Sunday, November 21, 2010
Monday, November 1, 2010
Oryx and Crake Response 2
Character Development
Snowman, or Jimmy is described as a character who takes great interest in online streaming, video games and literature. During post-apocolypse, their are various occasions where Snowman uses arcane (or figurative speech), which the Crakers do not understand, making Snowman upset.The greater part of this novel is focused on and seen through Snowman's thoughts and flashbacks. Margret Atwood essentially depicts the other characters' personalities through Snowman's perspective and judgements. And we discover more as we read about his many thoughts and how things were in the past. As the reader, we are already knowledgable of Snowman's personality, surroundings, family, friend(s) and interests; however, regarding Oryx and Crake, there are still many things unknown to us. Furthermore, everything is from Snowman's perspective, so we only get to see things as Snowman does. Crake is a character who has always been witty and not quite as loquacious as Jimmy, his character is a mystery to us because although we know some minor details about him; his motives, his thoughts and his reasonings remain unknown. The novel seems to be set up in a way, so that the further you read on, the more secrets are uncovered. The pieces start falling into place and there are some answers to the questions we had in the beginning, such as what are pigoons? rakunks? Why were they invented? Why aren't Crake and Snowman friends now? Although there is still a lot to question, Snowman will presumably answer them eventually.
Oryx, who is possibly the third most mentioned character in the novel, is very mysterious. Through Snowman's flashback, we know of her past as a child but no more than that. She is very corrupted, even to the point where she has no realization that her situation is moral outrage. Besides this, Oryx is only been brought up when Snowman daydreams about her. There is yet to discover more connections between her and Crake.
Eye
I chose this photo because I think it represents the Crakers (as they are characters too), because almost everything about them has been modified, whether it is eyes, hair, figure, etc. it has been "fixed". Nevertheless, whenever I have thought of a future, more sophisticated human being, they have always been more complex and able to do much more. However, in this case, Crakers are much more simple than humans. They do not feel lust, they are able to feed themselves with "herbage" that is self-produced, and they have simple minds and simple speech. Despite this, when the words "modified being" comes into mind, I still can't help but think of something more complicated, than something simpler.
Snowman, or Jimmy is described as a character who takes great interest in online streaming, video games and literature. During post-apocolypse, their are various occasions where Snowman uses arcane (or figurative speech), which the Crakers do not understand, making Snowman upset.The greater part of this novel is focused on and seen through Snowman's thoughts and flashbacks. Margret Atwood essentially depicts the other characters' personalities through Snowman's perspective and judgements. And we discover more as we read about his many thoughts and how things were in the past. As the reader, we are already knowledgable of Snowman's personality, surroundings, family, friend(s) and interests; however, regarding Oryx and Crake, there are still many things unknown to us. Furthermore, everything is from Snowman's perspective, so we only get to see things as Snowman does. Crake is a character who has always been witty and not quite as loquacious as Jimmy, his character is a mystery to us because although we know some minor details about him; his motives, his thoughts and his reasonings remain unknown. The novel seems to be set up in a way, so that the further you read on, the more secrets are uncovered. The pieces start falling into place and there are some answers to the questions we had in the beginning, such as what are pigoons? rakunks? Why were they invented? Why aren't Crake and Snowman friends now? Although there is still a lot to question, Snowman will presumably answer them eventually.
Oryx, who is possibly the third most mentioned character in the novel, is very mysterious. Through Snowman's flashback, we know of her past as a child but no more than that. She is very corrupted, even to the point where she has no realization that her situation is moral outrage. Besides this, Oryx is only been brought up when Snowman daydreams about her. There is yet to discover more connections between her and Crake.
Eye
I chose this photo because I think it represents the Crakers (as they are characters too), because almost everything about them has been modified, whether it is eyes, hair, figure, etc. it has been "fixed". Nevertheless, whenever I have thought of a future, more sophisticated human being, they have always been more complex and able to do much more. However, in this case, Crakers are much more simple than humans. They do not feel lust, they are able to feed themselves with "herbage" that is self-produced, and they have simple minds and simple speech. Despite this, when the words "modified being" comes into mind, I still can't help but think of something more complicated, than something simpler.
