Responses to Course Material

So, Hamlet...

At the last "Responses" post, we finished our big preliminary read of Hamlet, and now we have concluded analyzing this text inside-out, upside-down, etc. Our first assignment, the forums, was really interesting because of the different perspectives. Come to think of it, that word, "perspective," sums up the past month pretty nicely. Anyways, back to the forums. My favorite would definitely have to be the prisoner sound byte from NPR. Of course, there is a bit of bias from my love for the radio, but either way, I really enjoyed hearing about this rendition of the play in probably one of the most unexpected places ever. Especially after watching the Tenant version, I can kind of see some strong correlations between the play and the prison. There is the connection between the idea of surveillance, except in a prison, I am pretty sure it's a good thing, but there is also the idea that everyone is out to get you, i.e. no one is really on your side. I think that's how those 4 prisoners were able to relate to Hamlet's anger and frustration. In a way, it kind of reminds me of that thing where football players do ballet to increase their flexibility; people can find their strengths in some of the most improbably places. I did not really enjoy the other two as much, and I was a bit averse to the Hamlet in the Bush thing, because that leaned in the direction of racism (to me). It sort of reminded me of Heart of Darkness because the narrator seemed to blame the Africans, making them sound dumb.

And then there were movies. My favorites were the Jacobi and Tenant versions, and my least favorite was definitely the Hawke version. I think the real reason behind my choices was the fact that they make Hamlet seem a lot more insane relative to the others. They allowed me to keep rooting for Hamlet, even though he does some pretty wicked deeds, because I empathized with his horrible mental state. Of course, each had its own strengths and weaknesses. I think that the Oedipal complex was definitely overplayed throughout the versions, especially in the Jacobi or Branaugh closet scene, where Hamlet almost sexually assaults Gertrude (but then again, that kind of plays into the insanity, oh well). Especially after watching the plays, I found a lot of connections between my previous Shakespeare experience, namely Macbeth. The themes of usurpation and defying fate play a huge role in the two, but they sort of take opposite sides to the issue: Hamlet's throne has been taken from him while Macbeth steals the throne for himself. I also remember Ms. Huntley talking about certain pairings of themes in Macbeth, like fate vs. freewill and fair vs. foul, which I found myself recalling in Hamlet often, such as the "special providence" or the horrible maggot imagery with Polonius. Also, both can be seen to have gone insane, but at different points in the play, based on interpretation. Back to the closet scene, I kind of liked the idea of Hamlet in a more peaceful conference, like in the older productions with the "office" environment. Honestly, the Branagh version just seemed overly dramatic: if a scene was meant to be creepy, it was made extremely creepy; if Hamlet got angry, he got really angry. My favorite of the Ophelias was probably the Tenant one because I felt that she made herself more modern and equal to Hamlet, which is how I envisioned her as I read the play. She sort of blends my previous Shakespeare heroines: Juliet's innocence and wit with the cunning and fallibility of Lady Macbeth.

Now that we have analyzed our Shakespeare text of the year, I feel that we have built a big knowledge base, which we can pull from on the AP exam. However, especially with these annotations, I think that I have some trouble recognizing the structure. I don't know about anyone else, but after a while I feel like the annotations just mesh into this one big read, and everytime I stick down a note, I am pretty sure I have something similar elsewhere. Anyways, I look forward to hopefully entering the realm of novels. Plays are cool and all, but novels are just so much easier to read for me. Well, that's that. Ta ta for now!

Open Prompts, Part One

For this post, I chose the 2006 prompt: Many writers use a country setting to establish values within a work of literature. For example, the country may be a place of virtue and peace or one of primitivism and ignorance. Choose a novel or play in which such a setting plays a significant role. Then write an essay in which you analyze how the country setting functions in the work as a whole.

Student 3A: The best part of this essay was definitely the conclusion. Not to say that the other parts were bad, but this student simply nailed it in the end, taking in all of her ideas across the body and combining them into well-written statements. Going into the content, I would say that the writer's ideas were great and showed a strong understanding of the text (which, by the way, is Persuasion by Jane Austen), but it was the manner in which they presented those ideas that brought it down. They touched on everything in their thesis, but I felt that at certain points, especially the description of Bath vs. Uppercross, the author could have used a little less detail from the novel and added in more analysis. As a reader, I got the contrast part in the first sentence, so I wanted to hear more of the author's thoughts. In all, this was a really good essay. Aside from some structural points and a bit of redundancy, the writer demonstrated a clear understanding of the text, and made frequent reference to the effects/meanings of the countryside in Persuasion. I would agree with the score of 8 that it received.

Student 3B:

I feel like this author got lost on the tangent of comedy while writing this essay. It starts out with some promise, but even in their thesis, the writer calls the play a "successful comedy," instead of focusing in their argument towards the magic AP lit question: meaning. With regards to the content, there is a disproportionate amount of summarizing going on, and the writer is almost filling up space with details from the play instead of analyzing their significance. Even then, when the writer chooses to analyze something, it has very little to do with meaning. Towards the end, my thoughts were: I understood that the plot was funny the first time you said it! Move on already! Sadly, when they did move on, it was their conclusion. I agree with the reader's comments but not with the score of a 6. For one thing, I don't even think this person wrote enough because so far, all of the "good" essays that I have read have been more than 2 pages long. In the end, this writer failed to address the actual prompt and sticks to an unrelated description of the comedic effect, rather than the actual meaning that is generated by the juxtaposition of country and city life.

Student 3C:This essay demonstrates the importance of a strong introduction because it does not have one. On top of that the content was just plain irrelevant. Nothing that the writer wrote showed any insight into meaning at all, but rather just related details that seemed to fit the prompt. Plus, they should have probably included the word "country" somewhere in their discussion to form a link in the reader's mind between the prompt and essay. This speaks to the need to assume the reader knows nothing about your chosen work. Their use of second person is just not okay. This is not a conversation. This is an AP Exam, and I am certainly not your friend. The writer's claims just seem to obvious assertions that anyone can make without even reading it, and there is not even an ounce of DIDLS anywhere. The fact that it got a four actually makes me a bit happy because if this got four points, then with what Ms. Holmes has taught us, I am sure we can easily do better.

Close Reading

For this post, I chose yet another Slate article, "Censorship 101." It can be found at: click here!

In the article, "Censorship 101," Sonja West calls into question the recent Supreme Court decisions that have supported schools over students' free speech. In describing this trend, she then goes on to describe a vicious cycle that results from this process: as students see and experience censorship, as they grow older, they will embrace the same values and accept infringements on their First Amendment rights. Throughout her argument, West employs diction, syntax, and details in sending out her message to the reader.

The article consists almost entirely of informal diction. This generates a conversational effect throughout the piece, where the reader feels like they share a direct connection to what West is writing. There are plenty of opportunities to add in bits of legal jargon or formal words, especially in the paragraph describing the issues that children currently deal with and will face in the future. Yet West uses simple terms that are commonly used in the nation, such as "poverty," "racism," and "global military crises." In addition, some of the words West chooses to include have built rather strong connotations. For example, the word, "censorship," has always had a negative image that implies excessive control, and this idea is furthered when she uses similar words like "totalitarian." As the article is rather informative, West's diction adds to her argument by making the issue of the piece more understandable and thus applicable to the lives of the readers.

