Essay Assignment
Here is the Embedded Honors Essay Assignment for your independent novel and film.
Here are important dates and links to specific prewriting assignments:
Here are important dates and links to specific prewriting assignments:
Schedule of Assignments and Due Dates
Here are the due dates for essay reading and writing assignments :
Begin reading your story: 9/21
First reading response about an element of fiction: 10/3
Second reading response about an element of fiction: 10/10
Finish reading story and post final reading response about an element of fiction: 10/17
NOTE: Post reading responses on the blog
Finish reading story: 10/17
Watch film adaptation twice; complete notation worksheet by: 10/23
Compare/contrast prewriting: 10/26
Essay Assignment
Thesis Due: 10/31 (Share the thesis on our blog.)
First essay draft due: 11/12 (Share with Mr. Chapin, and share with a peer on Google Docs for a peer review)
Revised (second) essay draft due: 11/19
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGabriel Geller - Element of Fiction in The Forged Coupon - Conflict
ReplyDeleteThe Forged Coupon, by Leo Tolstoy, is a multiple point of view narrative about a simple joke gone horribly wrong. All of the characters has their own conflict as a result. The story begins with a father who refuses to raise his son’s allowance. As a result of this, Mitya forges a coupon in order to pay his friend, Makhin. The books first sentence explains that Mityas father is the head of the government tax department. Makhin, who taught Mitya how to forge a coupon went into an occupation in law enforcement. There are numerous moments of darkly comedic irony which enhance the complexity of the almost satirical narrative within the multi layered conflict.
Makhin explains: “‘It just so happens that I need this frame for this lady’” (239). It seems expected and convenient. He buys the photo frame with the forged coupon. Then it goes on a tangent affecting more people, every time a new person gets it, the more powerful and complex the conflict gets. What happens to the characters is so terrible all because of a grammar school boy who forges a coupon. This is strangely comedic in a terrible way. This is what makes the conflict in The Forged Coupon so interesting, in that the it develops all because of a poorly executed joke.
When Mitya and Makin went into the store to purchase a photo frame with the forged coupon, yet another simple condition was on their side. The vendor “began to examine the coupon with eyes that were clearly short sighted” (240). She was given this condition to allow the coupon to be passed on and the conflict to grow. These simple moments seem predictable but they are put in the story because the characters enable the conflict. In this case, Mitya and Makin got money with the change from the forged coupon and they were able to settle their debt. In addition, when the shop proprietor finds out about the forged coupon, he cares about it more than the woman, who is his wife. His wife then questions their marriage in that her husband belongs to that of a lower class. Hence, he cared more about the money. With the irony and satire, the story is told as if the narrative is on the side of the conflict more than the characters. These combine together and allow the complex premise of the story to develop in a thrilling and appealing fashion. The conflict is unexpectedly realistic in the most concise fashion.
Jordan Smith
ReplyDeleteThe Talented Mr. Ripley: Perspective
Patricia Highsmith’s novel, ~The Talented Mr. Ripley~ evokes multiple themes of perspective and reliability. Narrator Tom Ripley begins his escapade immediately after becoming reacquainted with Mr. Greenleaf, a man who wishes to bring his son back home from Europe. Mr. Greenleaf is hopeful that Tom can convince his son Dickie, to return. The novel opens with Tom wondering if he is going to be arrested: “They couldn’t give you more than ten years, Tom thought. Maybe fifteen, but with good conduct…” (8). If this man in fact believes he is a guilty con, how can his revelations possibly spare him scrutiny? The reader is more influenced by Tom’s narration style; we are made to know Tom Ripley, even if not to entirely understand him primarily because he is so blunt about lying- the reliability of his narration is questionable as he has a tendency to lie.
Later, Tom confesses to stealing checks: “He wasn’t stealing money from anybody. Before he went to Europe, he thought, he’d destroy the checks…” (17). The reader is introduced to this way of life, something entirely illegal, coming to know a fraud— but Tom Ripley’s problem somehow becomes our problem solely because of the way we learn Tom has been stealing checks. We acquire the knowledge in real-time, and this burden begins to feel personal. Tom Ripley’s seemingly-do-good intentions are there, even when he’s done something terribly wrong. He possesses stolen checks, but apparently is not scheming to cash them. This might be out of fear, or just plain morals that he holds. At this point, I found myself almost rooting for Tom Ripley to do the right thing- throw the checks away, even if I knew he would never actually do so.
Tom Ripley strategically acquires knowledge to use for his own personal gain later on. He seems to be very gifted with lying, especially when recounting a time when he was friendly with a Princeton student: “Tom had finally pumped him for more and more, foreseeing a time when he might be able to use the information…” (20). Tom lies about going to Princeton college; he exaggerates things that have never even happened to him solely to earn the approval of the Greenleafs. Maybe we’re coming to know a wrongdoer, because even the worst people are still human at the end of the day. Mr. Ripley is one very talented liar. Perhaps Patricia Highsmith intends for readers to see eye-to-eye with someone we would never outwardly trust.
Lamu Ci
ReplyDeletePride and Prejudice - Character Analysis
I am reading the book called Pride and Prejudice. So far, the story focuses mostly on Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy’s romance. I think that the establishment of the two interesting characters at the beginning, which causes the readers to want to read more and wonder what would happen between the characters.
Mr. Darcy, at this moment, seems not like a gentleman. Although the book indicates that he is good-looking and rich, which should make him attract people more, no one in the book seems to like him. He seems very arrogant and thinks other people are all below him. For example, when he is at the ball and Mr. Bingley suggests him to dance with Elizabeth, he replies: “She is tolerable; but not handsome enough to tempt me.”(7). Usually, the main male character in a story would be positive, but at this point, he does not seem nice.
