It's over, but it ain't the end...

The end is near, and I hate goodbyes...


Looking back over my blog archive, I could definitely see some strong and weak points in my writing.


The Top 3 Strongest Blogs:


1) Chopin's, The Storm - A short blog on some possible themes of Kate Chopin's The Storm. Looking back, I think it was one of my better posts.


2) Booker T. VS. Du Bois   - This post examines the similarities and differences between Booker T. and WEB Du Bois. I think I actually had some good points.


3) "A Good Man Is Hard To Find" - I did the most research on this text and I think it shows in this blog. I was pressed for time on this post, but I had fun with this story.


I guess the obvious reason for selecting these posts is simply, tone. My tone is these three blogs was more open and less critical. I don't necessarily think that they are my best work, but they will do. My best work was done less on writing and more on just thinking. Thinking about poems, or stories, and trying to understand the meaning. In retrospect, I probably could have done better writing.


I was honestly scared to take a literature course because it sounds so official, like you need a degree to get in. But what I found out is that it's really the opposite of that. Literature can be open for interpretation. Literature, can make you a better person. Literature, is people, writing for a cause. Literature can make you laugh, cry, smile, all in the same story. This is nothing to fear. My ideas about Literature have changed. I'm really happy that I decided to take this class, it was a challenge.


What Have I learned?


I like reading Walt Whitman.
Just because Alanis Morissette says it is, doesn't mean it is Ironic (even if I am a die hard fan).
Losing some things, will not cause disaster (no matter how much I think it will!) 


Also, I am smart enough to read and interpret literature.  Not everything has one singular meaning. There are multitudes and contradictions and trickster figures, all over the place. It's best to read, re-read, and then maybe read it again, before making a solid analysis. And if I have done all I possibly can and I fail, it can be done gracefully. 


Strengths and Weaknesses


Well, to re-iterate, I was scared to take this class because I thought it would be really analytical, but I ended up loving it. I think my weakness is something that holds me back in most areas of life, and that is just being afraid to fail. I feel like I could have contributed so much more, but held back in fear. I realize this is supposed to be a simple question, but I don't think I can give a simple answer. All I know, is that I interpret in my head; I say things that I wish I could say out loud. My strengths, I believe, are just having the tenacity to keep reading, or keep questioning, after I wanted to give up. Like with our mid-term essay, I lost sleep seriously trying to push myself to find the puzzle pieces to make it work. I feel like being overly passionate is a curse, but maybe it's the only thing keeping me going. I think without weaknesses, we would all be perfect, and no one will ever be that. I challenge myself to learn from this and hopefully find a way to speak my mind. 


In conclusion...


I never really check my grades throughout the semester. I just work my hardest and hope for the best. Judging by how tired I am and mentally exhausted, I think I earned an A. If it weren't for a flat tire, I would of had perfect attendance, I tried to put thought into my blogs, and I did the best I could, with the given circumstances. I think it's about what you learn, and I have learned so much from this class and previous classes, and I really hate to go, but I think I have exhausted my resources at CWI, so to speak. So 'goodnight and goodluck,' but never goodbye.


~Witney Ryan

So maybe I was too hard in my last post on The Crying of Lot 49, and maybe I do like it more than I think I do. As we were discussing it in class, I kept on thinking about how much I did understand what was going on, well, except for Trystero, which I still don't have a clue.


 This book reminds me of a cool dream, one that you want so badly to remember in the morning, but can't. Then like a week later, out of no where, you remember the dream, and you're like Totally! Yeah, that's this book in a nutshell. 


So I might not understand what exactly I'm reading at the time, but something will click later. And that's the thing with Pynchon I think, you're not supposed to know the whole story. It goes back to the decode VS. detangle example - and I think with Pynchon, it's more about detangling the clues. 


I found that I do have more in common with Oedipa than I thought. Well except for the young republican thing, but I'm all over the tupperware party! I see her character differently when you take in to context that  this was written in the 60's. Oedipa suddenly becomes a bold woman, who doesn't let anything stand in her way. 


