Close Reading

http://jezebel.com/5974934/in-defense-of-never-moving-on

This article is interesting because it's totally out of the ordinary- people always tell heartbroken lovers to "take time to move on". However, this man suggests that it might not be that bad of an idea to actually never move on. 

He has a frank but still eloquent tone, both to dispell the social norms of forgetting about your past relationships and to persuade the reader into imagining what he's saying, so that they can associate what is wrong with their behavior. He says that one needs to  "recall the inexplicable forces that caused you to act and react certain way. Because you'll encounter them again. There's a reason many of us tend to make the same mistake again and again. It's because we move those previous behaviors on to a shelf, into a taped up box containing one prior girlfriend or boyfriend. It's one we tell ourselves not to open. But moving past something means you can no longer learn from it." 

Calling the forces "inexplicable" and addressing the reader, saying that "you'll encounter them again", and "you can no longer learn from it" is like he's telling the reader what will happen to them, making them agree with him, especially because this is a very personal kind of topic. Saying that people make the same mistakes because they put their exes in a "taped up box" conjures images of items that were once of use that were put away in a dusty attic, never to be used again, even in cases where they could be useful, and saying that things are put on a shelf gives it the same kind of effect. His language is casual so you don't read this like a paper, but more like advice from someone who has had an experience. 

Open Prompt

2008, Form B. In some works of literature, childhood and adolescence are portrayed as times graced by innocence and a sense of wonder; in other works, they are depicted as times of tribulation and terror. Focusing on a single novel or play, explain how its representation of childhood or adolescence shapes the meaning of the work as a whole.

     In the book series Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling, childhood is not only portrayed as a scary place but also portrayed as innocent, showing that children can act and learn about things far beyond their age, but when it comes down to it, they are still children. This is mainly shown in the first book, The Sorcerer's Stone, where Harry is just barely eleven, and must undergo physical and mental trials not even fit for adults, while juggling a new school, friendships, and growing up, just like a "normal" child. The veiwpoint in this book of Harry's childhood pretty much sets the stage for the rest of the series- even though adolescence is a tough time, you make the best of friends, fight the worst of enemies, and learn the best of lessons as you grow up. 

     Harry's adventures start right as he turns eleven, too old to be called a child and yet too young to be called an adult. His sudden wonder and amazement at being thrust into a new and magical world symbolizes the wonder that people can feel when they suddenly start to see things in a new light-as they think they are growing up-but they're still excited kids. He's filled with so many different awesome feelings as he has a new world to explore, very much so like a child, which kind of shows us that even when you start being "older", your journey can bring out the child in you.
     When Harry was a child, he was mistreated by his Aunt and Uncle, whom he lived with. He was able to stand strong through their repeated onslaughts of cruelty, yet is watched over carefully by someone who knows what's trulyt going on. When he moves to Hogwarts, things move parallely- and admittedly, he is loved there, but he is mistreated by some students and teachers, and when he discovers that he has enemies out in the world, his new life starts to parallel his childhood. He is constantly under siege from those who wish him ill, yet is still watched over by Albus Dumbledore, who knows exactly what is going on.
     [I'm not totally sure what else to write here, but I feel I'd have to call upon the childhoods of other characters to make a point about how their arcs turn out]

Dead Salesmen

CHARACTERS

Willy Loman: The titular salesman. He is losing his job, he is haunted by ghosts of his past, and everything seems to be going badly. He is an angry hypocrite with a heart of gold but not really.

Linda Loman: Willy's devoted wife. Extremely passive and takes all the abuse he doles out at her because she loves him. Willing to choose him over her sons. She has extreme emotional strength and suffers through Willy's ups and downs and delusions.

Biff Loman: The "favorite" son. He was the kid back in high school-handsome, popular, athletic star-but he used to steal, he was rough with the girls. He failed math and everything went downhill from there. Now 34, he is unable to accept his dreams of manual work out west, and comes back home to try to become a salesman to appease Willy.

Happy Loman: The "lesser" son. He has ruthless ambition and a ruthless sex drive, and you can tell that he may be going down the same path as Willy.

Charley: Willy's next door neighbor and kinda-friend. He is the exact opposite of Willy, both as a man and as a parent.

Bernard: Charley's son, and the antithesis of Biff. He ends up successful while Biff doesn't.

Howard: Willy's boss, the son of the man that first hired Willy. Treats Willy poorly and shows the contrast between how Willy used to imagine business and how it is now.

Ben: Willy's older brother who went off to Alaska/Africa in search of their father, and walked out rich. He symbolizes the success Willy wished he had.

The Woman: The woman Willy cheated on Linda with. Biff found them and that's what made their relationship spiral.

SETTING
The Loman's Brooklyn home which is now surrounded by apartments.