Monday, October 25, 2010
The Value of Science Socratic Seminar
Response:
Richard Freyman stresses the fact that science cannot always solve social issues, as they are unbiased and do not take sides. He also mentions the problem with science is that you never know if it is a solid fact. Science is always neutral, the way it is used determines its "moral value", "To every man is given the key to heaven; the same key opens the gates of hell". Freyman later adds on that it is a scientist's responsibility to discover the unknown and research and explore the mysteries of life. He states that although scientists develop breakthroughs in technology, life, health and so on, all of these discoveries do not come with instructions. We utilize these innovations and inventions in whatever way we choose, therefore science and scientists do not influence whether things are good or evil.
I disagree with the thought that science is not influenced by good or evil, because I believe that they often have direct relations to each other. For there must be purposes for why some things are made or researched (that can influence the values of society). For example, contrasting "discovering a cure for cancer" with "weapons for made for destruction". Nevertheless, there are definitely occasions where things are discovered without any intentions, but then are used in a bad/good way.
Vocabulary:
Dispel- make (a doubt, feeling, or belief) disappear
Negate- nullify; make ineffective
Sobriety- the state of being sober
Questions:
Freyman states that all scientists have a lot of experience with doubt, uncertainty and ignorance. He suggests that whatever the result will be to a problem, the scientist will always have either, if not all three. Do you agree with this? If so, is it then safe to say that scientific facts may possibly be false?
Freyman states that although most of humanity longs for a peaceful world, he ponders if a perfect world will result in boredom which then leads to something similar to a dystopian society. To what extent do you agree?
Should science require instruction, as in the reason for its development (good or bad)? or as Freyman said, "morally neutral" (not taking any sides)?
Richard Freyman stresses the fact that science cannot always solve social issues, as they are unbiased and do not take sides. He also mentions the problem with science is that you never know if it is a solid fact. Science is always neutral, the way it is used determines its "moral value", "To every man is given the key to heaven; the same key opens the gates of hell". Freyman later adds on that it is a scientist's responsibility to discover the unknown and research and explore the mysteries of life. He states that although scientists develop breakthroughs in technology, life, health and so on, all of these discoveries do not come with instructions. We utilize these innovations and inventions in whatever way we choose, therefore science and scientists do not influence whether things are good or evil.
I disagree with the thought that science is not influenced by good or evil, because I believe that they often have direct relations to each other. For there must be purposes for why some things are made or researched (that can influence the values of society). For example, contrasting "discovering a cure for cancer" with "weapons for made for destruction". Nevertheless, there are definitely occasions where things are discovered without any intentions, but then are used in a bad/good way.
Vocabulary:
Dispel- make (a doubt, feeling, or belief) disappear
Negate- nullify; make ineffective
Sobriety- the state of being sober
Questions:
Freyman states that all scientists have a lot of experience with doubt, uncertainty and ignorance. He suggests that whatever the result will be to a problem, the scientist will always have either, if not all three. Do you agree with this? If so, is it then safe to say that scientific facts may possibly be false?
Freyman states that although most of humanity longs for a peaceful world, he ponders if a perfect world will result in boredom which then leads to something similar to a dystopian society. To what extent do you agree?
Should science require instruction, as in the reason for its development (good or bad)? or as Freyman said, "morally neutral" (not taking any sides)?
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Oryx and Crake Response 1
Atwood puts the last couple pieces of the puzzle together in these sections by showing the reader a series of flashbacks of Jimmy's life. There is a lot of foreshadowing, letting the reader further understand the personalities of both Crake and Jimmy. She spends a great deal of time describing videos games and its objectives and what role Crake and Jimmy normally take in these games.
