So this last month, we did a lot! We finally finished Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, engaged in a lot of AP practice, and then started Ceremony!
With regards to Ros and Guil, I felt like our discussions were just about as circular as the play itself, an I found myself at times feeling like I had figured something out and then losing my train of thought the next moment. I must say that a work of literature has never left me feeling so divided because I feel like there are two sides that Stoppard takes with this play: on one hand, you could just take it to mean that art is art and has no further meaning because it cannot replicate life, but then it just as easily could mean that we are above the ridiculous fantasy of art, which can only dream of being like life (but then you have meaning!). Really, though. Even with the other Shakespeare that I have experienced, like Hamlet or Macbeth, nothing has really left me as inconclusive as this play. It's almost as if each time I try to lean towards one theory, I feel like the other theory could just as easily come into play. Either way, I guess Stoppard's goal was to get people thinking - it's just what they're intended to think about that gets me! But the postmodern reading of the play did provide me with some further insights with how it fits into the trend and what specific techniques have arisen with the style. Nonetheless, I definitely plan to return to Ros and Guil and see if I can finally make up mind.
On a similar note, I recently had the opportunity to visit an art museum, and found myself caught within two realms. On one hand, there is the pre-1900s art, which exhibits beauty and more aesthetic values, but then comes modern art, which finds meaning in seemingly random collections of strokes. No offense to any connoisseurs out there, but I have never been able to wrap my brain around the concept, which came out to haunt me with the toilet piece in Holmes' critical lens presentation. I can see where one might get ideas about the absurdity of the modern condition from a toilet, but I would much rather spend my days analyzing a painting for meaning instead. I guess I'm sort of an aestheticist at the end of the day.
But, in a total change of gears, we have started reading Ceremony, and Ms. Homes' description of the circular narrative tied together three years of literature classes within one diagram. Having had both Am and Brit Lit, I have read through plenty of packets on archetypes, but seeing the continuum that we drew in class allowed me to understand the concept in a very new light. I'd always sort of seen each genre as distinct and separate, but that showed me how they can easily lead into one another. In addition, we read through a series of articles in preparation for our reading of Ceremony, which I found really interesting since I found a lot of connections to the very short introduction to Native American Lit that I had had in Am Lit. The three "R"s that I learned about in Mrs. Sauer's class even made a semi-cameo in Holmes' presentation! But alongside the insight into the mythos and the cultural values of the Laguna, I have found a lot of connections to the values that I have been able to experience in my own religion and culture. Of course, diversity and acceptance have made it a lot easier, but being Hindu and Indian in a deeply Western and Christian (sorry to generalize, but let's face it) culture has shown me two very different perspectives on the world. So as I have been reading Ceremony, where the hero is placed between these two worlds, I have found a lot of connections between his Laguna culture and my own Indian culture. One example being the use of deep myths that connect to nature, which I constantly learned growing up. This also happens to be our very first novel, which I actually enjoy because I feel like a novel is even easier to visualize as the story lacks the confinements of a stage (and the pre-Ceremony activities helped cultivate my ideas of the setting). As an added bonus, I feel like novels connect even more deeply to the author. Even though Ceremony is in third person, I feel like Silko's writing resonates much more than Stoppard's or Miller's simply because I do not see the distance between playwright and play.
Anyways, there's my two cents, and jeez the AP exam's in two months!!!
Sunday, March 16, 2014
Sunday, March 9, 2014
Open Prompts Partie Deux
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.
In Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman, Charley serves as a foil to the protagonist, Willy Loman. Charley's business and parental successes contrast with Willy's shortcomings in life, yet his ultimate respect for Willy serves to highlight Miller's ultimate message of the inestimable price of one's own values.
One of the most prominent similarities between Charley and Willy is their parenthood; both of them are fathers, and they have sons of the same age, Bernard and Biff, respectively. This trait provides for a deep contrast, however, as their parenting styles and their sons' outcomes differ vastly. Willy takes a deep interest in Biff and is continually trying to mold him into the perfect child. Charley, on the other hand, leaves Bernard alone and lets him become the person he chooses to be. Ironically, by investing himself so deeply in Biff, Willy generates a dependence in Biff that leads to his downfall, whereas Bernard is able to pursue a successful career as a lawyer with his father's minimal involvement. Through this contrast, Miller shows how Willy's attempt to force his own ideas of success upon Biff traps his son into a confused idolatry, which prevents him from going forward in life. It is only when Willy dies, providing the ultimate detachment from his son, that Biff is finally able to move beyond the values of his father and try and find his own values. In this way, Miller tries to convince the reader that one should always strive to find their own path, as opposed to living in the images of society or someone else's value of success.
Charley and Willy are also involved in business in some fashion. However, Charley leads a rich, financially secure life, whereas Willy continues to struggle to earn money to support his family. Despite Willy's lower income, Charley still carries a great admiration for Willy and his inability to give up hope. Even after his ultimate act of desperation, his suicide, Charley maintains that Willy's unending hope of a successful Biff and happy home life were what truly defined him. Even if he was a salesman, Willy's spirit could easily match that of his successful brother. Through their economic and moral differences, Miller points out that a person's true value lies in their character. Even if Charley is wealthier and has a more successful son, it is Willy who truly stands out as a result of his inability to ever give up on his dreams or values, even when Biff loses faith.