West generally uses syntax to keep the reader moving along as they read the piece. This is exemplified when she writes, "But that was then; this is now." This sentence blends the technique of the short, powerful sentence with a strong transition, as it sits alone in its own mini-paragraph. It leaves the reader wondering about the differences that have emerged in current society since the Tinker case, which West describes in the following section of the article. She also makes repeated use of brief interrupters, as in this sentence: "Those who are persistently told by their schools that certain speech is off-limits, however, are less certain about these basic freedoms." This adds an emphasis on the latter part of the sentence, which firmly supports West's idea of the far-reaching impact of these contra-student decisions.

The details used throughout the piece reinforce West's message and add a bit of reliability to her argument, leaving the reader with the impression that her idea is actually valid as opposed to some opinionated editorial piece. For example, she includes a study of a Yale Law professor in her description of the cycle of growing censorship from suppression of students' speech. Though the study does not directly support her claim, she is able to extrapolate a trend from it that does. Plus, the second any writer drops the Ivy league into an article, it adds a strong level of support in the reader's mind. In addition, West includes details from both sides of the judicial conflicts she cites in the article. In supporting the students' side of things, including the other side gets the reader thinking about who is truly in the wrong. She included a case that took place in Pennsylvania, where some students protested a racist team name, but the school administration shot down the idea. Any reasonable person can see the prejudice in the term, "Redskin," so by including this case, West sort of eggs the reader towards her argument.

Through effective use of diction, syntax, and details, West is able to get her message across to the readers. In both informing them and urging them towards an actionable argument, she sheds light upon the potential significant issue of school censorship.

Responses to Course Material

As we look forward to Turkey Day, it has been yet another eventful month on the AP Lit quest, which includes the start of a civil war between the hours.

So, we started out this period by finishing our discussions of Death of A Salesman.  I had some mixed feelings about the "fishbowl" discussions.  It was actually rather interesting to watch them and participate a little, and I liked having some structure in our discussions for a change through the simple prompts.  On the other hand, with the restrictions of the fishbowl, I felt like less ideas were stated and discussed. Still, since Ms. Holmes is by far the Salesman expert, I'm sure we understood what needed to be understood. Funnily enough towards the end, I began to realize that my family is kind of like the Lomans in the story. We've got the same structure: two sons and two parents, and my dad also drives a lot for his job.  Though we are by no means dysfunctional like the Lomans are, when I recognized these simple similarities, it emphasized Miller's idea of the common man to me; the Lomans are kind of generic, if not archetypal, characters that can easily be related to.

Moving on, we went on to write our first closed prompt this month as well, where we analyzed the poem, "The Century Quilt." Once again, though, I never failed to miss some deeper meaning/connection in the poem.  I guess with "Promises like Pie-Crust" it was understandable since I'd never really heard of the saying.  But with this poem, I kind of skirted around the deeper meaning by recognizing the simple, noticeable trends in the details.  When Holmes took it apart using her insane tools of literary analysis, I was kind of shocked that I had failed to trends as simple as structure (the sandwiches throughout the poem) the first time around. In the end, I'm assuming that it's okay for now, since we probably have many closed prompts awaiting us in the future. These essays actually remind me a lot of the history A.P. exams, even if we have a bit more freedom in A.P. Lit; these closed prompts particularly reminded me of the DBQs that we had to do in A.P.U.S.H., recognizing trends and pulling evidence directly from the sources just as with "The Century Quilt."

Of course, now we have just finished our big read of Hamlet, and I have got to say that so far, I have seen a lot of Macbeth in this play. From the presence of messengers to the idea of sending off the good guy to England (like Macduff), there have been many Brit Lit déjà-vu moments for me.  When I asked Holmes, she told me that Macbeth was actually written after this play, so my thoughts were turned upside-down, but I have also noticed some major differences between the two, especially the fact that Macbeth isn't much of a Senecan drama.  For example, everybody doesn't just die at the end of Macbeth, as opposed to Hamlet.  I also made a mini-connection with The Children of Men, another story I read during Brit Lit, when Hamlet mentioned the word, "quietus," which is a term used in the dystopian world of the novel. After making these connections, I am really excited to see what new ideas I'll discover during my close reading of the play, especially looking at meter.  I was able to recognize some areas where Shakespeare wrote in a long set of rhyming lines, but I have yet to figure out whether they are an actual sonnet or not.  I do have to say that deciphering some of the language is a bit challenging, especially with the myriad apostrophes thrown around. Yet, it was still exciting to read a British work; even if Shakespeare's perspective is dated, his writing is still masterful and a little enigmatic too.

As second quarter continues to move along, I would say that my biggest challenges so far remain with recognizing some of the less obvious rhetorical techniques, especially structure. With more experience in essay-writing, I hope to greatly improve on this, and I am eager to continue building on my general writing skills with our voice lessons.

Open Prompts, Part One

For this post, I chose the 2008 prompt:
In a literary work, a minor character, often known as a foil, possesses traits that emphasize, by contrast or comparison, the distinctive characteristics and qualities of the main character. For example, the ideas or behavior of a minor character might be used to highlight the weaknesses or strengths of the main character. Choose a novel or play in which a minor character serves as a foil for the main character. Then write an essay in which you analyze how the relation between the minor character and the major character illuminates the meaning of the work.

Student #1:
The introduction is very concise, but still sets up the context for the writer's argument. Without going too much into detail, describes Huang as the foil, and generates a nice thesis that returns to the real question of meaning in his/her chosen text, The Joy Luck Club. Though they have a great analysis of the overall meaning of the text, the writer spends more than half of it summarizing the text. These details were relevant because they show the interplay between Huang and Linda, which ties into the assertion that Huang's abuse led Linda to become more independent; however, it probably would have been better to shorten down on these details and intersperse their analysis of the meaning within them, as opposed to separating them into two different sections. The conclusion was exemplary, summarizing the details of the argument and tying things back to their argument on the meaning. This essay was very well-written and is actually one of the best open prompt responses that I have read so far.

Student #2:
From the beginning of this essay, the writer seems to lack focus on the prompt, which (not to sound like a stickler, but...) says the minor character, not characters. However, the author did have good insights into the interactions between Celle and the minor character, and I liked how the essay seemed to mimic the book as the descriptions of the foils seemed to mimic Celle's actual progression throughout the novel. Throughout the essay, they also do a great job of reemphasizing their original argument, which is pretty important considering the context of this essay - specifically the reader (AP test graders), who would most likely be caught somewhere between self-loathing and utter misery, who would probably like the idea of getting reminded of the argument they're grading. However, back to my original point, I think that the writer could have easily just picked one character, probably either Celle's father or Shug, who could speak to Celle's development and the overall meaning of the text, which is also never really clearly stated in the essay.