On the other hand, the story describes Elizabeth a lighthearted, joyful, and playful girl. Mr. Darcy is rude and judges her appearance at the ball, and even though Elizabeth hears it, she just “told the story however with great spirit among her friends.”(7). Generally, when girls hear bad stuff that people say about them, they tend to hide it and pretend they did not hear. However, the way Elizabeth acts is so different that she, as a main character, becomes compelling and unique.
Just like the title implies, Elizabeth has prejudice towards Mr. Darcy. She considers him a stupid and arrogant guy because he is rich. And Mr. Darcy is truly proud. He thinks the people at the ball are not at the same level with him, and he is more advanced than them. So these two main characters are just too different with each other and how characters are framed generally, and that makes the readers more curious towards the story. For example, how would these two people fall in love? Would they hate each other? Would they solve the problems between them? Therefore, the readers would want to discover more and have more interests in the book. So the establishment of the characters is very successful.
Morgan- The Trial
ReplyDeleteI am reading The Trial by Franz Kafka. The book is about a gentlemen named Josef K., and about how he gets arrested. The theme of The Trial is confusion which is shown and helped by the narrative point of view displayed by the characters actions. This book is written in the perspective of Mr. K, as he is called in the book. So far it is written in third person objective, and we as readers see how he is feeling and what is happening to him. I think that as the book progresses Mr.K will become more reliable, as he becomes more knowledgeable about what is happening to him, but is hard to tell if Mr. K is a reliable source because he is very confused, as confused as the readers are. In this section Mr. K is very confused about why he is under arrest, as he has been in the whole book so far. This passage shows basically what the book has been about “And why am I under arrest? He then asked. ‘That’s something we’re not allowed to tell you”’(2). All he knows is that he is being arrested by people who do not seem like police, but he is also allowed to still go to work. Mr.K questions everyone he meets, and each of these interactions; are shown by the third person objective stance the book has.
In the section that I have currently read, the theme seems to be confusion, because that is what the main character, and other characters, seem to be feeling during this whole section. Confusion plays a big part of the story because Mr. K is confused on why he is being arrested, and we the readers are confused but what is happening.
The Narrator's point of view, and lack of knowledge help reinforce the theme of confusion. The events that take place provide the reader with little to no more knowledge of what is going to happen or what is happening. “But it might be that the investigating committee could that I'm innocent, or not so guilty as been supposed,”(18). This is how Mr. K feels during the whole beginning of the book because he truly does not know, and everyone he talks to also does not know, or won’t tell him about his arrest. This theme of confusion is shown by how the book is written and the perspective is shown. Overall I really enjoy the book, and can not wait to see what is going to happen.
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep-
ReplyDeleteWhile reading, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, a theme was immediately noticed. The book is set in San Francisco in 2021, not far in the future from now. However, it was 53 years from when the book was written. The book is set in a world after World War Terminus, which left earth with radioactive dust covering the surface and not allowing the sun to be seen. This setting is of death and destruction which creates an obsession for life.
Most of the population to moves to Mars. During the story earth is a dying radioactive ball with a dwindling population. “The dust which had contaminated most of the planets surface had originated in no country” (Dick 15). The war is said to have been terrible. However, there are almost no details given by the characters. The book says, “No one today remembered why the war and come about or who, if anyone had won.” (Dick 15).The horrors not being remembered by the population is shocking. The characters accept what earth is now yet the past is not understood. Because the lack of memory there are no details about what happened exactly in the war to leave earth dying. “First, strangely, the owls had died… Medieval plagues had manifested themselves in a similar way.” (Dick 15-16). The understanding is that war was awful and in the present the earth is still dying. The setting is an earth where the few humans and rescued animals live among radioactivity destruction. The theme of death in the setting of the story leads to an important aspect, which is society's hierarchy and yearn for alive animals. The more rare the alive animal a person owns the higher the status a person has. Rick is embarrassed to have an android animal and throughout the beginning of the story he is hunting for a way to get a real animal. He lies often and wants to kill more androids for the money. Rick knows this money can buy him a real animal. “He thought, too, about his need for a real animal; within him an actual hatred once more manifested itself toward his electric sheep” (Dick 42). This is an interesting part of the story that I think will become more important. With death being dominant in the setting it makes sense for the obsession to be with life.
POV: Marlow’s Storytelling in Heart of Darkness
ReplyDeleteThe narrator of Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness is Charles Marlow. Marlow tells the story of his journey up the Congo River, which comprises the novella, to four other men on the deck of a ship. Marlow is introspective and thoughtful, a laborer and a philosopher. Marlow’s views, with their close and metaphorical description, give the illusion of being unbiased. However, as would be expected by his circumstances, yet beyond simply the terminology (savage), Marlow shows a deep bias against the native peoples he encounters.
In his second encounter with native peoples, Marlow devotes an entire page to artistic, skillful description. However, instead of personal analysis of these people, he describes them in the context of inanimate forms and angles, physical things splayed out over their environment, as “black shadows” and “moribound shapes.” Marlow recalls, “Near the same tree two more bundles of acute angles sat with their legs drawn up. One, with his chin propped on his knees, stared at nothing, in an intolerable and appalling manner” (118). He, with disdain, sees the natives as unpleasant objects. The description of “acute angles” implies their maltreatment. This is not met with sympathy, but with annoyance. The time spent analyzing the appearance of the natives gives a false impression of empathy. In addition, the description may seem focused on the dehumanization of the natives, which would further suggest empathy. In reality, however, the description does not say that the native peoples have been dehumanized, but rather that they were never human to begin with. There is no account of them being lowered, only of them simply being beneath, without mobility.