I'm curious why Pynchon decided to call her Oedipa, and is she going to kill her father and sleep with her mother? Is Pierce her father??? Ok, that's going a little too far, but there has to be something about a name like that.
I hope it reveals itself in the next two chapters, which I can't wait to read!

The Crying Of Lot 49???

So I made it through the first 79 pages and that is an understatement. I believe I only comprehended 30-38 pages give or take a few. I feel like I have a love/hate relationship with this book and I also believe that Thomas Pynchon may be completely out of his mind. 

I like to give books a fair read before I decide if I like them or not, and I'm definitely keeping my mind open to this book, I think my main problem with it so far is all of the obscure references. huh? 


I guess my big question is just why is this book important? 


It must serve some purpose or be the answer to some quest for the Holy Grail? Maybe? 
I suppose it's important to always read new things and keep your mind sharp...oh that's totally it! I think the purpose of The Crying Of Lot 49, is to make the reader think! 








This is not some calm, smooth, uneventful story we're dealing with. You drift off for a second and you miss everything. I found myself enjoying chapter 2 and 3 the most, because I could actually follow what was happening. After I read the first 9 pages, I thought I was a goner! But then I remembered the blog on how to read Pynchon, and I gave it another attempt.


I guess my main question is...What the hell is going on? 


I was fine up until Oedipa and Metzsger left the hotel room with the Paranoids, then I just got completely and utterly lost. I've been keeping my eye out for the references to lots, and wondering what Lot 49 is? 
I think at this point it has something to do with the WASTE symbol, but I could be completely wrong. 


Someone Please Enlighten this girl! (I usually read nothing but non-fiction)

Follow up for "A Good Man"

First of all, I must say that I thought the small group discussions were harder than I imagined. I think mainly because of the formality of it. It didn't feel like a class discussion, it felt more like a competition. That was just my initial reaction and maybe it's just because I get extremely nervous in leader type situations (I'm a failed Leo) but that was hard. The other thing is that I had quite a bit to say and I feel like I didn't say any of it. I think in a group discussion, one should be open to respond when they have something to say, and when someone is keeping track of that, it makes you more aware of what you're saying and all of a sudden, it's like you question when or if you should speak or save it for later. I don't know, maybe thats a good thing?

Anyways, I did prepare differently for this discussion than a normal class discussion and I'm not sure if it helped me? I started by reading the story on Friday and letting it sink in. Then I started doing research for scholarly journals about the story and other interesting articles. I started reading through the sources and tried to see if I could analyze the material. For the most part, the added resources helped me understand the characters in a better way. Then after I went through all the supporting evidence, I re-read the story and looked for specific examples of irony, foreshadow, "The good," and colors. The second time I read it, it seemed less shocking and more of a moral conviction.

My normal preparation for class is usually just reading and thinking about what I read, without any outside analysis. I think that is probably the norm for most people. I found it really helpful to find outside research on this story.

Three things I learned:

1) Having resources is always better than not having resources.
2) The risk of public humiliation is always motivating.
3) No matter how far-fetched it seems, someone will always come up with a conspiracy theory. 


For serious, I thought this was an interesting approach to a group discussion and I felt better prepared to discuss the text than I normally do, however I was really nervous. It did teach me a lesson about preparation though, and I think I need to step up my game on a regular basis.

~Witney Ryan

"A Good Man IS Hard To Find" if you ain't lookin....

WOW! I love this story. Flannery O' Connor really created a masterpiece when she wrote the short story "A Good Man Is Hard To Find." 


There really are many ways to analyze this story and I think it helps if you know a little background in the Catholic religion, as did O'Connor. 


The story gave me the HeeBee GeeBee's for sure! But also, I compared the story to Welty's "A Worn Path," immediately after reading it. The main reasons were that both stories were set in the South and both had a ton of symbols. Another reason was that they both struggled with some form of internal conflict. The Grandmother in Welty's story has to struggle with racism but also her grandsons condition. The Grandmother in O'Connors story struggles with finding grace, although she doesn't know it until it is too late. 


I guess both of these stories are classified as "Southern Gothic," which I would have to agree with. SG is its own sub genre of American Lit. that deals directly with issues of the South. It also uses irony, supernatural events, and unusual events. SG also tends to use racial tension and gun violence. 