Student #3:
First of all, this writer uses the syntax of a seventh grader; their sentence structure has almost no variation. Also, as a reader I have no idea who the main character is (Baba or Hassan?). Though I can infer that Hassan is the main character, I think it is a good idea to always assume the reader has no previous context with the subject material - better safe than sorry. None of their comparisons really tie into the meaning (which they do explicitly mention, so that's good), and their conclusion does not make much sense. They start off saying that the differences between the two highlight the good traits in Hassan, but then they say that both were loyal in the end. Also they say that Hassan "kept mostly to himself," so I did not really see how this ties into the theme of loyalty, which the author actually does explain earlier with Hassan's loyalty to his friends. This contradiction really detracts from the essay. Ultimately, like a lot of these "third essays," I believe that this writer got to this question in the end with say ten minutes left and just wrote something down to get credit. Some of the basics were covered, like what the meaning of their text was, but they really failed to adequately develop their ideas and provide an understandable context for their assertions.

Summary and Analysis: Death of A Salesman

THE BASICS
-The author of Death of A Salesman is Arthur Miller, who was born in 1915 New York, New York.  He was Jewish, though his wife was an firm believer in Christianity.  He was known for testifying before HUAC during the Red Scare.
-The play is set in New York, going between the city proper and a tenement-housing development in Brooklyn, which is where the Lomans and Charley & Bernard live.  The time period is generally considered around the 1950s, which is when Miller wrote the play although this is not often explicitly stated in the play.
Plot:
The play opens with Willy Loman returning home after another long trip.  His son, Biff, has just returned from his travels out west and is trying to settle down, but for reasons unknown for the moment, Willy is deeply bothered by Biff's presence.  When he arrives home, Linda receives him warmly, even as he starts to rant on over Biff advising him to relax his mind, and she tells him to make a sandwich before coming up to bed.  In this moment, we see Willy slip into a flashback, which is the first time we notice his "overactive" mind.  He slips into memories of his past, specifically episodes with Biff and Happy, his two sons, whom he loves and idolizes.  While he is ranting throughout this memory, his sons are in their rooms at the house, discussing their memories of their childhod and youth as well as their father's bizarre behavior and their concerns over his mental state. As Willy's daydream continues, he goes outside for a walk, during which Linda and the sons meet in the kitchen, where Linda explains Willy's suicidal tendencies.  As she explains the sons' their responsibility to their father, Willy returns, and Biff and Happy leave him in the night with the proposition that Biff is finally going to settle down and pursue a business opportunity with Bill Oliver, an old acquaintance. The next morning, everyone leaves the house optimistic, but as the day unfolds, all of their plans fail. Oliver doesn't even recognize Biff, and Biff impulsively steals a pen from him. Willy's attempt at gaining an office position in New York fails miserably and he leaves the office depressed and in another flashback moment. He ends up going to see Charlie, and sees a successful Bernard there, who is going to the Supreme Court in DC. This leaves Willy pondering the methods of success and revealing a suicidal urge. The three Loman men converge at a restaurant and everything is laid bare, which ultimately leads to a flashback revealing the origin of the rift between Biff and Willy: Biff witnessed Willy cheating on Linda. Willy is left alone at the restaurant and returns home with some seed to start planting in the garden. Biff and Happy return to an indignant Linda, who demands that they leave, but Biff decides to make it his final departure and hopes to leave on good terms with Willy. In trying to connect, he ends up arguing with Willy then crying in his arms. Willy takes this as a sign that Biff has forgiven him and loves him, and from that he finally decides upon taking his own life, so Biff can start a new life and business. In the final scene, the Lomans and Charlie are at Willy's funeral, where Biff denounces his father and decides to head out West while Happy announces that he will take the money and fulfill his father's dream (doubtful, though). In the end, Linda announces that she just finished the last payment on the house, but ironically no one is left to live in it but her.
Major Characters:
-Willy: An aged salesman and family man, who is beginning to lose his grip on reality.  He tries to deny his failures and inadequacies to both himself and others, especially his family, but he is definitely "tired," and this fatigue grows throughout the play.
-Biff: Willy's eldest son, who has lost pretty much all self-esteem. After witnessing his father's infidelity to his mother, he lost faith in all of his beliefs, as he had grown up idolizing his father.  This ultimately led him to drop out of school, and head out west to try and explore life as a free man.  He has a fantasy of living out in nature with cattle, as opposed to staying confined in an office and the regularity of a structured life.
-Ben: Willy's deceased elder brother. He often served as a father figure for Willy, since his father passed on when they were young and he was the man of the house.  He eventually hit it big through the diamond industry in Africa.  He offered Willy a position in Alaska to work for him, and Willy often regrets passing up this opportunity,
-Happy: Willy's youngest son, who comes off as rather dumb for most of the play, settling with the status quo of his life as a blue-collar worker.  He sort of fills in gaps in the family but has no substantial relationship with anyone, as he is often disregarded by others, especially his parents who tend to focus on Biff alone, which causes him to try and capture others' attention
-Charley: Willy's close friend; he is basically considered family.  He is actually a rather successful businessman, and he provides Willy assistance in order to maintain his pride, even though everyone knows that Willy asks for his money.  Willy continually tries to differentiate himself from Charley.
Tone/Style--
tone:
Since this is a play, there is not much of a tone since the author uses dialogue. However, Miller does tend to take on a more frustrated and conflicted persona through Willy Loman. As Willy is the main protagonist, his conflicts speak to Miller's views on the changing values in American society, where such things as age and wisdom are not valued in the face of commercial or monetary success.
symbols:
-The Phonograph from Howard's office: This represents the unalterable nature of the past.  In recording the actual sounds, Howard can remember the moments with his children.  However, this almost frightens Willy because it threatens to ruin his delusional memories of the past.
-Rain/umbrella: This might represent misfortune, as it begins raining right before Willy meets with Howard.  In addition, Ben always carries an umbrella, which might "protect" his fortune.
-Stockings: They represent Willy's guilt in two ways: one for cheating on Linda and another for not providing Linda as her husband
-Seeds: These represent Willy's hope for the future, which he believes will be a lot better with the help of his death and the insurance money.
point-of-view:
The play is definitely in the third person. However, there is plenty of first-person, as we experience Willy's flashbacks from the way he tells a lot of the story. There is really no reason to believe that Willy is unreliable, though since his memories do not shut out any of the bad details, such as his capture by Biff.
imagery:
A lot of the setting has a sort of drab, gray feeling that is typically associated with urban areas, where there is just a lot of people. A lot of the imagery is emotional, especially for Willy, whose actions and words tend to reveal much about his state of mind. The reader is able to feel and almost understand his deterioration. In the flashbacks there also seems to be nicer weather or a happier mood, which contributes to the overall feeling of hope that Miller tries to give that time period.