Marlow quickly moves on from the unpleasant sight, not wanting “any more loitering in the shade” (119), and immediately comes upon a pristinely dressed white man. Although he again begins by speaking of the man’s appearance, he quickly begins to analyze his personality, his purpose, and his relationship to his surroundings. He praises: “In the great demoralisation of the land he kept up his appearance” (119). This white man’s role in the “demoralisation,” whom he only assumes is good because of his impressive wardrobe, is disregarded. In contrast, the natives are not viewed as victims, but merely as unpleasant scenery. Marlow hints to the audience with this point of view that, although he mentions the injustices of the colonization, he is an enthusiastic constituent of the demoralisation itself.
Jordan Smith
ReplyDeletePatricia Highsmith’s novel The Talented Mr. Ripley explores many themes throughout the story about Tom and how he decides to pursue life’s greatest opportunities. Towards the beginning of this novel, Tom demonstrates several incriminating or immoral acts such as stealing checks, lying, and using people for his own personal gain. A prominent theme I have observed throughout most recent chapters focuses on Tom Ripley’s tendency to “become” someone else during these moments of anguish, he becomes another version of himself. I almost wonder if this is in fact linked to his past— something somewhere along the way, maybe some experience that changed him completely— Tom Ripley might be a chronic liar, but also a human. He often has fantasies of reinventing himself. For example, when he purchased a hat on a whim, he was exploring all possibilities of reinvention. “He could look like a country gentleman, a thug, an Englishman, a Frenchman, or a plain American eccentric, depending on how he wore it….” (35) As if Tom is able to shift between identities at his own leisure.
After meeting Dickie, Tom fantasizes about living his life instead. “Why should Dickie want to come back to subways and taxis and starched collars and a nine-to-five job...Tom envied him with a heartbreaking surge of envy and of self-pity.” (52) He then proceeds to ponder if Dickie might have liked Tom more had Tom played the part of a complete stranger; I think Tom possesses a certain aptness to seek validation way too much. Or perhaps he is simply facing an identity crisis. He demonstrates this quality of self-rejection with the Greenleaf’s, and even his Aunt Dottie who constantly compares him to his father. This might have something to do with the absence of Tom’s father— whom he mentions from time to time in the midst of his lamenting— or it could have some semblance with Tom’s own personal troubles. I think this general theme is an important part of Tom’s life: he doesn’t seem to know who he is. He is always changing, always becoming someone new to finally gain acceptance.
Gabriel Geller - The Forged Coupon - Element of Fiction - Characters
ReplyDeleteThe Forged Coupon by Leo Tolstoy follows many different characters that are affected by the forgery of the coupon. The characters are very significant in displaying the ongoing effects of such forgery. Their characteristics determine how the forgery effects them and their actions, beliefs, and motives. All of the characters have different placements in society. All of the characters have different views. Because all of the characters are different and under different circumstances, the effects of the forgery of the coupon are more interesting and profound and ranging in emotion symbolized through each individual character. As a result, the character arcs become more interesting and important in the storytelling. Each characters actions develop differently around the forgery of the coupon and reveal and strengthen its effects on an immense scale.
After the coupon had passed through the frame shop, the shop proprietor passed it on to a muzhik (peasant) named Ivan Mironov in exchange for some firewood. Ivan was aware that it was forged and it was in his best interest to continue the scandal of the forgery for his benefit. When he decides to try to get money off the forgery at an inn, he is blamed for the forgery and taken into the police station. It was his greed that led to this natural consequence. Ivan Mironov takes the police to the house of Yevgeny Mikhailovich, the man who gave him the coupon. Yevgeny immediately denies that he gave the coupon to Ivan. Then Ivan says: “One day we all must die” (246). Ivan Mironov appears to have nothing to life for. Ivan speaks with honesty. Yevgeny speaks with denial. Vasily, the yard keeper, then says “It’s common knowledge they’re (muzhiks) a stupid lot. Uneducated” (247). This is “common knowledge,” to the misfortune of Ivan, who in this scenario, is just as “stupid” as Yevgeny.
It was Ivan’s position in society that immediately put his character at a disadvantage. Ivan was charged with the forgery and Yevgeny got off the hook. Ivan is a peasant, Yevgeny is a businessman of a higher class so the odds were in his favor. The truth is, neither of them are responsible for the actual forgery of the coupon, they were just at the wrong place at the wrong time and both of them enabled the continuous journey of the forged coupon. That is the problem with all of the characters, they are all seduced into greed and try to get money out of it. It’s human nature at its worst.
Second Reading Response- The Trial- Morgan Busby
ReplyDeleteThe Trial
I am reading The Trial by Franz Kafka. In the second section of the book, Mr.K still seems to be very confused on why he is being arrested. In the book so far, Mr.K has been put under arrest, but he is still allowed to go to work and be a productive member of society. He has now been summoned to “court”, and he hopes to get the answers of why he has been arrested.
The book is still being written in third person objective. It mainly focuses on what Mr.K is seeing and experiencing. We have mostly seen his apartment, Mrs.Grunbach apartment, the bank, and now we have seen the court house. The court house descriptions, like “A medium sized, two windowed room was filled with the most diverse crowd of people,” (27), really help the story evolve. The descriptions really help me because I can imagine what is happening easier, which makes following this story better because I can picture what the characters are doing.
Mr.K still truly has no clue why he is being arrested, and he asks multiple times throughout the two sections I have read. Every time Mr.K asks he is generally meet with the same response, nothing, or I need to ask my manager. With this type of dynamic it makes the story interesting for the reader, and makes them wonder if Mr.K will be a reliable source or not. My prediction is that as the story progresses and Mr.K will become more knowledgeable about his case/situation he will become a very reliable source of information for the reader.
Overall the theme still seems to be confusion. The way that the story is told, by the writer really makes the theme believable. With Mr.K being the main focus and his lack of knowledge pushes the theme to the forefront of the story. “And, you wanted to learn how to trap an innocent man,” (35). In this passage Mr.K is getting very frustrated with the lack of knowledge given to him by the court officials. The theme of confusion is very well shown by passages like this because it show how truly confused Mr.K, and that's what the readers get to feel as they read the book, making them feel as confused as Mr.K is during his primary trial.
