Reread the lines in which Hamlet learns of Ophelia's death: 5.1.227-268. What do you make of Hamlet's reaction to Ophelia's death? Does his reaction surprise you? Is there some competition/conflict between Laertes and Hamlet here? Does Hamlet have a right to this grief? Why or why not?
Hamlet's reaction to Ophelia's death does not surprise me. Throughout the book, he never displayed his true feelings for her in a way that was clear and concise. This led me to believe that he had some feelings for her. If he did not have any feelings, he would not have pretended so much. I would have been much more surprised if Hamlet was not upset whatsoever over Ophelia's death. I also do not believe that he is playing a game when he is sad. Hamlet is not trying to pretend or mask his feelings. This moment is the one true reflection of his feelings. People react strongly to situations like death. Hamlet is not prepared for this, so he cannot have his emotions changed. Instead, what he feels comes out naturally. This is why I believe, out of the entire book, Hamlet is most honest with everyone, and himself, in this one scene.
Friday, December 14, 2012
Thursday, December 13, 2012
Hamlet and the Skulls
What is the significance of Hamlet's pondering the skulls in the graveyard (one of the most famous images from the play)? What does he take away from this?
Dear Based God,
Hamlet learns a lot for himself from looking at and examining the skulls. During this moment, he has a realization about life. All people become dust. No matter what significance they may have while alive, everyone is equal when they die. He ponders how the great people of their times will mean nothing in the future. For example, Alexander and Caesar are two of the people that he mentions. Their bodies will decompose and be nothing. In this way, for Hamlet, life does not mean anything. All significance of his life will be lost after death. This is how Hamlet views the world.
Love,
Evan and Pat
Dear Based God,
Hamlet learns a lot for himself from looking at and examining the skulls. During this moment, he has a realization about life. All people become dust. No matter what significance they may have while alive, everyone is equal when they die. He ponders how the great people of their times will mean nothing in the future. For example, Alexander and Caesar are two of the people that he mentions. Their bodies will decompose and be nothing. In this way, for Hamlet, life does not mean anything. All significance of his life will be lost after death. This is how Hamlet views the world.
Love,
Evan and Pat
Monday, December 10, 2012
Ophelia Questions
How do you characterize Ophelia? How would Hamlet characterize Ophelia? Do you agree with him? What does she bring to the unfolding of the story? What function or purpose does she serve? What lines from the text reveal her character?
Ophelia seems very submissive. She does whatever she is told to do. For example, Polonius and Laertes tell her how to act around and respond to Hamlet. She simply replies, "I shall obey, my Lord" (1.3.135). Not once in the conversation does she mention how she feels or what she wants from him. It is not focused on her feelings, but rather what her father and brother feel. She never tries to question this behavior. Instead, she accepts it and goes along with it. If my parents or brother ever tried to tell me what to do with other people, I would become angry and get in a fight with them. I would not stand for them trying to control my life. However, Ophelia allows this to happen with no resistance whatsoever. I am not sure if this is a reflection of her or of women in general during this time period. Ophelia could be a symbol for how life was when this play took place.
Ophelia seems very submissive. She does whatever she is told to do. For example, Polonius and Laertes tell her how to act around and respond to Hamlet. She simply replies, "I shall obey, my Lord" (1.3.135). Not once in the conversation does she mention how she feels or what she wants from him. It is not focused on her feelings, but rather what her father and brother feel. She never tries to question this behavior. Instead, she accepts it and goes along with it. If my parents or brother ever tried to tell me what to do with other people, I would become angry and get in a fight with them. I would not stand for them trying to control my life. However, Ophelia allows this to happen with no resistance whatsoever. I am not sure if this is a reflection of her or of women in general during this time period. Ophelia could be a symbol for how life was when this play took place.
Friday, October 26, 2012
Things Fall Apart Early Questions
Is the community represented as civilized? Does it have a strong language? What is the relationship between civilization and language?