POINT OF VIEW

The play takes place from the points of view of both Willy and Biff. When it's focused on Willy, he often has flashbacks of painful memories of the past. When it's focused on Biff, it usually chronicle's his frustrations with Willy.

TONE

The tone is somewhat pessimistic- the past seems to always be better than the present, when things change they change for the worst, and everything that goes wrong is the fault of the main character.

SYMBOLS/MOTIFS/IMAGERY

The West/Alaska/Africa: These are places that represent success (or it's opposite)- the West for Biff and Alaska/Africa is failiure for Willy, because that's where Ben went and got rich and he didn't. Wide open spaces and hard manual labor oppose the city and the sales work.

Seeds: symbolize Willy's labor to put food on the table for his family, as well as his failure to grow and nurture Biff properly.

Stockings: Represent the weight on Willy's shoulders of his infidelity to Linda-he gave Linda's stockings to the Woman, and Biff called him out on it.

Rubber Hose: Symbolizes Willy's attempts at suicide.

SUMMARY

This play starts at the Loman home in the evening. Willy has come home, quite exhausted, and Linda gets out of bed to meet him. He says that he kept kind of zoning out while driving. Their sons, Biff and Happy are at home. They're worried about Willy talking to himself all the time. Happy sleeps with a lot of girls, even those who are taken. 

Willy has a flashback. Biff says that he "borrowed" a football from the locker room, and Bernard appears, entreating Biff to study for math, because he'll fail otherwise. Willy claims Bernard can be really smart but won't get anywhere because he isn't well liked, and they fall to harassing the poor kid. Willy and Linda talk about how much Willy made, and he starts out with a high amount, but slowly reveals a more realistic, truthful number. They talk about Charley and you can tell Willy is jealous. Linda tells him he is the handsomest man, and Willy starts to talk about how much he misses her when he's on the road, and suddenly The Woman's laughter is heard. 

He falls into a secondary daydream (inception!) and The Woman tells him about how she picked him because he is funny and sweet, she thanks Willy for giving her stockings, and Willy is back into his conversations with Linda, who is mending stockings-he doesn't want her to wear old stockings. Bernard comes back and begs Biff again to study math. Linda and Bernard reveal some truths about Biff that Willy doesn't want to hear and he shouts at them. 

We are back in the present and Willy is sad that he did not go to Alaska with Ben. Charley has heard Willy and comes over to play cards with him. Charley is concerned about Willy and offers him a job. Willy goes hypocritical crazy and defensive and affronts Charley. Ben appears as somewhat of a hallucination, and Willy begins to mix them up. 

Willy's shouting wakes everyone else. Linda tells the kids that Willy borrows $50 a week from Charley because he works on commission now and pretends it's his salary. She tells the boys they don't care for Willy, and talks about finding the rubber hose. Willy walks in on their arguement and Willy misunderstands Biff and gets mad. Happy says that Biff is going to ask Bill Oliver, a business man, for a loan, and they optimistically outline a proposal. They go to bed but Biff secretly removes the hose from the basement. 

Willy wakes up the next morning and Linda tells him that Biff and Happy will treat him to dinner that night. He leaves, happy and excited, to ask Howard if he can have a non-travel job, and gets angry at Linda for mending a stocking. Howard is playing around with a tape recorder. Willy begs Howard for a job, but is eventually told that he is to be fired. He tells many anecdotes, including the one about the salesman who inspired him, but to no avail. Howard leaves and Willy thinks of Ben. Ben asks willy to go to Alaska with him, but Linda insists he has a good job. They are off to Biff's big football game. 

A dejected Willy goes to Charley's office to borrow money. Bernard is off to a job at the Supreme Court. Charley tells Willy that he's wrong that the key to success was being well-liked. 

Dinner. Happy banters with Stanley, the waiter. He's flirting with a pretty girl there. Biff arrives and gets in a word edgewise to let Happy know that he waited 6 hours for Oliver but no avail. Happy gives Biff a good lie to remedy the situation to Willy, but Biff insists on telling the truth. Willy arrives and things go badly. They leave him blabbering in the bathroom. 

Willy has a flashback to when Biff found him and the Woman together. This is the moment where the close father/son pair was wrenched apart. It's notable that Biff was so upset that Willy gave The Woman Linda's stockings. Stanley gets Willy out of his funk and Willy says he needs to plant seeds. 

Biff and Happy return and Linda is pissed. Biff insists on talking to Willy. Willy is in the garden "talking" to Ben about a $20,000 proposition to Biff (life insurance) he makes many allusions to suicide. Ben warns that Biff will call him a coward and hate him. 

Biff tells Willy that he is leaving for good. Willy tells Biff he is throwing his life away out of spite. Biff eventually ends up crying, to Willy's shock, revealing that his son still loves him. Willy urges them all to go to bed. He tells Ben that Biff will definetley go far with $20,000 and they hear the car start and speed away and crash. 

