Weblog11B March 26, 2008

         An ideal society is refered to as a Utopia. The term may be used to describe actual communities, to refer to fictional societies, or to describe an ideal that is impossible. The word “utopia,” meaning “no place” in the original Greek, is very similar to the Greek term “eutopia,” which means “good place.”

          Utopian fiction, such as Sir Francis Bacon’s The New Atlantis, is created when a utopia, ideal society, is the setting of a novel. The ideals that may be involved in utopias often include political ideologies. Authors, especially science fiction authors, like to use utopias, often in conjunction with dystopia. Dystopia is the opposite of utopia: the creation of a nightmare world, where none of the ideals are present. By combining these two elements, writers may point out possible extremes that may result from certain actions.

Weblog 11A

         As a reader, I notice that prose tends to use full sentence, where poetry does not. Also, ideas seem to be more completed in prose. When they are complete ideas in poetry, it does not seem to be spelled out as clearly for me. Also, there are paragraphs in prose, but I don’t think there are paragraphs in poetry. There are stanzas in poetry, but not in prose. Prose is able to be longer, such as novels. Novels probably can be written entirely in poetry, but this is far less common. Furthermore, often, but certainly NOT always, there seems to be less first-person passion and emotion in prose (less emotion flowing forth from the author). Finally, srict rules are often not followed in poetry (depending, of course, on the type of poetry). Certainly, the rules of grammar are not followed. The following lines from McKay’s Icarus are a good example:

“not to do what he done

done. Over and over he rehearses flight”

For one thing, he uses enjambment (the ideas, which would probably be considered sentences if this was prose, do not even end on the lines) and the word done is repeated twice in what would probably be considered one sentence in prose.

       Authors may choose to use one form of writer rather than the other for a number of reasons. For instance, prose is often more straightforward and more easily understood; therefore, if an author wanted to get a complex story told or an important point accors, this author may choose prose. Another possible reason for using prose is that the author might want to avoid sounding emotional, or may wish to sound professional. For example, if poetry was used when writing a business report or correspondence, it would be seen as rather odd and perhaps unprofessional in most cases. Using poetry, however, might make it easier to convey strong passion and emotion. When one is decompression by letting the emotions flow onto the page, it is likely that poetry may come more easily because it is not bound by the rules of grammar. Also, people are more likely to realize that there are poetic devices; whereas people often miss the literary devices in prose because they don’t realize that there are any to find.

I was a bit thrown off guard when McKay shifted from poetry to prose. Although, upon a second reading, a though does seem to have finished:

“But Icarus is thinking tremelo and

backflip, is thinking

next time with a half-twist

and a tuck and isn’t

sorry.”

         This almost seems like a bit of a conclusion because it wraps up and repeats the thesis statement (that Icarus isn’t sorry). Then, (at least on the version we used) there is an asterisk (*). And Finally, there is what appears to be a paragraph, or at least a large chunk of writing, which is very different from the lines that he has been using so far, even at a glance. 

         Maybe he did this in order to bring another layer into his piece. By shifting from poetry to prose, he is creating another literary boundary, just like he did in various ways throughout the poem: 

“with each breath enters lungs,

then blood. He feels resistance gather in his stiff”

Moreover, switching to prose could be a way of adding to the effect that Icarus is beginning to settle down, as reflected by the fact that “now his watching is humbler, less appropriative.”  

         I do think that, in the discussion about the difference between poetry and prose, it is important to note that not all prose fits into the categories described, and the same with the poetry. For instance, some prose may convey strong emotion, and some people may find it easier to “decompress” by writing prose rather than poetry.

Weblog 10B March 17, 2008

         Perhaps Auden is pointing out that humans have been somewhat apathetic to individual human suffering for many years, at least since the time of the myth of Icarus. He does this by pointing out that, despite the fall of Icarus, “everything turns away quite leisurely from the disaster; the ploughman may have heard the splash, the forsaken cry, but for him it was not an important failure.” Although there is no mention of the uncaring ploughman in the story of Icarus, there is also no mention of any great fuss made of the fall of a boy from the sky; thus, it may be appropriate for Auden to assume that this factor comes into play.

