Acquainted with the Night

Acquainted with the Night
Robert Frost
(1874-1963)

I have been one acquainted with the night.
I have walked out in rain – and back in rain.
I have outwalked the furthest city light.

I have looked down the saddest city lane.
I have passed by the watchman on his beat
And dropped my eyes, unwilling to explain.

I have stood still and stopped the sound of feet
When far away an interrupted cry
Came over houses from another street,

But not to call me back or say good-by;
And further still at an unearthly height
One luminary clock against the sky

Proclaimed the time was neither wrong nor right.
I have been one acquainted with the night.



There are many things about this poem that stand out to me. The first is that it has a rhyme sequence, as many of the poems in these packets do not. It uses repetition of the idea of being acquainted with the night. On a literal sense, Frost could be saying that he is frequently alone walking at night, and cannot explain why, for it serves as a way for him to gather thoughts up alone without having to be called back to a house (houses from another street). However, the night could refer to a confusion, a period in his life in which he was in the dark- which could be explained by the line "proclaimed the time was neither wrong nor right", as though it really was not a definite time for him to be able to make any sort of actions- Also the line "I dropped my eyes, unwilling to explain"- unwilling to explain the point in life he was at, and the lost feeling he had, along with the inability to know which way to go next.

poetry response

A Work of Artifice

Marge Piercy
(b. 1936)

The bonsai tree
in the attractive pot
could have grown eighty feet tall
on the side of a mountain
till split by lightning.
But a gardener
carefully pruned it.
It is nine inches high.
Every day as he
whittles back the branches
the gardener croons,
It is your nature
to be small and cozy,
domestic and weak;
how lucky, little tree,
to have a pot to grow in.
With living creatures
one must begin very early
to dwarf their growth:
the bound feet,
the crippled brain,
the hair in curlers
the hands you
love to touch.



There are a lot of directions that this poem could go in... primarily having to do with the fact that the tree has been altered from the beginning. In a physical sense, it speaks to the physical alteration of things from an early age- chinese women used to bind their feet at a young age so that they would never grow and therefore they would be hobbled for life with small and dainty feet. The tree must be cared for from a very young age in order to keep it dwarfed and small- but it goes beyond this. The crippled brain- if one is brought up in a family that imposes very hateful ideas, the person will grow up with these ideas. If a person grows up in a family imposing very loving ideas, the person will generally have these ideas. One must start at an early age to alter something or cripple something. I don't understand the last line- "the hands you love to touch".

END OF BOOK

The end of the book brings with it Robert!!! However, the happy profession of love soon turns ugly. As we know, the book ends in Edna's death. It can be disputed whether she killed herself or whether she let herself die... I would say the latter, because it goes with the symbolism that is through out the book. The whole idea of swimming out further than one can recover is a common theme, because in the end, Edna swam out further than she could recover, both literally and figuratively. In her life, she was trying to free herself, but she overdid it, went a little bit crazy, and ended up forgetting the responsibilities- essentially her children- that bound her to the life she had. Therefore she lost control of it, because she realized why she could never be with Robert, and though she may not understand completely why Robert left, she understood that it couldn't happen while she still had other responsibilities. She had swum out too far, and there was no way to recover. Thus, she drowned.

25-30

This is the part that covers Edna's affair with Arobin. It is interesting to me that she can go from disliking him to having an affair with him, though such actions are not unheard of. This accentuates her real intent behind the affair, which was in fact not affections for Arobin but instead a desire to be independent and to fulfill physical desires just like she knew that men in the culture were allowed to do. It is all about the rebellion.

The other part that gets me is that she is afraid that she is being un chaste- but it is Robert that she is thinking of, not her husband. This shows that she is already independent from him in thought, but dependent, instead on someone else.

The Awakening, Chapters 20-24

This is when Leónce gets suspicious.

Ok not suspicious, just concerned- he doesn't actually suspect that Edna has any feelings for anyone, he is simply wondering why she is not acting "herself". In fact, he is wondering this so much that he pays a visit to the doctor to ask and see if there is an explanation. This strikes me as a demonstration of caring toward her, as he is honestly concerned about her health. The doctor knows about this "women trying to be independent" thing and says that it will simply pass over. They then have a laugh about it. The doctor tells Leónce to just leave her alone a while and let her be, and she will be fine. Whether or not that was good advice is to come..

The Awakening 15-19

These are the chapters in which Robert leaves for Mexico. Though Edna knows that she has special feelings for Robert, this is the part in which she truly realizes it and it begins to cause her to look at life very differently. Primarily, she is extremely dejected at Robert's absence and tries to talk about him as much as she possibly can. She is angered at his lack of correspondence to her, but continues to visit his mother and question her husband about his having seen Robert. As the chapters go on, however, she gets increasingly independent. She tells Adéle that she would not sacrifice herself for her children, but she would her life. This is a very interesting statement that Adéle can't seem to grasp- but Edna basically sees harm in the idea of letting something take over ones self that they change their entire being and life to revolve around a certain thing- such as their children. Edna however is getting back into touch with her interests that she had lost in the process of being a wife, because she had never really realized that the loss of herself had happened.

The Awakening 9-14

This is the ocean part where Edna tries to swim away. We talked a lot about this in class... how her feeling of empowerment is projected through the water. It is a huge metaphor, as she previously was not able to swim on her own, just as in her life she felt that she had to get married and be a good wife in order to live as part of the society. However when she gets into the water she has a feeling of empowerment, and suddenly she becomes extremely independent and wants to swim out by herself. She is pushing herself out of her comfort zone, both in life and in the water, and though she likes it, it frightens her at the same time. She gets literally frightened in the water, and in her life, she can never figure out her own thoughts and what is going on with her own emotions. This frightens her in a more figurative sense.

LIIII POOOOO

Beginning Again

“If I could stop talking, completely
cease talking for a year, I might begin
to get well,” he muttered.
Off alone again performing
brain surgery on himself
in a small badly lit
room with no mirror. A room
whose floor ceiling and walls
are all mirrors, what a mess
oh my God—

And still
it stands,
the question
not how begin
again, but rather

Why?

So we sit there
together
the mountain
and me, Li Po
said, until only the mountain
remains.

—Franz Wright


I don't particularly understand this poem, but I believe it shows a level of introspection. Li Po was a chinese poet, so the narrator is indeed alone- which brings more light to the poem- this person is talking about how go in and go out, the actions that he does do not affect the mountain- though change is all around us, some things appear to remain constant. He performs brain surgery on himself, trying to change himself. It is a mess. There is a mess when he is alone. If he stops talking, he is trying to keep a constant- as speech- action- is change. However he can not prevent that so he is performing brain surgery. Not literally, of course, but forcing himself to be what he can't by changing his mannerism and be silent to try to "heal". This is the metaphorical brain surgery. I am not sure how exactly the poet plays in, but the mountain remaining symbolizes constance.

The Awakening 5-9

I am interested by the confrontation between Robert and Adéle. It confused me in part because I had the understanding that people in creole society would not suspect that Robert would have any sort of intentions, and that a woman would not respond or take any intentions seriously, because the woman in question is married. I would have thought that Adéle would not pick up on this, and it surprised me that she had. Robert's reaction was fitting, as it angers him a little bit. However it almost seems like he was angered for the wrong reasons- instead of being angry at someone suspecting his intentions, he seemed angry at the idea of her taking him seriously, or the idea of her NOT taking him seriously- he seemed angry at the concept of whether it should matter or not. Of course it is possible that he was not angry and was just putting on a front, but the front he would put on doesn't seem like it would be that one. It is also odd that Adéle talks to Robert instead of just telling Edna not to take him seriously. How bizarre.