There aren't many people at the funeral. Linda says that they were so close to paying all the bills. They were free.

Important Quotations

"I saw the things that I love in this world. The work and the food and the time to sit and smoke. And I looked at the pen and I thought, what the hell am I grabbing this for? Why am I trying to become what I don’t want to be . . . when all I want is out there, waiting for me the minute I say I know who I am."

This quote from Biff is significant because he's finally realized what he truly wants, and he is admitting to Willy that he is wrong. 

"He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine . . ."

This is a good description of Willy-he's going out there, hoping to be successful by being liked and looking good and kind. 

Theme
What you think is good for you may not be what makes you happy.




(Thanks to SparkNotes for the help!)

Response to Course Material

So the past few days in class, we've started reading Hamlet....which is really exciting to me because I love Shakespeare. So in celebration, I am going to write this post in Iambic Pentameter.

In class we have been reading on Hamlet,

a play in which a man does want revenge!

Our talks as groups do help although are long

The constant analyzing aids with my

understanding of the play in notes

and reading it aloud does make it good,

at least, more good to me than when we saw

a film adaption of the play in class,

for acting is a good way to discuss

events and deeper meanings in the work

....you get the point. I don't know how far I can go with that, but it sums it up, I like acting it out and discussing it the first time through, because watching the movie before we had any context didn't work for me and made annotating harder. 

Also, now I'm thinking in iambic pentameter. Thanks.

It reminds me of when we read MacBeth in Brit lit, and now I'm looking for elements of Shakespearean tragedy in Hamlet as well...the main one being that everyone dies at the end. Both are set in a royal family, and both have characters who are insufferable assholes. (sorry). It gets me thinking, though. 

Closed Prompt

http://badassdigest.com/2012/11/13/on-fake-geek-girls/

Recently, a comic artist named Tony Harris posted an extremely misogynistic post on his Facebook about how most girls who dress up in costumes for conventions are not attractive and not real "geeks", and therefore should stop dressing up and that "You have this really awful need for attention, for people to tell you your pretty, or Hot, and the thought of guys pleasuring themselves to the memory of you hanging on them with your glossy open lips, promising them the Moon and the Stars of pleasure, just makes your head vibrate."

This article is somewhat of a PSA to all those fired up about the Tony Harris scandal: appreciate the girls who are actually true "geeks", rather than worrying about all the girls that aren't. 

The author's diction tells us that he disagrees with Harris while still pointing out some valid points made in the rant. 

"Look, anybody who dresses up in a costume and goes to a convention is looking for attention. Let's not argue this point. I'm making a value-free statement here: if you show up at an event in a costume, you're not trying to melt into the crowd. The less you're wearing in that costume the less you're trying to be incognito. I think we can acknowledge this without being sexist or crass.

As for whether these cosplayers have knowledge of their costumes: impossible to say. Harris is painting with too broad of a brush here. I've met cosplayers who have no knowledge of their characters, and I've met cosplayers who are so precise in their knowledge they feel bad when they have a seam out of place. I know women cosplayers who dress up as characters so obscure I don't know who they are. I think it's weird when people try to hang out at enthusiast-based events without the enthusiasm, but that's not a gendered thing. That's a poseur thing."

Using casual, conversational, and non-commital words like "Look...let's not argue...I think we can acknowledge this without...impossible to say...that's not a gendered thing" effectively conveys the fact that he wants to be somewhat of a diplomat-he agrees with a few points of the "villain", but doesn't want to anger people, so placates them by discussing why said points can be valid. He drives home his point that the issue is more than meets the eye when he says "that's not a gendered thing", because he's expanding the scope of the article to a true "nerd community" problem (fake geeks), rather than a stereotyped subset (fake geek girls). 

He also effectively uses imagery to convey the ridiculousness of misogynistic men who "breeze past smart, engaged, passionate geek women because the dorky dudes didn't see the women as properly f*ckable." in this passage:

"Let's tell comic creators that we want female characters who are more than just excuses for cheesecake. That we want female comic characters who are rounded beyond their breasts and butts, who aren't spin-offs or namesakes or girlfriends of existing male heroes. And when comic creators provide these characters, support them with your dollars.

Make Real Geek Girls comfortable in our world by not being a bunch of sexist drooling pigs all the time. I can't even imagine being a woman at a con, where most of the women depicted in display art are highly sexualized at best, dehumanized and objectified at worst. I think the 'sexy' cosplayers add to the ugly anti-female atmosphere at cons...."

Using very specific image words like "rounded" regarding characters gives people the image of something being shaped, while conveying that this "shaping" is still a work in progress in best, and non-existent at worse. Calling certain men "sexist drooling pigs" definitely was written to give us an image-incompetent, leering men who see women as nothing but food, or "booty" (pardon the pun). Adding the word "dehumanized" before he says women are "objectified" sharply mixes with the image of men as pigs to create a notion that even those who have less than "human" behavior have the power to make someone innocent feel like the one who is truly less than a person. 

