Untitled @darth--nader-blog - Tumblr Blog

The end

You need to fight the power Ignoring an infamous figure will conquer Now impermanent and fragile like a flower Love won't exist any longer Silence contradicts human nature Darkness engulfs while idly sitting by Realization you too are in danger Time is ending, nothing to deny Screams of agony Too late to hear No longer a fantasy All will disappear Pair of eyes staring at nothing God watches the indulgence in sin Everyone thought he was bluffing Valley of ashes is where it begins

Lemonade

In Beyonce's Lemonade, it is apparent that she is freeing herself from society's norms of women. She claims that women should be quiet and oblivious to the traditions of men, in this case cheating. When she transitions from being an oppressed woman who wouldn't speak against her husband to a woman that would, she jumps into a room of water. The room is her bedroom, Beyoncé sees herself sleeping in the bed, and if water represents freedom then she's freeing herself from the oppression in her bedroom. She will no longer stay quiet about Jay Z's lies and the perfume on his clothing. When Beyoncé had the bat, she smashed the fire extinguisher which gushed out with water. This occurred when she said she'd rather be labeled crazy than jealous. Society makes women seem like they're going mad if they suspect the truth behind their spouse's affairs. Beyonce showers in the water representing she's freeing herself and allowing the whole world know about Jay Z's despicable actions.

Literary theory

I am honestly going to admit I am having trouble with my literary analysis of the Great Gatsby; for the first time in the course I don't feel like I'm confident in what I want to say. I want to talk about the significance of Nick being the narrator. The audience knows that Nick is dishonest because he admits it himself. So why is it that Fitzgerald makes him the narrator? The narration could have easily been told by someone outside of the story, where the audience would hold all the events that occur to be completely true. There wouldn't be any biased thoughts that would lead Nick from hiding the truth. Additionally why is Nick the narrator and not any of the other characters? When I was writing to the songs we were listening to in class I found myself most relatable to Nick. This is what makes this literary work so great, it's relatable throughout time. So I find it that Nick being the most relatable, is the most efficient way to tell the story.

Hypocrites!!!!

Interestingly, I found myself comparing myself to Nick when I was listening to the Rhapsody song in class. I saw myself as Nick when listening to the song that put me into the setting of Great Gatsby, so I will not repeat any similarities I have already discussed. Nick begins his narration with discussing the significance of morals and how his dad has ingrained these morals into his system. I assume many people can relate with that aspect of Nick's upbringing, but what makes Nick unique is he is constantly applying these morals to what seems like a demoralized society. I do the same but my morals are continuously being practiced because of religion. I see everything through a different lens if I'm looking at everything in a moral perspective. I view every little act a person does to reflect who they are. These symbolic interactions always disgust me, similarly Nick is disgusted by the actions of the Westerners who live on the Eastern Coast. In my case it's the morality of Muslims living in the U.S that disgusts me compared to Muslims living in Muslim countries. Even though I criticize these grotesque actions, I engage in them. Much like Nick, who was criticizing people at the parties, he was still participating. One might be able to conclude that me and Nick become hypocrites because we suffer from boredom like everyone else.

Lack of objectivity

I am probably one of the least objective people out there in this world, making me more likely to be a subjective person. I will not lie and say I don’t have a certain bias towards people. I cannot help but have prejudices; however, I do not necessarily act on these prejudices. Let’s say it is in the middle of the night and I encounter a black man dressed in obsolete baggy clothing, the first thought that may cross my mind is he is a dangerous man who has the potential to take my belongings. This biased belief that he is a threat to me is a lack of objectivity. I have my own experiences, which lead me to feel threatened, even though statistically speaking a black man in baggy clothes is not the biggest threat I can encounter. These thoughts do lead me to have a minor reaction, but I would not consider it much of an action. I would not look straight into the man’s eyes, which may imply that I have the guts to take him on or that he does not intimidate me. I would not go to the extreme of crossing the street or walking in the other direction, because I cannot have one bad experience constitute my actions to a certain subculture. I know I would not like to have people react in the same manner towards me or my family. Just because somebody sees me with my mother, who wears a hijab, should not flee in fear of a suicidal bombing. Yes there are “Muslims” who have been involved in terrorist attacks, but if one were to be objective and look at the facts, they will realize the overwhelming number of Muslims around the world. If all these Muslims believed in a religion that endorses violence, everyone would be dead by now. So I know we all cannot help but lack objectivity, but we should not act on these biased thoughts.

Great Gatsby Ch 1

I’ve noticed that the narrator of this book has a weird transition of addressing his father. In the beginning of the chapter he addresses him as my father, which is normally how people would address their parents when talking to someone who is not a member of their family. Later in the text he talks about his father as just “Father.” This gives his dad an authoritative power not over the narrator only, but for the reader as well. When one says Father, he is the father figure of both the speaker and the audience. The last time he addresses him in that manner is the last time he is mention in the first pages of the book. Thus, the narrator takes us into his world as if we share the same family, to further invoke empathy for the narrator. The narrator also does something very interesting, he does not tell the story as if it is currently happening in his life, but he is telling his story that has already passed. Of course the obvious way to tell this is the past tense in the verbs, but another way is that he deliberately makes a mistake when he tells the story. He says, “It was Gatsby’s mansion. Or rather, as I didn’t know Mr. Gatsby, it was a mansion, inhabited by a gentleman of his name” (pg 4). So he introduces the reader to a character, but takes it back because he is unknown to the reader still. Why make this mistake one might ask? To show that he is a credible person. If he made a mistake by revealing the truth too early, so we should assume that he is always telling the truth. The answer to if he truly is or not will be further unveiled.