The Awakening 1-4

This culture pisses. me. off.
O.K, I understand that it was the culture. But seriously, folks. How could it have never even crossed their minds that a woman is NOT in fact utterly devoted to her husband any more than her husband is utterly devoted to her? That she doesn't need to sit around all day and knit or chase after children? Or that if her husband has affairs, she is damn well allowed to, too?

Oh well. I must move past this.
I like Edna, although in the first four chapters she is not as dynamic a character as I would have hoped. She is in fact rather passive, as she doesn't address any of this oddity that she finds in creole life to anyone, but instead sits back and thinks about it. The crying scene shows the extent of that, although it is in fact probably her realization that something is wrong and that she can not be happy in a life like this. It is interesting how she has been dealing with it for so long. It is also interesting that she finds the culture with a lack of prudishness- they will talk about anything, just not do it.

Fear

My Fear

He follows us, he keeps track.
Each day his lists are longer.
Here, death, and here,
something like it.

Mr. Fear, we say in our dreams,
what do you have for me tonight?
And he looks through his sack,
his black sack of troubles.

Maybe he smiles when he finds
the right one. Maybe he’s sorry.
Tell me, Mr. Fear,
what must I carry

away from your dream.
Make it small, please.
Let it fit in my pocket,
let it fall through

the hole in my pocket.
Fear, let me have
a small brown bat
and a purse of crickets

like the ones I heard
singing last night
out there in the stubbly field
before I slept, and met you.

—Lawrence Raab



This addresses the nagging aspect that fear gives. He follows us... fear follows a person and indeed keeps track. People gain more fears as their lives go on (though they may lose some, they tend to gain more). More bad things happen to people as their lives go on and that develops more fears. The black sack of troubles is simply a metaphor for the cloud of fear and dread that hangs over a person. The person is willing fear to keep the fears small- keep it something that can fall through the hole in his pocket, something that he can lose easily and overcome. The other interesting part is the last line, which says "before I slept and met you". This says that he met fear in his dreams- therefore the fears that he has are not concrete, they are abstract fears, which is why Fear can not make it small enough to fit in his pocket- abstract fears are not small. Instead Fear must carry around the black bag; to fit the abstract fears.

Last Words

The exchange with the fiancee struck me. She is very much deceived into thinking that she knew Mr. Kurtz, not only very well, but in fact the only person that knew his true nature. Marlow feels very awkward in this scene because he doesn't want to tell the mourning fiancee that this was not true... it isn't exactly the right thing to tell someone who is mourning- however, he felt torn because she was terribly misinformed. She had no idea of the atrocities that Kurtz committed and his spiral downward into the darkness. I still haven't decided if it was ok that Marlow lied to her about Kurtz's last words... because yes, it calms her mind to make her believe that his last words were her name, because there is no use in upsetting her any further... but I am not sure if it is right to try to cover up what he did and pretend that it never happened.

Heart of Darkness

The theme of restraint comes up again in this section. However, it is used in reference to Kurtz, when he has the human heads on posts. The passage is "This only showed that Mr. Kurtz lacked restraint in the gratification of his various lusts, that there was something wanting in him- some small matter which, when the pressing need arose, could not be found under his magnificent eloquence."

This is one of the most prominent sections that reflects the savagery of the journey and the depth of the darkness that has taken Kurtz over. In Europe something like this would be seen as very horrible and under normal circumstances almost no human being would do this, but the darknes has overtaken Kurtz to the degree that he turns to the savagery of putting human heads on his posts. The worst part is that the heads are turned to him- demonstrative of his thirst for power and need to be in charge. He is worshipped as a God, and this power mixed with this darkness has taken hum over and made him do things that he would never do in a controlled society. Also, because he is not immune to the darkness like the natives, it has an extreme effect on him which is how this happens.

Restraint

The idea of restraint comes up a lot in this section. For example, at the beginning Marlow mentions that the cannibals are on board, but they did not eat each other in front of anyone. (or at all, in fact). As we talked about in class, it wasn't really a logical reason that they didn't eat anyone; it was simply a moral restriction and restraint.
Also, as we talked about in class, there is a scene in which the steamboat passes screaming natives in the dark and fog. (The white mist, in fact, which is an interesting twist of symbols) The people that show the restraint in this scene are not the "civilized folk" but instead the cannibals. They are the ones that keep pushing the boat through and keep everyone moving forward as the Europeans are afraid. It is ironic that their goal is to "tame the savages" but the "savages" show more restraint and civility than the Europeans in times of trouble.

Ownership of Darkness

In the beginning of section 2, there is a quote that goes "When you have to attend to things of that sort, to the mere incidents of the surface, the reality- the reality , I tell you- fades. The inner truth is hidden- luckily, luckily."
This theme of avoiding reality comes up many times in this section. It ties a little bit into the conversation with the aunt, and the "beautiful world of women" because they supposedly can not face "men's reality". However this begins to get tied in with the idea of the darkness- one must retreat from the reality or else he will be consumed by the darkness and will be driven wild and crazy like the darkness itself. In class we also talked a little about Kurtz's reality- how he claims ownership of everything when in fact the darkness owns him. If one doesn't retreat to his or her own false world- the beautiful world that women see, or something similar- the darkness will own him.

uncouth rivets!

There is a passage about rivets on page 30. Marow is talking to the foreman (the boiler maker) about how they shall have rivets. The foreman expresses disbelief... and then Marlow says "instead of rivets there came an invasion, an infection, a visitation." He then describes the invasion in somewhat of a pretentious way; talking about the appearances of the people. Using the word "invasion" is comparing the native to animals yet again. " four such installments came, with their absurd air of disorderly flight" is speaking to yet again the idea of colonization. Marlow is repeatedly reinforcing the idea of the natives being uncouth and untamed- they are disorderly and uneducated, which is why he is repeatedly comparing them to animals. Though the deal with the rivets began several pages earlier, it can also be used to instill the sense of un-civilization- the lack of something as mundane and commonplace as a rivet can be a lack of "civilization" in a way.

Marlow's Aunt

Hopefully it is kosher to write about the section that I talked about in class, because that is what I am about to do (if it isn't then just tell me and I will post on something different)

When Marlow sees his aunt, they begin talking about the his trip to Africa. She is convinced that what he is about to do is very noble- at one point she mentions 'weaning those ignorant millions from their horrid ways" This leads Marlow to make the statement about how Women are off in their own little beautiful worlds, and that everything is right and wonderful in the worlds of women. (It's queer how out of touch with truth women are. They live in a world of their own), Though this is obviously says a lot about the views of women, it also brings the idea of darkness back up. The word "beautiful" is repeated several times, emphasizing the perfection of the "woman's" world. This in turn brings out the imperfections and "darkness" of the "real" world. Yet another chance for Joseph Conrad to isolate the "darkness" of the world. He also talks about how his aunt sees him as the emissary of light... (this goes back with the idea of conquering the "horrid ways" and he is bringing the light of colonialism to the dark and unrefined world of the natives.