Though I personally don't agree with everything this author says about the "fake geek girl" debacle, I think it does a great job of conveying a diplomatic point while presenting readers with a view that is framed as "human". 

1988. Choose a distinguished novel or play in which some of the most significant events are mental or psychological; for example, awakenings, discoveries, changes in consciousness. In a well-organized essay, describe how the author manages to give these internal events the sense of excitement, suspense, and climax usually associated with external action. Do not merely summarize the plot.

     In the novel Sense and Sensibility, Jane Austen creates an engaging plot revolving around the social and love affairs of young women of the upper-middle class. The majority of the action isn't actually "action" in the sense of many novels- it all happens with the dialogue, thoughts, and relations between characters. Austen manages to make these as exciting as gunfights or car chases by making the characters relatable and exaggerating the action past what you would see in real life to make it seem more dramatic. 

     The way Austen makes characters more relatable is a key element in making the action exciting. Talking about two people who are suffering from heartbreak is somewhat boring, but feeling like you yourself are suffering makes you want to know how the pain will resolve and so you are more engaged in the action. Austen makes this possible by giving the characters traits that you can see in yourself (idealism, emotion, romantic vision, extreme judgement, a shoulder to lean on), and then gives each character a love interest that you may sympathize with or despise, giving you a reason to root for one or the other to succeed or fail in their courtships. 

     Another way Austen makes readers involved in the internal conflicts of the story is by making said conflicts somewhat dramatic. For example, there is the tale of Colonel Brandon, the 35 year old military man who falls in love with Marianne, the younger of the two sisters in the story. At first, you see his attentions to the 16 year old somewhat odd, but as his story unravels, you start to feel for him. It is filled with dramatic twists, the promising of his childhood love to his older brother, who then abused her and left her penniless with an illegitamate child, and as she died of tuberculosis in the slums, he promised to take care of her child and forever bear the heartbreak. As you find all these things out, you want to know what happens because the situation is so emotional but odd.

     Jane Austen successfully makes internal conflicts as interesting as external ones by making the characters relatable and the events dramatic. These techniques make the reader get involved with the characters and get them curious about the events, even though they all are just simple dialogues and relationships. 

(note: I do feel that this essay is somewhat short and my details could be more clear...also my conclusion sucks.)

Response to Course Material

In class, we have been reading and analyzing Death of a Salesman. Personally...I mean I can see why many people like it, and I can appreciate it...but I don't necessarily like it. The characters all annoy me- Linda is too passive, Willy is too hypocritical and blind, and Happy doesn't like to look at issues past the  surface. Biff is okay, but he can't redeem the whole play. When I was annotating it and thinking back to The American Dream, I found the symbolism more subtle, but I also felt that interpreting the whole story as an allegory for the American Dream in general was kind of a stretch. Internal issues tied together in beautiful circles, but I couldn't see how you could explicitly reach the conclusion that it meant something more externally, because I'm sure you could fit the ideas into multiple different puzzles to come up with different pictures. 

Da Amurrican Dreem

Summary: Mommy and Daddy are sitting in their living room, complaining about some late visitors, and how people can get away with doing anything that they want- they can be quick enough to want money, but slow enough if they have to work.

Mommy then talks about buying a hat, and makes Daddy pay attention. She talks about how she got her hat, met the chairwoman of the woman's club, who insisted that the hat wasn't the color that it actually was, and then promptly went to go exchange said hat...for the same hat...after throwing a huge tantrum. She talks about how people can't get satisfaction, and how she got her satisfaction.

Then Grandma enters with some nicely wrapped packages, and talks about how badly people talk to old people, and that's why they die. Mommy says Grandma has always wrapped things neatly, and then recounts how she never opened her lunchboxes at school and so always got it from the other children. They were poor. Now that she's married Daddy, she's happy, because she's rich and has the right to live off his money because she used to let him have sex with her. Grandma calls her essentially a skank and a gold-digger.

The doorbell rings, and Mommy and Daddy have that exchange that is very close to sex (you know which one I'm talking about). Mrs. Barker enters, and then there's a parody of a hospitality exchange. Mommy invites her to remove her dress, and Daddy "responds", which irritates Mommy.  Mrs. Barker asks if "their" visit has to do with the boxes.

Grandma says that that's not the reason, and Mommy gets irritated at her and the overcrowding of boxes, and tells Daddy to break her TV.

Mommy goes to get water for Mrs. Barker. Grandma tells Mrs. Barker the story of the people who were "quite like" everyone in the story, and the "bumble". (you can remember this story) After it died, the parents "wanted satisfaction" and called the agency back.

