Close Reading December 16

This article I read can be found here: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/opinion/sunday/kristof-do-we-have-the-courage-to-stop-this.html?ref=opinion

      After the recent violence in Connecticut, many editorials have been written arguing for various methods of preventing similar crimes in the future. Among these is an article written by Nicholas Kristof titled "Do We Have the Courage to Stop This?". In the article, Kristof argues for increased regulation on firearms, saying such regulation will greatly reduce the number of violent crimes in the United States. Throughout the article, Kristof uses strong diction, quantitative details, and syntax to create a though-provoking argument.

      In the article, Kristof uses carefully chosen diction to make his point and opinion powerful in a subtle way. He uses words that have certain connotations, for example he describes the politicians, whom he clearly blames for their inaction, as "feckless" (paragraph 7). Later he criticizes politicians again, saying Obama had a given a "moving" speech. This word generally has a positive connotation, but that connotation is one of emotion rather than of literal motion, and Kristof uses that to contrast what is currently being done from the strong action he thinks should be taken. For most of the article, Kristof's diction is mechanical and logical, but with a few choice words such as these he changes the opinion of the reader. 

      The details of the article are perhaps what makes the argument the strongest. By presenting numerous facts and statistics, Kristof is able to make his argument logical and convincing. He presents statistics comparing gun control in the US to that in other countries, such as Canada and  Australia, saying how restrictions on firearms there led to a clear decrease in violent crimes. He also makes comparisons with restriction on automobiles, citing the long list of regulations on automobile safety, which makes the lack of regulation on the obviously more dangerous things, guns, seem absurd. Finally, with a slightly satirical tone, he compares regulation of guns to that of ladders. He cites the regulations that exist on ladders, which are quite extensive, and then notes that guns cause over one hundreds times more deaths than ladders annually, but are not as strictly regulated. The statistics are the basis of Kristof's argument in the sense that they make his points hard to challenge.

      Finally, with syntax that challenges the reader, Kristof drives home his point. Throughout the article, he writes almost as if he were directly addressing the reader. This begins right in the title: "Do We Have the Courage to Stop This?" The use of the first person plural pronouns brings the reader into the text, empowering him or her to take action. The rhetorical question is thought provoking, and could possibly even cause feelings of guilt or defiance. Kristof continues asking rhetorical questions and including the reader through the use of pronouns throughout the article. He concludes it with the "Some of you…", again using a pronoun that includes the reader directly. Altogether, Kristof's use of these three literary tools create a powerful and convincing argument. 

Open Prompt-Dec 9

1990. Choose a novel or play that depicts a conflict between a parent (or a parental figure) and a son or daughter. Write an essay in which you analyze the sources of the conflict and explain how the conflict contributes to the meaning of the work. Avoid plot summary.

      In Arthur Miller's play Death of a Salesman the main character Willy Loman and his son Biff are constantly at conflict. Throughout the play, Willy believes in the capitalist business system and that anyone can be successful, whereas Biff denies this and tries to escape the business world. The origin of this conflict, as we find out towards the end of the play, lies in the family's past. In Death of a Salesman, Miller uses the conflicting ideals of Biff and Willy to contrast conventional views of the business world with human nature.

     The origin of the conflict between Willy and Biff originates at the end of Biff's high school years, as we find out in a mental flashback of Willy's in the second act. Biff had originally believed in his father and his father's world, thinking business was the only path to success and that Willy had succeeded and become essentially a perfect human being. In the flashback, Biff goes to meet his father in a hotel in Boston to ask him to speak to a teacher about changing a grade, again assuming his father is influential enough to have anything done. He finds Willy in a hotel room with an unknown woman. Immediately Biff becomes disillusioned with the Willy's whole world. He wonders how many other parts of what Willy has told him have been a lie besides his marriage. This disillusionment continues throughout the rest of the play, as Biff rebels against his father's views for the remainder of the play. The single scene in the hotel is the reason for the conflict, but it was built up to for years by Willy's lies or fantasies. If Willy had exposed Biff to the truth and given him a vision of a less ideal world, the events in the hotel probably would not have effected him so greatly.

     The conflict is the central theme of the play and provides context for Miller to communicate his themes. One of those themes is the failure of the capitalist business system. Miller feels that many people have views similar to Willy about the business world, and have bought into the system enough to have lost some perspective. In the play, Miller exaggerates this in Willy's case, making him in a complete fantasy world, and Biff serves to make it apparent to the audience how far Willy has gone from reality. Willy constantly makes statements about the business world that are generally accepted as true, for example, that one will start off with a low position, but move up after years of working somewhere. Willy has come to believe it so completely that he almost doesn't recognize that has not happened in his own case. Biff continually points out the flaws in Willy's thinking, giving entirely negative feedback and saying Willy has failed and that he himself does not have chance to succeed. Biff's disillusionment and the contrast with Willy's delusion's puts the dire situation of the Loman family in perspective.

Death of a Salesman Summary and Analysis-Dec 3

Death of a Salesman 

Author

Death of a Salesman was written by Arthur Miller in 1949. Miller is a famous playwright who won the Pulitzer prize for Drama and also authored several other well-know plays including The Crucible. Arthur Miller was also politically involved throughout his career as a writer.

Setting 

The play takes place in New York City. Most of the action occurs in the Loman's home and at several other scenes around the city including an office building, a restaurant, and Charley's Business. One scene occurs in a hotel in Boston. The time period of the play is unspecified, but it can be implied that it is meant to take place around the time the play was written, 1949.