Evening Concert, Saint Chapelle

Evening Concert, Saint-Chapelle

The celebrated windows flamed with light
directly pouring north across the Seine;
we rustled into place. Then violins
vaunting Vivaldi’s strident strength, then Brahms,
seemed to suck with their passionate sweetness,
bit by bit, the vigor from the red,
the blazing blue, so that the listening eye
saw suddenly the thick black lines, in shapes
of shield and cross and strut and brace, that held
the holy glowing fantasy together.
The music surged; the glow became a milk,
a whisper to the eye, a glimmer ebbed
until our beating hearts, our violins
were cased in thin but solid sheets of lead.

—John Updike

This poem, to me, speaks about the power that music has. I personally have an intense emotional response to music, and the poem illustrates that for me. It tends to bring up not only very vivid emotions but also images. I believe the poem speaks to this emotional response that music brings, and the images. The line " so that the listening eye
saw suddenly the thick black lines, in shapes
of shield and cross and strut and brace, that held
the holy glowing fantasy together."

The idea of "the listening eye" is what jumps out at me the most, because it is true that one listens to music with much more than just the ear. Music creates a picture in the brain that the eye can see- the picture can even be put onto paper. Sometimes in middle or elementary school children will be asked to draw what the music makes them feel- to draw the image that the music captures. The poem was most likely written after a particular powerful concert, and Updike felt moved to not only see an image but also write a poem about it. The poem in a way creates the same musicality as music itself: the sentences ebb and flow, strong words and statements are sprinkled through-out. The poem embodies the mind of a music enthusiast.

Eveline

Eveline is a story about a girl who is on her way to be married, but suddenly realizes that it is not what she really wants.

level one: Where are Frank and Eveline supposed to go live?
level two: does Eveline ever truly want to marry Frank?
level three: How does this story represent the human complex of desiring what one can't have, and then when one gets it, they don't really want it anymore?

Though the story was, in tandem with usual James Joyce style, confusing, I enjoyed it. Plot-wise, I completely saw the end coming. I knew that she was going to end up not being able to go with him, because the voice Joyce had written with describing her feelings for him was not particularly encouraging. I didn't, however, get much out of it on a level that went beyond the plot and an analyzation of Eveline's character. She obviously has no idea what she wants, which could reflect Joyce's perception of society or even himself. I caught a reference to a yellowing picture of a priest, which could carry the whole "death of church" trend. However the story was for the most part somewhat unclear.

Araby

Araby is a story about a boy who is madly in love with the sister of his best friend.

Level 1- Why does the boy go to the bazaar?
level 2- What does the dying priest represent?
level 3- What do you feel about Joyce's stance on the death of the Catholic church?

Araby was somewhat difficult to get through because though it wasn't enjoyable, it didn't have a surface point. Obviously Joyce was directing it to something deeper; the death of the catholic church, the growing materialism in the world. He is getting at a social commentary about Dublin. However, Joyce's handcrafted work needs much interpreting to make sense as being anything past the surface level. Though I got the Chalice reference and the dead-end reference out of it, the idea of the church did not really seem to fit in. The dying priest, though he played a part in the story, did not play a part in the plot. It read almost as if it were thrown in there to try to create the reference to the church offhandedly. However, as the story goes on to talk about the tree, and the saintliness of the girl, etc, the reference to the church begins to make sense.

The Misfit

The Misfit is a story about a family that has a confrontation with a murderer, and a woman's misplaced attempts to try and make the man see truth.

level one: What was the misfit originally convicted of?
level two: Why is the grandmother suddenly trying to convert the misfit?
level three: Why does an obsession with religious conversion always end badly?

This story was really bizarre. However I enjoyed it, even though technically it had a sad ending. The grandmother was a complete nutter. Just like the last story, I feel like there is a decent amount of the beginning of the story that is either unnecessary or not written extremely well. However as a whole I felt like the rocking horse winner was written better stylistically, because it tended to flow a little better.

It is interesting to me how people can be talked to about practically anything except religion. Once someone begins to talk about Jesus or God people just tend to shut down. I think the story is very explicit with that- not only are the characters in the story frustrated with the Grandmother (such as the misfit), but as a reader one kind of just wants her to be quiet. It is interesting how the grandmother chooses this in her desperation as opposed to just simply begging the misfit not to shoot her.

Rocking Horse Winner

The rocking horse winner is a story about a boy who is born to "unlucky" parents, and determined to be "lucky", is able to determine the winner of a future horse race if he rides his rocking horse to the finish.

1) What does the boy ride?
2) Why does the boy finally die? Is he lucky or unlucky?
3) What does it mean to be lucky? Why is it important that "luck" extends beyond wealth?


The Rocking Horse Winner has a theme of luck and one's drive for wealth. The boy, who claims to be lucky, comes from a family of people that claim to be unlucky. The theme of the story is essentially the drive to be wealthy. The boy confuses luck with wealth... and the mom's description of the fact that "luck" is what brings you wealth is to blame. The boy was brought up in a family without love- his mother didn't love him, and he knew this. The family was also brought up without money, so the boy felt that if he were lucky enough to bring in wealth, the family would be saved. However his drive for luck got mixed up with his drive for wealth- one can't make himself lucky, but one can make himself wealthy. He essentially drove away his entire family when he was on his rocking horse trying to see the finish- but he totally neglected that there is a lot more that his family needed then just money. Therefore in the end he was not lucky, but unlucky, for he was only looking for the finish.

1943

1943

They toughened us for war. In the high-school auditorium
Ed Monahan knocked out Dominick Esposito in the first round

of the heavyweight finals, and ten months later Dom died
in the third wave at Tarawa. Every morning of the war

our Brock-Hall Dairy delivered milk from horse-drawn wagons
to wooden back porches in southern Connecticut. In winter,

frozen cream lifted the cardboard lids of glass bottles,
Grade A or Grade B, while marines bled to death in the surf,

or the right engine faltered into Channel silt, or troops marched
—what could we do?—with frostbitten feet as white as milk.

—Donald Hall


This poem strikes me in several different ways. Primarily, I was drawn to it because 1943 refers to World War II, one of the most fascinating historical eras (in my opinion). The poem however hardly even speaks of the war, but instead of the daily life with an undermining tone of war. It, in a way, reflects war- when one is not actively fighting or in some other way involved in it, the day to day life can seem unchanged on the surface- but it isn't. War effects everything- especially a war to the degree of WWII. The author first speaks of becoming prepared, "toughened up" for war. However, the person being "toughened up" for war died ten months later. It is a difficult concept; to be "toughened up" for death. There is a melancholy to this segment, because that is indeed what has happened.The melancholy undertone continues as the writer talks about the milk, which is a mundane, daily task that is somehow still effected by the poison of the war. Finally, the poem ends talking about the war again, bringing what has been an undertone to the whole poem to the surface- "what can we do?"

The Lesson

The Lesson is a story about a girl who has grown up in a bad part of town and her reaction to a woman's attempt to show her and her friends that there is more to the world.

level one: What is the name of the main characters best friend?
level two: What is Miss Moore trying to teach the children?
level three: What is the significance of education to get rid of poverty? Is it effective?