One critical analysis I found on EPSCO said that the entire timing of the story added up exactly on a real U.S. map. All of the driving and landmarks were really on the map, except Timothy. When the family stops at the town of Timothy to eat at Red Sammy's, that is the only town that O'Connor made up (unless it is so small it can't be located with a map). Critics say that she chose the name Timothy specifically for the book of Timothy in the New Testament of the Bible. The verses in this book apparently deal with "how to be a good person and Christian", according to the article I read. 


(Source: Bryant, Hallman B. "Reading the map in "A Good Man Is Hard To Find.")


O'Connor uses irony, foreshadow, and biblical references to really underline the idea of the "Good." 

Villanelles make me curse....There really is nothing worse!

Just a fair warning.....

This is bad...bad...poetry.

But for the sake of the blog....here ya go. I might also add that after two hours, and 17 refrains later, I opted for using a Norah Jones lyric as my first refrain. So this poem is inspired by Norah Jones new album, which I highly recommend!

I Gotta Get Ya Out Of My Head

I gotta get ya out of my head-

can't sleep, can't eat

But remember the words you said.

I wasn't mad, I just went to bed

I didn't think it was sweet,

I gotta get ya out of my head.

You didn't read what I read,

practice deceit,

and remember the words you said.

What an awful ground to tread

'pick up the pace feet'

I have to get you out of my head.

I'm sorry if you were misled,

I didn't cheat,

I remembered the words you said.

After all no one's dead,

just hit delete,

So I can get ya out of my head,

and stop remembering the words you said. 

~Witney Ryan

Thursday Again...

I just keep telling myself if I can write this blog, I can have the Dublin Mudslide Ben & Jerry's in the freezer....Come on....


I've been sittin in this chair for hours...and can't come up with a worthy question, although there are many questions in my head.




What do all of these poets have in common?


It seems like they are all writing about life and their surroundings. I'm sure that is a common theme in poetry already, but these four poets, (Roethke, Bishop, Lowell, Brooks) do it in a very natural way. 


Two of my all time favorite Villanelles are by Roethke and Bishop.


~ The Waking by Theodore Roethke and One Art by Elizabeth Bishop ~


In The Waking, Roethke uses a masterful rhetoric to illustrate the tragic and beautiful cycle of life. Or at least that's how I read it. We sleep to wake, and wake to sleep, and it all happens very fast. I love how the words in this poem resonate and flow off each other to the very end.


In One Art, Bishop seems to poke fun at loss, which can be a hard thing to deal with, but it's no "disaster." I like to think of this poem as my mantra, because I struggle with loss on a daily basis (I'm sure we all do), and the more I can learn that it isn't the end of the world, the easier it is to deal with. She too uses rhetoric to make the reader think hard about the meaning. I think the second to last stanza is a good example of that. She doesn't literally lose 2 cities, 2 rivers and a continent, but if she did..it would not be a disaster. 


What is it about the human condition, that compels us to write about pain? 
.........

Tuesday Night Homework Club - 4/10/12

Post - Modernism...it's kind of like irony...it's hard to define. 

(It took me 2.3 seconds to find this picture By Munch.)

It seems that PM is philosophical by nature, but has a realist twist. The idea of the "HyperReal" a concept established by Jean Baudrillard, makes complete and utter sense.  In fact, the rate at which this HyperReal phenomena is occurring, seems to be speeding up at an incomparable rate because of the Internet. 

If an idea pops into your head, it takes Google 3 seconds to find it. And not only do you get what you were searching for, you get things you didn't even know you wanted to know. That's right!

Back in the day, like in Picasso's day, you were the source. If you wanted to know something or see something, you researched it, or painted it. There was no instant gratification was there?

I personally find myself getting overwhelmed really easily in this day and age because there is always some form of media bombardment in our daily lives. The second I wake up in the morning, 13 decisions flood my brain about the day. Instead of living reality as it comes, I live it through false "make believe" ideas   in my mind, and then I'm disappointed when they don't come true. 

I think I will finally take my parent's advice and "drink heavily," it's going to be a bumpy ride. 