The doorbell rings again, and in walks the Young Man. He's very good looking, he is a "type". Grandma calls him "The American Dream". He says he'll do anything for money. He then recounts his version of his twin's mutilation and murder, and the figurative effects it has on him.

Grandma offers a solution to Mrs. Barker about Mommy and Daddy's problem, and essentially, they all get "what they think they want"...satisfaction. The Young Man stays behind with Mommy and Daddy.

Grandma says that she'll leave things while everyone has what they think they want, and the end.

Setting
The setting of the artificially lit apartment is significant because it symbolizes a closed off, fake world.

Characters
Grandma- She's the commentator of the play, and can symbolize the Old American Dream. She is represented as almost androgynous, and has more values and sense than the rest of the characters.

Mommy- a vapid, somewhat masculine, childish reversal of a "Mother" trope. She desires total control, and her life revolves around getting satisfaction and on material things.

Daddy- a weak, feminine reversal of a father character. He and Mommy represent how America is now, somewhat.

Mrs. Barker- a somewhat confused, naive representation of the American people, or perhaps an outsider who is trying to understand.

Young Man- the New American Dream- handsome, strong, can't see things with pity or love, he's just a shell-does anything for money.

Techniques and Theme

The theme is about how materialistic and immoral the "American Dream" has become.

Albee uses a lot of indirect characterization to show the characters of Mommy and Daddy, and how they're totally opposite from the typical American perfect family sterotype, and how stupid and materialistic they are.  Everything that happens is quite odd-but he makes the characters react to it normally, showing how different they are, kind of how insensate they are.

There's a lot of symbolism too. Grandma's neatly wrapped packages are the belongings and properties of the Old American Dream- but Mommy and Daddy only see the pretty wrapping. The mutilation of the bumble can symbolize how people will turn anything against it's own nature, break it, then complain when it doesn't work right anymore and demand a new one-while Grandma keeps and takes care of her old things, even if they're broken (like the blind Pekinese). Lots of allusion to sex and gender and emasculation, kind of gives you a perspective on gender roles and feminism.

Quotes
Young Man:"Oh, almost anything...almost anything that pays. I'll do anything for money." (p109)

Young Man:"...I have no talents at all, except what you see...my person; my body, my face. In every other way I am incomplete, and I must therefore...compensate.:

Mommy:"...Daddy has tubes now, where he used to have tracts!" (p90)

silly n00bs

http://www.destructoid.com/how-xbox-live-is-blatantly-better-than-psn-233346.phtml

Ah, how I love Jim Sterling. Seriously, if you're interested in some really good video game journalism/humor/satire/what have you, check him out.

Now, some background. XBOX Live and the Playstation Network are the online stores/services for their respective consoles. There's a rivalry here- it's widely accepted that PSN is better, due to it's free services, more perks, and they don't (pardon my language) dick thier customers over as much. However, they did get hacked that one time, which is huge fodder for the XBOX fanboys.

(note, I am a PSN member, so I may be slightly biased.)

Background part two: Games journalism is a lot different from "normal" journalism- they use a LOT of comedy techniques (hyperbole, disparagement, verbal irony, litotes, dramatic irony based on knowledge that is regarded as widely known in gamer circles, non-sequitur things, parodies, lots of sarcasm, and lots of wit), and that's regarded as normal.

Anyways, to our article!

It's essentially a satire on the crazy arguments XBL (XBOX Live) members use to prove that it's better than PSN. Even though, if taken literally, this article talks about how XBL is better than PSN, the point of the article is to prove the opposite.

First of all, this can be nearly indistinguishable from a serious article. Well, as serious as games journalism gets. This is a parody article, because it imitates the style and content of a serious comparison article, with the aim of ridiculing the topic.

I digress. Anyways, Mr. Sterling starts off this article with a typical "funny" opening, setting it up for a generic compare-and-contrast between two things article.

"Since medieval times, humanity has debated, argued, and sometimes even fought over the eternal question -- which company is better, Sony or Microsoft? Angry diatribes have been written and blood has been spilled, but neither man nor beast have found the answer.

However, each side can score points in less encompassing criteria, and it is on these smaller battlefields that the war is being waged in earnest. One of the greatest war zones, the realm of online services, is the most hard-fought, but it's clear who is winning -- Microsoft. Yes, Xbox Live is blatantly better than PlayStation 

To someone who has some knowledge of current-gen gaming systems, this presents a case of situational irony. We expect that someone knowledgeable enough to write an article knows that PSN is better than XBOX, so we laugh, because we didn't expect his final statement. 

His reasoning for XBL being better than PSN is a group of non-sequiturs, the first being 

"It's called the economy, dumbass! Look it up in a book sometime.

