The End of the Dead

The Ending of the Dead:

It feels, perhaps, like we have been talking about this forever-, which is at once frustrating and fascinating. A large part of Joyce’s beauty, true beauty is in the universality of that message and in the way in which he renders it. It is so universal, say, that at alternate times in ones’ life, the language, the ending, the story, holds a different meaning. A choose your own adventure for the heavy-duty literary types, or as Foucault said, Headed toward death, language turns back upon itself; it encounters something like a mirror; and to stop this death which would stop it, it possesses but a single power: that of giving birth to its own image in a play of mirrors that has no limits, "Language to Infinity But as we Millburnites are a group wholly uncomfortable with ambiguity and lack of control, I can only offer these two interpretations as in reference to the commonly asked What does it mean?
It could stand as a negative reading- meaning that in this moment of self-actualization, Gabriel chooses to sacrifice his sense of self- to be more like Michael Furey, leading to his ultimate paralysis. Some readers are skeptical of the sincerity of the moment, wondering exactly how “generous” his tears actually are, critiquing his bitterness at Gretta’s appearance. They further this reading by stating that “swoon” here relates to the unconsciousness of death, and mark the ending as depressing.
But then there are readers like me, who read The Dead and get tears in their eyes, who staunchly defend the final paragraphs as some of the most beautiful in all of literature, who feel the ending with every last fiber of their beings. Because, to us, the end of The Dead is transcendent. Because in that moment of realization and self-actualization, of heightened awareness and simply being, Gabriel puts the world into perfectly placed perspective. We are all part of this human condition. We will all experience love and loss and failure. We will all know disappointment and joy. We will all be uncertain and sometimes frightened, or even plainly scared. And in knowing this, in channeling this feeling of connection, there is, even in the bleakest of hours, hope.
And hope inspires. It inspires actions and ideas, gestures and feelings. Life is a remarkable reckless wonder. And that’s enough to make this reader swoon.

So let’s say goodbye to James Joyce and hello to Holiday break. I’ll miss you but I hope you each have a wonderful time! Relax and enjoy!
And get excited for axe murderers and Siberian prisons, prostitutes with hearts of gold and gritty hot St. Petersburg! Crime and Punishment is next!

Lily, the caretaker's daughter, was literally run off her feet...

What does the opening of this story mean? I'm not trying to completely cop out of answering the question, but I don't think that the line "Lily, the caretaker's daughter, was literally run off her feet" has much hidden meaning. One of the key words in the sentence is "literally," and I think we are to interpret the sentence literally as it is written. Lily is breathless and ragged from running up and down the stairs in order to set things up for the big event. I think that Joyce uses Lily merely to set the scene, and he employs this line to show a hectic beginning to the evening.

I have a feeling that this won't be such a popular opinion, since it's not based on a real deep reading of the text, but while it's tempting to tie this in to some larger theme of life being entirely overwhelming, I really don't think Joyce intended for this line to mean much more than the literal words on the page.

Clay & A Painful Case

I really didn't want to post first, but here goes...

Both of these stories seemed to deal, at least on very basic levels, with sexuality. We see Maria (who has a name like [the virgin] Mary - a possible religious reference?) innocently avoiding intimacy, which is clear when she forgets what the back of the book calls "the more poignant second verse" of her song, one that discusses knightly suitors.

I also noticed that there was very little dialogue in this section. Not sure what that means though. Thoughts?

I liked A Painful Case a lot better. Mr Duffy is a really compelling character, which is evident from the first few pages, when he is described as having "an odd autobiographical habit" that leads him to narrate his life's events in third person. His relation to the theme of sexuality is shown when he goes on walks with (married!) Mrs. Sinico, but then ends his relationship (a word used loosely, I guess) with her after she touches his hand to her face. Once he reads about Mrs. Sinico's death, he begins to realize his role in it, and he feels bad that his rejection of her led her to become a drunk. I think that his own epiphany comes once he realizes that the woman is only a memory to him, and acknowledges that because of his self-imposed loneliness, he doesn't think he'll ever even be that, a memory, for anyone else.

These stories continue to be depressing accounts of real life in Dublin. The characters in them, however, are more mature, but this doesn't make them any less prone to feeling alone yet suffocated in Dublin.

Just to clarify...

The kunstleroman was Portrait of the Artist- NOT DUBLINERS... Dubliners is a work of fiction... I just wanted to eliminate confusion.

Wide-awake and laughing-like to himself...

What a pleasant change, from Silko to Joyce...

The Sisters is quite a fascinating way to begin Dubliners. We learned today that the novel (or collection) is the progression of James Joyce's life, a Künstlerroman; but why start with the funeral of a Priest?

