearless Creativity.
My Dad (the architect) wrote me (the art/architecture student) an email this week—here is a small bit of what he said:
“I noticed something this week while working
on a challenging project, and it is this…
whenever fear is present, my abilities are
limited. It is almost as though I need to get to a
point of "I don't give a..." in order to truly allow
myself to produce. Now people have different
ways of arriving at that point, but I believe we all
thrive in an environment that is focused and
fearless. Sometimes to get to that point we just
have to start, and then allow your effort and
gaining of knowledge about the situation to
dissipate the fear..” –Good ol’ Daddy
A few ideas I found when connecting this to Aristotle’s writings were this:
On page 1: Aristotle writes about imitation being implanted from childhood and says, ‘no less universal is the pleasure felt in things imitated.’ The way that I interpreted this to connect with my excerpt was that I found what my Dad was saying as reflective of my life. I could relate completely to the fact that when I get flustered and fearful of what people will think about my art and whether it will turn out as I envisioned it-- my creativity begins to all go down hill—but, when I relax, things fall into place. Therefore there is a pleasure in seeing imitation between humankind—one individual relating to another’s struggle and how it can be worked out.
This brings me to my second thought and that is from page 3- “..that it is not the function of the poet to relate what has happened, but what may happen—what is possible according to the law of probability or necessity.’ My Dad’s words spoke about the probability of creative flow when I began to relax and move away from fear. He was not stating an actual fact that was taking place he was speaking of what could happen when fear was let go.
Losing Control
I just recently heard the story of a comedian that had come to my church. He told us that he was a good kid and did the right things and lived what seemed to be a good life. Then things went wrong by age 21 he had a massive stroke which crippled his legs and for a couple years. He was at a loss he had no control over what was happening in his life. I think that sometimes we forget how much control over life we do not have and how fragile life and health are. He however didn't sit in pity for himself he believed that he would get through it and his resolve came from a higher purpose. He survived through his faith. Through this tragedy something bigger happened it caused this man(Joey) to build more character and be thankful for the important things in life.
In life their are unexplainable tragedies that happen and as Aristotle says on page 2 "The tragedies of modern poets fail in the rendering of character; and of poets in general is often true." He also says "For tragedy is an imitation not of men, but of an action and of life, and life consists in action, and its end is a mode of action, not a quality. Now character determines men's qualities, but it is by their actions that they are happy or the reverse." What I got from this is that tragedies are unavoidable but it is how we deal with them that defines character of a man or woman. The actions we take in response to a tragedy can either make or break who we are and who we can be. Do you accept that you have no control over tragedies, take control of your own behaviors and learn? I don't want to seem heartless, there is a time for grieving but there is a time to learn, grow and move on.
In life their are unexplainable tragedies that happen and as Aristotle says on page 2 "The tragedies of modern poets fail in the rendering of character; and of poets in general is often true." He also says "For tragedy is an imitation not of men, but of an action and of life, and life consists in action, and its end is a mode of action, not a quality. Now character determines men's qualities, but it is by their actions that they are happy or the reverse." What I got from this is that tragedies are unavoidable but it is how we deal with them that defines character of a man or woman. The actions we take in response to a tragedy can either make or break who we are and who we can be. Do you accept that you have no control over tragedies, take control of your own behaviors and learn? I don't want to seem heartless, there is a time for grieving but there is a time to learn, grow and move on.
Nightmare in the Jungle
In a recent Marie Claire, September 2009 issue, they had a story covering the abduction of Clara Rojas, who was taking in the middle of the day and was held prisoner for six years in a Colombian jungle. During this time, Rojas had gotten pregnant but had her baby boy taken away from her when he was just eight months old. This article talks about her time in the jungle and how she is doing with her life back in order today. The FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia) did absolutely barbaric and brutally disgusting things to these prisoners during their captivity, that I honestly wonder why there is not more people trying to help save the prisoners that are still being held against their will. The FARC kidnaps "high-profile" citizens to use as "bargaining chips" to get things in exchange from the Colombian government. Rojas tells reporter Catherine Castro about some of the tragic happenings that went on during her six years in captivity and how she came out still such a strong role model.