Paying for Xbox Live just proves it's better than the oafish PSN, which clearly has no respect for itself if it'll give us stuff without a charge. "

Yes, of course something is better just because we pay for it. This is an inference made that does not follow from the evidence. 

Another way he tries to "convince" us that XBOX is better is by sarcasm. 

"PSN got hacked once. Microsoft did not. Again, probably because we pay for Xbox Live, we can trust its security and know the service is able to afford a truly secure network that none of us ever need fear. To date, there have literally been NO reports (that I've seen) of anybody being harassed, attacked, conned, or otherwise inconvenienced by another person on Xbox Live (that I personally know)."

He expects that many people know that XBOX Live is a haven for immature people who constantly ridicule, attack, and harass others, making it a totally annoying, hurtful, and even unsafe environment for people to play in, and so his statement that it's nothing like that, he exaggerates the fact that it's what always happens, therefore solidifying why PSN is better. 

Just to keep this blog post short, I'll leave you with just one more example- I'm not sure entirely what to call this though. Hyperbole, colloquilaism, disparagement, etc?

"It's American

Unlike the PlayStation Network, Xbox Live is American, and as such it enjoys all the benefits that America has to offer. Xbox Live stands for freedom, a strong work ethic, democracy, God, eagles, Obama, and justice. Meanwhile, PSN is not American, and as such does not stand for freedom or any of the other things I can't be bothered to type out again. Also, it's probably racist a little bit.

Let us not forget that Japan started World War II by bombing a place once..."

At this point, I'm too entertained by this article to pick out all the different comedy techniques he uses, because it's such a complicated conglomeration, that I don't think I'd ever be able to really figure it out. 

Throughout the article, the voice and word choice he uses adds to the comedy. Using elevated language in some places, he makes things out to be more important than we know they are (see first excerpt), and in some places, he takes on the voices of various stereotypes (the true-blue American redneck, the ignorant fanboy) that most people generally see as idiotic and incorrect, to make us see his true point- this arguement is stupid, and PSN is obviously superior. 

2006, Form B. In many works of literature, a physical journey - the literal movement from one place to another - plays a central role. Choose a novel, play, or epic poem in which a physical journey is an important element and discuss how the journey adds to the meaning of the work as a whole. Avoid mere plot summary.

     In The Eye of the World by Robert Jordan, the characters have to undertake a journey from a small village to a large city, and from there, they go to a place in which the doings of the whole world are worked. This epic journey not only helps the characters grow, but symbolizes that growth itself.

     When our main characters, Rand, Mat, and Perrin, are introduced, they are mischievous farm boys, excited for a yearly festival. Rand's friends are teasing him about Egwene, the girl he's in love with, who, this year, is considered a woman. The village and the daily day to day workings of their lives symbolize simplicity. As they're getting ready for the long awaited festival, things are quite exciting, which foreshadows the excitement to come. 

     That night, after creatures that were originally thought to be fictional attacked the village and the outlying homes, Rand makes a journey back to the village and is greeted by total chaos. This is where things start. 

     Moraine, a mysterious lady in the village, has taken a liking to the three boys, and deems it imperative that they leave as soon as possible. Without explanation or trust, Rand must leave his now severely injured father to a yet unknown location. 

     This sudden shock that injures his father and leaves him in charge of what he has to do is the start of his journey, and him not knowing his destination symbolizes the uncertainty he has about his future. 

     As they flee, they are pursued daily by more and more enemies, and this makes their journey harder while hardening their resolve. Out of desperation, they take refuge in the ghost town of Shadar Logoth, where they are told not to touch anything or to take anything they are given by anyone. They explore the town, almost like the three boys they were before they started on their journey, and soon find a man offering them something if they'll help him. Totally disregarding all advice they were given before, they help the man, but quickly drop all the treasure he offers them once they realize he isn't actually a man, but an evil shapeshifter. 

     The characters being forced to take refuge in a place of darkness symbolizes the nature of their journey, as well as how their minds no longer have the lightness of before. 

Here, my time runs out. Hey, cut me some slack, it's homecoming weekend. 

I can tell that I need to work on remembering details, as well as pacing and balancing an essay with important details while not making the plot of the book I'm analyzing seem confusing, but at the same time, not being overbearing on the plot. I need elaborate on connections better, and well, just develop my memory. 

Responses to Course Material 2

(Okay, I know this was supposed to be posted by 10/7, I guess I never hit publish...)