Plot

The play begins with Willy coming home from a business trip, supposedly to Boston. Soon, it is revealed, that Willy never made it to Boston, because he couldn't stay focused on driving. Linda comforts him, saying he is just too tired after years of work to be on the road all the time anymore. The scene then switches to the two sons Biff and Happy, who are visiting their parents. The two boys talk as they sit in their old room, talking about their current lives and the changes since their high school years. As they fall asleep, a scene from Willy's memory of their days in high school takes over. A scene is replayed from before Biff's big high school football game showing the dynamic of the family in those years. A conversation between Willy and Linda is interrupted by the Woman's laughter in Willy's head, foreshadowing the later realization. The flashback ends and Happy talks to Willy just before going to bed. The neighbor, Charley enters and he and Willy engage in a game of cards. The game is interrupted by another flashback in Willy's mind, in which he converses with his brother Ben. It is revealed that Ben was a successful businessman and Willy missed the opportunity to go into business with him, and it has troubled him ever since he started doing poorly in his job. Meanwhile, Biff becomes aware of Willy's mental state and discusses it with Linda expressing concern. Linda is defensive of Willy and attacks Biff for being unable to find a suitable job and allowing Willy to rest easy. Willy enters the conversation, accusing Biff of not being true to Willy's dream of him being a salesman. Happy puts forward the idea of he and Biff going into business together, calming Willy. They discuss the idea and decide to meet with Bill Oliver, a big businessman about it in the morning. 

The second act begins in a positive scene as Willy wakes up well rested and obviously comforted by the idea of his sons going into business. This is the high point of the play as Willy leaves for work, he seems mentally at ease. Willy goes to his boss Howard to ask to be given a job off the road. Howard says there are no jobs for Willy in town, and Willy is reduced to almost begging, embarrassing himself. He loses his confidence from that morning and has another flashback of Ben while in Howard's office. Howard suggests he takes some time off, telling him to come back to work when he is mentally ready. Willy goes out on the street, recalling a scene about Biff not doing well in math class. He goes to Charley's business and meets Charley and Bernard, learning that Bernard has become a successful lawyer. Charley offers Willy a job, but he is too proud to accept it. Willy then goes to meet Biff and Happy in a restaurant for dinner. Before he arrives, Happy is distracted by a girl, and when Willy arrives, he asks how the business meeting went, not listening to Biff when Biff says he was unable to meet with Bill Oliver. Biff tries to communicate his sense of self-failure, but Willy does not heed him. Willy goes into the bathroom and recalls the scene where Biff discovers him in a hotel room with a woman, while Biff and Happy leave with the girls. 

Willy comes home after having bought some seeds and begins trying to plant them in the back yard, while talking to an imaginary Ben. He discusses a plan to get his family twenty thousand dollars from life insurance by committing suicide. Biff and Happy come home. Linda gives many harsh words about them abandoning Willy in the restaurant. Biff demands to see him, intending to tell him once and for all that he is not a businessman and is leaving to go back to the West. Linda refuses to let him see Willy but he finds Willy. At first the two yell at each other, Willy saying Biff was failing at business to "spite" him. Finally Biff breaks down crying and the two of them hug. Biff and Happy and Linda go upstairs to bed. Willy is unfazed by the entire episode and continue with his plan, killing himself in the car. The last scene is of the funeral. All the characters express sorrow at Willy's death. Happy and Charley support Willy's dream, Biff says he had a false dream. Linda seems to be in shock, saying she was finally done with the mortgage on the house after so many years of struggling. The play ends after the funeral. 

Characters:

Willy Loman: The main character of the play who has many characteristics of a tragic hero. Willy is just over sixty years old and has been working in the same company for over thirty years as a traveling salesman, without ever much success. Despite his failure to make it big in the business world, Willy continues to pursue the "American Dream" of becoming a great salesman even though it has begun taking its toll on him. By the time of the play, Willy is old an exhausted from many years of hard work trying to support his family. He suffers from constant mental scenes reminds himself of earlier days when things seemed better: when his boys were young and full of potential and his job was looking up. He also frequently recalls conversations with his older brother Ben. By the end of the play, Willy is consumed by these delusions and is no longer able to distinguish the truth from memories he has likely altered. Throughout the play it becomes apparent that Willy's job, family, and marriage all have serious flaws. His main delusion is his unfounded pride and confidence in his older son, Biff. It also becomes clear that Willy's true talent lies in construction, thought he continues to pursue business until his suicide at the end of the play.

Linda Loman: Willy's wife. Linda is a static character throughout the play, remaining steadfast in the face of Willy's mental breakdown. She always encourages Willy, comforting and soothing him. Linda constantly encourages Willy to continue his business dream, even though, as she acknowledges herself, he is not "well-liked" which is consistently quoted as a requirement to make it in business. Linda encourages her boys Biff and Happy to start a career in business, but it seems her only concern is taking weight off of Willy's shoulders. 

Biff Loman: Willy's oldest son, 34 years old during the action of the play. During high school, Biff was a football star, winning a championship game. After high school, Biff planned to attend the University of Virginia, but failed math class during his senior year. After he discovers Willy having an affair with another woman, Biff loses faith in his father's visions and does not attend the University, instead seeking out his fortune in the West. When he returns, Biff makes attempts at his family's persistence to try to make something in the business world, although Biff knows in his heart all along that he is not cut out for work in business. Throughout the play, Biff steals material objects from other characters.

Happy Loman: Willy and Linda's younger son, mostly ignored by his parents in the light of his older brother's accomplishments. Happy acts just as his name suggests, always trying to be agreeable and help out the other characters. Happy is not disillusioned about business as Biff is, and continues to pursue a successful business career. Happy holds a job as an assistant sales clerk, and constantly seduces women, including the those in relationships with his coworkers. 

Charley: The Loman's neighbor. A successful businessman who is not unkind but never particularly friendly to the Lomans. He clearly does not believe in Willy's fanciful business dreams. He lends money to the Loman's times to help them pay their mortgage.

Bernard: Charley's son. Constantly bullied by all three Loman men while in high school, but still holds a fierce loyalty to Biff. In the action of the play, Bernard has become a successful lawyer, arguing a case before the supreme court. His success serves to spite Willy's dreams, since Willy always denied he would be successful.

Other Characters: Ben, Stanley, Howard, unnamed Woman.