After reading Aristotle's Poetics and the article on Nightmare in the Jungle, I saw things that I normally would have not seen had I just read it like a normal, every day article. Aristotle points out that "Tragedy, then, is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude..." (Poetics, pg. 2). This article is composed of both a tragedy and a success. However, when focusing on the "tragedy" part of this story, Aristotle has it exactly correct. This specific tragedy was and still is an extremely serious matter, that the FARC are completing with an enormous magnitude. This so-called "imitation" is being deliverd with a precise degree that is both being actually successful and a failure. Aristotle also shows that "Character is that which reveals moral purpose, showing what kind of things a man chooses or avoids" (Poetics, pg. 3). In this article, it is clear that Clara Rojas never dismisses her morals and shows what kind of true character she is in this particular real life story by choosing to take care of herself through out her kidnapping and keep her head high with believing that she will come out alive and once again see her baby boy. This article and the article from Aristotle showed me that there are certain things that make something so in depth and discrete to look for and acknowledge when reading and listening to stories.
After reading Aristotle's Poetics and the article on Nightmare in the Jungle, I saw things that I normally would have not seen had I just read it like a normal, every day article. Aristotle points out that "Tragedy, then, is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude..." (Poetics, pg. 2). This article is composed of both a tragedy and a success. However, when focusing on the "tragedy" part of this story, Aristotle has it exactly correct. This specific tragedy was and still is an extremely serious matter, that the FARC are completing with an enormous magnitude. This so-called "imitation" is being deliverd with a precise degree that is both being actually successful and a failure. Aristotle also shows that "Character is that which reveals moral purpose, showing what kind of things a man chooses or avoids" (Poetics, pg. 3). In this article, it is clear that Clara Rojas never dismisses her morals and shows what kind of true character she is in this particular real life story by choosing to take care of herself through out her kidnapping and keep her head high with believing that she will come out alive and once again see her baby boy. This article and the article from Aristotle showed me that there are certain things that make something so in depth and discrete to look for and acknowledge when reading and listening to stories.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
"It Came from Wasilla" - The response...
The September, 2009, issue of Vanity Fair featured a lengthy article about former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin which, not unexpectedly, painted her national election campaign for Vice President, her personal life, and her Gubernatorial exertions in a light that might be called unfavorable by a lefty such as myself; the same article might be called slanderous, or, possibly libelous by Governor Palin - depending on what the truth really is. The October, 2009, issue published some of the letters to the editor in response to Todd Purdum's article, one in particular disturbed me:
"I didn't even like Sarah Palin that much, but after reading Todd S. Purdum's article I'm crazy about her. I've never come across anything so vicious and cruel, sarcastic and unsupported."
Ronda Pullen, Dallas, Texas
In "Poetics" Aristotle states "Tragedy, then is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action, not of narrative; through pity and fear effecting the proper purgatioon of these emotions." (2) While the play and the tragedy which has been the story of Sarah Palin is not yet completed, the striking part of the entire process, for me, has been watching this person slowly hang her career out to dry. Not in many years have the American people seen a person with a bright future turned into the laughable and decimated skeleton of a future which now remains.
"The plot , then, is the first principle, and, as it were, the soul of a tragedy..." (2). While nobody can predict the end of this tragedy, Sarah Palin is finished as a political force. Except in the same vein as a Rush Limbaugh, appealing to and offering advice to rabid and unteachable supporters of the extreme right, Sarah Palin is a tragic figure that is Oedipal scope and magnitude. The plot, however, still unfolds. The discursive practices of our political debate fascinate me in the same way coming alongside a major car accident does: I know there is suffering and tragedy present, but I just can't look away. I listen, I read, I watch, I am attracted and repelled in almost equal measure (favoring repulsion, slightly).