I don't think the community is represented as civilized or uncivilized. I think the author is representing the community in either way. He is simply describing the community as it is. To me, I think of the community as just how it is. This question is phrased to me as how the author chooses to portray the village. This may seem to be a minor distinction, but to me it is important. However, to me, the community is civilized to a point. There is a hierarchy, economic system, housing, families, ect. There are general rules that everyone follows. To me, this is civilized. However, I would not classify the community as the same as the United States. We are more "evolved". We have more technology, our rules are a little different, ect. Overall, the community is civilized to a point, but I do not consider them as civilized as us (the United States).
I don't think the community is represented as civilized or uncivilized. I think the author is representing the community in either way. He is simply describing the community as it is. To me, I think of the community as just how it is. This question is phrased to me as how the author chooses to portray the village. This may seem to be a minor distinction, but to me it is important. However, to me, the community is civilized to a point. There is a hierarchy, economic system, housing, families, ect. There are general rules that everyone follows. To me, this is civilized. However, I would not classify the community as the same as the United States. We are more "evolved". We have more technology, our rules are a little different, ect. Overall, the community is civilized to a point, but I do not consider them as civilized as us (the United States).
Monday, October 22, 2012
Literary Criticism
Is this text (The Stranger) an example of Camus resisting French coloinalism or supporting it? How would Kulkarni answer? How would you answer?
According to Kulkarni, The Stranger is an example of him not resisting French colonialism. He believed that Camus wanted Algeria to be mixed between the Europeans and the Arabs.
However, as Kulkarni stated, "In the 1930's when LE was conceived, no great anomaly was involved in adopting such a position" (Kulkarni 1529). There would be no reason for him to write about this situation. According to Kulkarni, Camus did not support French colonalism, but he was not writing his novel to protest their ruling.
I would disagree. I think Camus was writing in protest of French colonialism. As Kulkarni stated, he was in favor of the two groups of people being mixed. However, there is evidence that there were still problems. One of them that he focused on was the laws focus on Europeans versus Arabs. In the literary criticism, "In practice, no French court in Algeria would have condemned a European to death for shooting an Arab who had drawn a knife on him and who had shortly before stabbed another European" (Kulkarni 1528). Camus writes directly against this, as Meursault is convicted for this same crime. In his perfect world, the two would be seen as equals. In this sence, LE was written to protest this difference in the two groups of people.
According to Kulkarni, The Stranger is an example of him not resisting French colonialism. He believed that Camus wanted Algeria to be mixed between the Europeans and the Arabs.
However, as Kulkarni stated, "In the 1930's when LE was conceived, no great anomaly was involved in adopting such a position" (Kulkarni 1529). There would be no reason for him to write about this situation. According to Kulkarni, Camus did not support French colonalism, but he was not writing his novel to protest their ruling.
I would disagree. I think Camus was writing in protest of French colonialism. As Kulkarni stated, he was in favor of the two groups of people being mixed. However, there is evidence that there were still problems. One of them that he focused on was the laws focus on Europeans versus Arabs. In the literary criticism, "In practice, no French court in Algeria would have condemned a European to death for shooting an Arab who had drawn a knife on him and who had shortly before stabbed another European" (Kulkarni 1528). Camus writes directly against this, as Meursault is convicted for this same crime. In his perfect world, the two would be seen as equals. In this sence, LE was written to protest this difference in the two groups of people.
Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Meursault in Prison
What are the things he doesn't like talking about?
Meursault doesn't like talking about his time in prison. I think this is a part of a larger problem where he doesn't like talking about anytime where he has strong emotions. For example, he did not talk about his mothers funeral emotionally. He just listed the facts surrounding the case. This is the same with prison. Obviously, he has strong emotions and feelings because of his situation. He does not want to talk about it because to him, emotions are messy and complicated. He does not like dealing with them.
What explains the unspoken nature of these things? Why is there silence surrounding them? Is this silence positive or negative?