The theme of this story is essentially the response that the characters have to an attempt to educate them about getting a better life for themselves.
I believe it is significant to educate to get rid of poverty, but the truth is, and the story shows, that it is extremely difficult. As shown in the story, the kids are very happy when they don't realize what they are "missing out" on. When we read Nickel and Dimed last summer, I remember that when Eihnreich (I am not sure how to spell her name) tried to talk to the other maids (when she worked in a maid service) about what she was trying to accomplish by writing the book, many of them were simply disinterested. However, the other thing that many people have to realize is that although being in poverty certainly isn't a good thing, what is important is being happy- and money certainly doesn't mean that (ok it's a little cliche but still far too many people fail to see it). Sometimes the people without all the money and the "things" are the people that need to be teaching the lesson to the people that do have everything- because people tend to put way to much value on their material possessions, and their money. Not only does having money not mean everything.... it hardly really means anything. Not that education isn't a great thing... of course the kids should be educated, and of course they should know what is out there beyond what they know- but it should be recognized that people can be happy in all walks of life if they learn to put less worth on their money and more worth on more important things.

I Stand Here Ironing

"I Stand Here Ironing" is a story about the daughter of the narrator; her life as she grew.

What is the daughter's name?
Why did the mother emphasize how much she nursed Emily?
What is the effect of a father leaving have on a child?

Though I am not a mother, and don't plan to be for quite a while, I felt a connection with the mom. Simply because the story is so well-written; but it really allows you to understand the love that the mother has for her child. However it struck me as odd how she compared Emily to the other children- and she didn't even list many of the other childrens' names. It was as though Emily was the only one that truly mattered to her, and she felt in some ways as though she had failed Emily because of how melancholy she always was. The comedy is the fascinating aspect, to the mother. "How did she get that comedy?" is kind of the repeated theme and question for the piece. Her mother is convinced that it was obviously not from her own childhood. However I believe that in some ways, one can receive comedy from less than pleasant experiences. Like a coping mechanism, in a way... comedy could be a way for her to escape from it. Though at the same time, her childhood didn't sound too terribly painful... her mother was loving. So her comedy could have come from this.

Why does joe want this?

Joe wants more than anything to die, because he wants to end this state of almost-death that he is in. He is unable to speak, see, hear, has no arms or legs, and so he is essentially unable to communicate or establish a connection with a human being ever again. He feels that he is as close to death as possible without being dead, because he is essentially dead but aware of it. However, he realizes that he is a one in a million that survives; most people that suffer the kind of injuries or even things less severe than him will die, and he feels as if instead of winning he is the one that has lost, because being in this state of conscious death is much worse than just being dead (although he does say for a passage that there is no abstract cause worth dying for). He didn't think he could ever win a one in a million draw, and everyone thought that he had won versus everyone else because he was the one that got to keep his life, but he sees it as a loss because he must suffer with this for eternity... or at least as long as his natural life lasts.

How injured is Joe?

Joe is seriously injured. He finds out progressively through the first part that he is deaf, then he is missing his arms, then his legs, then he is blind and has no face. He essentially has no ability to do anything, communicate, or express his thoughts in any way. However, he is not paralyzed, and his mind is completely intact, which is the worst torture of all. All he has is his mind and his consciousness and therefore that is how the entire book is narrated. It would be extremely frustrating... maddening in fact, to be able to be perfectly conscious and be unable to express anything whatsoever. One of his greatest desires is to die because he doesn't want to have to put up with this, and therefore he realizes that death for a cause isn't worth anything because he is the closest to death that is possible without actually being dead, so essentially he is aware of his "death" as opposed to someone who is actually dead who is presumably unaware of this, and from that standpoint he says that a person should always preserve their life.

Gender roles in once upon a mattress

As someone who spent a lot of time with this show, I had a lot of time to think about the gender roles. In a way it tries to defy them, but in defying them it still defines what they are. Dauntless and Winnifred are opposite roles in the sense that Dauntless is submissive and Winnifred is very strong and powerful. She even takes on a boy's name; "Fred" to show her manliness. Dauntless is ruled over by his mother. Queen Aggravain also has some distinct "gender personality". Women are often stereotyped as being overly talkative and annoying, and Aggravain certainly follows this. King Sextimus is, though very nice, afflicted with loose morals, chasing girls constantly. This also follows a stereotype; that women act like they don't want to be pursued when they really do, that it is ok to "trap" them (as the jester says "I will set a trap tomorrow". However, the musical mocks this stereotype more than following it, as it makes it extremely humorous. Lady Larkin's conversation with Winnifred struck me as interesting as well, because not only does Winnifred tell Larkin to apologize to Harry (Harry is the one that should apologize for blaming Larkin for mistaking the princess for a chambermaid), But she also tells Larkin not to act "too strong" because men like "weak women". This is very counter intuitive for Fred to say, as she is the ultimate "tomboy". I find it very interesting that Fred doesn't practice what she preaches, though its possible that she just knows Harry's personality and that he is extremely pompous and somewhat stuck up.

Finally, the song "Happily Ever After" covers the whole fairy tale stereotype, as there is one line that Fred sings in which she talks about how the "princess is always a bride" or something. She sings about how when she is married she will be happily ever after too, but she makes fun of this idea a little bit as well, even though it is obvious that though she is not the "typical" princess, she still wants the same thing that "typical" princess want.

marriage

I believe that he defines marriage in this way before starting the article because many people have different ideas of what the institution of marriage means. Therefore, when he puts his definition, and the legal and religious definition, it gives everyone a level idea of what marriage. Though the definition provides good backing to the argument, it does neglect to cover the religious aspect of the institution of marriage. Many people could argue that it is slanted, just in the fact that it is so incredibly un-slanted. Though i personally agree with him, i can see how many people could say that he is not sensitive to the religious institution of marriage, and that the word "marriage" indicates a man and a woman, though the usage of the word "civil union" or something would guarantee the same rights. It really just comes down to the linguistics; whether people want to use the same word or not.

Airplanes

The comparison of a single parent household to a plane that does not always reach its destination is a creative metaphor, and the incentive behind it is very clear. Two parent households are usually more stable and secure than a one parent household, and therefore the child is, indeed, more likely to grow up safe and sound. However, though the metaphor is accurate on the surface, it is very shallow. There are many many more factors that go into the success of a child than just whether it is being brought up by a single parent or by multiple parents. Some of them can be linked to the status of the parents, but some of them aren't. Obviously the emotional and economic stability of the parent is usually more balanced when it is a married couple. This would be the factor that would create problems for the single parent. On the other hand, a single parent can certainly be just as supportive and loving as a child than a married couple can be... in some ways, more so, because many married couples that stay married simply for the sake of their kid can cause a large amount of tension in the family. Though this metaphor to a plane seems shallow and in some ways insensitive, it is acceptable until he begins to equate gay couples to this template. Gay couples can be just as emotionally stable, financially stable, and loving of a child just as a straight married couple can be. The reason single parents sometimes are less able to raise a child usually has to do with the stress caused by divorce or being a single parent, along with the financial strain that comes with not having a spouse to help support a child. However, a homosexual couple would not have these problems any more than a heterosexual couple would. In fact, the only real difference a homosexual couple would face would be homophobic adults and children harassing their lifestyle. This could create problems, but that is not at the fault of the parents.

Homophobia

I believe Vázquez waits to disclose the fact that the victims of the anti gay violence are, in fact, straight to make the reader realize that the crimes are committed against people that don't have the trait that the crimes are being committed against them for. It puts everyone on a level playing field... whether you are gay or not, you can be a victim of anti-gay violence, if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time. It also makes the reader realize that there really isn't much of a difference between people who are gay and people who are not... I believe that because it is still a very controversial subject that a lot of people are not well acquainted with, the choice to tell the reader that the victim was not gay adds an extra shock factor to someone who may not know what their beliefs around homosexuality stands, and will give an extra push in the argument against gay violence because people who are heterosexual and possibly uneducated about the whole issue will be able to relate to the victims even more and therefore adds to Vázquez's argument.

we're men (MANLY MEN!) we're men in tights...