Over the rest of the book confusing both Mr.K and the readers if going to happen by keeping us in the dark about why he is going to trial, and I think there is going to be a surprise twist at the end, and Mr.K is going to know what happened most of the time, if not all.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHonors Response #2
ReplyDeleteIn the second part of A Clockwork Orange, the main character, Alex, finds himself in a state prison where he is known only by his number, 6655321. He no longer has his own clothing, and he has little freedom. Later, he is subjected to strange torture that ends up ridding him of his violent tendencies, but also his ability to listen to music by association. Alex ends up “getting better” through relinquishing his need for control and having someone else in the driver’s seat of his life.
When Alex gets to the prison, he is completely remade as a person. His clothes get stripped away and exchanged for a uniform, and he is given a number instead of a name, “I was 6655321 and not your little droog Alex not no longer” (76). By taking these two measures, the prison succeeded in creating a clean slate for Alex to completely start over, and they also successfully created a blank canvas for their experimentations.
By Part Two, Chapter Two, Alex has already fallen back into his own ways. A new prisoner comes in, and tries to threaten Alex, only to be met with the resistance of Alex’s cell mates. In the morning, Alex finds the new prisoner in bed with him, and he reacts by beating him up, “What sloochatted then of course, was that my cellmates woke up and started to join in, tolckocking a bit wild in the near dark,” (87). Alex has already formed a new posy in jail, and it seems that he is their leader. By now it seems that Alex will return to beating people up and have a gang of likeminded people behind him, but that is short lived, as he is about to be experimented on.
Alex signs his life away for “Reclamation Treatment” the day after the fight ensues. He is brought into the Governor’s office and given a choice. He can sign the rest of his sentence to reclamation treatment, or he can serve jail time. “’Most certainly I will sign,’ I said, ‘sir. And very many thanks.’ So’I was given an ink-pencil and I signed my name nice and flowy” (94). The signing of the document is his final relinquishment of control before the experiments begin and his violent urges subside.
In his new home, he is given an injection and wheeled to a viewing room where he is attached to monitors with wires and forced to watch horrific films while scientists in lab coats measure his reactions. While watching the violent films, he becomes very ill, “…then I began to feel sick. I had like pains all over and felt I could sick up and at the same time not sick up” (104). He continues to feel this illness through multiple rounds of this testing, and whenever he is about to commit an instinctual violent act.
At one point, a he plots an escape by trying to get a nurse to come into the room, so he can knock him out and escape, but just as he is about to hit the nurse, he feels too sick. “Then I raised my two fisties to tolchock him on the neck nasty, and then, I swear, as I out and felt the like joy rise in my guts, it was then that this sickness tose in me as it might be a wave…” (120). Alex is now unable to feel any violent urges without getting incredibly sick, and his control over himself and others will only continue to dwindle if he continues to beat up people for fun. He will be unable to continue on his path of violence with this cycle of violence leading to nausea and sickness.
Alex’s actions driven by a need for control ultimately lead to him losing all of it through a series of strange experiments. By relentlessly harming other people, he is lead to vehemently reject violence, and by controlling everything, he is unable to control anything.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteReading Response #1
ReplyDeleteI firmly believe in karma. What you do has an effect on what happens to you. I’ve even witnessed it happen when someone says something mean and then they trip on a conveniently placed power cord ten seconds later. It’s a beautiful, natural way that justice can be doled out in fair helpings. “A Clockwork Orange” focuses on a boy named Alex who goes around with his gang beating up innocent people for no apparent reason. The author uses the fact that Alex becomes a naturally hateable person to engage the reader going into part two by giving Alex just what he deserves.
For the first 74 pages, Alex and his gang bring people near death just for fun. Their larger hits consist of a man and a wife in a cabin, “red vino on tap and the same in all places… started to pour and spot the nice clean carpet…” (22).” “O my brothers while I untrusssed and got ready for the plunge. Plunging, I could slooshy cries of agony…” (23). Alex and his gang beat the couple and rape the wife all while laughing and talking to each other and the reader very casually. This act that is horrifying to any reader seems run of the mill for Alex and his crew. This is a fairly horrifying chapter, but Alex isn’t done yet.
Still early on, in chapter four, Alex coerces two ten year old girls to come back to his apartment to listen to his records. While there, he gets the girls drunk, takes drugs, and then rapes them both,
“...and then I leaped on those two young ptistas. This time they thought nothing fun and stopped creeching with high mirth, and had to submit to the strange and weird desires of Alexander the Large... But they were both very drunken and could hardly feel very much” (46).
As we see here, Alex even goes so far as to justify the rape of these two girls by saying that they were too drunk to feel him raping them (Alex says this after getting the two underage girls drunk). Alex uses casual language in this part two, which suggests that this is not a very big deal to him. He assumes that just because they couldn’t feel anything physically, they wouldn’t feel anything emotionally. The author shows us in this quote even more than the last that Alex lacks the empathy to be considered “good” by the reader.
His last crime is sneaking into an old woman’s house and beating her to death. At the end of the chapter, though, the reader finally gets the satisfaction we were looking for all along, when Dim hits him in the face with a chain and leaves him for the police, “...and then I viddied that he had his oozy out, and then he upped me with it and snaked wishhhhh and he chained me gentle and artistic like on the glazlids,” (64). At this point, it is more satisfying to the reader that only Alex gets taken down, as he has been the ringleader the whole time. He has been the one responsible for all of the atrocities, and he has just dragged his crew along with him. When only he is arrested, it seems almost like a moment of justice for the reader.
By wrapping Alex up in a terrible, ugly, horrific, monstrosity of a package, him getting beat up and arrested takes a weight off the reader at just the right time in the book. Each incident of torture builds more disdain from the reader, which finally culminates poetically in his fall.