Glenn, now Crake, is competitive, witty and composed. Extinctathon is one of the many video games they play together after school. Here, Glenn gives himself and Jimmy their nicknames, Crake and Thickney. The Thickney is a defunct bird that hangs around in cemeteries; and although it was not done intentionally, this bird directly relates to the life of Jimmy. Being the only one left of his kind, while struggling to survive. On the contrary, Crake, the bird, was very numerous in its kind, much like how post-apolypse there are great populations of Crakers running around everywhere.
The author makes it clear that these boys were extremely close during their youth. Having this common history together, it is rather mysterious as to why they would have such distant and opposite ways of living now.
As I am reading on, there are thoughts about the difference (or similarities) of dystopia and utopia. Crake, I do not believe, is trying to construct a dystopian society, but the opposite. However, in the eyes of some, it is not a utopian society at all. Crake is making everybody equal, therefore making everything fair...but is it ethical? Nevertheless, like seen in history, this (more extreme) way of communism, does not always result in a positive outcome...
Glenn, now Crake, is competitive, witty and composed. Extinctathon is one of the many video games they play together after school. Here, Glenn gives himself and Jimmy their nicknames, Crake and Thickney. The Thickney is a defunct bird that hangs around in cemeteries; and although it was not done intentionally, this bird directly relates to the life of Jimmy. Being the only one left of his kind, while struggling to survive. On the contrary, Crake, the bird, was very numerous in its kind, much like how post-apolypse there are great populations of Crakers running around everywhere.
The author makes it clear that these boys were extremely close during their youth. Having this common history together, it is rather mysterious as to why they would have such distant and opposite ways of living now.
As I am reading on, there are thoughts about the difference (or similarities) of dystopia and utopia. Crake, I do not believe, is trying to construct a dystopian society, but the opposite. However, in the eyes of some, it is not a utopian society at all. Crake is making everybody equal, therefore making everything fair...but is it ethical? Nevertheless, like seen in history, this (more extreme) way of communism, does not always result in a positive outcome...
I chose this photo because i think it represents the clashing ideals between the people who want to live in Crake's world and the people who object it because it not morally or ethically correct.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Oryx and Crake Notes
Basic Plot
· “Snowman” is Jimmy in the future, his dad fostors human organs to transplant into other humans
· Crake is Jimmy’s friend from the compound
Family
· Not well knit family
· Jimmy’s Mom is strict and they have a distant relationship
· Jimmy likes seeing any sort of emotion from his Mom because she is unexpressive
· Mom does not support how the society is run, constantly argues with dad. Nothing is morally correct
Society
· Very organized, with different compounds everywhere. The Pleeblands however, are the complete oppostite
· Nobody is really united as one anymore
· Strange green eyed children
Government
· Large corporations
· There is no specific government
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Blog Response #4
Mullet Man 94
The description and analysis on both Vere's and Billy's reactions/expression during the situation seem completely parallel to what they would actually do (if written out by Melville). I also agree that Billy almost completely ignored the severity of his actions and punishment, but then again, it seems that Billy did not have any evidence of a guilty conscience for his conduct, therefore being so relaxed in that tense situation can be explained by his character.
The description and analysis on both Vere's and Billy's reactions/expression during the situation seem completely parallel to what they would actually do (if written out by Melville). I also agree that Billy almost completely ignored the severity of his actions and punishment, but then again, it seems that Billy did not have any evidence of a guilty conscience for his conduct, therefore being so relaxed in that tense situation can be explained by his character.
AWWYEE. chapter 22-30 response
How is the burial of Claggart ironic? What feelings and ideas does this burial conjure for you, the reader?
The irony in Claggart's formal burial was was that Billy was being held behind iron bars awaiting his death. This brings fourth the theme of good versus evil yet again. The innocence in Billy Budd is being neglected by others and hanged. Moreover, irony is brought up again after Billy's and Claggart's deaths. A paper stating the violent and primal Billy murdered the "innocent" Claggart by stabbing him through the heart. There is a little bit of sympathy for Billy in me for the false accusations made by others. I feel like the only people that would truly understand the situation to an extent, would be (most of) the crew aboard the Bellipotent. It is frustrating that Claggart was known as the innocent one, as his attacks on Billy were completely unprovoked and ended up causing the death of himself as well as Billy.