     First of all, we did a lot of practicing with DIDLES. I found this kind of hard, because I'm not used to looking at how things are constructed really, but once I got into the groove, I found that I really enjoyed annotating things...I'm not weird, promise. Just knowing how DIDLES works actually started helping me with my writing in general, like my college essays. I now think through specifically what each word and sentence should evoke in the reader...and this somewhat makes me feel like I'm using psychological manipulation to get accepted into college. Well, I mean, I know I'm not...but you know what I mean. I hope.
     Then we reviewed literary movements, and I always have found the evolution of literature quite interesting. Each time we talked about a different era, I'd think about the books of that era and see what characteristics it had of that time, compared to the times before and after it. This discussion also made me realize how huge of a fan I am of postmodern methods of writing, because I find unconventional ways of telling stories and revealing information to have a huge impact on me. It's also interesting to see how the things that are going on in history affect how literature is written.
    Because we all suck and forgot to bring our copies of The American Dream to school, we got to read those actually really awesome sheets on comedy, and the theories of how comedy works. I found it interesting and now I'm too lazy to go get my papers to tell you exactly what it was that I found interesting, but it's something about how there are multiple different ways that something can be funny, and they all kind of intersect.

Too Much Edumacation

http://jezebel.com/5945524/iranian-women-banned-from-77-college-majors-because-they-were-getting-too-educated

Iranian Women Banned from 77 College Majors Because they were Getting too Educated
(obviously, this title is sarcastic, immediately setting the tone)

This article, in general, is from a feminist perspective (the website itself is news with a feminist perspective). 

Diction:

      "Alarmingly, the ban was only instituted last month; while no clear reason for the new restriction has been cited by the Iranian government, officials have been disturbed by the declining birth and marriage rates and attributed this change partially to the sea change in accessibility of women's education in the country."

    This paragraph shows clear bias against the Iranian government's policies restricting women's education, with such words as alarmingly, and disturbed, words that have connotations that emphasize the Iranian government's backwards notions about the progressive change in women's roles. 

     Later in the article, word choices such as doubly sh*tty and damn mystifying emphasize how confusing and backwards this decision is. 

Details:

     " Iran was one of the first Middle Eastern countries to give women access to university studies, and since 1979 has encouraged women to get a higher education. But it appears that officials think it's gone too far: as of 2001, women officially outnumbered men in the Iranian college student body for the first time, a statistic that's now up to 60% female. Another element of the decision came from the amount of women present at Tehran protests over Iran's tumultuous 2009 presidential election, as shown above (not to mention both candidates' vocal wives)."     

     As you can tell, the article uses a lot of specific details from recent Iranian history. This kind of shows the reader how the culture there has progressed in regards to women's equality, and how shocking it is that the government would actually curtail this kind of growth. It also talks about how strict they are politically, and if the rise of educated women gives them political voices that the government is opposed to, well, just take away their education!

Language:

     In general, the things the article says evoke a feeling of indignation. With such phrases as "This is doubly sh*tty because Iranian history actually shows a pretty good track record for women and education." and "As for the full list of actual majors off-limits to women, it's pretty damn mystifying. While some of them will lead to high-salaried careers that could make women veer off the married-with-kids track, others are... English literature."

     These sentences make you feel like saying "what the heck, Iran? What are you doing?", which, I assume, is probably the article's whole point. 

Open Prompt!

1983. From a novel or play of literary merit, select an important character who is a villain. Then, in a well-organized essay, analyze the nature of the character's villainy and show how it enhances meaning in the work. Do not merely summarize the plot.

               In The Lord of the Rings, there are many characters who could be considered villains, all of whom have different motivations for doing what they do. The most interesting, however, is the character of Gollum. Gollum is not a typical “I want power, let’s kill everyone!” kind of villain. He is sneaky but timid, and is willing to sacrifice all for a singular object that has consumed his mind. He is not inherently “bad”, so to speak, but he will do bad things to achieve his goals.

               Gollum was originally a simple minded creature, not much unlike a Hobbit. One day, when his name was still Smeagol, he was on a fishing trip with a close friend, Deagol, when Deagol happened to find the One Ring of Power at the sea floor. Almost immediately falling under its spell, Smeagol demanded it, because it was his birthday.  In a fit of anger after being denied, he strangled Deagol. Back at his village, after discovering the invisibility powers of the ring, he used it for thievery and mischief, and was soon banished, after being given the name “Gollum”. He fled to the Misty Mountains, where the ring took over his body and mind.

               Throughout the story, Gollum first follows, and then guides Frodo, for the sole reason that Frodo possesses his “precious”, or the One Ring. He is willing to betray Frodo and Sam (as he did, in Shelob, the giant spider’s lair) at a chance to get the ring, and at the very ending, when Frodo seems all consumed and puts on the ring, Gollum bites his finger off, clutching wildly at his prize, when he drops off into the lava, destroying himself and the ring, once and for all.

               Gollum’s so called villainy symbolizes both a warning to Frodo, as well as the ring itself. Gollum started out as a creature not unlike Frodo, and ended up so corrupted, so pitiful, but doesn’t even realize it, in the same way that Frodo doesn’t realize that the ring is doing the same thing to him. Gollum also symbolizes the ring itself- the way it follows its target, corrupts it against those it once knew (Frodo starts trusting Gollum more than the ever-faithful Sam), and slowly poisons their mind.  