Theme Statement:
In Death of A Salesman, Arthur Miller comments on the eventual self-destruction that results from deluding one's self by placing faith in words and ideas rather than taking responsibility for/charge of these goals, all in the name of achieving conventional success and maintaining personal dignity.
-The title, alongside the few instances where it occurs in the play, especially when it basically happens in Howard's office, support this as Willy's optimism is the root of his downfall. He continuously fails to take true responsibility for his actions or embrace his guilt, and his failure to escape his delusion destroys him as a person.
-I think the setting offers a contrast between the industrious life of the city folk and the somewhat lazy life that the Loman children lead as semi-suburbanites and in their fantasies of life out west in nature. There is a recurring theme of the freedom of the open landscapes of the seemingly untouched west. However, in the end, these ideas display the characters lack of responsibility. Rather than face their problems, they simply hope to escape them and start afresh, which Biff has already done when he went out to explore his options before the action of the plot.
-Miller's style supports this theme because he uses Willy to reflect the frustration that every person feels when they have nothing truly genuine of their own. He continually juxtaposes different ideas and objects to show how Willy's firm clutch on a useless dream is both unrealistic and unhealthy. There is also a promotion of self-dependence and the people who take it upon themselves to achieve success like Bernard and Ben.

Quotes:
"Will you let me go, for Christ's sake?" - Biff
Throughout this scene, there is a mounting sense of dramatic irony. Biff keeps talking about moving on, and how he is ready to give up on Willy's romanticized vision of his future. Yet Willy cannot accept reality and let Biff go in peace; he has to leave some mark in his mind, something that will bring him back in the future. Everything that Biff says implies that he is going to leave and never plans on coming back, but Willy cannot leave the delusion and misinterprets Biff's words as an approval for his suicide.
"Nobody dast blame this man. A salesman is got to dream, boy. It comes with the territory." - Charley
I think that this quote serves to put some closure to the question of Charley's friendship with Willy, while acting as a sort of simple summary of the problems and hopes that Willy faced. As his life was spent trying to please others enough to buy products from his company, Willy was all but forced to dream of the day when he would have something of his own to sell or brag about to his customers. I think the first part also shows how Charley never really gave up on Willy, as reflected by his immediate condemning of Willy's first suicide thought in his office.

Close Reading No. 3

For this post, I chose the Slate article, "Comfort food," by Larry Lake.  It can be found at http://www.slate.com/articles/life/family/2013/11/families_dealing_with_mental_illness_need_support_too.html

In this article, Lake describes how society tends to embrace certain diseases and problems, like cancer or accidents, but points a cold shoulder towards many serious issues like drug abuse and mental illness.  In describing his experiences between his wife and daughter, he uses imagery, syntax, and details to get his ideas across.

Lake uses imagery to emphasize different ideas throughout his essay.  In the beginning of the essay, he uses sensory imagery to describe the food that his family received from the community during his wife's breast cancer treatments.  For example, he describes "chicken breasts encrusted with parmesan," "bubbling pans of lasagna," and "warm home-baked rolls."  He appeals to almost all of the reader's senses and almost instills a feeling of actual hunger in them by vividly portraying the food that he received.  Through this description, Lake is able to emphasize the idea that his entire community was in support of his family during their ordeal with his wife's cancer.  This serves as a deep contrast to the later descriptions of food in the article under the narrative of his daughter's struggles with alcohol abuse.  In pointing out the lack of community support, he describes one meal as "soup and grilled cheese," which almost sounds bland and depressing, which follows in this contrast.  The most detailed imagery in this section comes during the description of his daughter's car accident; he writes "a swollen mass of stitches, bruises and torn flesh" in describing her face in the hospital.  Lake never went into such graphic detail when describing his wife's outlook during radiation treatment, and these conflicting techniques serve to show the support they received in one case and the lack of in another.  The reader is also left in a much more empathetic position towards Maggie (his daughter).  Through a tactical use of imagery, Lake is able to establish his idea that those who suffer from mental ailments and addictions, like his daughter, are almost cast away by society with little to no support.

The syntax in the article serves to maintain the flow of ideas as Lake builds his argument.  In particular, he makes use of verbals to build up suspense in the narrative on Maggie.  For example, right before the accident, he writes "dozing off" and "maybe she was thinking."  As he describes the scene in the car, the reader is left to wonder about what is coming next until Lake ends this situation abruptly and forcefully with a short, straightforward sentence ("That night, an oncoming speeding car hit the van head on.").  He also makes repeated use of fragments to emphasize the lack of food (and thus support), such as in the sentence, "No warm casseroles."  Though short and choppy, this technique is especially effective as Lake tries to reemphasize the lack of compassion from his community while his daughter was dealing with an issue that could be considered more serious than his wife's cancer.  Likewise, he uses this technique of short or fragmented sentences in the earlier narrative of his wife's issues to emphasize and repeat certain details.  Aside from these, Lake mostly employs long, complex sentence structure, which connects his details into these strings of thought.  An example of this is: "Leftovers piled up in the refrigerator, and soon the freezer filled up too, this tsunami of food offerings an edible symbol of our community’s abundant generosity." By combining the trends of his filling fridge with the support of his friends into one long sentence, he creates a correlation between the two.  Lake's use of syntax serves to maintain a flow throughout the essay, which is interrupted at certain points to call to the reader's attention.

The details that Lake chose to include greatly influence the overall effect of the piece upon the reader.  Most often, the contrasting information between his wife's and daughter's stories serve to illustrate his overall point that people tend to ignore mental disease.  For example, he barely skims over the process in describing his wife's treatment, but in his daughter's treatment, he goes into each specific stage and event that occurred throughout.  In a way, it makes the reader more aware of the issue that Lake is trying to expose.  The fact that his wife had breast cancer is much more understandable to a reader as opposed to alcohol addiction but Lake reverses that scenario in the description.  Furthermore, certain details that are brought up in his wife's story resurface throughout, such as the idea of people offering or not offering help.  That detail in particular serves to point a finger at society or communities for failing to recognize the gravity of mental illnesses.  The conflicting details that Lake places in the article emphasize the societal issue that he is trying to point out to the reader.

In this article, Lake tries to get his readers to understand the bleak situation caused by society ignoring the needs of mentally ill or addicted people, as opposed to more universal problems/diseases like cancer or car crashes.  Through an effective use of imagery, syntax, and details, he succeeds in getting this point across.

Response to Course Material

Since the last reflection post, I would say that I have really focused on our reading and analyzing techniques.   Through annotating both The American Dream and Death of A Salesman, I have really started to notice both the minutia and the overarching themes, along with the differences between those two.  I especially liked our theme discussion of The American Dream, where we went through and listed out the thematic motifs and eventually came down to our final theme statement.  This process really helped me understand different elements of the play, and how theme transcends the story and acts more or less like a life lesson.  We repeated this exercise with "Promises like Pie-Crust," and I found that our discussions were getting more efficient and focused, especially with Ms. Holmes guiding us through the title's allusion.