What is the significance of Billy’s last words? How does it connect to themes and symbolism in the text?
Billy Budd's last words before his death were, "God bless Captain Vere". This greatly represents Billy's undying loyalty towards Vere. Prior to Billy's death, he does not express any anger or betrayal even after Vere's sentence. Also, he does not feel any guilt for murdering Claggart, the novel justifies the intentions of Billy's actions as they were simply an attack of impulse for accusing him of such preposterous things in front of Vere. Vere and Billy's relationship was not one sided, as Vere also repeated Billy's name before his death. As shown by his last words, Billy's personality has not altered at all throughout the novel, even with the influence of evil (Claggart & Squeak), he remains innocent and loyal to those whom he trusts.
WOOTWOOT. done.
The irony in Claggart's formal burial was was that Billy was being held behind iron bars awaiting his death. This brings fourth the theme of good versus evil yet again. The innocence in Billy Budd is being neglected by others and hanged. Moreover, irony is brought up again after Billy's and Claggart's deaths. A paper stating the violent and primal Billy murdered the "innocent" Claggart by stabbing him through the heart. There is a little bit of sympathy for Billy in me for the false accusations made by others. I feel like the only people that would truly understand the situation to an extent, would be (most of) the crew aboard the Bellipotent. It is frustrating that Claggart was known as the innocent one, as his attacks on Billy were completely unprovoked and ended up causing the death of himself as well as Billy.
What is the significance of Billy’s last words? How does it connect to themes and symbolism in the text?
Billy Budd's last words before his death were, "God bless Captain Vere". This greatly represents Billy's undying loyalty towards Vere. Prior to Billy's death, he does not express any anger or betrayal even after Vere's sentence. Also, he does not feel any guilt for murdering Claggart, the novel justifies the intentions of Billy's actions as they were simply an attack of impulse for accusing him of such preposterous things in front of Vere. Vere and Billy's relationship was not one sided, as Vere also repeated Billy's name before his death. As shown by his last words, Billy's personality has not altered at all throughout the novel, even with the influence of evil (Claggart & Squeak), he remains innocent and loyal to those whom he trusts.
^ cutest baby ever. Mason Moon :) anyways...
As represented from his nickname, "Baby Budd", his innocence and naivety remains constant. Touched by evil, but not influenced by it.
WOOTWOOT. done.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Socratic Seminar - Self-Respect
In this article Joan Didion explains how self-respect is greatly influenced by discipline and being able to accept yourself even when others do not. She does a good job to support her points, however I think she is blurring the line between self-respect and self-confidence. In my opinion, self-confidence is much more vulnerable to influence from others than self-respect is. Respecting oneself is how your treat yourself depending on what you believe is deserved and and the level self worth.
Didion's "big idea" seems to arise from when she supposedly had minimal self-respect from not making it into her fraternity. She focuses on the idea that in order to achieve self-respect, there must be discipline, as in to not discourage oneself (I feel this statement is more relatable to self confidence).
There are two statements saying "people with self respect have the courage of their mistakes" and " the willingness to accept responsibilities for one's own life -- is the source from which self respect springs", which I truly agree with.
Is there a real definition of self-respect? Because all people will have a different perspective on what it is by reflecting on their own lives.
Can self respect be influenced by others (as Didion stated) or is it solely based on how you accept your failures and accomplishments?
YEE YEE YEE. so thats what i think :) goodnightt everybodyy
love stooph
Didion's "big idea" seems to arise from when she supposedly had minimal self-respect from not making it into her fraternity. She focuses on the idea that in order to achieve self-respect, there must be discipline, as in to not discourage oneself (I feel this statement is more relatable to self confidence).
There are two statements saying "people with self respect have the courage of their mistakes" and " the willingness to accept responsibilities for one's own life -- is the source from which self respect springs", which I truly agree with.