Within Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman, Charley serves as a foil to the character of Willy Loman with special regards to his parenting and wealth. Through their contrasting relationship, Miller highlights the ultimate value of a person's own self-esteem as opposed to societal measures of success and wealth.
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.
In Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman, Charley serves as a foil to the protagonist, Willy Loman. Charley's business and parental successes contrast with Willy's shortcomings in life, yet his ultimate respect for Willy serves to highlight Miller's ultimate message of the inestimable price of one's own values.
One of the most prominent similarities between Charley and Willy is their parenthood; both of them are fathers, and they have sons of the same age, Bernard and Biff, respectively. This trait provides for a deep contrast, however, as their parenting styles and their sons' outcomes differ vastly. Willy takes a deep interest in Biff and is continually trying to mold him into the perfect child. Charley, on the other hand, leaves Bernard alone and lets him become the person he chooses to be. Ironically, by investing himself so deeply in Biff, Willy generates a dependence in Biff that leads to his downfall, whereas Bernard is able to pursue a successful career as a lawyer with his father's minimal involvement. Through this contrast, Miller shows how Willy's attempt to force his own ideas of success upon Biff traps his son into a confused idolatry, which prevents him from going forward in life. It is only when Willy dies, providing the ultimate detachment from his son, that Biff is finally able to move beyond the values of his father and try and find his own values. In this way, Miller tries to convince the reader that one should always strive to find their own path, as opposed to living in the images of society or someone else's value of success.
Charley and Willy are also involved in business in some fashion. However, Charley leads a rich, financially secure life, whereas Willy continues to struggle to earn money to support his family. Despite Willy's lower income, Charley still carries a great admiration for Willy and his inability to give up hope. Even after his ultimate act of desperation, his suicide, Charley maintains that Willy's unending hope of a successful Biff and happy home life were what truly defined him. Even if he was a salesman, Willy's spirit could easily match that of his successful brother. Through their economic and moral differences, Miller points out that a person's true value lies in their character. Even if Charley is wealthier and has a more successful son, it is Willy who truly stands out as a result of his inability to ever give up on his dreams or values, even when Biff loses faith.
Within Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman, Charley serves as a foil to the character of Willy Loman with special regards to his parenting and wealth. Through their contrasting relationship, Miller highlights the ultimate value of a person's own self-esteem as opposed to societal measures of success and wealth.
Thursday, March 6, 2014
Summary and Analysis of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead by Tom Stoppard
Author:
Tom Stoppard was born in Czechoslovakia and moved a lot as a child due to World War II. He lost his birth father to the war and eventually ended up in England. The recurring theme of identity within Rosencrantz and Guildenstern might stem from his displaced roots as a child. In addition, his experience with World War II might contribute to his use of Absurdism and Postmodernist elements.
Setting:
Supposedly within the story of Hamlet, but it's left almost entirely ambiguous. The playwright himself took advantage of this in the film adaptation.
Plot:
The play opens with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern on their way to the court of Elsinore. They have a purpose and direction, yet cannot remember why they are headed that way. The entire time, they are engaged in a game of heads or tails. They encounter some players and place a wager with the troupe's leader, which ends up in their favor. The Player is forced to hold a performance for them, but R & G leave in the middle, reaching Elsinore. Their misadventures continue at the palace, but it is at this point that their role in Shakespeare's play begins, and so the first structured dialogue occurs with their meeting with Gertrude and Claudius. Then, with no lines, they return to the non-structured confusing narrative. Then, they meet Hamlet.
R & G are spending time with Hamlet to fulfill the King's demand that they find out what's wrong with him. Eventually, the troupe of players comes to Elsinore as well, and the Player is mad at R&G for bailing on their performance. Hamlet devises his plan to figure out his uncle's guilt, and the players act out The Murder of Gonzago, which freaks out Claudius. Then, they end up having to leave and end up on the boat.
R & G open the letter Claudius gave them and figure out what Hamlet's fate is (unbeknownst to them, Hamlet is listening the entire time). While they sleep, he slips in and switches the letter. Then, pirates attack the ship, and R & G and Hamlet end up in barrels. When it all settles, R & G emerge but Hamlet is gone. Then the players somehow emerge from a third barrel. R & G open the letter and find that they are ordered to be hanged instead of Hamlet. Then G has an outburst of rage as the player jokes about death. The play ends with the scene where they are hanged.
Characters:
-Rosencrantz: The more happy-go-lucky of the pair. He has moments of brilliance but is ultimately seen as a nuisance by Guildenstern. He remembers nothing.
-Guildenstern: The more pensive of the two. He often tries to break free from the confines of the stage and questions the role of the circular narrative.
-Player: The one character in the play who understands the true nature of his place within the literature. He knows the cyclical immortality and embraces it. He is often the voice of reason.
Stoppard's voice:
This play is unique in that it has so narration within the stage directions. In a way, Stoppard takes on a witty persona within his narrations, where he uses interesting, colorful diction.