Watching Death of A Salesman was a very helpful experience because, even while annotating afterward, the text's transitions into Willy Loman's flashback scenes are hard to understand.  I almost wish that we could see an acted out version of The American Dream, for it might reveal more meaning in certain moments of the play through a visual representation of the action.  In addition, I learned another acronym for big reads (S.T.I.F.S.), and I thought that this different technique helped reinforce the idea of big vs. little picture.  This last week, we learned some new ideas on the definition of tragedy, especially how that idea has changed between the ancient Greek and modern eras.  After reading the articles last Friday, I was left with the idea that Death of A Salesman is a tragedy.  Though we are still ruminating on this idea, I still think that this story has many things in common with Shakespearean tragedies, like Macbeth and Othello, especially with regards to the idea of an individual fall.  As we continue in our discussion of the text, I hope to gain a better grasp of this along with some of the overarching messages in the play.  As I annotated, I felt like there were some repeating motifs, but I was not sure about their significance or contribution to the meaning, such as the water or the dynamic between Willy and Charley. 

Going back to the idea of analyzing texts, I thought that the multiple choice practice activities were also helpful.  Having already done some in the summer, I felt more prepared this time (especially with Ms. Holmes' strategies).  One of the things about this class that is rather surprising to me is the lack of specific units.  In my previous lit classes, there was always a framework to guide the activities we did in class, but with A.P. lit, it's almost like I come to class with no idea about what we'll cover next (other than the list of novels).  In a way, I would say that the articles and discussions have made me start thinking on my feet more, which will definitely be a useful skill come May.

As we continue along on our intellectual quest, I hope to continue checking in on poetry, which I still have some trouble analyzing, and I also hope to continue building on my knowledge of terminology, so that I can effectively respond to the texts we read.

Open Prompts, Part One - No. 2

For this post, I am reviewing responses to the 2009 exam.  The prompt is: "A symbol is an object, action, or event that represents something or that creates a range of associations beyond itself. In literary works a symbol can express an idea, clarify meaning, or enlarge literal meaning. Select a novel or play and, focusing on one symbol, write an essay analyzing how that symbol functions in the work and what it reveals about the characters or themes of the work as a whole. Do not merely summarize the plot."  I actually liked this prompt because it is a bit more clear about that magic A.P. question of meaning.

Student 3A:
 I think that this student did a great job in their analysis of Ibsen's The Wild Duck, and though there were some minor flaws (some syntax errors and semi-illegible handwriting), I believe that this student really earned the nine points given to him/her by the grader.  Though I have never read any of Ibsen's work, this student used enough plot details to establish a sufficient amount of context for their point, such as in their description of Greggers: "who wishes to expose... a horrible act... to serve his own ends."  This detail really helped me understand the conflict that was set up in the metaphor between the duck and dog and the Hjalmar family and Greggers, respectively.  Throughout the essay, 3A tied the plot events that s/he described back to the duck, and the overall meaning of the play.  I particularly liked their description of the duck's meaning at the conclusion of the story with Hedvig's reaction to Greggers' revelation.  Describing how Hedvig shot herself after hearing the ugly truth, 3A tied this event back to both the original idea that the duck represents the Hjalmars' fantasy of happiness, but also added a deeper level of insight by describing the duck as a metaphor for "innocence," which Hedvig was "unwilling to part with."  This student did a fantastic job of recognizing and elaborating on a symbol in their chosen text as well as connecting this symbol to the meaning of the the story.

Student 3B:
 Honestly, I was leaning more towards a five than a six after reading this essay.  This student did choose a symbol and explain its significance to the text with the lampshade representing "covering up the truth."  However, for the most part, I felt that s/he just added in related details from the plot and never really took the time to explain the symbol's meaning further than how it characterizes Blanche Dubois.  For example they wrote, "The reader becomes accustomed to not trusting anything Blanche says... The lampshade symbolizes her fantastical and unreal view of things."  Though this sentence goes along with the writer's established idea on the lampshade, there is almost no connection made between the details listed in those phrases and the symbol itself.  Instead the writer just describes different instances of Blanche hiding the truth and then just restates their characterization of Blanche as secretive.  In addition, they never made any connection to the overall message or theme of the story, but rather, they continually described how the lampshade is like a metaphor for Blanche.  On a side note, they also had a lot of grammatical errors such as a general disregard for apostrophes in the beginning.  This writer did an adequate, but rather mediocre job at explaining their reasoning, and the essay would have benefited from less character details and more analysis of the symbol's value in the overall text.

Student 3C:
It's funny how in this set of essays, the handwriting gets much neater as the score goes down.  This writer did a great job of recognizing and offering a primary meaning for the symbol of the machete, but never really went beyond that.  The essay consisted almost entirely of details with very shallow analysis that was often irrelevant to the meaning or significance that it provided to the story.  They wrote, "Okonkwo never let a woman touch his machete because that would defeat its purpose of being symbolic."  This sentence makes no sense and leads to a random discussion of African women in the story.  To strengthen whatever argument they were trying to make, this writer could have tried to reference some female characters in the story and contrast the machete's link to Okonkwo's manhood with some feminine characteristics.  With regards to syntax and style, I almost felt like I was reading work from a seventh grader (no offense intended, it's just my opinion); their sentences were almost always ten words or less and they even slipped in some Is, which detracts from the seriousness of the essay.  In all, though the writer chose and stuck with a symbol throughout this essay, they had very little discussion of the meaning of the symbol and thus never truly answered the prompt;  I would give it a 3/9.