Is there a real definition of self-respect? Because all people will have a different perspective on what it is by reflecting on their own lives.
Can self respect be influenced by others (as Didion stated) or is it solely based on how you accept your failures and accomplishments?
YEE YEE YEE. so thats what i think :) goodnightt everybodyy
love stooph
Saturday, September 25, 2010
chapter 15-21 response
What is the tragedy in chapter 19? Do you sympathize for Billy Budd? Why or why not?
Captain Vere is having a discussion with Claggart as he accuses Billy of conspiracy. Captain Vere, doubts his claims and demands evidence. They decide to call Billy in to confront him; and from past experiences the reader knows that in tense situations, he has the tendency to stutter. After listening to all the accusations, Billy is speechless and reverts to violence, throwing a fatal blow to Claggarts face.
Similar to the incident with Red Whiskers, he acted on impulse. This violent side to him seemed to appear from his character when he felt wronged. As perfect as he may be appearance wise, Billy definitely struggles mentally. I sympathize Billy for the fact that people despise him without a solid reason to, and even creates false accusations in order to make Billy's life worse. However, I feel that Billy, or anyone for his age, should act so recklessly even though he knew it was false, as did Captain Vere. His actions were too rash. Billy does not look too innocent now, by more primal and imprudent.
Is justice served for Billy Budd? Why or why not? Who is to be thanked or blamed for the decisions of the court?
Justice is definitely not served, not only because killing someone as a punishment doesn't really solve anything, but also becasue both Claggart and Billy were at fault for their own deaths. Firstly, if it were not for Claggart's bad impressions as well as the need to punish Billy (from hearing false rumors), Billy would not have striked him. Secondly, Billy claims that Claggart always treated him with nothing but praises and friendly behaviour. Even with Dansker at his side warning Billy to be more aware of Claggart's attitude, his advice was ignored, Billy felt he had no reason to suspect Claggart of anything. He is completely oblivious, and his violent outbreak was not going assist him in any way either. They are both responsible for their own death.
Captain Vere is having a discussion with Claggart as he accuses Billy of conspiracy. Captain Vere, doubts his claims and demands evidence. They decide to call Billy in to confront him; and from past experiences the reader knows that in tense situations, he has the tendency to stutter. After listening to all the accusations, Billy is speechless and reverts to violence, throwing a fatal blow to Claggarts face.
Similar to the incident with Red Whiskers, he acted on impulse. This violent side to him seemed to appear from his character when he felt wronged. As perfect as he may be appearance wise, Billy definitely struggles mentally. I sympathize Billy for the fact that people despise him without a solid reason to, and even creates false accusations in order to make Billy's life worse. However, I feel that Billy, or anyone for his age, should act so recklessly even though he knew it was false, as did Captain Vere. His actions were too rash. Billy does not look too innocent now, by more primal and imprudent.
Is justice served for Billy Budd? Why or why not? Who is to be thanked or blamed for the decisions of the court?
Justice is definitely not served, not only because killing someone as a punishment doesn't really solve anything, but also becasue both Claggart and Billy were at fault for their own deaths. Firstly, if it were not for Claggart's bad impressions as well as the need to punish Billy (from hearing false rumors), Billy would not have striked him. Secondly, Billy claims that Claggart always treated him with nothing but praises and friendly behaviour. Even with Dansker at his side warning Billy to be more aware of Claggart's attitude, his advice was ignored, Billy felt he had no reason to suspect Claggart of anything. He is completely oblivious, and his violent outbreak was not going assist him in any way either. They are both responsible for their own death.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Sunday, September 19, 2010
chapter 8-14 response
6. What characteristic of Billy's leads him to the forechains? Is this character a strength or weakness?
Billy is awakened by one of the afterguradsman during the middle of the night. Without much of a second thought of whom it may be or why he may be waking Billy up. Billy obediently meets the guardsman where he was instructed to. As mentioned before, one of Billy's biggest weaknesses is that he is naive and often oblivious to the true motives of other people. For example, in this situation, the guardsman is attempting to corrupt Billy and even offers him money. As questionable as it may be to the reader for the reason behind the guardsman's action, Billy does not even recognize the fact that this man is trying to get Billy into trouble. His innocence/naivety/obliviousness is a really big obstacle for Billy, even when the forecastlemen arrive, he does not explain to them the situation that has just happened because he does not want to "tell on" the guardsman, so he can protect him from getting into trouble.This characteristic is definitely a weakness.