There are many images of the fall of the church. Obviously we have the death of the Priest; we have the broken cross, the faded vestments, and the curious confession. Joyce tells us that the Priest had a great impact on his life; he taught him languages, history, and problem-solving skills, in addition to mentoring him with other aspects of life. From this we can imply that the church, through the Priest, was likely to have had an effect on Joyce as a child.

But when the Priest, and thus the church, dies, is Joyce trying to tell us that it will no longer occupy a significant place in his life? We know that there will clearly be a great shift in his life, since he emphasizes the effect the Priest had on him, but how will this change materialize?

And then there's the title...isn't it strange how Joyce titles this story with the characters who don't show up until the very last pages of the story? Perhaps it has something to do with how they place the blame of the Priest's broken cross on James...maybe they will be a continual source of blame for James.

Scholes mentions the roles of counterparts in his criticism found in our edition's appendix...maybe Joyce is introducing us to the character counterparts...

The bottom line is that it's a rather peculiar way to start off, but, like most other novels we've read, it is sure to embody great latent significance.

Dubliners: Sisters

In class we were asked to finish reading sisters and then post a blog about what's going on within the first story Sisters. When we begin to read the novel, we the readers are already informed of its structure: Mainly that Dubliners will contain a set of short stories that begin with childhood, then continue through other pivotal points in life, and conclude with death. Seems quite simple enough. However, in this first story, death occurs. Not just the random death of a person in a town but the death of a man who is close to the main character of the novel. It is through the death of Mr. Cotter that James Joyce characterizes this first section as the childhood portion of his "novel". Although unnoticed at first there are many aspects of this section that bring about thoughts of, or directly relate to childhood. The first one is when the adults were discussing how the young child should play with children of his own age. This is what they would consider a normal childhood. The child however, would rather spend his time with the Priest. Another important, although obscure reference to childhood is loss. I think that each persons childhood is marked by, or impacted by, a death or loss of some sort. Whether it be a grandparent, close friend, or pet, loss occurs within childhood. Furthermore, I think James Joyce may be commenting on the fact that childhood is characterized by its downfall, or loss of innocence. Although we are not shown the exact emotional reaction to this mans death, it is likely that it would be a traumatic experience for a child--even if the man went as peacefully as Mr. Cotter was described in his death. In addition i believe the last sentences have a lot to do with childhood or children. Despite the fact that i might be going out on a limb here ill go with it. When he Mr. Cotter is described laughing in a room alone in the dark it is perceived by most adults that something is wrong with him, that he must be crazy or something. For a child, however, laughter is purely laughter, which means things like happiness and not craziness. As a result it think the fact that we are shown the adults perspective on the laughter before his death is important because it is different than a child's perspective would be. Also in class we talked a little bit about why it is called Sisters, although im not entirely sure i think this could have to do with the sisters who were taking care of Mr. Cotter, and the conversation of the women at the end of the section.

OHYOS: Immortality & The Written Word

Throughout OHYOS the themes of death and the written word have occurred again and again. More specifically, however, they have been united and related multiple times. First, with Melquíades who says that the sanskrit writings ought to be translated after his death. Then with Fernanda, who decided that while she waited for death to take her that she would write letters to her children. And lastly with one other person Amaranta Ursula? not quite sure also write letters. I think that immortality THROUGH the written word is the theme trying to be portrayed by Garbiel Garciá Marquez. For example as José Arcadio Segundo tries to decipher Melquíades sanskrit writings, Melquíades literally reappears. Whether or not this is real or fantastical it furthers the idea that Melquíades is immortal as a result of his writing. Another theme seen within OHYOS is memory (or lack thereof) and its relation to history. Therefore I think that when Marquez relates the written word to immortality he might be alluding to the fact that many things are only known now because others have recorded them at some point in history. Thereby through it being written down, the past can live on and be remembered.

One Hundered Years of Solitude

Hello,

Hope everyone had/is having a good Halloween. So about 100 Years of Solitude. One thing that stood out to me as I started to read this book was that it didn't feel like it was required--that sounds bad. But basically I really enjoyed reading this book because it's themes and the way it was written. Although I do respect and like William Faulkner and The Sound and The Fury, it was pretty rough getting through the first section as well as other parts. This was not the case with 100 Years of Solitude. However, after I finished reading it I did pick up on some similarities between it and TSATF. One major similarity was that although it flowed clearly there were a couple of times in which I said wait, when is this taking place. Other things that stood out to me were the themes of family and story telling. Symbols or what I believed to be symbols also kept popping up, such as ice, money, and birds.

oops! ...let's talk about sartre too

Sartre states that Faulkner could not tell the story in any other way... I found this statement to be pretty powerful. Initially, I disagreed. Though it would leave out the motif of the human construct of time, I thought the story could be told chronologically and produce a similar outcome. However, giving it greater thought, does the confusion make the book? Is it specifically done to make readers work harder and get lost in the present in the Compson family? I personally think it is specifically and effectively crafted. What do you guys think? What's Faulkner's reason for distorting time?