Summary & Analysis: The American Dream

The Basics: Edward Albee wrote this play from 1959-1960, and it draws inspiration from the rising trends of the mid 20th century, especially consumerism and feminism.  The play takes place in a generic, drab apartment from the 1950s, and all of the action seen by  the audience occurs in the living room, which is rather symmetrical.  There are only five characters in this play:
1) Mommy is the alpha-male of the group.  She attempts to manipulate and dominate every situation and considers any sort of response from other characters to be a challenge, especially Grandma.  Along with Daddy, she is rarely able to attach any sort of sentimentality to anything.  Instead, she is worried the most about attaining satisfaction in exchange for whatever she spends on something; she basically loses all emotions and compassion when she cannot achieve satisfaction.
2) Daddy takes on the role of the woman-of-the-house in the play.  He is almost always submissive towards anything that Mommy says to him, and it is heavily implied that he has recently undergone a sex-change operation, which serves as his ultimate emasculation.  Though he is rather empty (in an emotional sense), Daddy does still see reason and understands true morals, as opposed to Mommy, who has really lost her entire ability to care for others.
3) Grandma acts as a foil for Mommy and Daddy, and she often challenges/breaks any tensions or delusions that build up among characters.  In particular, she often easily foils the intense sexual tension that rises between Mommy and Daddy.  Grandma is also rather androgynous in that her gender does not play a major role in her characterization; rather, it is her age and experience that develops her as the rational and moral beacon of light in the midst of the apathetic and emotionless Mommy and Daddy.
 4) Mrs. Barker plays into the generational trend of Mommy and Daddy, especially with regards to her lack of morals.  She appears later in the play and initially acts as another challenge to Mommy's authority due to the fact that she is higher up in the social ladder than Mommy.  However, this conflict fades away, and she becomes significant toward the end because she takes an understanding attitude towards Grandma and actually listens to her.
5)  The Young Man (A.K.A. the American dream) is the other "outsider" (meaning not in the actual family... yet), who shows up towards the end of the play.  He mainly interacts with Grandma, telling her his life story, which reveals that his twin was the original adopted child that Mrs. Barker sold to Mommy and Daddy, who ended up mutilating and killing it in their pursuit of satisfaction.  He is a handsome, emotionless shell that will do anything for money and blends into the surrounding social norms to get by.
Plot:
The story begins with Mommy and Daddy discussing seemingly random topics like their appliances, the sloth of the maintenance workers who have not arrived yet, and the fact that people can't achieve satisfaction.  Mommy eventually takes over the conversation, forcing Daddy to listen to a story of how she went to a store, bought a hat, met a woman who disputed with her on the color (beige or wheat) of the hat, and eventually forced her way into getting a new one.  Grandma shows up with a large stack of boxes, initially denying to explain their contents/significance, but later on she continually tries to do so with the other characters ignoring her.  When Grandma arrives, it leads to a series of minor verbal scuffles between Mommy and Grandma, where each derides the other while Daddy watches.  Then the bell rings, and Daddy is to go open the door, but he hesitates, which leads to intense "sexual" tension between Mommy and Daddy, where Mommy appeals to his masculinity (which ironically isn't there since he has had a sex change).  Ultimately, Daddy does open the door to find Mrs. Barker on the other side, who enters but has completely forgotten her business there.  Grandma hints that she knows the reason, but Mommy, in her continuing ire, does not allow her to speak.  Eventually, Mommy and Daddy exit the room and get lost within the apartment, leaving Grandma and Mrs. Barker alone.  Grandma explains Mrs. Barker's purpose of coming (as the adoption lady, she sold Mommy and Daddy their original child, who ended up being "unsatisfactory"), but she does not really understand and ends up going to see Mommy in the kitchen.  Meanwhile, a Young Man rings at the door bell, and speaks with Grandma, who recognizes him as the twin of the original "bumble" or adopted child.  Mrs. Barker briefly returns and Grandma attempts to explain her purpose again and succeeds this time.  Then, she leaves the Young Man with Mommy and Daddy, setting up the scenario through which Mommy and Daddy get a new child.  Mommy cries when she realizes that Grandma has left, but almost immediately forgets her woe when she sees the Young Man.  With this, the four characters celebrate their "satisfaction."  Unbeknownst to them, Grandma is actually nearby, sitting offstage (only the Young Man notices her) and breaking the fourth wall.  Finally, Grandma ends the play at the celebration scene, implying that though the characters are happy in this moment, the paradigm of no satisfaction (as in the beginning) will return.
Voice/Style:
Though there is not a speaker or narrator in the drama, most of the dialogue takes on a childish tone, since most of the characters speak in a basic manner with a great lack of understanding.  This is especially true of Mommy, Daddy, and Mrs. Barker, who continuously forget things throughout the story, and have little to no understanding of morals.  From Albee's point-of-view, he is trying to comment on the changes that have begun taking place in society, especially the rise of materialism and the rising place of women in society through equality movements, as exaggerated through Mommy and Daddy's role reversal.  He uses some interesting imagery to do this, such as "sticky wet".  The lack of emotions and morals is exemplified by the intense details of the mutilation of the bumble.  In addition, there are many significant symbols in the play.  Grandma's boxes and their contents represent sentimental memories of the past, which people had to earn in the old American ideals.  The young man represents the appeal of the new American dream, but his lack of emotions refers to the lack of actual substance in this dream.  Thus, Albee similarly uses intense symbolism to get his point across, which contributes to the childish, derisive, and immoral tone he takes as he deals with the issues.
Quotes:
"Grandma: (A little sadly) I don't know why I bother to take them with me... you know... the things one accumulates." --p.120
This is significant because it signals the departure of the old American dream, which has tried its best to satisfy the endless, emotionless, materialistic desires of the new generation but must now make way for the new dream, which though lacking in substance can cater to these needs.  To me, it symbolizes the fact that the next generation has lost its sentimentality and ability to experience true human emotion.
"Mrs. Barker: Ambition! That's the ticket..., but he is the Village Idiot." --p. 84
I found this passage significant because it calls back to the idea of the uselessness of language to adequately get ideas across.  In particular, it brings to light the fact that Mrs. Barker has no real understanding of societal norms, even though she has climbed the ladder, or that society has become so perverted that it cannot recognize its own inconsistencies.
Theme Statement:
In The American Dream, Albee warns that the current generation has lost its connection to the traditional ideals of the original American dream, having replaced its sentiments and merit with a baseless, materialistic drive for complete satisfaction, but there is hope for future generations, who may choose to revert back to older values.
The title of the play sets up the piece to be a commentary on the idea of the American dream, which, according to Albee, has changed significantly since the days of pioneer-stock, like Grandma.  In particular the dynamic between Mommy and Daddy is a continuous reminder of the emotional and moral failings of the new American dream, which is solidified with the arrival of the Young Man (or the shell).  The cyclical, repetitive plot and language also act as allusions to the idea that satisfaction can never be completely attained, and that true satisfaction lies with the older American ideal of earning something, rather than acquiring it because this process just leads to unending expectations of more and more.  Thus, the absurdist elements point out the stupidity of that which Albee intends to criticize/warn his audience about.  However, the hope is clearly symbolized through Grandma breaking the fourth wall and allowing the audience to decide which dream they intend to pursue.

Close Reading No. 2

For this post, I chose another Slate article, "Romeo and Juliet," which can be found at: http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/movies/2013/10/romeo_and_juliet_directed_by_downton_abbey_s_julian_fellowes_reviewed.html

This article is a movie review of the newest film inspired by Shakespeare's famous tragedy, Romeo and Juliet.  In it, the author, Dana Stevens, offers mixed feelings about the film, leaving the reader with the idea that it is a rather well-made movie rendition of this story but with some flaws, which probably will not appeal to a wide audience under 20.  Stevens uses three main areas of rhetoric to achieve this meaning: visual imagery, an interesting mix of diction, and effective selection of details.

Stevens uses imagery to highlight both the good and bad elements of the film.  And since this is a film review, it follows that most of it is visual imagery.  Stevens was especially impressed with the settings of the film, which she praised as "gorgeous."  She writes, "Every scene seems to take place in a different fresco-adorned palace or pristinely preserved church."  This sentence helps reinforce her interpretation of the setting by allowing the reader to paint pictures of idealized Italian villas and cathedrals; these pleasing images allow the reader to sort of forget Stevens' previous qualms with the film.  On the other hand, Stevens also uses imagery to criticize the film, especially as she discusses the lack of chemistry between Romeo and Juliet.  For example, she uses the phrases "model-handsome" and "magazine-ready looks" to describe Douglas Booth, the actor portraying Romeo.  These images contrast with Stevens' picture of Hailee Steinfeld (Juliet), who she describes as "pretty in a normal-girl-on-the-street-way."  Stevens creates these different images within the reader's mind to reinforce her argument that the two characters do not play well together, which causes the movie to lack the important focus on their relationship.  Thus, by allowing the reader to visualize certain elements of the movie, Stevens helps the reader understand her mixed feelings about it.