        Furthermore, by using the myth of Icarus, Auden adds layers to the poem. He may be reminding people of a point made in Icarus: the foolishness and pride of humans cause their suffering. Also, using this story adds to the effect of the poem by giving it a mythological element, which makes it more interesting.  

        The story of Icarus is not the only basis for Auden’s poem. Another point that it seems Auden is making, but which is not found in the story of Icarus, is that there are also amazing things in life, miracles, that now seem mundane to us. We don’t even pay any attention to them, just like we don’t pay attention to the terrible things.

         Perhaps this myth is so popular because it contains ideas that transcend time and space. Throughout history, people have been acting out of pride, ambition, greed and foolishness, and these actions have frequently led to their downfall. This story may speak more to the male experience in many cultures, including ours, because men have played the powerful roles for so long and in so many cultures. Men have been the ones in power, or at least, they have appeared to be the ones in power. The story of Demeter and her daughter seems to reflect the situation of females, at least in some cultures/times. They must work through men to get what they want.

         The story of Icarus also contains the theme of a young man defying the instructions of his father, and falling as a result. This happens throughout most, if not all, cultures, times and places. It also brings to mind the invincibility fable (which I learned about in PSYC 150 – Child Development). This fable is affects the minds of teenagers and is a contributing factor in the choice to do drugs, have unprotected sex, speed, and so on. Icarus probably suffered from the invincibility fable, thinking that his wings would not melt, he would not fall or get hurt. This theme probably contributes to the popularity of the story because it makes the story universal.

       Finally, another thing one can look at as reflection of the themes in Icarus the at the beginning of the story. This great king was so intoxicated with power that he was doing something terrible: ordering sacrifices for the menator. The one who tried to stop him, Icarus’ father, was punished for his attempt; however, he escaped from the evil king’s grasp. Maybe this is saying that good will always win out. Also, the king who was intoxicated with power was overcome by his enemy.

Weblog 10A

         Knowing that the poem was not written by a mother suffering the loss of her child does change the interpretation of the poem a bit. No longer can any confusing words or images be attributed to the distraught ravings of a mother in despair; although, one could say that Atwood may have put in some confusing elements so she could give the illusion that the poem was composed by the mother.

         Being aware of some of the details of the speaker’s life also contributes to a change in the interpretation of the poem. I now think that maybe when the speaker, Susanna Moodie, refers to “the land [she] floated on but could not touch to claim,” she may be referring to the land that she was living on as a pioneer. This land was still wild, and it may have seemed untameable and un-claimable. Also, I now think that maybe when this six-year-old “set forth on a voyage of discovery,” he was just innocently exploring. If the “young son” had been a bit older, I may have thought otherwise.

         Even with the new information, including the meaning of bathysphere, I still do not understand what is meant by “the air locked” and “he was hung in the river like a heart.”

         I cannot, however, say that I see a big difference in my interpretation of what Atwood is saying about the loss of a child. It still seems that she is portraying it as a terrible thing. Knowing about Susanna Moodie does strengthen my interpretation that Atwood is saying the loss of a child is horrendous. Because Susanna was a pioneer, winters were likely very difficult times, and spring would be a time to celebrate because the hard winter was finally over. However, Atwood makes it clear that the loss of her child diminished the joy Susanna could feel at the arrival of spring. This is made clear through Susanna’s obvious sorrow, even though “\It was spring, the sun kept shining, [and] the new grass lept to solidity.” Furthermore, when Susanna “planted him in this country like a flag,” Atwood seems to be pointing out that this loss is something that will never leave. Flags are somewhat permanent symbols, and to plant a flag somewhere claims that land for whomever that flag symbolizes. By planting him in the land “like a flag” she is saying that the land will always be associated with him and she will always remember the loss she suffered. There would always be a cairn marking her future.

         Overall, the knowledge I gained by investigating some of the information about the speaker seems to have illuminated a few things, and also substantiated some of my initial interpretations.