Post-Modernism For Real...

We begin our Post-Modernism week with three extremely important writers, Robert Hayden, John Berryman, and Ralph Ellison.  I found the short Bio's on these writers interesting because they seemed to have alot in common.
Here is a quick reminder:

Robert Hayden: 


Born: 1913
Died: 1980
Adopted when he was 18 months old.
Poor background/ Traumatic childhood
Studied Music
Read modern poetry (Hughs, Cullen)
Grew up in Detroit


John Berryman:


Born:1914
Died: 1972
Father commit suicide, mother remarried.
Traumatic childhood
Studied Poetry
Taught at Wayne State in Detroit
Multiple Marriages

Ralph Ellison: 


Born: 1913
Died: 1994
Father died when he was three
Also read modern poetry (Langston Hughs, Cullen)
Awarded Music Scholarship, but switched to poetry
Multiple marriages

Out of the readings this week, I was most confused by The Invisible Man, by Ralph Ellison.

I was trying to read the story with my irony goggles on. Searching for some hope that the plot in this story was just a sick joke and not in fact actually taking place.

I think one of the most important parts of the entire story is the opening scene in which the grandfather is on his deathbed. The grandfather, who the boy takes after, is a trickster figure. He even tricks his own family. After Reconstruction when the South was a terrible place for African Americans to live, the grandfather did what he had to do to survive. He was polite and made sure not to cause any trouble. But this was a lie and he even calls himself a "traitor." And the most important thing is to keep up this tradition of undermining the white folks. This idea is what haunts the protagonist his whole life.

Throughout the story, words and ideas of Booker T. Washington are echoed, and this is another important theme. The second paragraph brings up the idea of "separate like the fingers of a hand." And the bot even calls himself a "neo-Booker T. Washington." But he mentions that it was in his "pre-invisible days." This is what leads me to think that invisibility equates to trickery.

Fast forward to where he is in the fighting ring and he finally figures out that his blind fold slipped and he could see. He is using a trickster move to dodge the other boys and have others take the blows that were aimed at him.

When he is trying to figure out whether or not to win against the "big boy," and he is conflicted about his moment of humility, he catches a blow to the head and is knocked out. This moment is pivotal because he starts to realize his grandfathers words very much a part of him.

The last four pages give me a stomach ache when I read them. I have a hard time interpreting what the protagonist is actually thinking.

I'm waiting until after class to finish this post. I will have to follow up.

TBC.

WORD TO THE ENGLISH CLUB!

On March 23rd, the CWI English club presented the first Word reading of the semester. Despite the fact that it was held on a Friday night on the eve of Spring Break, there was a full house. I too had nothing else to do on a Friday. (Did I type that out loud?).  But Seriously, it was worth the drive to Nampa.

There were a total of six brave speakers including our classroom's very own Nathanael! The line up included poets, non-fiction writers and even a songwriter. The array of images made for an eclectic palette.
I apologize in advance for forgetting some or most of the names of speakers, my notes are hard to decipher.

From the first speaker, a dark and twisted non-fiction story, maybe not suited for the young children in the room. All I can say about that one is that I would have never thought I would hear cinnamon and blood, used in the same sentence.

Next, a young writer with a small cache of poems. My personal favorite was his last poem in which he took a humorous approach to stereotypes. Although, by the number of uncomfortable faces looking around, I'm not sure if it was a fav. of everyone. (Welcome to Idaho.)

Next was our Musician friend, solo without guitar. I always find lyrics interesting when they are being spoken. For some reason, they lose a dimension in translation. I think the writer was extremely passionate and brave for sharing so many of his songs.

Next, a semi-autobiographical poet/writer, who reminds me of someone..but I can't put my finger on it..hmm.
I appreciated the realism in his writing. Often we forget that life is full of poetic moments all on their own.

Nathanael Peterson was our next poet. I didn't realize she was the same poet who wrote "Learning Korean" in the second edition of Caliper, which happens to be one of my favorite poems. She was full of witty epigrams that for me was a high point. There is nothing better than a great epigram.