For the most part, Stevens' diction is pretty colloquial, making the article easy to read.  In many of her descriptions, Stevens uses words at a basic level that anyone with a basic high school vocabulary could understand, such as "swooning" and "idealism."  These words are simple, straightforward and easily engender the positive meanings that Stevens is looking for.  However, she also uses plenty of elevated words that stick out from the rest of the article, which speak to her expertise in the area as a movie reviewer.  For example, the words "martinet" and "melange," which are rather uncommon (or at least the first one, which was completely new to me), are added into her "abusive" description of Juliet's father and the description of Romeo and Juliet's failed on-screen love, respectively.  In addition to the air of literary knowledge that such words exude, they also have very specific meanings that help the reader get a better sense of the movie.  For example, her characterization of Juliet's father as a martinet gives the reader an overly strict, negative image of the character.  Though the average reader might not understand them, these word choices added in a level of sophistication to the piece.  Through this mix of diction, Stevens adds to her different arguments, and leaves the reader with an impression of reliability.

Many of the specific details that Stevens includes in the article act to reinforce her differing ideas on the movie.  In the beginning, she includes the fact that the script was written by the same person who did Downton Abbey, a show which has become popular for its high ratings and awards.  This fact leaves the reader thinking that the film has to be at the same level of quality of that show, which Stevens believes it is in certain areas.  In particular, many of the details of the review, such as the chemistry of Hessey and Whiting (another Romeo and Juliet pair), are used to compare the film in the context of other renditions of the story.  These details act as evidence for Steven's points as well as reference points for the reader to generate their own conclusions on the film.  Another example of this would be the reference to the recent appeal of fantasy stories like Twilight or Harry Potter to teenagers, which Stevens uses to prove her point that the film would not appeal much to a younger audience.

In this review, Stevens encourages her readers to try out the film for many of its great attributes, but she also warns her audience not to get their hopes too high due to some major defects, especially the failed on-screen pairing of Romeo and Juliet.  Through the rhetorical techniques of imagery, diction, and details, Stevens successfully imparts this message to her audience.

Response to Course Material

This is the last post in September... whoa.  This month flew by, but with no shortage in material.  I would say that this was really more of an adjustment period for me, getting back into the habit of school and adjusting myself to the new learning environment of team A.P., especially our daily discussions.

A lot of the topics we covered this month were the basic tools that we will be using throughout the year to reach the level of literary analysis necessary for the A.P. exam in May.  In particular, our discussion of the use of diction, imagery, details, language, and syntax (D.I.D.L.S.) was very interesting and helpful to me.  Though I had  encountered these topics in my other lit classes at OHS, our discussions of the three example texts and the close reading activities have been eye-opening for me; I have noticed a difference in how I read, especially what I focus or draw ideas on.  For example, I had actually read The Sun Also Rises two years ago for my American Lit class, but I did not pay much attention to Hemingway's diction and syntax, so our class discussion offered me a new perspective on the text's overall meaning.  Likewise, I had read The Cask of Amontillado (the short story I annotated) in eighth grade during our Poe unit, but in annotating the piece, I noticed a lot of interesting details that almost popped out of the story because I knew to look for them, such as symbols and syntax variations.

In addition, the experience of reading through the open prompts and the graders' critiques was very eye-opening because it was almost like a discussion put into a concise essay.  Seeing the ideas that the students came up with was both impressive and somewhat self-assuring because, especially after doing a (very basic) practice open prompt in class, I am growing more confident in my ability to think and write analytically.

Of course, we also read through the first of our major texts, The American Dream, which was a direct application of the close reading techniques we learned.  We also learned about Existentialism and Theater of the Absurd.  I found these two topics to be especially interesting because I was introduced to them last year through both my A.P. French class (we read L'etranger) and my Brit Lit class, where we discussed them in the context of the modern era.  I felt that through the information we received in class as well as our discussions, I have been able to develop a stronger picture of these styles, and I can recognize the absurdist elements of The American Dream, such as the cyclical plot elements.  Moreover, I feel like we have done a pretty good job in our discussions of developing some strong theories on Albee's ideas on materialism, especially with the doll house analogy.  These theories have  helped me distinguish themes/messages in texts (as opposed to motifs), such as the idea that materialism is an evil of society that threatens American traditions, as exemplified through the interaction between Mommy and Grandma.

Though I am by no means ready to take the A.P. just yet, I am excited to see the progress that I have made this month, and I hope to continue to improve my reading and analytical skills, especially as I annotate The American Dream. 

Open Prompts, Part One

For this post, the objective is to respond to some responses to the open prompt section from previous A.P. exams.  I chose to respond to the answers to free response question 3 of the 2004 A.P. Lit Exam.  The prompt was based on a quote by Roland Barthes: "Literature is the question minus the answer."  Students were asked to consider the effect of a central question within a work, and how the extent to which the author answers that question affects the meaning of the text--the test writers actually used the magic question!

Response #1: Student N

Student N's response focused on the central question of Candide by Voltaire: "Is this the best of all possible worlds?".  I was rather impressed with the amount of textual evidence that the student was able to incorporate into their analysis, accompanying each detail with an explanation of its contribution to the answer to the central question.  This is also reflected in the A.P. reader's comments when they write, "[the writer]... understands how to relate incident to theme in a fluid way."  The student organized their analysis in a very clear manner as well, with all their details flowing in the chronological order of the novel, and rather than trying to recall small details or techniques, the student focused on the larger, philosophical scope of the work, which allowed them to interpret its meaning.  For example, the student repeatedly referenced the phrase, "we must tend our own garden," to show how Voltaire ultimately leaves a high degree of ambiguity in his answer to the question.  This leads the student to derive a "Christ-like" meaning from the text as their final conclusion.  Though this might be due to my unfamiliarity with the text, I thought the student did start to detract from their original question towards the end, and their discussion of the concepts of love, pain, and change seemed a little disconnected from their conclusion that this is the best world. On the whole, I agree with the score because the student successfully addressed the prompt and tied it back to the meaning.

Response #2: Student J

First of all, kudos to the poor, poor person who had to read through this student's response because I lost my patience around the second squiggly mark.  Though the student did begin their essay by addressing the prompt with Twain's central question ("What does it mean to be free?"), they lose focus on this topic as they continue to simply list plot events and their meaning without truly describing how the author answers the question.  For example, though it is very insightful to recognize that Huck and Jim can only build their relationship outside of societal constraints, the student does not tie it back to how Twain defines freedom.  Even by the end, when the student describes Huck's decision to travel west as a realization that "he is not free," they still fail to touch on how this affects the story's meaning.  Instead, I would have interpreted this as a realization that Huck realizes that he is free to choose his own destiny and path, which is Twain's definition of freedom.  Consequently, the story is centered around Huck and Jim's quest to gain control over their own lives.  Although the student "skirts around" the prompt, their essay was still well written and shows a deep level of insight on the story.  All they needed to do was concentrate on how the plot elements they described answered Twain's question.