I do not agree that manly and sensitive are opposite- I think they can not only be compatible but they are often complimentary. There are plenty of men that can fit the definition of manliness... assertive, strong physically and mentally, and who has a drive to get things done, but they can still be kind and willing to connect on a personal level with people. Though I don't believe Eustace really fits that mold, he tries to in some ways. His long love letters and his passion can show that he could potentially be "sensitive" as Mansfield would put it (I don't really like that term), but his personality will not allow him to understand what other people feel. It isn't really because of being a man as much as just what his personality is like... and the stereotypes that follow men are great ammunition to feed the ego that he has. He already is dominating and controlling, but the old idea that manly men are SUPPOSED to be dominating and controlling makes him feel as though it is ok, so he doesn't do anything about it. Unfortunately for him, in modern day society it creates a lot of problems in relationships. Women do not want to be dominated or controlled, so he doesn't have a lot of success with women.

The Last American Man

Gilbert crafts a careful image in her choice to name the book "The Last American Man". This makes three assumptions... that he is somehow the "last" of something, that there is a difference between an "American" man and any other type of man, and an idea of masculinity. That he is the last one could be taken into very simple terms... that in all the future generations, people are becoming more and more inept at being able to live without human commodities and human resources. Therefore, no one will follow in his interest in nature because there will be no nature/ no people with an interest in nature left. However it can also speak of the standards he sets for himself... no one else can follow them, because of how he has trained himself highly for his entire life, and what he doesn't realize is that his perfectionism is not, in fact, natural; the people that he idolizes so much, who he is trying to live like, probably wouldn't have even satisfied his extreme desire for perfection. He would have been disappointed with the very people that he emulates, making either him or them the true "American" persona, and whichever he is, it is the first and last of whatever kind he is trying to create. Also the idea of being "American" comes up here... why is he not called the last frontiersman? America has changed from being a culture looking for freedom and exploration to one of the most materialistic cultures in the world. The life he is trying to live reflects the idea of old America... at least, he wants it to. Unfortunately, it also reflects a desire for attention; just what America today has come to stand for- and an idea of what he does is the right thing and everyone else is wrong. Though this doesn't necessarily reflect modern- day America (many cultures have had this idea for a long time), it isn't positive like he wants it to be.

De Tocqueville

In Europe and America, the different view of women have to do with their character more than anything else. Though Americans respect the character and freedom of a woman, and rarely "lavish her" as the way that Europeans do, they also have given specific tasks to a woman as opposed to a man. The argument for this is that women are the best at carrying out their tasks, and men are the best at theirs, and therefore they have divided them into very specific groups. Apparently society can be driven forward more easily if people stay in the tasks assigned to their own gender. Apparently the European society is allowing more women to do things that men would do, but they still give them an image as being seductresses and inferior mentally. However, De Tocqueville argues that women are equals intellectually and their freedom should be respected, but by having each gender stay in his or her specific "task" of life, they will in fact be putting women as equals to men because they are equals though assigned to different tasks. Men don't do the woman's task, women don't do the man's one.

Beauty and the Beast

Many of the fairy tales, especially the ones that were converted into disney movies, portrayed women as either a mother figure or as the romance figure of the story. Often these stories had a theme of a beautiful woman who ended up getting married. The story of Beauty and the Beast shows this very well... the original tale had Belle with a single mother, not a father. Also, I believe she had siblings. However, the disney version of Belle is the epitome of the "perfect female" in the eyes of a 18th or 19th century male. She is modestly dressed, does not seem to even know of her own physical beauty. She is intelligent and loves to read (though this would lead her to be opinionated, which many men would have not liked in a wife), but this gives her an air of acting very innocent, but having a lot of knowledge about the subjects she likes to read about. The fact that she longs for more than just being a usual housewife to a man like Gaston shows that she has an independent nature and in turn has a strong mind, which appeals to women as a role model. The story is very focused upon her physical beauty however, and the Beast, when she meets him, falls in love with her after an amount of time. She falls in love with him as well, despite his ugliness. This can give off an impression that women should be able to love a man no matter who he looks like, but there is rarely a story that has the reverse... a handsome man falling in love with a less than attractive woman. On the other hand, when she kisses the beast, he turns back into the handsome prince, which leads the story back into its emphasis on physical beauty. She doesn't REALLY have to put up with this ugly beast all her life, even though she loves him for who he is and not what she looks like. There are mixed messages that this story preaches... Though it tries to preach that love and beauty is on the inside and not the out, it still manages to portray its characters as extremely attractive and therefore still perpetuate the image that especially women, though often men as well, are judged very readily on their appearance as opposed to their personalities.

Nature

The chapter on commodity is one that speaks the most to me, though the whole piece does to some degree because most of the time I want nothing more than a cabin in the mountains with no aid but maybe running water and a fireplace for warmth. It seems weird, and hard to explain, but I have a rather strong dislike for technology. The last line of the chapter, "A man is fed, not that he may be fed, but that he may work" realizes that people aren't the reason for everything. Though nature works to nourish man, it's a cycle... man must work, in turn, to nourish nature. Instead of taking what nature gives "him" (speaking for all humans) and creating things that will ruin nature but maybe make his life a little easier, he is taking this nourishment and using it for a selfish reason. Instead, using this nourishment to help others, in the natural world and the human (which really is part of the natural world though we don't like to admit it) one, is what people should strive for. There has been a movement in recent years to be more earth-friendly, because man has screwed up the earth almost beyond repair and is just now realizing it. Many people are afraid to be environmentalists or supportive of environmental programs because they are afraid that negative connotations will come with it, but in reality there is very little that is more positive and beneficial to all of man kind than taking care of the planet we live on.

MoMA

Interestingly enough, I found thte piece that really resonated with me in an ad for Color Chart on the MoMA's site, but it was an actual art piece in an exhibition in the museum. The ad I saw was the same photograph of a boy repeated three times, cast in blue, with a different word under each photo. We'll note that the boy is african-american. (I think the reason that this resonated a lot with me is because of the book we just read- they are hugely connected). The first word was "blue", describing the most obvious... which is the color of the picture. The middle was "black", which was the color of the boy's skin, and the third was "boy". There were several other similar ones in the online gallery; such as "magenta colored girl", which could be "magenta colored" or magenta , colored" depending on how you want to interpret it... the girl pictured is african american, which would lead to the interperetation of the "colored" part. There were others as well, but after reading this book, those two struck me the most because it shows how often times color is the first thing that we percieve about another person. Though saying "Girl" or "Boy" certainly isn't going into great depth about their personality as an individual, it identifies them as human, whereas saying "black" or "blue" or "magenta" is just talking about the most obvious attribute that would catch one's eye- the color. I think it really shows how people perceive one another. First impressons are often times everything. Everyone is guilty of this; someone does not appear similar to another person, usually the other person's first impression is that they will not like this person. It's perfectly natural, but I think these photographs really capture that essence.