Response #2
ReplyDeleteFeminism in Pride and Prejudice by Lamu
For what I have read so far, the book evokes an idea of feminism by creating Elizabeth Bennet, the main female character of the story.
Firstly, the story indirectly shows that women were in low ranks at that time through descriptions and conversations. “Mr. Bennet’s property considered almost entirely in an estate of two thousand a year , which, unfortunately for his daughters, was entailed in default of heirs male, ona distant relation.” (18). This paragraph implies that women at that time had no right to inherit their family’s property. Therefore, women were considered more menial and inferior than men. In the book, there are many female characters act in that way, like Caroline Binley, who falls in love with William Darcy. When Mr. Darcy writes a letter, Caroline companies him and keeps giving him tons of praises, even though Mr. Darcy responds very coldly everytime. For example, “she says: ‘How delighted Miss. Darcy will be to receive such a letter!’ He made no answer. ‘You write uncommonly fast!’ ‘You are mistaken. I write rather slowly.’ ‘How can you contrive to write so even?’ He was silent.”(31).
However, Elizabeth is quite different from her or other female characters. She does not care about her status, and she does not afraid men who are wealthy and high status. She is brave and she does whatever she thinks is right to do. For example, She has refused Mr. Darcy’s invitation to dance, which shocks everyone at the dance, and it is not only because he is wealthy, but also he is always pride, so it is very uncommon for him to do that. Thus even if Elizabeth is not willing to dance with him, she should act like she is. But Elizabeth does not care and refuses. Moreover, Elizabeth has also rejected William Collins’ and Mr. Darcy’s proposals. Almost every women in the story wants to have a rich husband or wants their daughters to marry a rich guy, like Charlotte Lucas, Elizabeth’s best friend. Elizabeth had thought that, just like her, Charlotte would never marry someone who’s just rich but shows no connotation and upbringing, but Charlotte chooses to marry William Collins. Elizabeth disdains it and still insists to be herself. So when Mr. Darcy surprisingly proposes her, she still chooses to refuse him due to her prejudice on him. She even says: “I would now thank you. But I cannot-I have never desired your good opinion, and you have certainly bestowed it most unwillingly.” (129). Elizabeth’s action shows that she is a strong and independent woman. She does not act inferiorly in front of men. She thinks she has the right to refuse things that she does not like, even if you are wealthy.
By constructing this kind of female character, the story shows a idea of feminism, and Elizabeth becomes much more unique and attractive than others. And the story indirectly indicates that women should have their own thinkings and should not be driven by money or fame.
Hypocrisy in Heart of Darkness
ReplyDeleteHypocrisy is a major theme in Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness. This hypocrisy, evident in the speech of Marlow and of others he encounters, often stems from racism and the inability to see natives as human.
Hypocrisy is often expressed in a single self-contradicting sentence. On his journey upriver, Marlow encountered--and enlisted--a group of natives supposedly known for being cannibals. He is grateful that “they did not eat each other before my face” (138), showing that he believes that they truly are cannibals, yet he also describes them as “fine fellows--cannibals--in their place” (138). By definition of fellows and by definition of cannibals, cannibals are not fine fellows. Marlow attempts to show an empathetic heart in his word choice, a moral standing. He tries to imply that he is understanding of the culture of the natives. The hypocrisy of this is that this does not show cultural appreciation, but rather shows a racist ignorance: the belief that all one can expect out of the natives is for them to eat each other, and that is a pleasant surprise that they can function outside of that context.
Certain recurring words also demonstrate a certain racist hypocrisy in the characters. When speaking of the imperialist missions in Africa, most Europeans use the word “trade.” This phrasing is not unexpected in the way that Marlow’s cannibal assertion is, but it nonetheless carries a significant amount of weight. The idea that the Europeans are involved in “trade” with the native would mean that the Europeans believe that the natives are able, if exploitable, trading partners. The racist hypocrisy within this assertion is that the Europeans know that the natives are not only being exploited, but care for their livelihood is eliminated completely in favor of looting. The term “trade” is often used in tandem with the word “civilize.” Again, this rhetoric is meant to express a humane wish, but really represents acts of near slavery and torture.
As Sense and Sensibility continues, we learn more about the lives of the Dashwood sisters, particularly concerning their loves lives. Both Marianne and Elinor have men they are interested in, or have men that are interested in them, but along with this theme of love we see, in this part of the book, a theme of secrecy emerge. Both Marianne and Elinor keep secrets about who they are involved with and how they feel about them.
ReplyDeleteAfter Marianne becomes involved with Willoughby, Elinor is rather disapproving of her sister moving so quickly with a man she has just barely met. At one point in the story, Willoughby wants to give Marianne a horse to show his affections for her, and she is delighted, but Elinor immediately interjects, seeing her sister trying to accept such an unreasonable and outrageous gift. “Elinor the ventured to doubt the propriety of her receiving such a present from a man so little, or at least lately known to her. This was too much” (49). After this, Marianne feels that she must keep what she and Willoughby do under wraps to avoid the disapproval of her family. She does not want her family to think that she is moving too quickly with Willoughby and then try to separate them. She and Willoughby then spend most time by themselves, avoiding the watchful eyes of Elinor, only for Margaret to witness him cutting off a piece of Marianne’s hair, a sign that they have become engaged. Margaret runs to Elinor and says, “But indeed this is quite another thing. I am sure they will be married very soon, for he has got a lock of her hair” (51).