STYLE:
PoV - Stoppard's point-of-view is from the third person as he narrates the play. He takes on an interesting angle with a blend of existentialist and absurdist elements.
Imagery - The play's imagery is more emotional than sensory. Stoppard's idea is to make the audience uncomfortable with some of his imagination. For example, his frequent breaking of the fourth wall where R & G point into the audience and especially the prostitution analogy.
Symbolism
- the Boat: life/fate and the fact that we are at the whims of Nature
- Coins: the ultimate role of chance in life, and how most coincidences really are coincidence even if they seem to hold significance
QUOTES
"But why? Was it all for this? Who are we that so much should converge on our little deaths?... Who are we?" - Guil
This really emphasizes the existentialist element of Stoppard's play. This occurs towards the end and Guildenstern has finally come to question his role within the play.
"Uncertainty is the normal state. You're nobody special." - Player
I think that this quote is significant because it blurs the line between the play and life, where the advice given to R & G can be applied to real life within the scope of Absurdist ideas.
THEME
In Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Tom Stoppard encourages the reader to embrace the ambiguities of life and take advantage of their power of choice in making decisions on their path; he also comments on the limited nature of art in its non-reality, and yet as art is interpreted in a unique fashion, it can be incorporated within the unique conscious, decisions that people make, generating a sense of life within art.
Author:
Tom Stoppard was born in Czechoslovakia and moved a lot as a child due to World War II. He lost his birth father to the war and eventually ended up in England. The recurring theme of identity within Rosencrantz and Guildenstern might stem from his displaced roots as a child. In addition, his experience with World War II might contribute to his use of Absurdism and Postmodernist elements.
Setting:
Supposedly within the story of Hamlet, but it's left almost entirely ambiguous. The playwright himself took advantage of this in the film adaptation.
Plot:
The play opens with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern on their way to the court of Elsinore. They have a purpose and direction, yet cannot remember why they are headed that way. The entire time, they are engaged in a game of heads or tails. They encounter some players and place a wager with the troupe's leader, which ends up in their favor. The Player is forced to hold a performance for them, but R & G leave in the middle, reaching Elsinore. Their misadventures continue at the palace, but it is at this point that their role in Shakespeare's play begins, and so the first structured dialogue occurs with their meeting with Gertrude and Claudius. Then, with no lines, they return to the non-structured confusing narrative. Then, they meet Hamlet.
R & G are spending time with Hamlet to fulfill the King's demand that they find out what's wrong with him. Eventually, the troupe of players comes to Elsinore as well, and the Player is mad at R&G for bailing on their performance. Hamlet devises his plan to figure out his uncle's guilt, and the players act out The Murder of Gonzago, which freaks out Claudius. Then, they end up having to leave and end up on the boat.
R & G open the letter Claudius gave them and figure out what Hamlet's fate is (unbeknownst to them, Hamlet is listening the entire time). While they sleep, he slips in and switches the letter. Then, pirates attack the ship, and R & G and Hamlet end up in barrels. When it all settles, R & G emerge but Hamlet is gone. Then the players somehow emerge from a third barrel. R & G open the letter and find that they are ordered to be hanged instead of Hamlet. Then G has an outburst of rage as the player jokes about death. The play ends with the scene where they are hanged.
Characters:
-Rosencrantz: The more happy-go-lucky of the pair. He has moments of brilliance but is ultimately seen as a nuisance by Guildenstern. He remembers nothing.
-Guildenstern: The more pensive of the two. He often tries to break free from the confines of the stage and questions the role of the circular narrative.
-Player: The one character in the play who understands the true nature of his place within the literature. He knows the cyclical immortality and embraces it. He is often the voice of reason.
Stoppard's voice:
This play is unique in that it has so narration within the stage directions. In a way, Stoppard takes on a witty persona within his narrations, where he uses interesting, colorful diction.
STYLE:
PoV - Stoppard's point-of-view is from the third person as he narrates the play. He takes on an interesting angle with a blend of existentialist and absurdist elements.
Imagery - The play's imagery is more emotional than sensory. Stoppard's idea is to make the audience uncomfortable with some of his imagination. For example, his frequent breaking of the fourth wall where R & G point into the audience and especially the prostitution analogy.
Symbolism
- the Boat: life/fate and the fact that we are at the whims of Nature
- Coins: the ultimate role of chance in life, and how most coincidences really are coincidence even if they seem to hold significance
QUOTES
"But why? Was it all for this? Who are we that so much should converge on our little deaths?... Who are we?" - Guil
This really emphasizes the existentialist element of Stoppard's play. This occurs towards the end and Guildenstern has finally come to question his role within the play.
"Uncertainty is the normal state. You're nobody special." - Player
I think that this quote is significant because it blurs the line between the play and life, where the advice given to R & G can be applied to real life within the scope of Absurdist ideas.
THEME
In Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead, Tom Stoppard encourages the reader to embrace the ambiguities of life and take advantage of their power of choice in making decisions on their path; he also comments on the limited nature of art in its non-reality, and yet as art is interpreted in a unique fashion, it can be incorporated within the unique conscious, decisions that people make, generating a sense of life within art.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)