Writing

Wrights realization is that the world is always going to be the way it is, and the only thing he can really do is write his ideas down and hope that people will listen, if they don't listen, he will keep writing, if they do, he will keep writing. I do agree with this, because the expression of ideas is the only thing that is going to change anything. Many people say "well if you want something to happen, stop writing about it and do it" but writing about it IS doing something because writing is one of the strongest forms of persuasion that exists. When people write, they educate others about their ideas in a non violent and non forceful way, in an intelligent, and usually in an educated way. When people read, they become more conscious of the world around them and as they read all sorts of different ideas, they better their own about how to create the best type of world for everyone to live in. Of course people will always have contradictory ideas and there will always be problems with this, but fighting about it isn't going to help anything. The only thing a person can really do is express his or her own ideas without trying to rid the world of all the other ones, accepting that others do not necessarily have to be wrong for him or her to be right, and to write down what they believe.

Artists and politicians

Though I can see why Wright would say a thing like artists and politicians stand at opposite poles, it isn't true in all senses. Though art is often times viewed as something that is narrowed in on and interpereted as specifically or as widely as the artist intends, and politics is often something that requires the view of a big picture, and everyone needs to have the same idea of it for it to work (Especially in the case of communism, which is why communism has been unsuccessful at each attempt). However, in a more abstract sense, the two types of thinking can be interdependent, because in order to achieve the creativity and simple drive to begin to create a political world that may work. During Wright's time, this mix may have been a little less obvious, with politicians writing political books, that existed only to promote their own politics. However, it is rare to see a very prominent modern politician that hasn't written some sort of autobiographical work. Many of todays politicians are writers, and certainly many use their artistic tendencies to enhance their politics and their ability to appeal to the greater good.

Quotes

"I knew that not race alone, not color alone, but the daily values that give meaning to life stood between me and those white girls with whom I worked. Their constant outward-looking, their mania for radios, cars, and a thousand other trinkets make them dream and fix their eyes upon the trash of life, made it impossible fofr them to learn a language which could have taught them to speak of what was in their or others' hearts. The words of their souls were the syllables of popular songs."
This is him commenting on the white girls that he worked with. Though it was different than in the South in the sense that the girls interacted with him like a normal human being and didnt disrespect him in the way that the southern white girls did, he still felt very apart from them because they had grown up without learning how to give themselves an identity, in turn are just looking for material things to make them happy. Wright uses the phrase "outward-looking," where he refers to himself as inward looking; he is introspective and analydical of himself and the actions he takes, whereas the girls are not. He refers to this as a different language... the two can never understand things on the same plane because they don't view themselves on the same plane as the other, even though there is no racism between them.

Changes

Though I don't entirely understand what is referenced to by "the change" that wright sets in motion, I think most of the changes that occur with him are positive. His decision to move to Chicago will (hopefully!) benefit him greatly, because Chicago is now officially out of the south. Though of course there was racism all across America, he hopes that he will not have to live at this level of subservience that he does in the south. Wright also undergoes another change, although I don't believe the second one is quite as drastic as moving to Chicago. After hearing about H.L. Mencken, he begins reading his works- and other works of the famous authors in his time period. Wright is rapidly becoming more knowlegeable about the world around him, and the racism- and the feelings behind it- than the average black person during his time. Therefore he could fight the system from the inside, as a well read, respectable man that has the power to surprise the people around him into thinking that maybe blacks do have a right to be respected. I believe that this is an extremely positive change, although it could potentially get into trouble, because many whites were intimidated by intelligent blacks and were afraid that they would learn the system and fight against it, or to realize their own equality- and therefore often times whites would be extra violent and hateful towards the blacks that truly knew their own identities.

stealing

Wright realizes by knowing other black people that are working with him that the only way he can really get ahead is to steal. He had never really thought about stealing before... not because it was morally wrong, but just because it had never crossed his mind. He had always kind of had the idea that if he worked hard and was honest then white people would either seem him as an equal or at least treat him better. Unfortunately he learns that all black people are treated the same way, all of them are expected to be stupid and to "know their place", and he mentions that it scares white people even more when black people know that they should be treated as equals. Wright decides that the only way he can get out of the south is to steal. He justifies this by saying that it is very minor compared to the way he is treated by white people every day. Although at first I didn;t want him to steal as I was reading the book, simply because he had never lowered himself to the white person's level in the past, I realized that his life was a living hell and the only reason he was even having this dilemma was so he could go somewhere where he could possibly make more of an impact and make a difference. Though it bothers me that he is doing exactly what the white people expect of him by being a criminal and keeping his head down, he is really only acting this way so that he can keep up appearances until he can get out of there. For this, I think he is justified.

Griggs

When Griggs tells Wright to "learn how to live in the south" it essentially means that Wright is too independent. He needs to learn to put his head down and obey, and not question authority. In the south, there will be racism, and Wright can not fight against it, so if he is going to live there he must deal with it because that is the only way he can get by and stay alive. Wright naturally has a very questioning personality, and he is very aware of the racism that is happening aroung him. The fact that he "doesnt seem to notice" when a person is white or black is a great charachteristic nowwadays, but during that time period- and in the south- it was something that could get him killed. Griggs, as a friend, thinks he is helping Wright.... and in a way, probably is, just like the principal- because he knows that there is no way Wright will be able to keep a job or keep away from violence if he doesn't understand the danger of trying to see himself as an equal to a white person in the south. The fact that he did not tell Mr. Crane about the harassment and instead took his money and walked out shocked him a little bit because he realized that he was beginning to bend to what the southern society wanted... subservient black people. the fact that not only the white people wanted this, but the black people also seemed to tell him to act in this way, was scary to him. no wonder he wanted to go north.

speech

Wright is and he isn't justified in refusing to say the speech. I wanted to agree with him because as valedictorian, he should have a right to be able to say his own speech. In modern days, he definitely would have been justified. However, it seemed as though his school and that time period was all about appearances, and it seemed as though the principal simply wanted to make him look good by writing the speech for him. the principal thought he was doing Richard a favor by writing the speech,and Richard was angry because he was tired of people trying to control his every action, and he would refuse to deliver a speech that he did not write because he did not want people to believe he was a way that was different from his true self. For this reason, Richard is justified. Though his speech may not have been as skillfully written, it was truer to the deliverer, and Richard knew that was important. Also, the principal mentioned something about how it was going to be delivered to both white and black people- and it is possible that it had an element of submissiveness that Richard did not want to label himself with.

Uncle Tom

Wright is angry with his uncle initially because he got mad when Wright told him the time, because uncle Tom thought he was being impudent. However, as the fight continued, Wright was bewildered at his uncle's ignorance and need for power. He was tired of being beaten for things that were not worth even admonishments. At one point he makes a reference to the plantation boys, the boys that just hung their heads and did as they were told. Wright knew that he could never be one of these boys, and he was angry at his uncle for being so ignorant as to try to make him be submissive in this way. This was how white people were treating black people, and if black people just learned to hang their heads and take it without showing their own equality, this mistreatement would not cease. Wright was angry at his uncle for being too big-headed to be able to realize this, to be able to realize that Wright needed to have a spirit and a sense of individuality, and that his uncle had no right to treat him the way he was trying to.

Writing

I'm not entirely sure why Wright would have felt gratified after showing others his writing, except that when someone has created something that they are proud of, showing it to someone is always gratifying. Also, in a way, his writing was sort of like a miniature triumph over his aunt and grandmother. The fact that he was supposed to be praying, and he had made it very clear that he did not believe in the religion of his family was extremely frurstrating, and the writing was sort of a way to vent the frustration and use it in a productive manner. Also, his writing was something more mature and intellectual that he had begun- something he hadn't really been involved in in the past. Though he had loved to read stories, he had never actually created them, and the feeling he got from reading stories was very gratifying. The fact that he was now creating stories and had the hope that sharing them with someone else would make them have the same feeling he got from reading stories would have been very exciting.