One may suppose that I feel some sympathy for Palin from the framing of my words, but nothing could be further from the truth; I am more than happy to see this politician removed from the world stage, if only temporarily; it is in the nature of the fall where I find myself feeling some sadness. The national stage in the United States is unforgiving, this is not unknown to anyone who has aspirations for national office, but there is a spitefulness and a cruelty that has been applied to Governor Palin's bid. This candidate was set out in the desert tied to a stake and left to dry out. Even her running mate could not distance himself from her quickly enough, once he found out that she could not debate, interview, or even speak coherently about any national or international policy. I do not feel sorry for Senator McCain or his staff - they had their chance; but just as I would not hesitate to walk up to a horse with a broken leg, draw my sidearm and shoot the horse, to end its suffering, so would I have liked to have seen the Palin horse put out of its misery; compassion is what we lack in politics today.
Ideological polarization and ad hominem rhetoric have become the rule. Tragedies like those seen in the rise and fall of Governor Palin are sad to see, but I am much more disturbed by the letter sent to Vanity Fair, has a new supporter of Palin been created by this article? How many more might have been created?
"I didn't even like Sarah Palin that much, but after reading Todd S. Purdum's article I'm crazy about her. I've never come across anything so vicious and cruel, sarcastic and unsupported."
Ronda Pullen, Dallas, Texas
In "Poetics" Aristotle states "Tragedy, then is an imitation of an action that is serious, complete, and of a certain magnitude; in language embellished with each kind of artistic ornament, the several kinds being found in separate parts of the play; in the form of action, not of narrative; through pity and fear effecting the proper purgatioon of these emotions." (2) While the play and the tragedy which has been the story of Sarah Palin is not yet completed, the striking part of the entire process, for me, has been watching this person slowly hang her career out to dry. Not in many years have the American people seen a person with a bright future turned into the laughable and decimated skeleton of a future which now remains.
"The plot , then, is the first principle, and, as it were, the soul of a tragedy..." (2). While nobody can predict the end of this tragedy, Sarah Palin is finished as a political force. Except in the same vein as a Rush Limbaugh, appealing to and offering advice to rabid and unteachable supporters of the extreme right, Sarah Palin is a tragic figure that is Oedipal scope and magnitude. The plot, however, still unfolds. The discursive practices of our political debate fascinate me in the same way coming alongside a major car accident does: I know there is suffering and tragedy present, but I just can't look away. I listen, I read, I watch, I am attracted and repelled in almost equal measure (favoring repulsion, slightly).
One may suppose that I feel some sympathy for Palin from the framing of my words, but nothing could be further from the truth; I am more than happy to see this politician removed from the world stage, if only temporarily; it is in the nature of the fall where I find myself feeling some sadness. The national stage in the United States is unforgiving, this is not unknown to anyone who has aspirations for national office, but there is a spitefulness and a cruelty that has been applied to Governor Palin's bid. This candidate was set out in the desert tied to a stake and left to dry out. Even her running mate could not distance himself from her quickly enough, once he found out that she could not debate, interview, or even speak coherently about any national or international policy. I do not feel sorry for Senator McCain or his staff - they had their chance; but just as I would not hesitate to walk up to a horse with a broken leg, draw my sidearm and shoot the horse, to end its suffering, so would I have liked to have seen the Palin horse put out of its misery; compassion is what we lack in politics today.
Ideological polarization and ad hominem rhetoric have become the rule. Tragedies like those seen in the rise and fall of Governor Palin are sad to see, but I am much more disturbed by the letter sent to Vanity Fair, has a new supporter of Palin been created by this article? How many more might have been created?
Overhearing Obama
This week, while I was finishing my accounting homework at the table in my apartment, I was eavesdropping on my roommates as they listened to Obama's Healthcare Reform Speech on Wednesday after our first session. While I am not a hardcore political activist, like all three of my roommates are, it moved me to hear them all so passionate about one subject: the fact that all of them want universal healthcare. While this is a very controversial topic, they all had different reasons for backing up the same opinion. It made me realize that while I might not want to have incredibly strong opinions on any given subject, I should at least be able to converse with my roommates on something so important to them. They could have sat talking for hours, if homework and life had not stopped them. And overhearing there debates and discussions, I realized that I wanted to participate, even if it was for the smallest side comment. I wanted to have a small snippet of information that I could offer the conversation.