Weblog 9B March 13, 2008

          Upon first reading of Margaret Atwood’s “On the Death of a Son by Drowning,” I have the impression that it is about a mother grieving the loss of her son. Perhaps the son died just before they were to travel to a far-away new home, and the mother took the “swamped body” to bury it in the new country, “like a flag.” Although, she refers to the sails as “dreamed,” so perhaps this impression is wrong.

        When the first line says that he “navigated with success the dangerous river of his own birth,” I think that perhaps she is referring to the birth canal. Maybe it was a difficult birth and she is lamenting that he survived that which doctors thought he wouldn’t, only to drown later.

        Later, she writes about the “swollen water.” The word swollen makes me picture white foam that resembles the puss on a swollen wound.

        There are some images that I need to investigate in order to have any ideas what they mean: “his head a bathysphere,” “his eyes’ thin glass bubbles,” and “hung in the river like a heart.”

Weblog 9A

     The term love song is most commonly interpreted literally as a song about love; however, it is also another term for a narrative story. This poem presents a story about Prufrock growing old, and about his love-life. The attribution of the term love song to this poem is also somewhat ironic because it appears from the story revealed through the poem that Prufrock did not actually have anyone to write a love song for. The narrative themes of this poem are revealed in lines such as, “I grow old…I grow old… I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled,” and “is it perfume from a dress that makes me so digress?” The sad lack of love from a woman in Prufrock’s life is revealed in lines such as, “I should have been a pair of ragged claws scuttling across the floors of silent seas.” Due to the lack of womanly love in Prufrock’s life, the poem is not really about love, but rather about a lack of love. Perhaps part of the reason Elliot changed the name of the poem from “Prufrock Among the Women” to “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” was to add this element of irony. The use of the word among in the original title seems to imply that Prufrock was not really attached to any of the women, but was simply living among them without actually having relationship with them. Finally, the “Love Song” portion of the title may be taken from Rudyard Kipling’s “The Love Song of Har Dyal.” Kipling’s poem is about someone, presumably a man, feeling downcast and alone, and wishing that his beloved would return. In addition to the similarity of theme, the two poems are also similar in that they have repetitious elements. In Kipling’s poem the repetitious element is “Come back to me, Beloved, or I die!”[1] 

      Elliot’s poem also contains various elements that make it similar to a love song in style: rhythm, repetition and rhymes. Moreover, it contains thematic elements common to love songs and regarding love stories. One great example of these things is the following line, which is repeated throughout the poem: “In the room the women come and go, talking of Michelangelo.”  Also, “yellow fog that rubs its back upon the window-panes” appears several times. Repeated and rhythmic lines within the poem include “there will be at time,” and “do I dare?” A thematic element is found in the line about Prufrock having “seen [his] head (grown slightly bald) brought in upon a platter.” The line about Michelangelo not only contains the three mentioned stylistic features, but also contains references to themes that are frequently found amongst love songs: women and the arts. Also, the intertextuality in the poem references various stories involving the love of a man for a woman, such as that regarding the story of John the Baptist’s beheading due to the king’s love for a dancer. These stylistic and thematic elements give significance to the “Love Song” portion of the title.

Footnotes:

1 – http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/K/KiplingRudyard/verse/p3/hardyal.html

2 – Please see Wikipedia.org for more information

---

[1] http://whitewolf.newcastle.edu.au/words/authors/K/KiplingRudyard/verse/p3/hardyal.html

Weblog 8B March 3, 2008

      Modernism, a movement that began in the late nineteenth century, included a broad range of cultural reformations and revolutions within various fields: literature, politics, economics, architecture, social, and other arts. This movement has had a great impact on all these areas of culture. Modernists rejected traditional ways of doing things, and sought-out new and better ways of progressing. The proponents of this movement believe in the power of humans to change and improve their surroundings. Some modernist thinkers wished to use this movement as a way of rejecting capitalism.