Tone and Style: Miller's tone and point of view are difficult to identify exactly because the work is a play. The tone of the work can be identified as harsh and pessimistic through the atmosphere the play creates. The entire play's events, except for a brief scene at the beginning of Act II are catastrophic and heartbreaking at worst, and delaying the inevitable at best. The complete lack of joy except for empty sad, ironic humor in some places, communicates Miller's distaste with the whole affair of the play. In some places, it seems his tone is almost satirical, since he creates essentially an "anti-American Dream," by having every aspect of the American Dream escape the family without fail. 

Miller's style throughout the play is masterful. His character come to life and move the plot along through their personalities and goals. Miller's hand driving the plot is completely invisible. It is usually difficult to tell how he feels about specific events and character, since his narrative style offers no bias. 

Point of View

Miller's clear point of view is that the business world and the "American Dream" can both be quite harmful, and he means to illustrate this through the play. It seems that Miller's point of view is most associated with the character Biff. Biff is the only one of the Loman family who is willing to speak out against the business dreams of his father and brother. Biff tries to point out the obvious destruction caused by the capitalist business system, which Miller tries to say through the entire work. If any character's lines are Miller speaking through one of the characters, they are definitely Biff's.

Imagery

The imagery is vivid and realistic by nature of the work being a play. In most of the scene (in the movie version) the Loman home was portrayed as dark and uninviting. The constant disrepair of the house, and the apartment buildings towering backstage shutting out view of the outside world cause this. The set of the play creates the atmosphere and sets the mood. 

The imagery changes when Willy travels back in time in his head. In the past, the backyard is shown as open and free, with tries, sunlight, and grass. This contrast from past to present emphasizes Willy's dreams of the past as a better place, whether or not it is true. Ben is constantly portrayed with a golden light around him, making him seem almost divine, and contributing to his image as a flawless figure in Willy's eyes. The past is also often accompanied by flute music, meant to recall Willy's father. The music serves as auditory imagery, making the past scenes soothing and peaceful.

Symbolism

There are many symbols throughout the play. I will discuss only a few of the main ones.

Seeds/Nature/Growth: Throughout the play, to both Willy and Biff, nature represents freedom, though only Biff realizes it. Biff constantly talks about how he feels shut off by the city and the business world, saying how he wishes he was in the wide open spaces of the west, under the sky, working with his hands, etc. In the West, Biff would not be closed off by the city, and so he views the west as a sort of paradise. Willy, on the other hand, seems to subconsciously realize that nature is freedom. He mentions several times that the new apartment building, which took the place of the Lomans' backyard, is shutting them in. By contrast, the wide open space they had before let them be free. In the end of the play, Willy constantly struggles to buy seeds to plant a garden. He uses his garden as an escape from the events of the play.

Trophy/Football: To Willy, the days of Biff's high school football career represent the safety and success of the past. The trophy symbolizes the culmination and downfall of the Loman's happy lifestyle. During high school, everything was looking up for the family: Willy was doing well in his job, Biff and Happy were successful, promising success in business that would be able to support their parents in old age. These dreams all came crashing down. In Willy's memory, as is clear from all the flashbacks, football was the cause of all this success and the thing he associates with it. Football and the Trophy from the Evan's Field game come to metaphorically be the success of the past.  

Quotes 

"You can't eat the orange and throw the peel away- a man is not a piece of fruit."- Willy

This line summarizes Arthur Miller's view of the nature of the business world, and puts Willy's downfall in perspective. 

"After all the highways, and the trains, and the appointments, and the years, you end up worth more dead than alive."-Willy

Summarizes the great irony of the play and of the capitalist business world. 

Theme

In one sentence: One theme of Death of a Salesman is the falsehood of the American economic dream.

Explanation: The setting is New York in the late 1940s contributes to this theme ironically because it seems that it would be the place where the American Dream was most achievable. The post world war II period is generally though of as being the most prosperous in American history with the American Dream most attainable. New York offers a setting that is American through and through, further adding to the irony. The work's title contributes to this irony by juxtaposing the obviously negative word "death" with the generally positive or neutral word salesman. The play's atmosphere is usually chaotic and unsettling, subtly communicating some impending doom, which is made inevitable by the title and the continuous downward spiral of events. The atmosphere gives the play a distasteful air which is blamed on Willy's false dreams. 

Response to Course Materials-December 2

     I'm glad that we have finally started Hamlet. I am enjoying it a lot more than the other two plays we have done. The play is much more engaging than Death of a Salesman for two main reasons. First, I haven't ever read the play or seen a performance of it as I had with Death of a Salesman, and second because it's set in an unfamiliar time period, which makes the people and events more exotic. With the Loman family, a lot of the details seem boring because they are typical things of a working class family in American. In Hamlet however, the family dynamics and interactions are completely foreign. The play is also much more intellectually engaging than either of the the other two plays because of it's difficult language. The other two plays are written in easily readable english, and to have any thought provoking discussion takes some effort in searching for symbolism and such. With Hamlet, just reading it and trying to figure out what the characters are saying is intellectually stimulating, since their language is so different from our own, and they sometimes speak almost in riddles. On top of that, there is definitely still the aspect of thought-provoking symbolism that the other two plays had.
     On a different note, it seems that at least half of the year will be focusing on plays. I would've found this a little odd at first, since typically one does not think of plays as being as literary as novels. But after discussing the play, I realize there is just as much opportunity for symbolism and meaning, perhaps more. The only downside of the plays for me is that it's extremely difficult to identify the authors voice. In most novels, the authors style is clear through the parts where a narrator speaks or the scene is described. In plays, however, there is only dialogue, which makes it hard to distinguish the author's style from that of the characters, actors, and stage director.

     

November 18 Close Reading

For my close reading this week, I read "How to Live without Irony" by Christy Wampole. The full article can be found here: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/how-to-live-without-irony/?ref=opinion. 

     In the article "How to Live without Irony" Christy Wampole discusses the dangers she sees in the current "ironic" lifestyle she sees in many young adults. She characterizes the ironic lifestyle as a lifestyle that avoids being genuine about anything. Some examples she gives are the tendency of young people to give gifts as jokes rather than genuine gifts, and also the existence of "hipsters". Throughout the article, Wampole argues that the ironic lifestyle is dangerous to society because it fosters empty humor, destroying sincerity about everything, and because it will leave no legacy behind for the next generation. Wampole effectively argues this with careful diction, second person syntax, and humorous imagery.