Response #3: Student U

If I didn't know any better, I'd bet that this student ran out of time on this essay and scrambled to get points for writing down something.  The student uses rather basic syntax, which is still confusing to read at times.  For example, "The demeanor Okonwo had to prevent change was very high...".  Meanwhile, they barely address the meaning of the text.  Even though they establish that Achebe's answer to the question is that change does eventually happen, they do not describe how answering the central question (do things stay the same?) affects the meaning of the text.  They simply tell the reader what happens in the story and mention that change occurs in the story, but there is no mention of how these events provide any broader meaning to the story.  However, I did enjoy the process they employed in their introductory paragraph, where they provide the context for their argument, leading up to their main idea in the end of the paragraph.  Ultimately, Student U did recognize the question and provided a little evidence to their point, but they failed to really address how the use of a question really influenced the meaning of the novel.

Close Reading No. 1

For this post, the article I chose was "Caught in the Crossfire" by David Weigel, which can be found at http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2013/09/crossfire_returns_to_cnn_the_new_debate_show_isn_t_bad.single.html.

The article, "Caught in the Crossfire," looks at the recently revived C.N.N. show, Crossfire, and how it relates to its earlier version as well as political trends.  Though Weigel both attacks and praises the show, he also points out the fundamental issues that plague politics-based television programs.  He achieves these effects using mostly informal diction, providing details that relate strongly to his arguments, and some unconventional syntax that provides emphasis on certain points.

Weigel uses a mix of mostly colloquial and some formal (technical) diction, which reveals a derisive tone through sarcasm.  For example, when describing the atmosphere surrounding the first episode of the show, he uses the word "fete" to describe the public's reactions, implying they were actually excited about seeing the show.  However, in the very next sentence he describes the show as "din," which refers to unpleasant sounds.  Through this positive-negative description, Weigel puts forth his opinion that, even if the program shows the potential to offer some new insights into the political world, Crossfire will fall back into the trend of divisive, biased politics that has come to be expected of all political shows.  However, Weigel uses political jargon to maintain a serious tone amid his poking fun at the show.  For example, he describes Stephanie Cutter, one of the hosts, as in "campaign mode" and "Obama-boosting," which though rather comical sounding, still point interest on the major issue of taking sides on the show.  Finally, his use of colloquial diction makes the passage seem almost like Weigel is having a conversation with the reader.  For example, he describes Newt Gingrich as "delightfully high on himself."  Weigel could easily have used the word egoistic, but by using this phrase, he breaks the author-reader barrier of typical journalism, which usually has a much more formal tone.

The details that Weigel includes and references in the article also help articulate his message to the reader.  For example, in his description of the downfall of the original Crossfire, Weigel includes the fact that comedian Jon Stewart recognized it as only another bias-based debate show, as well as the fact that C.N.N.'s president agreed with that statement.  This really points out the absurdity of the show in that a comedian (ironically) turned out to be a better pundit than the experts that ran Crossfire, including the network's president himself.  Also, Weigel provides a majority of his details on the debates that take place on the show, but he barely squeezes in one paragraph to talk about the more effective host, S.E. Cupp, whom he describes as a positive element.  This left me with the impression that his positive comments were minor concessions or counterpoints that did not offer much of an argument against, and instead highlighted, the substantial amount of flaws that he pointed out in the show.  On the other hand, Weigel did include details on the biases present in the arguments of both parties, which leave the reader with a nonbiased image of the story.  He provides the example of Cutter (a Democrat) contending her views against a Republican congresswoman as well as that of Bob Menendez (a Republican) arguing against Syrian intervention.  This is vital because the article is not focused on either Republican or Democrat political views, but rather on the effect that their debate has on the show and its viewers.

Weigel's creative use of syntax also emphasizes his points and helps him return to his argument throughout the piece.  When he describes Cutter's interesting speaking style in response to outrageous arguments as intentionally choppy to bring out her point, he masterfully couples that to a series of sentence fragments to give the reader a direct example of this method ("...pausing. At odd. Intervals to make. A point").  Weigel also uses plenty of interrupters in his sentences, which add in descriptive details as well as build emphasis on certain ideas.  In the same paragraph where he describes Cutter's TV style, Weigel describes her rise to prominence through media success: "...TV hits, hard-won TV hits, TV hits that other advisers wanted so badly..."  This series of interrupters adds a strong emphasis on her successes on TV, which set the stage for Weigel's description of her communication methods on TV.  This technique also lends itself to the conversational element of his writing because it makes it sound as if he is speaking directly to the reader.  Another technique that Weigel employs is the use of short sentences, which are especially noticeable since most of his sentences are rather long.  For example, he writes, "Those are the ingredients for good TV.  Nobody on the screen used it."  These sentences bring out a strong critical voice from Weigel and depict some frustration from his perspective.

Though David Weigel's article, "Caught in the Crossfire" is definitely not an example of conventional journalism, his writing makes use of a variety of interesting rhetorical techniques.  His blended diction, effective use of details, and creative syntax combine to enhance his critique of the revived news program and emphasize his notion that political programs are too easily merged with bias and debates.

Petersen's Poetry Stuff

After working through the poetry section, I have found that my biggest challenge with poetry is getting bogged down in the small details and not recognizing the bigger picture.  The poem that gave me the most trouble was Keats' "La Belle Dame Sans Merci."  Though I was able to pick up on metaphors present in the piece, I found that I really was not able to pick up on the overarching messages and themes of the poem.  The clearest example of this is the fact that I did not pick up on the fact that the knight was dead until reading through the answer key for number seven.  After comparing my answers to the correct ones, I noticed that my major problem was that I focused on each detail's significance rather than how they all played into the bigger picture.  On question five, instead of recognizing that the setting ultimately conveys the "decay and decline" of the seasons in fall, I focused on the fact that the story takes place in a seemingly mystical forest.  Consequently, I think that Keats and some of the other romantic poets are confusing due to the fact that they often use very elaborate language, which paints a beautifully elaborate picture that distracts me from the actual message.

Response to Petersen's Diagnostic Test

When I first took the test, I was rather surprised to start off with a name I recognized from my Brit Lit class, John Donne.  Even with this little confidence boost, however, I ended up getting many questions in this section wrong, which was a little annoying.  I think that I got bogged down in details of the piece rather than trying to go for the big picture.  For example, on question 6, which asked about the major conceit of the text, I chose "lovers as a compass," but the real answer was "earthquakes and celestial movement."  The reasoning behind my answer choice was that Donne seemed to refer to the love in his poem as a journey, which I extrapolated to mean a direction for life.

I also found myself falling into that wonderful trap of self-doubt, which led me to choose the "safer" answer choice on some questions that I was a little iffy on.  On number 12, I was choosing between choices d and e because I knew Austen often poked fun at the gentry.  However, I decided to go with the idea that she glorified the middle class because I thought that was her message, rather than the simple choice that she "finds the Bennets ridiculous."

Even with these mistakes, I was still very happy to see a lot of familiar names and concepts, especially in the last set of questions, which I remembered learning about in my American Lit class.  I also think that because that section was nonfiction, it was easier to understand, as opposed to the other narrative, which was from the middle of a story.  

All in all, I'd say the diagnostic experience was very enlightening, and I have a clearer idea of things to focus on for this year.