        Artists, including writers, within this movement wished to make their audiences look at things in new ways and reject their preconceptions. By using methods and techniques that did not appeal to the majority, these artists helped change the face of art. One such literary technique is stream of consciousness.  Unlike other literary techniques of the time, stream of consciousness is not supposed to always sound coherent. Rather than a smooth flow of ideas and storylines, it is a flow of thoughts and images, of emotional and psychological processes coming from one or more characters. This technique uses the first person, something that was not done in other techniques. With stream of consciousness, the written equivalent of characters’ thoughts, feelings and reactions are presented to the readers. This unconventional method does not appeal to the majority of readers, and it often surprises readers with its non-traditional style.

Info gathered from Wikipedia and from http://classiclit.about.com/od/literaryterms/g/aa_stream.htm

Weblog 8A

       Writers frequently create personas, or characters, within their art. Sometimes these personas seem to be based upon a non-fictional person. In the case of Sylvia Plath’s “Daddy,” the persona seems to be based upon the author. Although it seems that the voice in “Daddy” is based upon Plath, there are some details that are not accurate representations of Plath’s life.

         The speaker in the poem says that she “was ten when they buried [her father]” and that “at twenty [she] tried to die;” however, it is known that Plath’s father died when she was eight and that she tried to commit suicide at the age of eighteen. It is possible that Plath was just simplifying the numbers by rounding them; this may add to the nursery-rhyme effect. It is also possible that when she says that, when referring to her age when they buried her father, she is not referring to the literal burial, but that she was ten when others moved on and she was left behind, still stuck in the “black shoe.” However, this explanation does not seem likely, as she does have other areas in the poem where the details are autobiographically inaccurate and cannot be explained this easily.

         Another possible inconsistency that has been pointed out is that the speaker in the poem states that “the vampire,” or her husband, “drank [her] blood for…seven years.” Some point out that she was only married to Hughes for six years, saying this indicates that there is yet another inconsistency in the timeline provided in the poem. If this is the case, then perhaps Plath is making reference in some way to the number seven because it is known to represent perfection and there are Biblical references to this number. Conversely, maybe she was not referring to the number of years she was married to Hughes, but the number of years from when she met him to when they were separated, which was seven years.

        Inconsistencies are not only found within the quantitative details, but also within the qualitative ones. For instance, the speaker says that she has “lived like a foot for thirty years, poor and white.” According to the information we have about Plath, it does not seem that she was especially poor. For instance, her father was a professor, which probably brought a better income than many would have had at that time. Also, when she was attended post-secondary school, she seemed to have a fair amount of provision from her sponsors, including her recuperation at the hospital after her suicide attempt. Of course, poor is a relative term; in the eyes of a multibillionaire she probably was poor. Also, poor could be referring to her quality of life and emotional state, rather than her material wealth.

        Another inconsistency is found when she refers to her “gipsy ancestress.” It is known that her mother was born to Austrian immigrants, and her father was German. Thus, she was apparently not a descendant of gipsies. Maybe this was an attempt to align herself with an oppressed group of people, just as she aligns herself with the Jews. Moreover, it is also possible that this inconsistency, as well as the others mentioned, may have been deliberate in order to ensure that the poem was not completely about her. She may have felt some security in hiding, although not very well, that the poem was an expression of her own deepest pains. Maybe, in her state of mind, this seemed comforting in some way. It certainly is easier to pour out your soul when you know that there is some deniability that it actually is the truth.