     Wampole's humorous imagery in the opening few paragraphs serves to set a satirical tone for the rest of the essay. Her description of "hipsters" in the first paragraph is stereotypical and slightly humorous. She mentions "outmoded fashion" and mechanical possessions like "record players" and "fixed-gear bicycles." The descriptive language, along with the almost caricature like picture accompanying the article serves to set a humorous tone that the reader can relate to.

     The main strength of the article is in Wampole's diction. All throughout the article, she uses precise language. Often this precise language seems over the top, which contributes to the humor of the article. This first appears in the first few when she uses words like "haunts" to describe the actions of "the hipster". Later she calls the hipster the "most extreme manifestation of the ironic lifestyle". By choosing big words like these to describe quite ordinary things the tone comes off as humorous and slightly mocking. It is difficult to tell exactly what the point of such inflated languages was, it seems to be trying to make a satirical criticism on the subject she is discussing. Whenever the author makes a clear or concluding statement directly to the reader, she uses much more understandable and appropriate language, like when she says "Somehow, directness has become unbearable to us."

     Finally the syntax adds effect through he specific use of pronouns. In the first paragraph, she uses the the pronoun "he" to describe hipsters in general. This creates a humorous effect because it parallels the description with a scientific description of some other species, making the "hipster" seem foreign and unfamiliar. In the concluding paragraph, Wampole uses the second person "you" pronoun to make her point to the reader unmistakable. In the second to last sentence, she challenges "determine whether the ashes of irony have settled on you as well." It is a powerful and rather accusatory statement directly to the reader. However in the last sentence, she redeems it slightly by saying "it takes little effort to dust them away."

     Overall the article is well written, and it brings up an interesting point. I have definitely seen the attitude Wampole is talking about, but I feel that her opinion about it is perhaps harsher and more extreme than the situation makes necessary. The final statement of the article has a particularly biting tone, and the excessive language in places comes off as somewhat pretentious. It is a good article, but it definitely could have focused more on the main point and less on making fun of hipsters.

Open Prompt 1981- November 11

Vergil's epic poem The Aeneid contains extensive allusions to myths and other works of literature. As Vergil's hero Aeneas travels around the Mediterranean, he encounters people, places, and monsters that are familiar from other stories. Through constant allusions to Homer's Iliad and Odyssey and other well-known myths, Vergil hopes to put his hero on the same level as the heroes of those stories and myths. 

Vergil's main goal in writing The Aeneid was to justify the rule of Caesar Augustus. He intended to do this by writing a story about Aeneas, Augustus' supposed ancestor, making him seem almost god-like and thus justifying Augustus' bloodline. The heroes the roman readers would have been familiar with were the heroes of the works Homer and other myths, so Vergil tries to put Aeneas on their level by having him encounter and overcome many of the same difficulties. He does this by recreating events from those stories in allusions that are sometimes obvious and sometimes subtle.

      The entire first six books of The Aeneid allude to the Odyssey from their structure. For all of these six books, Aeneas sails around the Mediterranean and stops at various islands, just as Odysseus does in the Odyssey. Some of the places Aeneas comes to are exactly the same as those Odysseus went to. For example, Aeneas accidentally lands on the island of the harpies, whom Odysseus also encounters. Likewise, he finds the island of Polyphemus, where Odysseus landed. Finally Aeneas is also forced to sail through the strait between the monsters Scylla and Charybdis. By placing Aeneas against the same obstacles that Odysseus and his crew faced, and having Aeneas overcome them in the same or even cleverer ways, Vergil makes Aeneas seem Odysseus' equal or even his better.

      Aeneas' wanderings also contain more subtle parallels with the Odyssey. The main example of this is his stay with Dido, the queen of Carthage. Aeneas stays with Dido for a time, and perhaps falls in love with her. But eventually, Hermes brings the message from the gods that Aeneas must fulfill his duty elsewhere, and Aeneas departs. This echoes Odysseus' stay on the island of Calypso. He stays there for a time, and his possible love for Calypso conflicts with his duties to wife and homeland, and he finally departs upon prompting from Hermes. With these more subtle allusions, Vergil intends to parallel Aeneas' character with that of other heroes, rather than his deeds. Aeneas' ability to overcome his personal feelings and do his duty shows his inner strength and service to the gods and other men.

     The second six books of The Aeneid allude to the Iliad just as the first six allude to the Odyssey. Once Aeneas reaches Italy, he must fight a war to gain control of the land. Ultimately he must defeat a man of superhuman strength, Turnus, whose physical prowess mimics that of Achilles and Hector. Throughout the conflict, Gods also appear and aid the combatants of both sides, which is a common occurrence in the Trojan conflict as well. By making Aeneas overcome such a mighty foe, Vergil puts Aeneas' strength in war, and thus that of Rome, on the same level as the heroes of the old stories. 

     The Aeneid also contains allusions to various myths besides the works of Homer. Throughout his wanderings, Aeneas encounters people and places that allude to other myths, such as the temple of Daedalus, and the descendants of Perseus and other heroes. His journey to the underworld also alludes to the feats of Hercules and Orpheus. Through all these adventures, Aeneas becomes the hero of all heroes, having experienced the equal of any of the most famous heroes of Greek and Roman mythology. 

     The allusions, both subtle and obvious, that are contained in The Aeneid all serve to impress the reader with Aeneas' feats. At the end of the book, the reader has seen Aeneas overcome all the most difficult obstacles in the world. This made Aeneas noble in worth in their eyes, elevating to  an almost god-like status. By doing this, Vergil's epic turned the popular opinion in favor of Caesar Augustus, who, as Aeneas' descendant, supposedly had the same strength, nobility, and courage.