7. Discuss the spilled soup as a revelation into Claggart's character and motivation.
Claggart was definitely unpleased when he saw Billy spill the soup on the recently cleaned deck. Claggart's attitude towards Billy is an example of dramatic irony, as Billy, even when warned by the Dansker, believes that Claggart favors him and praises him when they pass each other. The Dansker can read Claggart quite well, and cautions Billy that he is planning something evil against him. Claggart complimented Billy "Handsomely done, my lad! And handsome is as handsome did it, too!" as he passed by the spilt soup, however, his expressions quickly change into a bitter and unpleased face, even scaring a drummer boy causing him to spill his soup. The reasoning behind Claggart's hatred for Billy is envy. He is jealous of Billy's goodness and his appearance, and this jealousy is what feeds his strong animosity towards him. Later, Squeak reports to Claggart that Billy has been talking behind his back, and falsely accusing Billy's dislike towards Claggart. Obviously, Claggart would not defend Billy, so he almost encourages what Squeak says and takes every word as he truth. In Claggart's mind, because of Billy's apparent attitude, this calls for revenge.
I chose this photo of the devil because the devil and Claggart have a very similar characteristic, which is that they feed their hatred (for Billy/God) because of jealousy.
Billy is awakened by one of the afterguradsman during the middle of the night. Without much of a second thought of whom it may be or why he may be waking Billy up. Billy obediently meets the guardsman where he was instructed to. As mentioned before, one of Billy's biggest weaknesses is that he is naive and often oblivious to the true motives of other people. For example, in this situation, the guardsman is attempting to corrupt Billy and even offers him money. As questionable as it may be to the reader for the reason behind the guardsman's action, Billy does not even recognize the fact that this man is trying to get Billy into trouble. His innocence/naivety/obliviousness is a really big obstacle for Billy, even when the forecastlemen arrive, he does not explain to them the situation that has just happened because he does not want to "tell on" the guardsman, so he can protect him from getting into trouble.This characteristic is definitely a weakness.
7. Discuss the spilled soup as a revelation into Claggart's character and motivation.
Claggart was definitely unpleased when he saw Billy spill the soup on the recently cleaned deck. Claggart's attitude towards Billy is an example of dramatic irony, as Billy, even when warned by the Dansker, believes that Claggart favors him and praises him when they pass each other. The Dansker can read Claggart quite well, and cautions Billy that he is planning something evil against him. Claggart complimented Billy "Handsomely done, my lad! And handsome is as handsome did it, too!" as he passed by the spilt soup, however, his expressions quickly change into a bitter and unpleased face, even scaring a drummer boy causing him to spill his soup. The reasoning behind Claggart's hatred for Billy is envy. He is jealous of Billy's goodness and his appearance, and this jealousy is what feeds his strong animosity towards him. Later, Squeak reports to Claggart that Billy has been talking behind his back, and falsely accusing Billy's dislike towards Claggart. Obviously, Claggart would not defend Billy, so he almost encourages what Squeak says and takes every word as he truth. In Claggart's mind, because of Billy's apparent attitude, this calls for revenge.
I chose this photo of the devil because the devil and Claggart have a very similar characteristic, which is that they feed their hatred (for Billy/God) because of jealousy.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Lady of Shalott Personal Response
The Lady of Shalott focuses on a unilateral love story to break the Lady’s curse. In the poem, it does not give any details as to why or how she may have gotten cursed; however, the conclusion explains how she managed to escape from it. Though she is able to break free, tragedy and misfortune definitely overrules the majority of her life. As soon as she escapes to pursue her love, Sir Lancelot; she sang her last song “till her blood was frozen slowly, and her eyes were darkened wholly.” With elements such as love, the natural world and the supernatural play a central role as to why her death was tragic.