As previously stated, he does not like talking about these things because of emotions. I think this silence is a bad thing. It is not healthy for one to bury all these emotions inside and never talk about them. Meursault should not avoid these situations and instead embrace them. If he dealt with his emotions better, maybe he would not be such an outcast in society. Also, there is a good chance he wouldn't be in this situation at all.
Meursault doesn't like talking about his time in prison. I think this is a part of a larger problem where he doesn't like talking about anytime where he has strong emotions. For example, he did not talk about his mothers funeral emotionally. He just listed the facts surrounding the case. This is the same with prison. Obviously, he has strong emotions and feelings because of his situation. He does not want to talk about it because to him, emotions are messy and complicated. He does not like dealing with them.
What explains the unspoken nature of these things? Why is there silence surrounding them? Is this silence positive or negative?
As previously stated, he does not like talking about these things because of emotions. I think this silence is a bad thing. It is not healthy for one to bury all these emotions inside and never talk about them. Meursault should not avoid these situations and instead embrace them. If he dealt with his emotions better, maybe he would not be such an outcast in society. Also, there is a good chance he wouldn't be in this situation at all.
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Page 52 "The sun was shining almost directly overhead onto the sand, and the glare on the water was unbearable." "It was hard to breathe in the rocky heat rising from the ground."
This description also decribes how he feels in the situation with Raymond and Masson. He feels out of place with these two close friends. In that way, the time spent is unbearable for him. Also, not that he literally can't breathe, but it shows how uncomfortable he is at this time. It is very weird and hard to be around 2 people who are so close. He might feel like a third wheel, which is a tough place to be. Overall, I feel that the weather does describe the weather, but also describes the mood and the feelings of Meursault.
This description also decribes how he feels in the situation with Raymond and Masson. He feels out of place with these two close friends. In that way, the time spent is unbearable for him. Also, not that he literally can't breathe, but it shows how uncomfortable he is at this time. It is very weird and hard to be around 2 people who are so close. He might feel like a third wheel, which is a tough place to be. Overall, I feel that the weather does describe the weather, but also describes the mood and the feelings of Meursault.
Thursday, September 20, 2012
Character Perspective
Describe Meurseault from another character's perspective.
Maman's friends are definitely confused by Meurseault. He is viewing his mother in a casket and has almost no emotion. This is definitely not the reaction that they were expecting. Also, in their heads, they probably assume that there was some sort of distance in their relationship. Because of their relationship with his mother, her friends do not like Meurseault. They assume that it was his fault for the distance because their friend is a good person. Because of this, Meurseault is probably right that they are all judging him. Also, Maman's friends might be scared of him. Here is their friends son, sitting at Maman's casket. He has no emotion. One interpretation of this might be that he doesn't have a heart. He comes across as very cold. Also, and this is a little bit of a stretch, but they might believe that he had a part in her death. If he could have no emotion seeing his mother dead, it's not a stretch that he would do something to her. Overall, I believe that Maman's friends do not view Meurseault in a positive light. They do not like him, and are confused by him.
Maman's friends are definitely confused by Meurseault. He is viewing his mother in a casket and has almost no emotion. This is definitely not the reaction that they were expecting. Also, in their heads, they probably assume that there was some sort of distance in their relationship. Because of their relationship with his mother, her friends do not like Meurseault. They assume that it was his fault for the distance because their friend is a good person. Because of this, Meurseault is probably right that they are all judging him. Also, Maman's friends might be scared of him. Here is their friends son, sitting at Maman's casket. He has no emotion. One interpretation of this might be that he doesn't have a heart. He comes across as very cold. Also, and this is a little bit of a stretch, but they might believe that he had a part in her death. If he could have no emotion seeing his mother dead, it's not a stretch that he would do something to her. Overall, I believe that Maman's friends do not view Meurseault in a positive light. They do not like him, and are confused by him.