The faculty speaker of the night, Kelly Ford, was definitely worth the wait. Her short non-fiction story "You will miss me when I burn," was a little gritty and passionate western. She proclaimed to borrowing the title from a Bonnie "Prince" Billy song, which I had no idea who that was. I googled him and that is a whole other blog in itself.
I really hate to compare writers to other writers because I feel like every writer should be their own thing. But this story really reminded me of the contemporary writer Annie Proulx. Ford's writing style is organic and comes off natural and easy to visualize, which is also a trait of Proulx.
Fav, quote from the story, "A beautiful girl, like a good horse, can change the world."

Great end to another successful Word.

Tuesday Night Homework Club

Aside from the fact that it feels like forever since I sat down to write a blog (or anything for that matter), I'm trying to refresh my spring broken brain. 


I'm thinking of a thought that was brought up about The Wasteland and I was curious about it as well, as I was re-reading my last blog. 


Who was T.S. Eliot writing for? His poem requires the reader to have a wealth of knowledge at their disposal, and yet then he provides notes. 


This seems to contradict the purpose. 


But what is the purpose?


AND ANOTHER THING.....


The original title, HE DO THE POLICE IN DIFFERENT VOICES: part I, could have been a hint that Eliot was using different speakers in his poem, which I didn't really catch onto at first. 


Which raises another good question, what constitutes a speaker? 


I believe for the sake of argument, a speaker can be anyone or thing that is speaking or having a thought that is not the original speaker's thought. So in the case of The Wasteland, stream of conscious and imagined characters count. 


It becomes hard to differentiate where the speaker changes, especially after the first section. The sections following one, seem to be a narration and they include multiple speakers. 


I still stand with my first initial thought and will need to read this poem at least 20 more times. 

THE WASTE LAND - T.S.ELIOT

If I thought understanding Walt Whitman was going to be my hardest task this semester, I thought wrong. Hello T.S. Eliot.

This is only the second time I’ve attempted to read it,  so I don’t feel too bad that I’m struggling to understand it.

I want so badly to understand this poem and I think it will take at least another 20 reads to grasp it.

I got the post WWI theme that is present throughout the poem and the move towards the apocalyptic end of the world.

There is a blend of high society and low class culture. This is in the second section with the high-class woman sitting on the throne, and then the women in the bar-“In rats’ alley.”

There seems to be many emerging themes that are constantly being tested.  Aside from the obvious them of death, there is also a theme of resurrection and the cycle of life.

This is seen in the references to decay. Especially in the last 8 lines of section one, where the speaker asks,

“That corpse you planted last year in your garden, has it begun to sprout?”

With this line in mind, and the opening line, 

“April is the cruellest month, breeding lilacs out of the dead land.”

These two references to death and gardens, brings to mind the cycle of life and decomposition. We all die and we all become dirt. This can seem cruel – breed as lilacs.

The poem’s form is also hard to pinpoint. It seems to slip in and out of various styles. There is free verse, iambic pentameter, end rhyme, couplets, repetition, and so much more.

I think Eliot uses these different forms to his advantage. Rather than having one solid form throughout the entire poem, he changes the form to match the tone of the action. (Or that is my theory at least.)

The more times I read this poem, the more I understand it. Or the more I think I understand it. Can’t wait for class discussion. 

Thursday's Blog

Hemingway's Big Two-Hearted River, draws the reader in, and just when your hooked, it's over.

Things I liked:

The narrative structure - I believe there are only two instances where there is dialogue. I felt that this type of structure worked well with the overall theme of the story. Which leads me to the next point, the theme.

The theme seemed to be about human interaction with nature and how how even though the town had burned and the luxury of convenience was gone, one could survive off the land.

Things that were curious:


On page 981:  "Nick's heart tightened as the trout moved. He felt all the old feeling" (981).

I felt a tension between Nick and the river at this instance, but the story gives no clue as to what the old feeling is.

A paragraph later we find out that "Nick felt happy. He left everything behind, the need for thinking, the need to write, other needs..."(981).

It doesn't seem to matter that the town of Seney is burnt, Nick is more focused on what isn't burnt, the river.