As for Elinor, she becomes very secretive for the opposite reason of Marianne. Edward comes to visit and she is thrilled, as she misses him and never gets to see him after moving from Norland. They spend a whole week together, but then has to leave. After he leaves, Elinor becomes convinced that he does not like her anymore, and she sits at her drawing table alone, pondering him. She hides from her sisters and mother, as she does not want them to know how much she worries about Edward and if he has fallen out of love with her. “Elinor found every day afforded her leisure enough to think of Edward, and of Edward’s behavior, in every possible variety which the different state of her spirits at different times could produce,—with tenderness pity, approbation, censure, and doubt” (92). Elinor feels that she must keep these feelings about Edward a secret because she is ashamed. Marianne already thinks of him as dull, and Elinor does not want her sister knowing that she is sad over him.
Works Cited
Austen, Jane. 1811. Sense and Sensibility. New York: Bantam Books.
ReplyDeleteCharacters
The idea of characters in this story is unique and complicated. There are humans and many types of androids that share earth. For the most part humans are focused on more in the story. However, certain androids have bigger roles in the plot. The similarity in all of the androids is that they are very similar to humans. The goal of all characters in this story are to be as human as possible. Having human qualities helps them blend in to humans. Whether this is important for the robot to hide from police or to the manufacturer.Over the course of this story the characters all become more human. Androids become unidentifiable and humans can not tell what is alive or fake.
Rick in the beginning of the story is relatable because he is human. Making conversation with his wife and caring for the sheep are traits of humanity. When Rick and his wife wake up in the first scene there are emotions. “‘I’ve never killed a human being in my life.’ His irritability has risen now; had become outright hostility.” (Dick 4). Rick defends himself when his wife calls him a murderer for killings androids. He is also portrayed as human when his neighbor finds that his sheep is fake. “‘You poor guy. Has it always been this way?’... ‘Um. I won’t say anything to anybody here in the building.’... ‘I don't know, maybe it doesn’t make a difference.’” (Dick 11-13). In this scene Rick is embarrassed and sad that his sheep is not real. This is him showing that he cares and has feelings. Later in the book the characters change. There is less of a difference between androids and humans and often it is extremely hard to differentiate.
As Rick hunts the new androids he finds they become increasingly intelligent. Luba is even clever. The android asks Rick to take the Voigt-Kampff test. “‘I’ll take the test,’Luba Luft said, ‘If you’ll take it first.’” (Dick 102). The android is so human like that it can not be easily detected. If humans are so easily replicated and androids are easily created, then Rick and other ‘humans’ could be androids who don’t know.
.
Honors Response 3
ReplyDeleteFinally free from Staja (state prison), Alex finds himself cured of his violent urges, but constantly getting beat up by those he had tormented in the past. Finally, he comes to a remnant of his past that takes kindly to him and finally gets somewhat away from what he used to be. However, as Alex learns, you can never fully run away from your past.
The first thing he finds is that his home and family are completely different. His parents now have Joe living with them, who they now consider more of a son than they did Alex. Joe even starts enforcing rules of the house on Alex, “‘Ask permission before you sit, you mannerless young swine,’” (136). When Alex enters his room, which was his music “sanctuary” before he went to jail, he finds everything gone, “And then I viddied what else was missing. My stereo and my disc-cupboard were no longer there, nor was my locked treasure chest that contained bottles and drugs and two shining clean syringes” (135). When Alex finds his own home isn’t his anymore, it starts him on a downward spiral of digging up his past.
At the local library, he is talking to a man about killing himself, and a man reading near him keeps shushing him. Eventually, the man looks up and recognizes Alex as the boy who beat him up some time ago. “I never forget a shape, by God. I never forget the shape of anything. By God, you young swine, I’ve got you now.” (143). The man and his friends start beating up Alex, who is defenseless because he gets sick every time he has a violent urge, and they beat him until the police arrive.
The police that arrive on scene turn out to be Alex’s old crewmate, Dim, and Billyboy, a boy Alex used to beat up. They bring him to a field and beat him. “I will not go into what they did, but it was all like panting and thudding against this like background of whirring farm engines,” (150). When Alex finally gets up and starts to wander, he comes across a familiar sight.
He finds a cabin with the word “HOME” on the gate. A while back, in the very beginning of the book, Alex and his crew came into the cabin, beat up the man living there, tore up his manuscript, and raped his wife (who we learn here died of shock shortly after the incident). The man doesn’t recognize Alex, but sees that he is wet from rain and sort of miserable, and invites him in, “‘Sit down by the fire’ he said, ‘and I’ll get you some whisky and warm water.’” (153). The man eventually brings Alex into town for a meeting after writing an article about him, and they give him a room to sleep in. When he wakes up, he finds that music is playing in the next room, which of course makes him ill because of his treatment. He begs the music to stop, but it only gets louder, “So I creeched again for them to stop and went hammer hammer on the wall but it made not one malenky bit of difference.” (167). He sees flyers around the room that say DEATH TO THE GOVERNMENT, and he takes it as a sign to jump out of the second story window. And he does.
While he doesn’t die, it should be at this point that Alex realizes there is no way to fully escape his past. What he does will always haunt him, and sometimes even to the point of jumping out the window and attempting to kill himself. Even though Alex was cured of his violence, his past will stay with him forever.
Gabriel Geller - Forged Coupon - Element of Fiction - Theme
ReplyDeleteThe Forged Coupon by Leo Tolstoy is a story two contradicting themes; evil and spiritual awakenings. The first half of the book is very much so focused on the greed of the characters and the horrible outcomes the forgery of the coupon causes while the second half brings all of the events full circle with a chain reaction of regret and reformation with a series of good deeds, unlike the evil deeds of first half of the book. Stepan Pelageyushkin, an ex-military peasant, becomes a murderer corrupted by evil, then radically redeems and reforms himself through a new spiritual awakening. Stepan culminates the evil of the coupon at the end of the first half and first starts the reform of such evils in the second half. The drastic changes Stepan’s character goes through reflect the themes of evil and spiritual awakenings.