One of the passages that made me think about how this conversation impacted me was stated that "the objects of imitation are men in action." This directly correlates to my desire to be one of my roommates: to imitate them and be a "man of action," or in my case, be of some use to their conversation and reaction to Obama's Healthcare Plan. Because of my eavesdropping and consequential motivation to know more about this one subject, maybe I am on my way to becoming a man of action. Hopefully, this feeling to participate will not abate in the near future, and help me on my way to learn something useful to say in the next apartment discussion.
A incredibly more relevant passage to my eavsedropping is the one that simply states that thought is "the faculty of what is possible and pertinent in given situations." I wanted to be able to comment and question and listen and reflect and be a "pertinent" part of their conversation. I was heald back not only by need to finish my accounting, but by my lack of useful information that pertained to the subject. My thoughts were unable to convey any sort of thinking that was useable to the conversation I wanted to join.
Though the converstation may have been brief, and I may have only halfheartily been paying attention to what my friends and apartment mates were saying, it obviously made enough of an impact for me to reflect on it here. And hopefully, as I pointed out above, in the near future I will be able to say something of consequence the next time I have the urge to participate.
One of the passages that made me think about how this conversation impacted me was stated that "the objects of imitation are men in action." This directly correlates to my desire to be one of my roommates: to imitate them and be a "man of action," or in my case, be of some use to their conversation and reaction to Obama's Healthcare Plan. Because of my eavesdropping and consequential motivation to know more about this one subject, maybe I am on my way to becoming a man of action. Hopefully, this feeling to participate will not abate in the near future, and help me on my way to learn something useful to say in the next apartment discussion.
A incredibly more relevant passage to my eavsedropping is the one that simply states that thought is "the faculty of what is possible and pertinent in given situations." I wanted to be able to comment and question and listen and reflect and be a "pertinent" part of their conversation. I was heald back not only by need to finish my accounting, but by my lack of useful information that pertained to the subject. My thoughts were unable to convey any sort of thinking that was useable to the conversation I wanted to join.
Though the converstation may have been brief, and I may have only halfheartily been paying attention to what my friends and apartment mates were saying, it obviously made enough of an impact for me to reflect on it here. And hopefully, as I pointed out above, in the near future I will be able to say something of consequence the next time I have the urge to participate.
Obama shrugs off political 'circus' over healthcare
The article that I read can be found at http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/healthcare/la-na-obama-60minutes14-2009sep14,0,7413399.story
This article describes the issues that have come up concerning the contriversial debate of healthcare reform. In particular it addresses the heated and not always productive debates that have occured.
I think that there are a couple of points from Aristotle's "Poetics" that relate to this article and why it made an impression on me. First is the idea that Aristotle brings up about Recognition (pg. 4 "Recognition, as the name indicates, is a change from ignorance to knowledge..."). In this article, Senator Wilson made a heated comment but then later realized what he did was not called for. I think that in making that heated comment and being forced to face his own immaturity, Senator Wilson was brought to recognize that his actions were innappropriate.
I think that the event that this article talks about could also be seen as a Scene of Suffering as Aristotle talks about. At the apex of this event when the Senator Shouts at the president, it is obvious that both parties are frusterated that such a serious debate is getting nowhere.
Nixon
http://watergate.info/nixon/checkers-speech.shtml
42
I was reading parts of Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker's guide to the Galaxy again. The tome in question is not exactly short and I've ploughed my way through it a few times already but this time I was hunting for a specific part of the story with very little luck. The main character Arthur Dent is thrown into a number of ridiculous events after earth is demolished to make way for an intergalactic expressway.
In one part of the book which I failed to find, Arthur makes his way to a distant planet in search of some direction in his life. After some treacherous travels he arrives at a filthy cave. Supposedly the universe's greatest life coach lives there and Arthur is in desperate need of some coaching. A hideously disfigured and very smelly character appears pushing out a solar operated xerox. The life coach makes a copy of his biography and hands it over. He explains that the biography outlines every major event and decision he ever made which led to life in said filthy cave. He suggests that Arthur looks long and hard at all the choices the life coach made and when in a similar situation do the opposite.