I guess my question is: Is this just a story about a guy going fishing, or is Hemingway asking the reader to read between the lines?


I also find it interesting that Nick is so damn happy. He gets off a train at a burnt town, has to haul his heavy baggage up hill in the heat, camp along the river, and he is happy. Even when he burns his tongue, he is happy!

When Nick starts to remember his friend Hopkins, there seems to be another glimpse of tension. Nick's reminiscence of the Black River trip seems to be important to him and maybe it is part of the old feeling that he brings up in previous thought.

This is the only real reference to a past. The rest of the story or narration is of life in the moment. All the action takes place second to second. Hemingway also emphasizes to great detail the small, fleeting moments, for example:

"Then he walked up to the tent. The hoppers were already jumping stiffly in the grass. In the bottle, warmed by the sun, they were jumping in a mass. Nick put in a pine stick as a cork. It plugged the mouth of the bottle enough so the hoppers could not get out and left plenty of air passage" (986).

This is just a small example but the entire short story is filled with these small moments in great detail. Even the dew on the grass seems significant.

Just as I began to think this really was just a story about fish, the last line:

"There were plenty of days coming, where he could fish the swamp" (992).

This last line leads me to conclude that this is more than a fishing trip. I think Nick is escaping his past, finds solitude in the peaceful river, the swamp is a metaphor for his past, and there will be plenty of time to deal with that..in the future?  Maybe..... This scenario even seems too simple.

What am I missing? IS THIS STORY ABOUT FISH?

“Black Woman” by Georgia Douglas Johnson

A Mother is talking to the child she doesn’t have, but wishes she could. She is telling the child about the ugly world that is filled with cruel men and that is the reason she will not have this child.

Close Reading

1)    The title is interesting because it was originally titled “Motherhood” but then was changed to “Black Woman.” I would agree that the title should be Black Woman because it emphasizes the underlying meaning of the poem, racism. There are no clues in the poem that would lead us to believe the poem is about racism, so the title is it! I think once you read the poem, the title has a new meaning.

2)    For once, I actually understand all the words in a poem. This is extremely rare!

3)    Knock and not, In and Sin, You and Cruel, Bear and ear, Pain and Again, Earth and Birth.  Some of these sounds are rhyming, and some are more alliterative. I think the flow of the poem is smooth and the sounds help to emphasis emotion.

4)    A Black Mother is literally talking to a child that she is not going to have. There aren’t any other characters present that we know of. The poem doesn’t really give any hints as to where this is taking place. My perception of the action is changing and I’m starting to think that this woman might be having an abortion?

5)    A knock at the door, a cruel and sinful world, bear the pain, Monster men, precious child, birth. All of these images are working to create a picture in the reader’s mind that the mother is not to blame for whatever is happening; the cruel world is to blame.

6)    The speaker is a woman. She thinks the world is cruel. She does not want a child. She cannot bear the pain of ignoring her child. She is Black. She believes the world is full of monsters. She thinks if she gives birth, the child will live in a horrible world. Her heart can’t handle having a child. She thinks she will reunite with the child in eternity? The speaker is alone. (I hope I got that right.)

7)    (Cruelty, sin, still, eternity, heart, pain, monster, precious, men, birth.)

These are a few words that help set the poems tone. The speaker seems angry towards the ways of man and the world that she doesn’t want to bring a child into it. But I think this poem goes beyond racism. The tone is partly remorseful that she, the speaker, doesn’t want to be the child’s mother.

8)    The poem does follow a structure. There is internal rhyme and end rhyme. The poem has repetition of lines and sounds, which helps to emphasize the emotion.

9)    The tension is between the speaker and the unborn child, and also between the cruel world.

10) “I cannot let you in”

“I cannot bear the pain”

“be still, be still, my precious child”

When I first read this poem I simply imagined a Black woman talking sweetly to herself about why she doesn’t want to have a child. After a closer reading I got a completely different image. Possibly a Black woman, who is disgusted with racism, that she decides to have an abortion because she doesn’t want the child to suffer like her. I’m not sure if this is accurate, but I feel like there is something else going on this poem.

The Death Of Romanticism...