Friday, September 14, 2012
Translation Challenges
What challenges does a translator face? What challenges does a reader face when reading a work in translation?
A translator faces many challenges when translating a story from one language to another. One of the biggest challenges is that certain words do not translate exactly. For example, there are many times when I am in Spanish class and I will ask Senor Hiertz, "How do you say (insert English phrase) in Spanish?" A lot of times, he will pause and not be able to come up with a word or phrase. Also, some of the times he does the word he gives me does not fit with the exact meaning I am looking for. This is only with basic words and phrases. I cannot even imagine how hard this must be for an entire book, with much more complex words and ideas. This challenge of making sure the original meaning does not get lost in translation is very difficult and nearly impossible to complete. As for a reader, they do not face the same challenge. In fact, the reader does not really face a challenge at all. The reader can only read what is presented in front of them. If the translator does a poor job, then the meaning can get confused for the reader. However, there is nothing the reader can do about this unless they speak the language the text was originally published in. They must read what they are presented with. Overall, the pressure is on the translator. They face many challenges, while the reader does not face any.
A translator faces many challenges when translating a story from one language to another. One of the biggest challenges is that certain words do not translate exactly. For example, there are many times when I am in Spanish class and I will ask Senor Hiertz, "How do you say (insert English phrase) in Spanish?" A lot of times, he will pause and not be able to come up with a word or phrase. Also, some of the times he does the word he gives me does not fit with the exact meaning I am looking for. This is only with basic words and phrases. I cannot even imagine how hard this must be for an entire book, with much more complex words and ideas. This challenge of making sure the original meaning does not get lost in translation is very difficult and nearly impossible to complete. As for a reader, they do not face the same challenge. In fact, the reader does not really face a challenge at all. The reader can only read what is presented in front of them. If the translator does a poor job, then the meaning can get confused for the reader. However, there is nothing the reader can do about this unless they speak the language the text was originally published in. They must read what they are presented with. Overall, the pressure is on the translator. They face many challenges, while the reader does not face any.
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Are changes in language directly related to the power of a group of language users?
I read a status on Facebook during break about Harry Potter that used the word muggle. It reminded me that muggle is now an official word in the Engligh language. This word was used by many after the books were published. It makes me believe that changes in language are directly related to the usage by the majority. Words will not be added or removed from the dictionary unless the majority of the speakers agree with the changes. That's why muggle was added to the dictionary. Harry Potter was and remains very popular The majority of speakers knew what the word meant and would use it. If anyone in the future ever wants to make a major change to a language, they must get the support of the majority of speakers.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Does language define our identity?
I am a big rap fan. Over break, I've been listening to Common's new album, The Dreamer, The Believer, a lot. The production is very strong, and the lyrical content is deep and meaningful. I think language used absolutely defines our identity. I immediately associate Common as a very intelligent person. Fair or not, that is how I see him. On the other hand, I cannot take someone like Lil Wayne seriously. He is not able to use language in the same way as Common, and comes across as stupid. This does not just apply to music, however. I believe we all, to certain degrees, will take someone more seriously if they come across as coherent and inelligent. We see them this way based on the way they use language. If someone does not do this, we may not appreciate their ideas fully. Language definately defines our identity.
Should governments have a language policy for a particular nation?
One of the big debates happening in Ameican politics right now is the role of government. How muchpower should they have? Should the government be able to restrict what we do? This made me think about language. Should a government be able to force a language policy on its people? To me, the answer is no. I do not believe that the government has the right to enforce it. Take America, for instance. Do I believe that it would be in the best interest of people who do not speak English to learn it? Absolutely. However, they should not be forced to learn it. If this were to happen, some minority languages might become extinct in certain countries. Also, many languages are a reflection of culture. If language is restriced, then culture might also be restricted. Finally, there would be no reason for anyone to learn other languages. This would be unfortunate, as we can connect with others better when we understand their language and culture. A government should not enforce a language policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)