Love plays a crucial role in this poem, as it was the drive the Lady had that allowed her to break free from the curse that isolated her from the rest of the world. Being confined in a tower, her life was lonesome and the only way she could view the world was through a mirror. Sir Lancelot was the glimmer of hope the Lady had, he was her motivation to break away from the curse. However, not only did Sir Lancelot not share the same feelings as her, but their first encounter was when she was dead. At this sight, everyone in Camelot was in shock and fear upon seeing her body, but in spite of this; Lancelot comments on her “lovely face” followed by a benediction. Even though Lancelot gave her a blessing and complimented her, the blessing is not anything out of the ordinary, as it could be said to anyone, as well as strangers. Therefore By complimenting her, he was showing condolences for her and the Lady’s love for him was nothing but a unilateral love story.
The Lady is a prisoner of the world; she cannot experience the beauties of nature that surrounds her. Trees, rivers and flowers are significant and add to the theme of lively nature in contrast to the Lady’s isolated and forlorn life. In fact, the first two stanzas of the poem are dedicated to illustrate the environment around her. One may say she was more connected to the natural world than she was with human beings, however, the natural world was not the motive that made her escape the tower and curse. It was Sir Lancelot, a human being, therefore it can be inferred that this curse was not upon her since birth, as she still has emotions and connections with and for other beings.
The theme of the supernatural plays a fundamental role in this poem, adding mystery and magic to the Lady of Shalott’s life. The curse that is upon her rules her life and ultimately causes her death. The meaning of the poem is more effective without the explanation of her curse because it allows the reader to use their imagination and develop their own story of how she got cursed. The Lady is secluded from society and lives an isolated life, however, this is not the reason she weaves. It is symbolic of her skill, expression. It is her art. Her final piece of art before death was a carving she carved her name onto the boat, almost as if she wanted people to recognize her existence.
It was the Lady of Shalott’s choice to leave the tower to join the living world. Although Tennyson does not suggest or give any details of the origins of her curse, the reader must assume what happened to her. Without knowing this important detail, determining whether her death was indeed tragic or her way of breaking out of the tower and seeing the world for herself, is dependant on the reader’s perspective. Nevertheless, from the information presented in the poem, we can safely assume that her isolation from society and the world resulted in her loneliness. She died very tragically, lonely; and love, the natural world as well as the supernatural, was a constant force working against her.
EDITED BY: KRYSTAL AND OSMAN
EDITED BY: KRYSTAL AND OSMAN
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
CareBear 90210's Response
for response 1 id have to agree with Steph fully. I think that there is something more to Billy punching Red Whiskers and turning his hatred into love, im sure that we will see this concept again in the story.
for response 2 id have to disagree with Steph. I think that although his innocence is his greatest attribute, it is not Billy's weakness. To me Billy seems as the kind of person that can stand up for himself, as in the conflict between Billy and Red Whiskers.
-Carebears90210
for response 2 id have to disagree with Steph. I think that although his innocence is his greatest attribute, it is not Billy's weakness. To me Billy seems as the kind of person that can stand up for himself, as in the conflict between Billy and Red Whiskers.
-Carebears90210
Monday, September 13, 2010
Blog Response #1
http://carebears90210.tumblr.com/
The first response gave a lot of insight on what the narrator was trying to do with a third person narrative. It also helped me understand why the author decided to write this way as well. I really liked the response to the first question, it was well written.
Regarding the second response, because I also answered the same question, we both have completely different opinions on how Billy responded. I suppose one commonality we had in our posts were that we did not expect Billy to punch Red Whiskers back. I'm taking in the information from both our posts, but I don't think I quite agree with his post.
The first response gave a lot of insight on what the narrator was trying to do with a third person narrative. It also helped me understand why the author decided to write this way as well. I really liked the response to the first question, it was well written.