Alright folks, it is almost that time once again. You know where you start having more frequent panic attacks, eating leftover pizza for breakfast, and writing checks you HOPE will clear at Starbucks. Okay, forget that last part, who writes checks anymore? Cross your fingers and hope your approved.


What I'm trying to say is, well it is time for Midterms!


Ok, let's calm down and think, I'm sure we can come up with a strategy.


Why Am I talking to myself?






Here's what I'm thinking...


I'm going to take an idea that we brushed up against early in the semester which is the idea of the death of romanticism in America at the time and duration of the Civil War. Also, the beginning of a realistic approach in literature and art. 


Here's a possible thesis statement...


"The Civil War caused the inevitable death of romanticism in America, and shifted the country towards realism." 


What do you think? Can I prove this?


I would use the following texts:


1) Bierce's Chickamauga, to show how the stark reality of war contributed to the aging of youth.
2) Twain's A Private History, to show how the Civil War became a traumatic event in the consciousness of America, crippling the will to fantasize. 
3) Dickinson's poems, 448 and 479, to show her portrayal of death as a reality the people faced in the shadow of the war.




Is this feasible?


If this doesn't sound good, I will just go with topic #5 about the role of death within multiple texts.


Yah, how does this sound?

Booker T. Washington and W.E.B. du bois...

            After reading both “sides” if you will, I would consider Booker T. Washington to be on the conservative side and Du Bois to be on the liberal or “militant” side. There is definitely a difference in tone in these essays, but I’m hesitant to classify Du Bois as militant.

            I find it coincidental, that the more conservative of the two, was in fact born into slavery. I would have expected Washington to be more radical and more of a die hard against the South. 

Was there a method to his madness? 

Is this a classic “keep your friends close and your enemies closer” scenario?

I can’t help but wonder if Booker T. was torn between his mixed racial heritages?  Did he view himself as a middleman between Blacks and Whites?

            In his closing statement at the Atlanta Exposition:

“ …let us pray God, will come in a blotting out of sectional differences and racial animosities and suspicions, in a determination to administer in a nation absolute justice, in a willing obedience among all classes to the mandates of law. This, this, couples with our material prosperity, will bring into our beloved South a new heaven and a new earth.”

                                                                 -Booker T. Washington

I think we get a true sense of who Booker T. Washington was as a person, in these closing words. He may have been conservative and overly reserved in the advancement of equal rights, but I believe he was cautious for a reason. Considering that he came from slavery and lived through the Civil War, he had seen so much hatred. He wanted to make a difference, and he did.

W.E.B du bois was an extremely powerful figure and leader for the African American race, and rightfully opposed to Washington’s views. Even though he was born after Emancipation, he saw at a young age the ugliness of racism that existed between races. Unlike Washington, he thought the way to equality was to stand up and fight for it.

From, The Souls of Black Folk,

“ …Negroes must insist continually, in season and out of season, that voting is necessary to modern manhood, that color discrimination is barbarism, and that black boys need education as well as white boys.”

            -W.E.B. du bois

This was partly a rebuttal to Washington’s approach of backing down and slowly earning a wage. Du bois advocated an equal playing field now, not tomorrow.

 

I found myself agreeing more with du bois for many personal reasons and I still consider him one of the top three most influential figures on civil rights. I also found it interesting that regardless of his “radical” views, he was the first African American to earn a PhD from Harvard. His legacy is huge.

Oh..Now I totally get it!

Irony, sarcasm's tricky sister.....


I really had a hard time finding the verbal irony in The Passing of Grandison, but after last Friday and reading Kailie's blog, I totally get it, I think.


She really had some great examples for irony that I didn't catch:


""Upon hearing that Grandison is very happy being a slave and has no intention of leaving, the colonel beams and think to himself regarding the abolitionist, "What cold-blooded heartless monsters they were who would break up this blissful relationship of kindly protection on the one hand, of wise subordination and loyal dependence on the other!""


Hahaha, Silly Abolitionists and their trying to help slaves, what were they thinking?


I think the trick to finding verbal irony when one is reading is to really understand the tone of the author. I have a habit of taking everything I read for serious. Which is funny, because I'm an extremely sarcastic person. 