Response to Course Material November 4

I feel as though this unit on Death of a Salesman is beating a dead horse a little bit. There are two reasons I think that: first, Death of a Salesman is part of the curriculum for American Lit. and a lot the students have already had a class in which the story and its symbolism were discussed in detail. Secondly, it seems that this play the exact same thing as The American Dream in a lot of ways. Both center on a family obsessed with consumerism and the capitalist system, and in both the author makes a powerful message about how this attitude leads to death and destruction. Admittedly, these two plays are still quite different in style even though their themes are the same, and it seems that we will still be able to learn a lot from doing a close reading and analysis of both, and then comparing the two. However, I feel it would be more interesting to branch out from the theme of the horrors of capitalism instead. There is such a huge variety of good literature out there, and we have such a short time to cover it this year, it seems almost a waste to spend so much time on two plays that are so similar. For this reason, I like the reading from the textbook more than a lot of the other assignments we do. The textbook gives a lot of excerpts from various texts; in chapter four we got to read work from Amy Tan, Langston Hughes, and several other well-known authors. The textbook gives a much better all-around knowledge of literature than reading the specific texts in detail does. Obviously, we have to study the texts that will allow us to pass the AP test, but I sometimes think we could gain more from the course if we didn't have the exam to worry about.

American Dream Summary and Analysis

Author

The American Dream was written by Edward Albee in 1960. Edward Albee is a famous playwright who also wrote Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf and several other notable plays. He has received multiple Pulitzer Prizes for his work. In this particular play, Albee delivers a stinging attack on the consumer culture of the 1960s through a comic, absurdist play.

Setting

The play takes place in a family apartment. It is implied that it is in a city, but the city is never named. The time period is also unspecified, it is probably meant to take place at or shortly before the play was written. The unspecified time period helps make the play's message more general.

Plot

The play opens with a conversation between Mommy and Daddy discussing the late arrival of an expected guest. While waiting, Mommy tells a story about how she went shopping for hats earlier. The conversation is dominated by Mommy, and Daddy is often inattentive. Grandma then enters carrying a load of boxes. She joins the conversation, and Mommy briefly describes her childhood with Grandma. Grandma herself is sarcastic, and makes many comments about being old. Then Mrs. Barker enters. None of the characters quite remember why she has come, and they engage in pleasant conversation about family matters and Daddy's ambitions. Daddy and Mommy leave the room, leaving Grandma alone with Mrs. Barker. The two talk, Grandma talks, telling a story implicitly about Mommy and Daddy. After the story, Mrs. Barker and Grandma realize why she had come. Mommy and Daddy return and Mrs. Barker exits the room again with them. A young man comes to the door, and grandma invites him in. The young man says he is looking for work, and Grandma asks him questions about himself, referring to him as "The American Dream." Grandma then prepares to leave the apartment with the boxes she packed, and tells the young man he will be able to find work there. Grandma departs, leaving the young man to stay with the family. 

Characters

Mommy: a commanding character with a cruel, somewhat twisted personality. Throughout the play she dominates and manipulates Daddy and Grandma, but clashes with Mrs. Barker. She has exaggerated characteristics of an upper class woman in a consumerist society. Mommy exhibits a disconnect from other characters and logical thinking.

Daddy: a weak character, who is subservient to Mommy throughout the play. He has many feminine attributes, and is manipulated by Mommy calling him masculine at several points. Daddy also exhibits a disconnect from other characters and logical thinking.

Mrs. Barker: a self-described professional woman who visits the apartment. She has a controlling and disdainful personality, often asserting her authority over other characters. She engages in gossip and generally shares the extreme consumerism demonstrated by Mommy. She too exhibits a disconnect from other characters and logical thinking.

Young Man: a character who appears only at the end of the play. He comes to the apartment looking for work. Though physically attractive, he says he is deprived of feelings because of the loss of the twin, which it is understood was Mommy and Daddy's adopted child. He appears less disconnected than the other characters, and ironically, to have more feelings than them. 

Grandma: Mommy's mother. She constantly makes sarcastic and self-degrading remarks about old people. Originally, she seems senile to the audience, as she does to Mommy and Daddy, but as the play progresses, it becomes apparent that she is aware of her surroundings and only mocking the other characters. Unlike the other characters, Grandma has strong morals and is able to think logically. 

Style

The play is written in an absurdist style. There is constant repetition of thoughts and actions, to the point that it is extremely frustrating to the audience. The play deviates from absurdist style in that it does not end in the same place it begun. Comedy is also present throughout the play. The humor results from both ironic statements and situations, and also from small vulgar jokes.

Voice 

The authors voice is not apparent throughout most of the play, since most dialogue is devoted to the absurdist style, focusing on repetition and disconnected interactions. In these places, it is difficult to see any specific elements of Albee's style. In general, the author speaks through Grandma. Her sarcastic remarks and challenges to the audience at the end clearly represent Albee's opinions. Through Grandma, he speaks directly to the audience. 

Point of view

Mommy, Daddy and Mrs. Barker share a capitalistic, selfish point of view. Each is focused on consumerism and material wealth, to the point where their morals are destroyed. This contrasts strongly with Grandma's more humanist point of view. Grandma values morality over material wealthy, and the two parties conflict throughout the play, though only Grandma is conscious of it. It becomes clear throughout the play that Grandma's point of view reflects Albee's own opinions. 

Tone

Albee's bitter tone in the play is clear from his satirical portrayal of characters and conversations. By exaggerating negative characteristics and events, Albee makes his displeasure at consumerist ideals clear.

Imagery 

The imagery in most parts of the play is intentionally dull. This blandness creates an atmosphere that is generic and unexciting in the apartment, and this helps convey the themes of emptiness and amorality. In some places, however, vivid description is offered. This occurs mostly when the image reflects negatively on the characters. The most prominent example of this is the story about Mommy and Daddy's adopted baby. The ways in which they mutilate the child are described in great detail by Grandma, creating horrific images. In instances such as this, the imagery serves to create disgust in the audience and direct it at consumerist values.

