How do you understand the relationship between Cordelia and Lear? He seems to love her, and she him, but how? Why is she unable to speak when her very survival depends on her speaking? Why is he unable to hear her truth?
To take the same concept from another angle…. While her sisters’ speeches are excellent examples of verbal manipulation, the one person (Cordelia) who goes in honestly with Lear’s best interests at heart is punished because she doesn’t want (or know how to) “play the game.” Have you seen situations like this? Have you used your powers of manipulation to get what you want? Have you been the loser in a game like this?
Cordelia does indeed love her father, and Lear does indeed love her, but unfortunately Lear has a very skewed idea about love. He believes love is materialistic, that love is about who gets the biggest piece of the pie- in the sense that he gives his most loving daughter the biggest piece of his kingdom, but also that the daughters are in competition for who loves him the most. What Cordelia has realized is that this is not so. Because Cordelia loves him, she cannot lie to him and try to scheme him into giving her part of his kingdom. In fact, she loves him to the extent that she would rather him realize that her sisters are simply power hungry and lying to him to get to he kingdom than for herself to get a part of the kingdom as well. He, once again, is unable to hear her truth because he, like the sisters, is somewhat power-hungry. He does not like the idea of this form of honesty because in his eyes one should be able to state how much they love him and be done with it. I don’t believe I have ever personally experienced something like this, other than simply noticing people that will appear to care about an issue in order to appear a “better person” or maybe even just to put it on a college resume and end up pushing aside people that really do care about the issue because they are so concerned with their self image (think back that poem we read about the man who appeared on the surface to be this wonderfully wholesome man but in fact had done something very bad in the past, and maybe he treated people badly personally, but he was convinced everyone seemed to like him because he did good things). I believe this happens frequently, and it comes out of a similar desire for power and selfishness that the sisters are consumed with.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Blog #4
Huxley's view of the future is indeed horrifying, and it is indeed difficult to put a finger on exactly why, seeing as everyone is perpetually content and happy. However, it is a false happiness. People are homogenous, they seem to lack a real understanding at what is going on. They spit back information without fully grasping it. Even the most intelligent ones- the Alphas- are very brainwashed. People have no ability to have a personality. Though they are constantly under an illusion of happiness, they in fact are not truly happy because they have no appreciation of happiness. One must experience suffering and pain in order to know that happiness is something to treasure. Therefore they are in a constant state of dumb bliss that is unfounded and illogical. They are like robots, too brainwashed to break out of the mold. To people in our society now, a society that encourages individuality, this loss of individuality is horrifying. True, for one inside the society it may not seem too bad, but once one has had a real taste of what it is like to truly experience life, I'd imagine that people that are not too terribly brainwashed would never turn back.
Blog #3
The argument essentially is arguing for freedom. Yes, the society has comfort and "happiness", or at least, lack of sadness, anger, shock- "negative emotions"... but for this, the humans are like children. They have known no suffering. Mustapha Mond's argument is that this is better, to know no suffering, and have no freedom to know suffering. The savage, John, however, believes that the world is better with suffering... because when one has the freedom to suffer, one knows what happiness truly is, and one appreciates it. The people in the society do not appreciate anything because everything is handed to them. The savage is making the argument that he would much rather feel the pain and appreciate the happiness, because he has the experience of feeling the pain, and the freedom to experience it. His argument is that the freedom to be happy and sad and to live one's life the desired way is many times better than a controlled state of constant contentment.
Brave New World blog 2
The idea of constantly giving pleasure is a major theme in the book. The society uses things like sex, games, soma, and their "catch phrases" to illustrate this. When people constantly receive pleasure, sexual or otherwise, they will not complain. Because sex is such a staple in the society, people do not fall in love, as they can "have" whoever they want and are expected to keep doing so. This eliminates attachments of humans to other humans, which in turn builds the attachment to the central society. This extends to the games as well... it is the idea of everyone constantly being in the company of everyone else, because therefore people will be conditioned to fear solitude and not want to be alone- hence adhering even more to the society. Soma is obvious- it keeps people on a surface level of happiness.. under an illusion that they are happy. Finally, phrases like "ending is better than mending" is once again to prevent people from forming attachments... the phrase, referring to clothing, keeps an infusion of "newness" in their life- the excitement and pleasure of forming something new, and discouragement of forming any sort of attachment with an article of clothing that will keep them from throwing it away. This phrase, however, coupled with the availability of sex, once again keeps an infusion of newness- this time in the form of people- in their lives, once again so that they will never form attachments and turn away from the society.
Brave New World post 1
Though on the surface, Huxley's "Brave New World" seems to be a very far-fetched interpretation of the "future", there are certainly aspects of it that are reflected in todays society. For example, the use of helicopters to travel is very much mirrored by our modern use of cars. Children, also, are in a way "conditioned".... something that has been going on in religious education for centuries, but modern children must learn a certain amount in a certain amount of years, using standardized testing to regulate the levels. Things are thought of as "first grade" level, "second grade" level.... very much regimented, such as the conditioning that the kids in 'Brave New World" go through. Also, the idea of pampering is an overtone in our society, just as it is essential to their society. With our celebrity role models that live very pampered lives, the advertisement of a need for material items, etc., our society very much revolves around materialism and need for a constant state of "happiness", just like in Brace New World.
There are some things that are different though. For example, people have their various "places" in the book, and stay in their places. They are happy in their places. This is seemingly the opposite of the foundation of the United States, whose ideology states that people should and do have the ability to raise and lower their social status with education and type of profession. America is founded on the idea of being a "free country"--- how free it actually is is debatable, but in Brave New World, the society is very much NOT free.
There are some things that are different though. For example, people have their various "places" in the book, and stay in their places. They are happy in their places. This is seemingly the opposite of the foundation of the United States, whose ideology states that people should and do have the ability to raise and lower their social status with education and type of profession. America is founded on the idea of being a "free country"--- how free it actually is is debatable, but in Brave New World, the society is very much NOT free.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
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.
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.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
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".
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".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)