When I was reading Grandison, I was trying to figure out who the characters really were and what was really taking place. I wasn't exactly clued in on the irony until the end of the story. Which proves to be extremely ironic.


I'm not exactly sure of the difference between irony and sarcasm, because they seem to be from the same blood. Is there a difference? 


I found plenty of sarcastic remarks throughout the story, but I guess they could be considered irony, in retrospect. 

Stephen Crane Needs A Hug....

Remind me NOT to take my book of Stephen Crane poems on my next picnic....


Crane seemed to me to have a stark, depressing outlook in the majority of his poems. (by majority, I mean all of them.)




Here are a few poems I wrote in the style of Crane. 
One of them is a parody, guess which one...


#1
Alone in this darkness
I asked myself the meaning
of this life?
And I answered with
no regret, for my 
heart was empty.


#2
I followed a road to no where, and
saw a man, shirtless and begging,
"should I stop?"
The man was smiling, content
What a fool.




#3
Ghostly figures arose in shadow
There was hollow and hollow of heart and soul,
and sigh and sigh of pain and tremble,
vigorous pleas and loss of desire,
In the hour before the light,
he took back the night.


#4
A man said to his shrink,
"Sir, am I crazy?"
"Truthfully?" replied the shrink.
"Don't answer that!
My times up."

The Irony of Grandison

I truly am having a Reality Bites moment this week because all I can think is “That’s Ironic.” I’ve read and re-read The Passing of Grandison, and I’m at a loss for the Irony.

Let me see if I can come close:

Example 1: Page 230 – “ He was a youth about 22, intelligent, handsome and amiable, but extremely indolent, in a graceful and gentlemanly way;”

This could be taken for verbal irony because in fact the speaker actually intends the character to be lazy.

Example 2: page 235 – “ You may take Grandison, said the Colonel to his son. “I allow he’s abolitionist proof.”

This could be seen as situational irony because in fact Grandison is not abolitionist proof.

 

Example 3: Page 240 – “ Oh Dick,” she had said with shuddering alarm, “What have you done? If they knew it they’d send you to the penitentiary, like they did that Yankee.”

Here, Charity Lomax is upset that Dick Owens hypothetically freed a slave. This irony is situational because the expected outcome was that she would be happy and impressed by his accomplishment. After all it is stated in the beginning that there is nothing Dick Owens won’t do to “please a woman. (230)”

As for verbal irony, I’m having a rough time. Overall, I found the story entirely ironic because Dick Owens tried so hard to free Grandison and he appeared to be a faithful slave. It was not until the final paragraphs that we learn Grandison wasn’t content being a slave like the Colonel led us all to believe, and the joke was on him.

Maybe…. The title is verbal irony because Grandison doesn’t “Pass,” he Lives. Symbolically, the old Grandison dies and the new one gets to live freely amongst his family.

Any thoughts? 

Three Cheers For Compassion...

         

          Another week behind us and three classic stories burned into our memories forever, which is a good thing. I was just reading our class's blogs and trying to connect the dots, between the three stories that is. What could two grotesgue Civil War stories and an erotic love triangle all have in common?
                              Compassion!

Both of my fellow bloggers agree in one way, shape, or form... Take A Look...

Kailie thought The Storm was :
                 "(A) super sexy story and by far my favorite thing I read this semester."


And Dennis had this to say about Chickamauga and A Private History...

"The first thing that stood out to me that was very similar in the story was that the stories started out with the same innocence of the main character (s) in the story. "




Def'n:
Compassion - Sympathetic pity and concern for the sufferings or misfortunes of others. (Source- Macbook Dictionary)


In The Storm, it was easy to feel compassion for all characters because we are human and try to see all angles of a complex situation (hopefully). After our class discussion I felt I had a better understanding of the story, and could feel myself identifyng with Calixta. 


And with both Civil War stories, I felt as if I was fighting on the North and South, and no matter how you look at it, it's a double-sided knife. 


This is Literature.


No, not this blog.




These Stories, 


they take few minutes to read, 


but change the way we think, 


maybe forever.