Symbolism

There are several symbols in the play that represent consumerism. The first one that appears is the hat that Mommy describes in the story. Symbolically, the hat represents the consumer nature of buying things for their image or for the status they give rather than their actual purpose. Mommy is angry when the hat is described in a different way, changing its image, while it doesn't change the hat itself. The baby or "bumble" also becomes a negative symbol of consumerism, becomes it comes to represent the destruction of reason and morality with the obsession of for economic satisfaction. Masculinity also becomes a symbol for power. Daddy lacks masculinity, and because of that Mommy controls him almost at will throughout the play. At the same time, Mommy and Mrs. Barker gain masculinity through being a chairman (rather than woman) and through being the dominant household figures. This masculinity is reflected by the authority Mommy and Mrs. Barker assert over other characters.

Themes

One theme of the play is the pursuit of satisfaction above all else. Throughout the play, the characters, especially Mommy, work towards happiness. In their eyes, happiness is primarily achieved through material wealth. The characters continually search for satisfaction in this way, but as Mommy says "You just can't get satisfaction these days." Their search for wealth ultimately makes them sacrifice many other things, which should be far more valuable, like love, family and kindness. 

A second theme is the commodification of things that should not be commodities. The most prevalent example of this is the child. Mommy and Daddy treat the child like a product or toy. First they literally buy it, as Mrs. Barker says, "I can remember Mommy and Daddy coming to see me, oh, about twenty years ago, about buying a bumble…". The bumble of course refers to the baby. Once they buy the baby, they treat it as a product, growing bored with it over time, then trying to "fix" it when it "breaks". Ultimately, they dispose of their old "product" and buy the latest version in the form of the young man. 

Sunday, Oct 21 Close Reading

For my close reading this week I read the article The Census: Phantom Constituents by Brent Staples. The entire article can be found here: http://theboard.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/the-census-phantom-constituents/.

     In the editorial The Census: Phantom Constituents, Brent Staples argues that prison populations are skewing the political process because prisoners are counted by the census as residents of the area in which they are imprisoned and therefore affect political representation, even though they cannot themselves vote. Staples strongly denounces this loophole in political representation and calls for it to be fixed. In the article, Staples uses subtle tricks of word choice, language that evokes guilt, and chooses only to include specific details.
     At many points in the article, Staples gives no evidence to support his claims. Normally, this would call the reader to question his statement and possibly lose trust in the whole article. However, in most of these places, Staples simply mentions, as if in passing, that the fact is "clear" or "obvious". There are numerous examples of this: in paragraph seven he begins "The obvious solution is...", the next paragraph begins "Not surprisingly," and many similar statements can be found throughout the article. The effect of this diction is that is causes the reader to accept the fact without much consideration, making him/her agree instantly with things that could be debated. This is a subtle but extremely useful technique in editorials, because it allows the writer to focus on the main points without spending time defending every detail. In addition, it is slightly condescending and gives the writer a tone of authority.
     At one point, Staples compares the prison situation to the touchy subject of slavery. He claims that counting many prison inmates for votes when they cannot themselves vote is similar to the way slaves were counted as three fifths of a person in the census but were likewise not allowed to vote. He writes,  "And it brings to mind the slave-era United States, when enslaved persons were denied the vote and counted as three-fifths of a person for purposes of apportioning representation in Congress." He furthers this comparison by pointing out that many of the inmates are indeed African American. This comparison, while it makes sense, is a little extreme. It does, however, have a powerful effect and emotional impact. The statement evokes guilt and defiance in the reader, since nobody wants to appear as if they are supporting anything even remotely similar to slavery. Effectively, this draws the reader to Staples's side of the argument through disgust and guilt. 
     Staples also uses rather contrived examples to support his point. He gives a specific example of an area where the majority of the population is composed of prison inmates, and tells the story of how a candidate was elected in this area and how the situation would have been different had the inmates been counted as residents of their homes rather than the prisons. Obviously this is an extreme example. In most districts, the election situations would be little different if whichever place the inmates were considered residents of. By choosing such a specific example which is a statistic outlier, Staples legitimizes a claim that would be discredited as far from the norm had he proved other less extreme examples of the effect. 
     With all these techniques, Staples creates an effective argument without the use of excessive facts and figures. His appeal is primarily emotional, and when the article is not read closely, the techniques can completely escape the reader and change his or her opinion almost subconsciously. 
     

Open Prompt Response October 14:

Prompt:

2004. Critic Roland Barthes has said, "Literature is the question minus the answer." Choose a novel, or play, and, considering Barthes' observation, write an essay in which you analyze a central question the work raises and the extent to which it offers answers. Explain how the author's treatment of this question affects your understanding of the work as a whole. Avoid mere plot summary.

Response:

     In the allegorical novel Animal Farm, George Orwell implicitly addresses the question of why communism fails. He addresses this question indirectly by investigating an example of a communistic society in which events are not marred by propaganda or time. Through his example of the farm animals' society, Orwell answers his own question by showing the reader that communism fails because, it manifests in corrupted form, it provides only a temporary solution, and because members of society are innately unequal.

     George Orwell shows us the corruption of true communism through the animals' deviation from the vision of Old Major, who is representative of Karl Marx. In the beginning, Old Major presents his pure form of communism, but as the play progresses, it is corrupted as the pigs seize power. This seizure of power occurs gradually, so the animals are unaware of it. But the reader, who can perceive events neutrally and whose memory is superior to that of the animals, see the gradual progression that leaves the system in a totally different state than it began in. These changes are explicitly presented on the wall in the novel, where the commandments of the system are written, but which change many times throughout the novel. Each time they change, the animals still treat them almost as divine law. By showing this, Orwell means to parallel it to events of the Russian Revolution, and how the corruption of a pure idea was obscured because it occurred gradually. 

     The novel ends with a scene that brings the story to complete a circle, making it end exactly as it started, but with pigs in place of farmers. Thus the problem of oppression the animals experienced was solved only temporarily, because the pigs eventually oppress them just as the farmer had.