        Throughout this poem, Plath uses, or appropriates, upon the suffering of the Jewish people during the Second World War. There is debate about whether it is okay for Plath, or any writer, to appropriate from the suffering of others. In some ways it seems that okay, but in other ways it seems wrong. Because this poem seems to be an expression of extreme emotion and long-held pain, maybe it is okay that she parallels her suffering to that of the Jews. Maybe her mental state contributed to the strong Nazi images with which she painted her father, and to the extent that she compared herself with the Jews. Her suffering does not seem to compare to that of the Jewish people. It seems like an insult to compare her life with the torment these people went through. Although, one cannot truly understand how much she suffered unless one experiences the same things: a child’s loss of a father, a mental breakdown, a mother’s loss of a child, and possibly depression and bi-polar disorder. In sum, maybe it is okay for writers to use comparisons between sufferings as part of their artistic expression, but this should be done with caution and respect for those you are comparing. But, perhaps it is not the same thing to use someone’s suffering in a comparison, as it is to appropriate from someone else’s suffering in the sense that one is profiting from someone else’s suffering. I think it depends somewhat on the motivations with which someone else’s suffering is used. In some cases, the use of someone’s suffering in a movie or a book can raise awareness for the one who is suffering, as well as generate a profit for the writers or producers. In other cases the writer is only using the suffering as part of artistic impression, which, if done carefully, can add greatly to the artistic effect of a work.

Weblog 7B February 27, 2008

       Of the many lessons to be learned from Sophocles’ Oedipus the King, there is one that stands out: no one can escape destiny. Following from this lesson is that one should respect the Fates and not attempt to defy their will, lest one should anger them.

       In Greek mythology destiny was said to be personified in three white-robed figures, called the Moerae or the Fates. It was also said that the Moerae were even more powerful than the gods; not even Zeus could alter the will of the Fates. If the greatest god could not defy the Fates, then how much less could Oedipus, a mere mortal? In attempting to do so, he may have angered the Moerae, causing them to deepen his misery and shame.

       Various characters in Oedipus attempted to escape the Fates, to their own downfalls. Iocaste and Laios attempted to defy the Fates by preventing the prophecy made over their son from coming to fulfillment. Their pride and disrespect toward the Fates may have cost them more than they knew. It is one thing to disrespect the gods, but it is worse to disrespect the Fates. Perhaps things would not have been so difficult for them, and for Thebes, if they had not attempted to change the course of destiny. They committed a terrible act when they turned their son over to be killed, and they were surely punished for that, both in their lives and in Hades. Also, there may not have been so much heartache if they had not attempted to change what the Fates had set in store. First they had to endure the guilt and pain of killing their son, and then Iocaste also had to endure the pain of realizing her mistake in marrying Oedipus, the supposed savior of Thebes. Laios had to first endure the shame of having no son as a successor, and then he was murdered. Furthermore, perhaps the people of Thebes would have been freed from the Sphinx sooner if the monarchs had not attempted to get rid of their son, or maybe they would not have been subjected to her at all.

      Oedipus seemed a very quick-tempered young man, prone to rash judgements and decisions. For instance, he immediately judged Creon as a traitor, before even hearing his story. Further, acting on emotion, he refused to believe for a moment that he was not, in fact, the son of Polybus. Furthermore, to his own downfall, he made the hasty decision to leave his home in fear of fulfilling a terrible prophecy. In his mind, this decision would save him and his family from what the Fates willed; however, unbeknownst to him, he was setting in motion the very events that would fulfill the dreaded prophecy. Twice the Fates had been angered: first by his parents, and then by Oedipus. Further, when the truth is so near to being revealed, Iocaste verbally disrespects the Fates by saying that one should “have no fear of [prophets and prophecies].” Perhaps they would have allowed her to die before discovering the truth, or perhaps they would have been a little kinder to her if she had not defied them yet again and in so brutal a manner.

      Perhaps the fates would have gone easier on Oedipus and his parents if they had not attempted to escape their destinies. Maybe Oedipus would not have blinded himself, maybe Iocaste would not have committed suicide. Their fates would have played out completely differently. The end result of Oedipus marrying his mother and killing his father would not have been different, but perhaps it would have been easier. Maybe Laios would have been revealed to be a terrible person and Oedipus would have taken the thrown and executed his father in order to protect Thebes. There are many ways in which Fates may have been satisfied, but because various characters used their free wills to disrespect the Fates, events played out more tragically than they otherwise may have.