Paralysis

After his mother had a stroke, Wright was afraid to go in and see her. He didn't want to see her in her weakened, paralyzed state because she was so frail. She was the only true authority figure that Wright had growing up, and the removal of that was extremely frightening to him. He had always viewed his mom as very powerful and strong, and when she is paralyzed and sick he suddenly sees a side of her that he has never seen before, realizing that all authority is still only human and can suffer and be weakened just as he. He becomes very afraid of not being accepted into the family of an aunt or an uncle, but when he does end up living with his aunt and uncle, he is unhappy (partially because of the "dead boy's room") and begs to go back to his mother. because he has not known anything but her authority, it is very difficult for him to adjust to any other type of lifestyle, escpecially with his desire to care for his mother but inability to figure out how to help her in any way.

Jews

It seems as though most of the racial tensions in Wright's life have to do with his heritage. People aren't born inherently racist- he demonstrates this when he describes the "white" and "black" people in parentheses, such as the part where the white man beats the black boy and Wright assumes that it is because the man is the boy's father. Same with the Jews- though he isn't in contact with too many Jews except the store owner and his family. In fact, he even saysthat the reason that he felt such racism against Jews is because it had been taught in his religion. Jews were considered "Christ-killers" and there was a lot of anti semitism at the time. Also, he felt the divisions of race very strongly because he was beginning to feel the divisions between himeslf and white people. The fact that Jews are generally white also probably caused him to feel more distant from them than if they were black. The fact that he was scapegoated and blamed for things as a black caused him to want to put someone else below him, which is human nature, so he did that to the Jews.

why is Wright hungry?

The simple answer to this question is that he is hungry because he is poor and therefore has no food. Since his dad brought home the food, and his dad left, he has no more food. His mom tries to get a job, ironically as a cook, (for a white family), and wright occasionally tags along to try and get scraps of food from the white family when they are done eating. What he doesn't understand is why he must wait until other people have eaten in order to eat, though he is the one that is starving. When he goes to the orphanage he is not fed. (If there was any deeper meaning to extract from that question, i didn't catch it. I figure he is hungry because his dad left and there is no food, plus it is harder for his mom to find a job because she is black and a woman, and he is not treated as well or fed as well because he is black.)

Education and Empowerment

I agree with Taylor's argument to a degree. Boredom does not produce good results- many brilliant students never realize their potential because teachers and school systems try to force them into some predefined mold. I am lucky enough to have always attended a school that has encouraged me to be actively involved with what I learn, and to make schooling inetresting. Though I can certainly not say that I have never been "bored" of school, I can say that the years of education that I have recieved- taken, if you will- will be well paid off. Many people that do poorly in school are bored. Not at a challenging school nessecarily- but at a regular school system with regular, "cell-like" classrooms and teachers. I know someone in particular who attended Carmel schools before eventually moving to Sycamore and then University. He told me once that he got very poor grades at Carmel, which obviously surprised me because he is extremely intelligent and a straight A student here. Upon being asked why, he simply said that he was so bored that he didn't do any of the work. Though I have not experienced this firsthand, I have heard many cases of this phenomenon- someone with a very high intelligence absolutely not applying themselves until they are given a reason to show that the work is worth their application. Some school systems have created programs for children like these- such as the Extended Learning Program at Pike- but other school systems try to lump all children together into one homogenous mass. When I shadowed at the Key School, which is in IPS dstrict and underfunded, Spanish 1 2 and 3 were all lumped together in one class. I have heard teachers complain about teaching "slower" and "faster" kids within the same class; I can't even imagine what it could be like to teach three different levels within a classroom!
This article makes me think a little bit about the movie "Freedom Writers", where kids- not well educated yet bright- were put in a high school freshman class with a new teacher who didn't seem to understand that they "did not posess the abilities" that other kids did. She slowly rekindled their love to learn by connecting with them. When I went to IPS school 54, many of the older teachers had just submitted to yelling at the kids until they did what they were told, while some of the younger teacheres became more involved in the kids' lives. It seems as theough some people that have been teaching for a long time lose the love for teaching, and lose touch with the interests of the kids. Just because a kid doesn't get good grades doesn't mean they are unintelligent. I can think of several very distinct examples of this.


So his position on wiping out schools. I don't agree with this, because a poor education can be better than no education at all- though, that is debateable- and though he used examples, it was still a time period full of ignorance, hatred, racism, and other various problems. Certainly schools should be imporoved- they should not be all homogenous, as children are not and have different needs that must be catered to- different types of programs should be enacted. Teachers should have to ability to connect with students, not just preach things at them. It's difficult to achieve in a school where the students don't pay to go and therefore the teachers are paid less. Often times the more talented teachers teach at private schools- which is fine- but in many ountries, public schools are no "worse" than private schools. the quality of the education recieved is very similar. People shouldn't have to pay to recieve a quality education- every school should be able to tailor to the needs of improving every individual. This is obviously easy to say and hard to do, but it is the only way to keep kids in school and keep them from being bored.

nonintellectual education

In a way, nonintellectual education- nonacademic, if you will- is more important than one's academic education. Many people overlook this fact, but the thing is, nonacademic education is a sort of training in order to get an academic education. In preschool and kindergarten, sure there is an academic education, but it is more focused on how to behave and function in society. At a higher level, such as this english class, we are not just learning how to write sentences, but to become beneficial and impacting members of society. Physical education is important as well- keeping the body healthy is important to keeping the mind healthy. Though academic classes are certainly important- no one could move forward in the world without them- people need to learn to question what they have been "fed", to be active and participatory in all areas of life, and how to respond to GETTING an academic education- traits that many people in the world do not possess. Many people go to school and learn things to take the tests but do not retain them beyond that- there are many extremely ignorant society members, and the biggest mistake is when the ignorant society members attempt to teach others. Though many people may disagree with me, one of the worst things to try to teach a person is to obey and believe everything they are told. Instead people should be taught to question in a civilized manner, present their own ideas, and therefore become the driving force in moving the world forward instead of the hook that keeps the world behind.

conservative vs. republican

I have always agreed with Alex's idea that liberal and conservative people should not be labeled as "democrats" or "republicans", because it often encourages voters to simply join a party and vote for said party without actually considering what the candidate has to say. It was very interesting to hear it from the perspective of someone who considers himself a conservative, because I have always sort of written off republicans as being the ones that are more likely to just choose a party as opposed to looking at the views. Obviously it's rather narrow-minded of me to believe that, and it's all because of those "political parties" that people group themselves into. I get a different idea about someone when they say that they are "conservative" as opposed to "a republican". It seems as if calling yourself "a republican" or "a democrat", using the noun, is defining to who you are. On the other hand, using "liberal" and "conservative" as adjectives is more like a trait, or part of the whole, which is more appropriate in defining a human being.