    Orwell's main answer to his question, which is presented constantly throughout the novel, but never explicitly stated is that there will always be inequality because of the innate inequality of people (or animals). Each type of farm animal in the novel represents a stereotypical type of person in society, and throughout the novel the differences between the types destroy the system. The main example of this is the horse Boxer, who is loyal and selfless, giving far more into the system than anyone else but receiving no reward. In the same way, each of the types of animals on the farm contributes a different amount unintentionally because of different attributes of their species which they cannot control. This results in the society being destroyed because some species like Boxer are worked to death, while other contribute nothing. 

     All the events and representations in Orwell's allegory serve to answer his question indirectly. Instead of explicitly stating why communism fails in a way that could be attacked or challenged politically, he instead emphasizes what is wrong and lets the reader decide for himself/herself what the true problem is and how it might be fixed. The implicit question about the nature of communism ties Orwell's novel together, but also makes it relevant outside of literature. 

Response to Course Material, Sunday October 7

It seems to me that the course material has been skipping around a little bit in the past few weeks. We've spent some of the time learning about literary techniques and the literary periods, and some of the time reading and analyzing The American Dream. I am wondering if this is going to be what it is like for the whole year, or if there will be a point where we're done having lessons about DIDLS and other techniques and we focus more on applying them to literature. I realize that the lessons about general techniques and themes are necessary for our understanding, but I enjoy it much more when it is in the context of concrete examples in certain works. I'm excited to get to the point when we start applying DIDLS and the critical lenses to The American Dream and other works in greater detail.
With regards to The American Dream, I'm still quite baffled about a lot of points in the play. After our reading and short discussion in class, I understand some of the basic themes and messages in the play (or at least one interpretation of them). But I'm still not understanding why Albee thought the particular style of play was the best way to communicate the things he tries to say in it. Personally, I find it hard to take a serious message away from a play if the play itself is not serious. I hope we discuss this and finer details about specific passages in the play in more detail in the coming weeks.

September 23-Close Reading Response

For my close reading, a read an editorial from the New York Times titled "Washington Versus American", by Ross Douthat. The article can be found here, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/23/opinion/sunday/douthat-washington-versus-america.html?ref=columnists.
        With this editorial, Douthat tries to make the point that government programs themselves are unintentionally the cause of unequal redistribution of wealth in America. Many private enterprises are closely linked with government operation, and therefore receive a large portion of government spending, including some of which that should be going to stimulate the economy. Douthat investigates Washington DC as the scene for this. In his editorial, he uses carefully chosen diction, contrasting negative and positive imagery, and a simile to prejudice the reader against the system he describes.
        Douthat open his editorial by describing D.C. in 2002. In this description he uses words that suggest decline and decay, describing the parts of the city as "scarred" and "blighted" (paragraph 1).
In the second paragraph, he contrasts the image of the city in 2002 with that of it today as a happy, prosperous place. He describes the city today in pleasant, inviting terms, using phrases such as "[streets] crowded with restaurants and bars." This passage brings to mind an image of nighttime parties and revelry, strongly contrasting the image in the previous paragraph. In addition, Douthat continues to use carefully chosen like "luxurious" to describe the city.
      Later in the essay, Douthat established a simile that he refers to several times. He compares Washington D.C. to the "ruthless capital in the Hunger Games" (paragraph 6). I haven't read that story, but I have heard enough to know this isn't a complimentary comparison. Douthat suggests that like that fictional capital, D.C. and the government are draining the fortitude of the rest of the country. This simile is continued in the next paragraph, when he offers the somewhat humorous disclaimer, "There aren’t tributes from Michigan and New Mexico fighting to the death in Dupont Circle just yet" (paragraph 7). The effect of this simile is to make the alleged crimes of Washington seem worse by paralleling it to a capital and government that is an extreme case of tyranny. 
        All of the literary techniques used in the editorial serve the authors purpose--that is, convincing the reader of his opinion. He does this through contrasting the new, rich capital with the decrepit one of ten years ago, and then investigating the change. Through his explanation and comparison of the capital with a fictional one, he effectively demonizes Washington D.C. and its role in the country's poor economic condition.

September 16: Open Pompt Response

Prompt: 1999. The eighteenth-century British novelist Laurence Sterne wrote, "No body, but he who has felt it, can conceive what a plaguing thing it is to have a man's mind torn asunder by two projects of equal strength, both obstinately pulling in a contrary direction at the same time."

          From a novel or play choose a character (not necessarily the protagonist) whose mind is pulled in conflicting directions by two compelling desires, ambitions, obligations, or influences. Then, in a well-organized essay, identify each of the two conflicting forces and explain how this conflict with one character illuminates the meaning of the work as a whole. You may use one of the novels or plays listed below or another novel or work of similar literary quality.

My Response:

          In Stephen Crane's novel The Red Badge of Courage, the young soldier Henry Fleming is torn between his instinct for self-preservation and his duties as a soldier. Throughout the novel, the different feelings confuse him, with each one dominating in different scenes. By describing Henry's internal conflict, Crane hopes to capture the internal conflict between fear and duty that every soldier must face.

          The meaning of Henry's internal struggle is made significant by Crane's generality. Throughout the novel, Crane leaves out many details, such as the name of the battle, the name of the generals, and the location of the battlefield. He also refrains from referring to Henry by name in most cases, preferring to call him "the youth" or "the soldier". The effect of this is that the conflict and characters are almost anonymous--it could be the story of any soldier in any battle. This generality gives Henry's conflict a deeper meaning, because it is not his conflict, but the conflict of a generic soldier.

          One side of Henry is dominated by fear. Before going into battle, he expresses doubt in his own courage, wondering if he will be able to stand his ground. Crane describes how it seems to Henry that all the other soldiers appear not to be troubled. But because of the impersonal sense of the story, it seems Crane means the reader to understand each soldier feels this way. Crane therefore seems to be making the point that all soldiers are afraid, but they gain courage from the group.

          Henry's fear is counteracted in part by his sense of duty. In battle, he is able to conquer his fear by losing his sense of individualism, and becoming part of the army as a whole--like a "cog in a machine". But the victory of one emotion is only temporary, and before long fear returns to dominate Henry, and he flees the battlefield. Several more times though out the novel, Henry's conquers his fear, only to have it return shortly afterwards. Crane therefore makes the point the coming to terms with the fear of death does not occur in a moment, and that a soldier's internal conflict lasts days, weeks, or the whole time he is a soldier. 