On Symbols

Today in class we were told to talk about the symbolism of various objects. I will talk about trees. There are several important trees in the first section. The first is the tree that Caddy climbs when trying to find out what is going on inside. The second is the tree(s) where Caddy meets boys when she is older. In both cases, the tree is a symbol for a loss of innocence. This is somewhat ironic, as trees are often viewed as something that is stable and can be turned to for comfort. There is a certain irony in Caddy, who Benjy turns to constantly in his life, distancing herself from Benjy when she is among the trees, even though she has lost her earthly scent (in the perfume scene).

William Faulkner Fun Fact

Since some people were not pleased with my previous "long" post, ill keep this one short. One fun fact about William Faulkner I discovered while during some research is that he was unable to join the United States Amy because of his hight (about 5' 5''). Subsequently, Faulkner joined the British Royal Flying Corps.

That is all.

Song of Songs which is Solomon's

Hi everyone:

The Poem in the Bible seems to be closely linked to T-Mo's Song of Solomon. Let's start off with the obvious connections:

1)The Name...

just kidding. That's too obvious.

But it is a love story between King Solomon and a Shulammite woman (she's black). And in many ways, it closely parallels the relationship between Milkman and Hagar/Pilate. It's a story of desire in which a Bride seems to be searching for her ideal bridegroom (Hagar awaiting Milkman). When she gets him (Ch. 2) she begins to think of him endlessly, in an almost obsessive manner, much like the mutual passion and lust in SOS. Chapter 3 of Song of Songs closely parallels T-Mo when the bride awaits her groom on her bed, but he is not there. This is strikingly similar to the story of Hagar's source of misery. Ch.4 of the biblical text is heavily centered on lust - essentially superficial love. This too is a direct parallel to Milkman and Hagar...

Then as it continues there is mention of other significant parallels:

- navel

-breastfeeding

-carnal love

Archetypes in SoS

Hi everybody. Looks like I get to take the lead on this one too!

I realize that there a lot of archetypes out there (Milkman as outcast, Ruth as unfaithful wife, etc.), but I am only going to comment on one. This is Pilate as the earth mother. The first time we meet Pilate, she offers Milkman and Guitar food. Significantly, she offers eggs, which are a symbol of life. Also, her feet point outwards, symbolizing how she gives direction to Guitar throughout his life. Finally, there are many indications of her being connected to the earth (i.e. gravelly voice, collection of rocks, traveling the earth, etc.).

Well, there you have it. I have now started 3 out of the 6 blog discussions. Hope y'all are happy.

(As a side note, does anyone else pronounce guitar gee-tar? Or is that just me?)

Readings and Song of Solomon Take 2

Sorry about the blank post...

I, probably like most of you, was hoping someone else would write the initial blog post. However, it seems this will not happen soon, so I will take the plunge. Probably the most interesting part of the readings is the myth of Oedipus and the oedipal complex. You might be wondering how this applies to Song of Solomon. One of the interesting parts of SoS is Ruth's obsession with her father. Although Ruth's obsession does not lead to quite the dramatic events of the Oedipus myth, there are parallels. Mainly, both stories have major negative events caused by a lack of knowledge and communication among the main characters.

As much as I would love to continue, it is dinner time. Any comments? I think my comments above certainly need some fleshing out.

Murdering the Innocents

Things I noticed in Chapter II of Hard Times -

McChoakumchild's name is a very obvious means of personifying him as somebody who is unpleasant to children, somebody who murders innocents. If this were not clear enoguh, Dickens even directly criticizes McChoackumchild and his teaching approach: "If he had only learnt a little less, how infinitely better he might have taught much more!" (8).

Dickens introduces the third gentleman as a "pugilist". From watching the most recent Sherlock Holmes, Fight Club, and Snatch, I imagine that fist fighting would be of dubious legality as it is today and carry negative connotations. It is also brutish, violent, destructive, and not very intellectual, so Dickens may be casting this gentleman and his philosophy in an immediate negative light.

The gentleman scolds the children for agreeing to paper a room with horses. He suggests that horses never walk up and down sides of rooms in reality, but this is in fact a truth to Sissy, whose father works with horses in the circus. This, along with the other things mentioned in class, shows the irony in Gradgrind's and Bounderby's philsophy: what they assert as Fact is actually not so.