Regarding the second response, because I also answered the same question, we both have completely different opinions on how Billy responded. I suppose one commonality we had in our posts were that we did not expect Billy to punch Red Whiskers back. I'm taking in the information from both our posts, but I don't think I quite agree with his post.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
chapters 1-7 response
Examine the incident between Billy and Red Whiskers. What is the incident meant to do? Does it suggest something about Billy's character or just Red Whiskers?
With his good appearance and friendly nature, Billy is portrayed as a almost perfect character. This incident between Billy and "Red Whiskers" is meant to show the audience that as likable and innocent Billy may seem, he is physically powerful, and able to inflict pain using violence. His character is also slightly impulsive, "he gave the burly fool a terrible drubbing" (295) . As much as this sounds like a violent encounter from our perspective, this earns respect and love from "Red Whiskers". This can suggest the author is foreshadowing what will later on happen in the book due to Billy's use of violence. Red Whiskers is just a character used to show Billy's violent side of his almost perfect persona.
8. What is Billy's flaw? How important is this flaw in understanding his overall character? Has it altered your original evaluation of him? How?
Billy's greatest flaw is his innocence. Although it may not seem like one, what comes with this quality, comes gullibility, which can make him very vulnerable to any kind of influence, as well as evil ones. If he trusts everyone, there is no longer a border between good and evil and eventually he will have a psychological war with his conscience, not knowing which one is the "right choice". Some may not view this as a flaw because innocence is a large part of what make Billy so affable to the crew and the audience (of the book) alike, but if you weigh the differences, his innocence is more of a flaw, than what adds to his perfection.This has definitely altered my original evaluation of Billy because the novel does not focus on what is bad about him, but what is good. However, in all that perfection lies a giant hole in Billy's character which is how exposed he is to others' influences'.
[please ignore the fact that this is homer simpson]
i chose this image because Billy Budd is almost perfect in every way externally, he is lacking a lot mentally. He is simple-minded, does not have much experience with the world, has a limited amount of vocabulary and occasionally primitive.
With his good appearance and friendly nature, Billy is portrayed as a almost perfect character. This incident between Billy and "Red Whiskers" is meant to show the audience that as likable and innocent Billy may seem, he is physically powerful, and able to inflict pain using violence. His character is also slightly impulsive, "he gave the burly fool a terrible drubbing" (295) . As much as this sounds like a violent encounter from our perspective, this earns respect and love from "Red Whiskers". This can suggest the author is foreshadowing what will later on happen in the book due to Billy's use of violence. Red Whiskers is just a character used to show Billy's violent side of his almost perfect persona.
8. What is Billy's flaw? How important is this flaw in understanding his overall character? Has it altered your original evaluation of him? How?
Billy's greatest flaw is his innocence. Although it may not seem like one, what comes with this quality, comes gullibility, which can make him very vulnerable to any kind of influence, as well as evil ones. If he trusts everyone, there is no longer a border between good and evil and eventually he will have a psychological war with his conscience, not knowing which one is the "right choice". Some may not view this as a flaw because innocence is a large part of what make Billy so affable to the crew and the audience (of the book) alike, but if you weigh the differences, his innocence is more of a flaw, than what adds to his perfection.This has definitely altered my original evaluation of Billy because the novel does not focus on what is bad about him, but what is good. However, in all that perfection lies a giant hole in Billy's character which is how exposed he is to others' influences'.
[please ignore the fact that this is homer simpson]
i chose this image because Billy Budd is almost perfect in every way externally, he is lacking a lot mentally. He is simple-minded, does not have much experience with the world, has a limited amount of vocabulary and occasionally primitive.
Goals for English 20
This term, one of my goals for English 20 is to have my final first term report card mark to be higher than my mid term mark because i want to see that i have made progress and improved from what i started with. Another goal of mine is to improve my understanding and analysis of novels and poems. I don't want to rely on class discussions for me to understand a piece of literature.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)