          Henry's internal conflict is much larger than Henry himself. By focusing on the opposing feelings and questions tormenting Henry's mind, while also distancing the reader from Henry's individuality, Crane creates a powerful message about war and soldiers in general.  

Response to Course Material (September 9)-
          The only material we have really covered in class so far has been the literary terms. The rest of the time has been devoted to outlining the course and our goals for the year. The literary terms were somewhat overwhelming, and a lot of them are quite similar and difficult to distinguish. I have used many of these terms before in AP Latin, but it is more clear cut in Latin because most of the literary devices depend on the word's case, so they can be easily identified without even knowing what the sentence is saying. In English it's a lot harder, and it seems you often have to understand the context well to identify the literary device. Often, as we saw an example of on the terms test, multiple literary devices can be present in the same sentence. It also seems a lot of the terms are a little redundant. For example, "caesura" means "a pause". That's all, just "a pause", so there is really no reason that using the word "pause" instead would change the meaning of what is being said. In addition, if literary terms are so difficult to identify at times that a student who has studied them and is specifically looking for them, and analyzing the sentence for some time can still not correctly identify them, how much effect could they possibly have on a normal reader? If the literary device is too subtle to be noticed, then it probably has no effect on the reader, and therefore should not really be considered a literary device.

Entry 3-Analysis of "Me Talk Pretty One Day"

           In the excerpt "Me Talk Pretty One Day", David Sedaris describes what learning French was like for him. His writing is witty and amusing, and it has a casual tone, as if he were holding a conversation with the reader. Despite this tone, the writing does not lack any formality in structure. In general, the essay follows most of the rules that Michael Harvey outlines in his book The Nuts and Bolt of College Writing.
          Sedaris's vocabulary is simple, avoiding what Harvey calls a "pompous style" (Harvey, page 3). Most of the words are short and common; the word the reader is most unlikely to know on the first page is probably "stegosaurus". Even in situations where uncommon words would be appropriate, Sedaris prefers to use several smaller words, or a hyphenated adjective. On page one, he describes his classmates as "well-dressed" rather than chic or elegant. On the same page, he chooses to write "what this woman was saying"over a shorter but more sophisticated phrase like "her dialogue", or "her discourse". Though this simple style Sedaris uses elongates the writing in places, it becomes much easier to read and understand.
          One technique Harvey describes that aids the flow of writing and "helps the reader absorb a lot of information without feeling overwhelmed" (Harvey, page 29) is the use of introductory phrases. Sedaris employs introductory phrases throughout the excerpt. On the first half of page 13 alone, he uses two: "While I can honestly say..", and "when called upon,...". He also uses participial phrases such as "Having given it some thought,..." (Sedaris, page 13), which help avoid cluttered sentences with an excess of clauses. Both these types of phrases also help the flow of the writing by varying sentence structure.
          Though Sedaris's writing generally follows the style Harvey suggests, it is not without its flaws. Sedaris uses the passive voice several times when it is unnecessary. In the first page, he writes that "Vacations were discussed" rather than "The students discussed vacations". This phrase sounds somewhat unnatural, and also goes against Harvey's rule of using consistent characters (Harvey, pages 23-27). The subject of the previous clause is the students, so the writing would flow better if the next sentence continued to describe the students directly using the active voice.
          Sedaris also frequently uses unnecessary prepositional phrases, which Harvey warns against. In the second paragraph, he writes "I've moved to Paris with hopes of learning the language." It would perhaps be clearer to replace the prepositional phrase with a participle to make the sentence "I've moved to Paris hoping to learn the language." The use of abstract nouns is typical in pompous writing, Harvey says and should be avoided because it confuses "who does what"(Harvey, page 13). There are many of other examples of excess prepositional phrases and the passive voice throughout the essay.
          In general, Sedaris writes in accordance with Harvey's suggestions, using short concise language that does not confuse the meaning with pompous style. Although there are places where Sedaris goes against Harvey's preferred constructions, these places are the exceptions, rather than the norm.

Entry 2-Poetry Study Goals

My five goals while studying poetry this year are:
-Focus on reading by sentences, rather than by stanzas/lines.
-Interpret messages and themes better.
-Learn to identify meter better.
-Learn to identify literary devices better.
-Learn to identify type of poem (i.e. sonnet, ballad, etc.).

Whenever I read poetry, I tend to focus on the musical or rhythmic aspect of the writing, rather than the actual content. By focusing on rhythm and rhyme, I look at words almost one at a time, and think about the meaning of each and how it fits into the rhyme scheme and the meter; however this usually causes me to lose track of the bigger picture in the poem. I need to practice reading poetry more like prose--focusing on the sentences as the main units, rather than the stanzas. Doing this will help me with my second goal of understanding the main messages and themes better. I have had a lot of experience with meter and literary devices in AP Latin while studying the Aeneid. The majority of the literary devices are the same, but I've noticed they tend to be subtler in english poetry. Scansion seems to work the same way in english as in latin poetry, but I think I could still benefit from studying these two things with more detail and specifically in english poetry. The last goal is simply a question of memorizing the definition of each type of poem and how to identify it. Practicing these a bit will make those questions about the type of poem "freebies" on the exam.

Entry 1-Reactions to the Diagnostics Test

The diagnostics test was a good indication of what we will be learning about in the course. It seems for questions like these, a certain type of thinking is required, which we will learn in class. For a lot of the questions, simply memorizing terms and being exposed to many examples of them will make the answer instantly recognizable. I found that with questions like these, it is often best to trust one's intuition. The answer that pops out the first time is most likely the correct one, and by trying to analyze all the options extensively, one tends to get confused and make absurd answers seem plausible with long trains of thought. It might also be better to read the questions before the passage, so one can focus on the aspects the questions ask about. While the passages are in themselves interesting, and often worthwhile to read, within the time restrictions of the test it is better to focus only on the aspects needed to answer the questions.