When we first meet Stepan, he kills a peasant named Ivan Mironov, who steals his horses. He is sentenced to one year in prison. Deranged, he then goes on a tangent of multiple killings for no reason other than pleasure. About his innocent victims, Stepan has “one thought in his head: how to kill them” (280). Then he cuts their throats, and many other throats. He kills all these people simply because he feels that he has the ability to pull it off. Finally, he encounters the police and very willingly turns himself in with much intent, “Oh, I’m the one who slit everybody’s throats up at Domotvorov’s place the night before last” (282). His character has no real motif, so he resorts to killing people randomly. When he killed Ivan Mironov, he killed for his two horses. Now, he just kills. Stepan didn’t refer to his murder of Ivan Mironov as a “terrible act” (266). With this, he develops the belief that killing isn’t always a bad thing, so he kills random innocent people in which he struggles to present real reasons for doing so. His character is mentally lost, confused, and unbalanced.
Back to prison, haunted and suffering in mental anguish of his actions, he becomes a different man, for the better. He befriends inmates and is taught the Gospels. His friend, Vasily, plans an escape and they go their separate ways. Before this happens, Vasily states, “‘Do you think there’s any shortage of villains out there?’’’ Stepan replies with, “‘It’s not for us to judge them”’(296). Stepan uses the terms “us” and “them.” He feels divided from the man he once was. Not too long ago, Stepan was “them,” the villains. Now he is “us,” the inspired man healed by religion. Now in a very different position, he doesn’t want to judge those who he is different from. He judged and killed all of those “villains” where in reality, he was the villain. These two men are at different stages in their faith. Vasily looks forward at his future and wherever it may take him. Stepan, freshly inspired by religion, looks at it with a deep contemplation and reflection and ultimately contradiction of his past self. His character is corrupted by evil and eventually overcomes such evils through a new found spiritual awakening in the most unlikely place imaginable, prison, the juxtaposition of his new found self.
Analysis of Pride and Prejudice
ReplyDeleteThe title of the book is Pride and Prejudice, which represents the main traits of the two main characters, Elizabeth Bennet and William Darcy. However, even though they do not like each other when they first meet, both of them gain true love by changing themselves into a better one.
In the book, both the main characters have their own appealing characteristics, but also have drawbacks which lead them to get away from each other. Elizabeth is a playful and independent girl. Unlike others, she has her own thinkings and is brave to speak out. But she judges people immediately by the way she thinks, and once she has a prejudice on others, it is very hard for her to remove it out of her mind. William is very wealth and honorable, but he thinks people are inferior than him, so he does not want to have contact with them, which is very arrogant and disrespectful.
However, the change of their relationship starts at William’s letter. At this point, William is attracted by Elizabeth. But because she believes that the reason why Charles, who her sister loves, leaves so sudden is because of he tells him to, and he has mistreated George because he is jealous of him, so she refuses him. Then William decides to write a letter to her to explain everything and leave. After Elizabeth reads the letter, she is shock and begins to realize she is “pleased with the preference of one...Till this moment, I never knew myself.” (141). When they meet each other again, Elizabeth surprisingly finds that William has changed a lot. He becomes a gentleman and helps poor people, and unlike before, he has a good reputation. So Elisabeth begins to feel more ashamed and even regrets her refusion. She thinks that William would never love her again. However, he asks Elizabeth again gently: “...My affections and wishes are unchanged, but one word from you will silence me on this subject forever.” (246), and Elizabeth tells him how she really feels and she thinks it is her prejudice which leads to this situation. After that, “Had Elizabeth been able to encounter his eye, she might have seen how well the expression of heartfelt delight, diffused over his face...made his affection every moment more valuable.” (246) . Contrasting to “He spoke of apprehension and anxiety, but his countenance expressed real security.” (128) when he proposes the first time to elizabeth, that is such a huge change. So finally, Elizabeth accepted him and they are together.
The story begins with “It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife...that he is considered as the rightful property of some one...” (1). It describes love as a subject that men and women need to show their status. However, the book makes Elizabeth and William change to show what a true love is. They don’t love each other because of their families or properties. They know each other very well and love each other’s everything after experience separation.
3
ReplyDeleteThe setting is a major character in Heart of Darkness, by Joseph Conrad. The idea of interiors and exteriors, and the comparisons between them, represent much of the significance of the setting. At the outset of the novella, just before Marlow begins his hundred-page monologue, the narrator explains that, to Marlow, “The meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the tale which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze, in the likeness of one of these misty halos that sometimes are made visible by the spectral illumination of moonshine” (105). This means that Marlow believes that external presentation is where the true meaning of things lie. This is in contrast to the popular understanding: that true value lies in the internal truth of something. The narrator is specifically referring to Marlow’s view on stories (episodes), and that the storyteller is where the meaning lies, rather than the story. Throughout the story, contrasts between interiors and exteriors flood Marlow’s storytelling. For example: Marlow expresses more romance for Africa represented in maps, coastlines, and riverbanks (exteriors) than represented by its internal meanings and essence.
This distinct search for meaning within exteriors even pervades Marlow’s analysis of Kurtz. On Kurtz’s very bald head, Marlow says, “‘The wilderness had patted him on the head, and, behold, it was like a ball—an ivory ball ... it had taken him, loved him, embraced him, got into his veins’” (153). Marlow derives deep meaning from the external appearance of Kurtz, rather than from his internal workings. He views Kurtz as a man who’s external appearance and behavior is a result of the external environment. Marlow’s interest is in the way the external world--the wilderness, the river--affect the external appearances and actions of people. He has a great fascination over whether or not Kurtz has become savage-like because of his environment.
The title of the novella may allude to this theme in setting. The story, because it is told mostly by Marlow, focuses mostly on external settings--riverbanks, maps, actions of people--but it is entitled “Heart of Darkness”. The darkness of Africa, both regarding the morality of it’s colonization and the depths of its forests, is not often explicitly discussed. In addition, Marlow strays from the idea of the “heart” of things, another very internal idea. The title, therefore, represents a contrast for the reader to consider.