Dickens also says that this gentleman "had it in charge from high authority to bring about the great public-office Millennium, when Commissioners should reign upon the earth" (5). This is a clear reference to the Biblical Judgement Day. As we said in class, it shows that Fact is the religion of Coketown, an irony in itself.

Dickens uses the vessel metaphor throughout the whole chapter. This might be to emphasize the fact that children are malleable, empty to begin with. Compellingly, at the end, McChoakumchild compares himself to Morgiana in the Forty Thieves and the vessels as weapons of boiling oil, implying that this education is turning the children into weapons, much like Gradgrind is a weapon, "a kind of cannon loaded to the muzzle with facts, prepared to blow them clean out of the regions of childhood at one discharge" (3).

What in the Dickens?

Hi Everyone!

Hope you are having a great weekend!

As we discussed in class, satire is the literary are of diminishing or derogating a subject by making it ridiculous and evoking towards it attitudes of amusement, contempt, scorn or indignation. Satire does not attempt to harm or damage by ridicule, but rather to shock to gain attention and begin social change. The themes of satire are maintenance of standards, reaffirmation of values, and the necessity of reform. That being said, I asked you each to take a literary device, define it, and explain why/how it is used in satire. These devices are: tone, irony, exaggeration, distortion, understatement, innuendo, ambiguity, catalog, simile and metaphor, oxymoron, parable, and allegory. I'm interested to see your answers below. I'd also love to see what you have to say in response to Plato's Allegory of the Cave in comparison to the world established in Hard Times.

How is Othello desfined as an "other?"

In class today we began a discussion about how Othello is defined as an "other" or outsider. There is the obvious example that he is a moor. However, the separation goes deeper than this. Whereas Othello is a military man, many of the other people he deals with are politicians. These people are much smoother than Othello, and it shows in their relative language. Can anybody think of other ways he is separated?

How powerful is NOT Rochester

Rochester is immediately defined as being compliant: "I agreed. Just like I did with everything else." He is also tricked by his family, and therefore ends up married to a woman (a creole) who he barely knows, unaware of her genetic history. ALthough his marriage does save him from the financial disgrace toward which his life was headed, he does not originally possess much power. He, following the trend of his wife and her mother, is alienated and distrusted by the black servants. Instead of being the wealthy, white respected man, as he would like to be in England, he is isolated and becomes fearful as well - which is supported by his walk in the woods, similar to antoinette's reoccuring dream, and the fact that they live near Massacre. Paranoia and danger are clearly present.
HOwever, he does posses patriarchal power. From a feminist lens, it is obvious that Antoinette is oppressed/suffocated by the patriarchal society. Antoinette gives ito Rochester (sexually) and he continues to treat her terribly - only lusting, never loving her. By the end, he uses his Englishman power to completely revoke Antoinett'es identity when he symbolically takes her name away by calling her Bertha. And then as wel all know he locks her up in the attic.
So, in my opinion, even thoug hhis family ticks him and he is isolated, he learns to develop and execute his [ower as a man in a patriarchal society.
WHat do you think? Is he powerful? What in the language supports your view? Do he use or take advantage of his power for evil? Does it make you think more or less of him'? Or do you sympathesize with him... an outsider who had no idea what he was getting himself into?

Google Logins

Hi Everyone!

I will be emailing you your google logins and passwords within the hour. Directions on how to login can be found at http://tinyurl.com/mtpsgooglelogin. Please do this by Wednesday.

Some of these blog entries look great!

Jane Eyre's Growth

Hello fellow Scholars:

What's the deal with Jane Eyre? How exactly can we classify her growth, if she indeed grows at all? I said, in class today, that her growth was purely introspective--that is, Jane does not progress and grow in the eyes of society; rather, her growth is strong and evident only insofar as it pertains to her own psychological characteristics, viz., her knowledge of what she truly wants, how she sees herself as a person and member of society, how that image of herself matters, etc. To me, it seems Brontë is not concerned with how the opinion of society at large might change regarding Jane, but rather how society's unchanging opinion, namely one of sexual prejudices, forces Jane to change herself, and ultimately come to the realization of what is important to Jane, not society.

What do you think? Does my proposition seem sound? Is it invalid? Is it entirely wrong and contrived :) ?

Welcome to AP Literature Period 4!

Hi Everyone!

I hope that you each had an enjoyable weekend! For those of you who have blogged before, welcome back! For those of you who are new to this... WELCOME!

Our blog will serve as a sort of virtual classroom, coffeehouse, debate arena. It generally transcends each of these designations. Sometimes you will be asked to respond to a specific question, but more often than not you will respond to each others queries and theories.

So, let's begin!