      This idea of escaping the Fates does translate to our culture and time, but in a slightly different manner. The idea of three robed apparitions is no longer prominent; however, the many people today believe in destiny or fate. For them, the lesson in Oedipus the King would be that things are bound to turn out a certain way, no matter how one tries to change it; this is destiny. On the other hand, many contemporary people would reject this message because they say that their free will takes precedence over any pre-determined fate. Judging from Oedipus the King, it seems Sophocles would argue that each person has a destiny to be fulfilled and that this destiny cannot be escaped. Perhaps one can use the free will to determine the way in which one’s ultimate destiny plays out, but this will not alter the final outcome. Thus, the most important lesson in Sophocles’ Oedipus the King, for the original audience and perhaps also for people today, is that one cannot change destiny, but can only do one’s best to with the fate one has.

Weblog 7A

     Sylvia Plath, best known for advancing the genre of confessional poetry, was born on October 27 1932 in Massachusetts. Her father Otto, a German immigrant and bee expert, was a professor of German and Zoology at Boston University. Her mother, Aurelia, was born to Austrian immigrants and was about twenty-one years younger than her husband.

     During the Great Depression, in 1936, the family moved to Winthrop, where her mother had grown up. Point Shirley, the section of Winthrop where her maternal grandparents still lived, is mentioned in Plath’s poetry. Plath spent most of her childhood years living with her Unitarian Christian family in Winthrop. However, despite the fact that she was raised in a Unitarian Christian family, it is said that Plath had mixed feeling about religion throughout her life.

     Sadly, just over a week after her eighth birthday, Plath lost her father. A short while after losing a close friend to lung cancer, Otto developed symptoms, some of which were similar to those his friend had experienced. As a result, Otto misdiagnosed himself with lung cancer. Unfortunately, by the time he saw a doctor, his diabetes mellitus had progressed too far and his leg had to be amputated. Due to complications after the amputation, Otto died on November 5, 1940.

     Despite the struggles she experienced, and perhaps partly because of them, Plath became a great writer. Her poetry was published for the first time when she was only eight years old, shortly after her father’s death. After high school, Plath went to Smith College on a scholarship. While interning at Magazine Plath began to experience mental problems. She subsequently had a mental breakdown, attempted suicide, and entered a mental institution, where she received electroconvulsive therapy. After her release from the institution, Plath graduated from Smith.

     Again overcoming difficulty, Plath went on to Cambridge University on another scholarship. While at Cambridge, she met Ted Hughes, and English writer. They were married on June 16, 1956, less than a year after meeting one another.

     The couple moved to Boston after Plath taught at Smith College from July 1957 to October 1959. While in Boston, Plath had the chance to audit seminars by Robert Lowell, who is credited with initializing the genre of confession poetry. Plath and Hughes later lived in London and then moved to Tawton, a small English town in Devon.

     Plath’s life did not become easier after her marriage; in 1961 she had a miscarriage. Then, late in 1962, after Hughes had an affair with Assia Wevill, her marriage fell apart. Plath moved with her children, Frieda and Nicholas, back to London.

     Early on February 11, 1963, Plath placed her head in the oven, turned it on, and waited for death to come; she died a short while later. Despite this desperate act, there is evidence that she was still a caring mother: she left out milk and bread, and she blocked herself off from the rooms in which her children were sleeping. She also took other strange steps in preparation for her suicide. For instance, she left a note with one of her neighbours to call the doctor. Also, she knew that the au pair was set to arrive at 9:00am. Some take these facts as indications that perhaps she did not actually wish to succeed in this suicide attempt. I however, think that perhaps it is further evidence of her love for her children. Maybe she wanted the doctor to be called just in case her children somehow inhaled some of the fumes. Maybe she hoped her children would sleep until either the au pair or the doctor arrived. Perhaps she wanted to make sure that the au pair, someone her children knew well, would be there to comfort them when they found out the terrible news.

     Sylvia Plath, well-loved novelist and poet, lived a life full or turmoil. Perhaps her struggles contributed to the passion that is evident in her writing. The fact that she persevered for so long, and was still able to think of her children when she was in the midst of so much pain, is evidence of her strong spirit. But, sadly, her spirit was not strong enough to continue enriching literature with her words.

                                                              ~info courtesy of Wikipededia