The entire book has been a source of much enjoyment over the years and I'm sure Aristotle would agree for many reasons. Most of the characters in Adams' book are neither good nor evil in any of their archetypal forms. A better description would be antiheroes. On page 4 of poetics Aristotle claims the perfect tragedy should [...]excite pity and fear. [...P]ity is aroused by unmerited misfortune. The effect is greater if we can associate with the character and the misfortune is brought through some personal error or frailty.
Aristotle calls all art forms an imitation of nature and that which is known to man. On page one he explains why people enjoy such likenesses. It gives the beholder an opportunity to find themselves learning and inferring. Even when the original is not known from nature there is much to learn from such imitations, which is where the Hitchhikers Guide shines. I don't know any aliens who habitually travel with little more than a towel, and yet reading Adams' tale I learned much about myself and in some instances was subjected to a different view of things that turned out to be highly applicable in everyday run-ins with my co-humans.
On page six Aristotle reminds us that the greatest thing by far is to have command of metaphor. Adams has that command and yields it like a flamingo would be yielded in croquet. When describing giant planetary bulldosers, Adams paints us his nature defying image saying they hung in the sky the way bricks don't. As Aristotle reminds us, With respect to the requirements of art, a probable impossibility is to be preferred to a thing improbable and yet possible.
Hannah Mayer
Excerpts from: Hatch’s Order of Magnitude: Methodical Rankings of the Commonplace and the Incredible for Daily Reference, by a Man of Extraordinary Genius and Impeccable Taste, by Michael Hatch.
Introvertedness to Extrovertedness:
1. Mute
2. Introverted
3. Quiet
4. Average
5. Open
6. Friendly
7. Outgoing
8. Gregarious
9. Life of the party
10. Raving lunatic
Intelligence:
1. Somatic death
2. Vegetable
3. Slow learner
4. Feeble-minded
5. Obtuse
6. Average
7. Astute
8. Perceptive
9. Bright
10. Gifted
11. Genius
12. Prodigy
Pleasure to Pain:
1. Orgasm
2. Euphoria
3. Bliss
4. Pleasurable touch
5. Comfort
6. Numbness
7. Discomfort
8. Irritation
9. Pain
10. Torment
11. Agony
Times to Eat:
1. Farm breakfast
2. Breakfast
3. Second breakfast
4. Brunch
5. Elevens
6. Tiffin
7. Lunch
8. Afternoon snack
9. Tea
10. Sundowner
11. Dinner
12. Supper
13. Late dinner
14. Dessert
15. Late-night snack
16. Midnight snack
17. Dead-of-night bite
This text made me feel a number of emotions. First and most powerfully, I felt humor. The author’s use of odd and clever words made me laugh out loud a number of times. I also felt a bit inferior because there were so many words I did not recognize and had to look up online. The text not only made me feel different emotions, but it made me think. I wondered how the author decided the order in which he put the words and what standards he used to compare with.
The text was so effective making me think and feel because it followed some of the guidelines laid out by Aristotle in “Poetics.” First of all, on page 3, Aristotle stressed the importance of a plot, and that plot should have a beginning, middle and end. Hatch (the author of the text above) uses this in each of his “poems” (comparisons/lists). He starts at the beginning with one concept and works towards the end where the concept changes (either to the opposite meaning, or on a scale from weak to strong). The middle of his poems is the transition period, where the difference between the first concept and the last are neutral.
Also under the category of plot, Aristotle says (on page 4) that “Reversal of the Situation is a change by which the action veers round to its opposite.” Hatch uses this model of reversal in every one of his poems. He starts with one idea (such as “stupid” or “pleasure”), and by the end of the poem he has made his way around the opposite idea (“smart” or “pain”).
Another important part of a poem or tragedy that Aristotle stresses is the character. He states that the character must be true to life (page 5). Hatch uses this suggestion in each of his poems, and that is why they are so funny to me; because everything is true!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)