Prompt 3
ReplyDeleteMorgan Busby
Literary Adaptations
Ray Chapin
October 17, 2018
The Trial Response
In the last section of The Trial by Franz Kafka Mr. K is still working on figuring out his case with the court and judges. Mr. K throughout the whole story does not know why he was arrested and charged with a crime, that he does not know what it is. The whole book is Mr. K following a wild goose chase of why he was arrested, and how to get out to of the charges. He talks to several different lawyers, and court officials in several different chapters.
This book was made to show the complexity of law, and the court. Generally, this type of case would never happen, but it illustrates the levels of that people have to go through to discuss their case with the correct people. “And anyway, it’s not entirely sure that all judges would believe me,” (113). This is Mr. K trying to convince a court painter to discuss his case with the many judges assigned to his case. He is looking for information on his case, but also he is looking for someone to speak highly of him to the main judge on the case, which the painter knows.
Mr. K seems to stay at relatively the same amount of knowledge as in the beginning of the book as the end, but not because he wants to, but because no one will tell him much. Mr. K is a reliable source of information for the reader. He is never proven wrong in the entire book. This book is told in first person. It parallels quite nicely to how Rear Window is told. They are both told in first person, and the audience gets to see very little of others live, and what is actually going on the the whole story. “I hear things about the court here and there,” (98). Mr. K is only hearing partial things from everyone he talked to throughout the whole book. In this section he is talking to the manufacturer about his case. Mr. K wants to know what he has heard about his case. It seems as though everyone is talking about Mr. K’s case, but not talking to him about anything. The wild goose chase feeling definitely stems from this. It feels as though he is told to go and talk to everyone, but no one has any answers. Overall I think the book was quite enjoyable, and I cannot wait to see the film.
ReplyDeleteAndroid #3
This book, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, by Philip Dick is told through the perspective of Rick Deckard and John Isidore. He is the narrator and tells the story in the third person limited. The switch between the characters is important to the story. Rick and Isidore start off so dissimilar. Rick is an android bounty hunter and makes his living ‘retiring’ them. In contrast Isidore is very empathetic to Androids. Rick is ashamed to have an electric sheep and kills androids. He also has little emotion. This is an important contrast to Isidore. He is damaged and considered less than human even though he seems to carry the most human like personality. This is because it seems that through the book humans and androids are becoming more similar with less feelings. The contrast of personalities narrating the book eventually help explain the change in Rick.
Rick, from the beginning, is made to be a nice character that fits the world where he lives to the best of his ability. Rick and the whole human population living on earth is obsessed with living animals. He has a wife who he disagrees with sometimes but overcomes that. Rick also has an electric sheep which he lies about. Being ashamed that it is not alive he says it is to hide his inferiorness to society. His job is to hunt down and ‘retire’ androids that look very much like humans. He is reliable and trusted to tell the truth by the reader.
John Isidore is firstly portrayed as dumb and inferior. He is considered below human. This is shown when he kills the cat, “‘The chickenhead, Sloat said, ‘brought it in.’” (Dick 77). Isidore is portrayed as incompetent and therefore not trusted. Through the book he continues to grow. This is seen through his, “empathy box,” which is his caring and emotions towards humans and androids. This personality is very different from Ricks in the beginning.
Towards the end of the story Rick has more contact with androids as he hunts them. However his run-ins with them change him. Trap after trap he kills the androids. Then he begins to have feelings. One of the best examples is when he beds with Racheal. This turns the book around and shows he too feels for them. Although he still kills some androids he knows it is wrong. And by the end he knows he must find a different job. It is shortly after he meets Isidore in person that they begin to have the same “empathy box” of feelings that feel for androids.
Tom Ripley in The Talented Mr. Ripley by Patricia Highsmith has always seemed to have a recurring need to gain the acceptance of others. Upon becoming once again acquainted with old friend Dickie, Tom demonstrates a rather surprising behavior- he believes Dickie is capable of “becoming” more than he has limited himself to be. “He was only sorry that Dickie fell into this category as a painter, because he wanted Dickie to be so much more.” (58) I found it rather odd and unconventional that Tom was abruptly so subsided by Dickie’s success, or lack thereof- even when Tom was bragging about his own success and skills, he still wished for Dickie to amount to someone more successful than himself. I of course was reminded of another novel by Diana Wynne Jones. In her fantasy novel Howl's Moving Castle the protagonist Sophie Hatter is forced to live her life in the shadows of success attained by her younger sisters. In my own life there have been several instances where I have wanted for people I cared for to be of more success than myself. I have shared pointers or advice, and lessons I’ve learned with others so that they might not repeat my mistakes. I think human nature is to want to see the success of anyone we come to know, regardless of whether or not we exemplify a certain fondness for them. In actuality, success comes in variations. For Tom, I believe he saw potential in a life that was not his own. Overshadowed by this envious rage growing inside of him and plotting to take over. Further on into the novel, Tom begins to grow more envious of Dickie. He suddenly has a desire for murder, he wants to become him. “He wanted to kill Dickie… He had just thought of something brilliant: he could become Dickie Greenleaf.” (96) The most chilling aspect of this unforeseeable desire for murder is that Tom is unpredictable; he went from showing compassion for a man’s future, one which could lack ultimate success— to considering murder. Unpredictability is frightening. One minute a person could be showing interest in your life, the next, he could be plotting your murder. You never know, not when life is entirely luck of the draw I suppose.
ReplyDeleteThesis:
ReplyDeleteCompares to the short story, the film is added by more details on cinematography to clearly show each character’s trait, so that they are more vivid to the audience.
Thesis: The powerful obsession for life in a continuously lifeless world makes the book more powerful than the movie.
Delete