So learning about the rhetorical situation and argument tips this week reminded me of when we had to write persuasive essays in Lit/Comp 9. I can't exactly remember what I wrote about, but I do kind of remember not learning about these things.I also remember that I got a B on that essay... so having a little checklist like the rhetorical situation Prezi gave us seems quite useful- subject, purpose, audience, persona. I noticed how this tied in quite nicely to the points on making a good argument, because to make a good argument (whether in an essay or even in real life), you must first consider all the points in the rhetorical situation before you can decide what combinations of arguing you want to use- pathos, ethos, and logos. I already knew that I use a lot of logos when I argue with people in general- I try to use facts to explain why they are wrong- but I didn't realize that I use pathos as well when things are getting hard, because if you think about it, appealing to someone's emotions is a very powerful way to make a point to them.

[note: I think this post is quite short. I'll edit it if I think of more ideas or examples.]

Sedaris talks Pretty

     "Me Talk Pretty One Day" by David Sedaris perfectly follows the guidelines laid out in Harvey's book The Nuts and Bolts of College Writing. Really, it does. Poring through the book to pinpoint flaws in the essay, I realized that Sedaris makes fantastic use of concision, punctuation, and writes great beginnings and endings, among many other things. 

    For one, Sedaris is pretty concise with his storytelling. From the get go, you don't see him beating around the bush about what's going on. Harvey says concision makes prose graceful, easy to read, but may be hard to write, as an author may thing they are stripping all the meat off their writing, just leaving some bones. That isn't the case whatsoever here. He starts paragraphs bluntly, almost like a mission statement of what he's going to talk about. "I’ve moved to Paris with hopes of learning the language.", or "The first day of class was nerve-racking because I knew I’d be expected to perform" (Sedaris). These statements, although frank, are clear and concise, flow well with the essay, and make room for the equally concise but incredibly entertaining anecdotes. 

     Harvey tells us that punctuation is one of the commandments of writing, it's purpose, to make sure readers understand what you're writing. Scouring "Me Talk Pretty One Day", you cannot find any fault in his punctuation, even in sentences that would be easy to mess up, such as "I absorbed as much of her abuse as I could understand, thinking – but not saying– that I find it ridiculous to assign a gender to an inanimate object which is incapable of disrobing and making an occasional fool of itself" (Sedaris). Most people would have messed this sentence up somehow, by adding an extra comma, or getting rid of the dashes...but the way Sedaris does it, it reads smoothly in your head.
     The beginning and ending to this essay serve their purpose, or at least, Harvey would think that they would. He says that the beginning should grab a reader's attention and set them up, while and ending should make them feel like they read something worthwhile. At the beginning, he talks about how he's going back to school at age forty one. My first reaction was "wait, why?", so I kept on reading. He ends the first paragraph with a sentence that's unrelated to the rest of the essay, but kind of sets the humorous tone for the rest of the essay ("...billboards picturing a cartoon stegosaurus sitting in a canoe and eating what appears to be a ham sandwich." (Sedaris)), which made me want to see more of that. The essay ends with him wrapping up an anecdote, so it doesn't have the typical "in conclusion..." feel, but he does sum up the point of his essay before it ends by saying "Understanding doesn’t mean that you can suddenly speak the language. Far from
it. It’s a small step, nothing more, yet its rewards are intoxicating and deceptive" (Sedaris).
    With his use of concision, proper punctuation, and a good beginning and ending, Sedaris perfectly exemplifies what Harvey wants from an essay. He doesn't have to talk pretty some day, because he already does. 

Poetry Study Goals

-Read more carefully and come to at least a basic understanding before I start answering questions
-Learn about poetry structure/kinds of poetry
-Brush up on literary devices
-Be able to pull the message out of the poem faster.
-Pinpoint tone better

Diagnostic Test

Although I am loath to admit it...I did pretty poorly on this diagnostic. Maybe it was because I'm sitting at my laptop in a totally different country trying to consume some pretty odd tasting oatmeal, or maybe it's just that I don't have my head back in the English game. Whatever it is, I'm not totally happy. Going through my results, I start to see what I did wrong. For one, I have no idea what the different forms of poetry are. Secondly, I don't think I read the answers properly, because for a couple of those, I swear I would have gotten them right if they looked like that the first time...sigh. To my embarrassment and horror, I notice a large chunk of my wrong answers are in the Pride and Prejudice section, which happens to be a book I've read a bazillion times. The next chunk of wrong answers come in the last section, which I'll admit, I didn't read properly and I kinda fudged the answers.

Conclusion: If I read the questions and passages better and brush up on more basic literary things...I'll probably be a bit more set than I am now.