Presentations

My two favorite presentations were the Tony Eli Jordan Christina group and the Brittany Maggie and whoever else was in that group group (don't mean to forget, its just that brittany and maggie appeared the most in the ad). They weren't nessecarily professional by any means- I doubt that the charachters in either of the commercials would actually air because people could argue that their enthusiasm could have adverse effects and appear to be making fun of the product, but in the class, I think Brittany's enthusiasm (HILARIOUS) and basically Tony's entire commercial were extremely memorable. However, the Nick Martin, Liz, Elise and RJ group was certainly the most professionally done commercial. It was very polished, though I think they could have cut back on shots of the car driving, because that felt like it went on a little too long- but otherwise, judging purely by finesse and how well the commercial was done, theirs was probably the best. All of them were entertaining, and I think all of the groups had an element of humor in it which helped their appeal. A lot of commercials today try to be very funny, and i believe that those work the best. (I have mentioned this before).

Pottery Barn article

What pleasantly surprised me the most about this article was how much the company is looking for customer satisfaction. Of course, if a company is known for having happy customers, then it will be more successful- but the personal touch in it was how many of the furniture piece ideas were concieved from what the employees wanted for themselves. I thought i t was very interesting how the designers are encouraged to go out and do other things (besides sitting in an office and working) because for one, they will be happier that way, but most i mportantly they will be more creative and get better ideas from looking at the world and experiencing it. If a piece is designed and the designer hesitates when asked if they would want to piece or give it to their best friend, then the piece is trashed... because they produce what they would like to have, because they know that customers want the same kind of quality as the designers. I believe this is extremely positive marketing.

stores I frequent

A store I frequent is Forever 21, which is a women's clothing store. The store is painted all white, usually huge, and is somewhat delightfully disorganized. The main reason that I like it is because it has clothes that fit an array of fashion styles, but is usually rather cutting edge (when it comes to the fashion scene in indianapolis). Though I am not really a preson who pays close attention to fashion, the fact that it contains so many different types of clothing makes it sort of an adventure to shop there, and it will piece very interesting combinations of clothes on the mannequins to attract and encourage shoppers to branch out and try things that they may not have bought walking in. Though that is a obviously a ploy to get people to buy more things. Hoewever, it is an enjoyable store to shop at, and the fact that it is very inexpensive certainly adds to the appeal.

Superbowl commercials

There was one commercial in particular that reminded me a lot of the article that we just read. It was for SoBe Lifewater, and it featured a very scantily-dressed woman dancing, and then a gecko that appeared to be looking up her dress, but upon closer inspection was actually staring at the water. It was very similar to the ad that the article talked about, in which the boy appeared to be staring at the woman but was in fact looking at the product that was for sale. It uses shock value to sell the product, but in a very sexual way. It can certainly be seen as borderline offensive, but at least it had no underlying theme of violence like the ones in the article. However, many of the other commercials did not have a sexual theme, which was very pleasantly surprising.

wednesdays class

Our class on wednesday was certainly interesting. I dont't really have much more to blog about other than what i already have written, but my opinions stay essentially the same. However, looking at the article from a rhetorical view, she exaggerated a lot. Sometimes she got so incredibly carried away with her argument, that it was a little difficult for her to make a good argument. On the other hand, some of her arguments are spot-on, and the reason the women in the class got so involved in the argument is because we've experienced some of these things. Maybe we haven't had a violent act committed against us, but what about getting our butts grabbed? or getting rated from 1-10? Many of us relate to that.

On the other hand, there were several men in the class that got very defensive- and though sometimes it bothers me because this is a subject i feel very strongly about, i believe that they have a right to be defensive. Men are often lumped together as being all sexually demeaning, all "pigs", and that is simply not true. As i said in the last post, most of the men that i know are extremely respectful and certainly would would not be affected by any of the articles in a negative way. However, I believe that that it is simple fact that they often neglect- though of course most men are not sexual predators, violent, or demeaning, it is still statistical that more women get hurt in these ways then men, and therefore, the argument focuses more around women. Certainly a case can be made for men, but the fact still is, the problem is so much bigger for women because of sheer numbers.

As far as advertising goes; when Tony said that the point of advertising is to sell things, i certainly agree with him. However, I don't think that people, male or female, need to be demeaned for the sake of selling things. There are many other types of commercials that can work (like the "wtf?" ones.). Unfortunately, once censorship starts, there is no telling where it can stop, which is why this is such a complicated issue.

exploitation in the media

I have thought a lot about this article. It is something that affects me personally, and I can see the truth in what she writes. Although sometimes I feel as if she is going a little bit overboard ("Is the woman in the ad laughing or screaming?" when she is clearly laughing) Some of the other ads are extremely disturbing, such as the little boy looking up the woman's skirt, or the perfume ad. I am routinely reminded of the expectation of men to have power over women; I hear the phrase "pussy-whipped" almost every day, even from men that I consider respectful. Some of the biggest problems that I rememvber were in middle school- I remember the boys in my class rating us from one to ten, there was one that even would go around grabbing girls' butts- he was eventually expelled from sycamore for something involving the sexual harrassment of one of my best friends.
Often times, ads that show the reverse- such as the women staring at the man, etc, are viewed as funny, or feminist because of the objectification of the man. However, as the article states, there is a line to where objectification stops being funny and starts being disturbing, and the line applies to both genders. Unfortunatley, the media seems to put the line in different places for each gender.
Many women might read these ads and immediately target men as the cause of the problem, and men will immediately assume that women will do this, but in truth it is the media that is at fault; and history. In history, men have been the ones in power, and though women are certainly gaining power, the media is resisting by objectifying women and sexualizing them. though it happens with men, it simply happens more often with women.
On the contrary, after reading articles such as this and seeing this type of advertisements, I am continually surprised by how respectful men can be. I am often expecting them to act a certain way and then they don't; and so this type of advertising obviously doesn't affect everyone the way it affects some. That being said, it certainly does affect some- women and men both.
Women are encouraged to be sexual- I see it every day, many girls who lack confidence in their personality or intelligence simply exploit their looks because they are afraid that the other parts of them have no worth. I continually see women accusing each other of being "whorish", or not sexual enough. I see men accusing women of these things- the problem, unfortunately, is much more complicated than "men are pigs" as some women (and men!) will jump to conclusions and say. Each of us is affected by the society we grow up in- sometimes more so than we might think, and sometimes less so. Self-esteem plays a very large role in this; women with more self-esteem are more confident and therefore less "sexual", most of the time. They will put value on their personalities, their intelligence, their gifts, as opposed to their looks. and men will see this and appreciate it. I know for a fact many men that already do. The media needs to begin to encourage women to find that part of them- and men as well- as opposed to putting such weight on physical appearance.

Commercials

Deciding to watch the style channel, I knew that the commercials on this channel would be very distinctly geared toward the crowd that would watch the network. I knew that the commercials would be geared toward women, but what I didn't expect was the age group. I don't usually watch the style network, but I had always assumed it was something that more teenage girls would watch. On the contrary, the commercials are geared towards marraige-age woman. Several of which were for home improvement/ home-making products, such as disinfectant, or kitchen supplies.
One commercial in particular, which was for (if i remember correctly) a birth control pill, was obviously geared to women. However, the commercial had a physician reccomendation, in which an actual physician comes on the commercial to reccomend the pill, the commercial made a (i believe) conscious choice to make the phycisian a woman. Though a physician reccomendation is certainly a good thing to have in a commercial for a medical product, the fact that a female physician is helping to sell a birth control product gives it an even more powerful appeal to the audience because it establishes csoomething very obvious in common with the target audience- both women, and therefore both can speak the benefits of the product from actual experience as opposed to just medical knowlege.