My argument

Baz Luhrmann gives depth to the characters in Romeo and Juliet (1996) by utilizing their wardrobe, and these individual traits would not be ordinarily be uncovered in a two hour play.

Questions about sex/gender/sexuality

Throughout the film the two lovers, Romeo and Juliet, are displaying their affection towards each other. Is Romeo any less of a man for being so affectionate, and is he criticized by other men for being so? In the opening scene of the film, the violent interaction between the Montagues and Capulets caused neighboring civilians to be involved. How do these civilians' reaction reflect their gender role? How does it compare to the two families fighting in the scene? Is Romeo's family more worried about Romeo secluding himself from the world or that he is demonstrating unmanly-like characteristics? Note the transition to a soft song: Introduction to Romeo by Craig Armstrong, when Romeo first appears in the movie dwelling on love. The bystanders play an important role standing in the background of scenes; they represent the gender roles in this setting. Civilians of each sex usually share common behaviors and attitude. The men are seen laid back smoking while women are shown to be giggling and trying to sexualize themselves to appeal to others. Is this held constant for the main cast as well both the males and females?

Sonnet

A pleasure to the eyes. An ache to the head. But with her, time flies; Until you're left dead. Do not make the grave mistake Of completely opening up to her, Your heart is what'll she take, cremate it, ashes in urns Everything is prioritized over you, She's with you but she's not, Playing mind games with a fool. Existence will fade until you're just a thought. The fused souls are not compatible in this world, Yet she resides in the heart increasing his love ten-fold.

First sonnet about Romeo

If Romeo was real, Shakespeare's first sonnet seems to apply to Romeo because of Romeo's desire of beauty. Romeo is described as "the most handsome and courteous of all the youth of Verona" (pg 120). Thus, we can assume that Romeo's beauty is wilting away as described in the sonnet. Romeo desires to have his heir resemble his beauty, and in order to do so he needs to have his children with a beautiful person. This explains his rapid switch in interest from Rosaline to Juliet. At first glance, Romeo's love for Rosaline disappears and claims he has never loved before until he saw Juliet. His mentality reveals that he is after a beauty that can bear his children, so his beauty can be preserved as said in the sonnet, "His tender heir might bear his memory." Romeo's love for himself makes himself his biggest enemy. His self-sustaining love will only lead him to his own doom, as we know happens in Romeo and Juliet. Romeo does not pass on his beauty to his heir because of his vanity. Although Shakespeare wrote the sonnet, this doesn't necessarily make him the narrator; I believe Rosaline is the speaker. She criticizes Romeo for getting over her and correctly foreshadows the death of his beauty by not conceiving children before his death.

Senator Bernie Sanders! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

Although some criticize Bernie Sanders' foreign policy, I stand with some of his policies of how the United States of America should stand with the world. As a senator, Sanders has voted against wars that the U.S has waged, and it was not until now that America learned that it would have been for the best if we did not wage that war. Bernie opposed both the Gulf War and the Iraq War, because he believes that there can be an alternative solution without bloodshed. But just because he opposed those two wars does not mean he is a pacifist. He supported the use of force to stop the "ethnic cleansing in the Balkans." He also supported using force to stop the terrorists that were in Afghanistan. Bernie is not afraid to get his hands dirty if there isn't any other means to achieve justice. He believes that the U.S shouldn't police the world alone. It should work with neighboring countries where the conflict is occurring to establish the peace, rather than just sending troops and resources which would add more fuel to the fire. But I'm not saying I'm completely pro-Sanders in terms of his foreign policy. His idea of a two state solution for the Palestine and Israel conflict will not suffice. Neither side will be pleased. The conflict does not only deal with having its own political and economic state, but it revolves more around religion. Additionally, it won't pass off as an easy solution to Palestinians that the U.S. should create two separate states when the U.S has been supporting Israel financially, with it receiving 25 percent of America's foreign aid budget. So in conclusion, Bernie Sanders does have an overall agreeable foreign policy where we won't be waging wars left and right like Bush did, but there are some things that need to be tweaked.

Fighting and fighting. Continuously fighting. Why fight when the means to victory is unknown? Unknown to All Invading the body, these criminals defy any human. Rich or poor. Will there ever be a punishment to cease madness?

Journal #2

Raymond Williams believes that one of the major underlying themes that makes tragedy so unique is its “dramatic form” (pg 7). What makes the tragedy is not just the events that occur to the actors, but it’s the relationship between the chorus and the actors. The actions may be important in the tragedy, but the essence of the drama is the response to what occurs to the actors by the chorus. Williams claims, “it is no accident that as this unique culture changed, the chorus was the crucial element of dramatic form which was weakened and eventually discarded” (pg 7). With the chorus gone, the unique definition of tragedy disappeared as well. From the tragedies I have studied (e.g. Antigone) the chorus was one of the most vital roles in the play. They interact with both the actors and the audience and hold valuable pieces of information, making the anticipation of whether or not they will reveal this information even more dramatic. Their explanations of the actors’ untold feelings provide an additional dramatic affect because of the underlying expressions revealed.

#professorclaman

Sontag HW Journal

Although Susan Sontag presents a valid argument critiquing the over interpretation of literary works, there seems to be some extreme claims that I don't necessarily agree with. She correctly pointed out that literary critics have took it upon themselves to interpret a series of types of texts. This ruins the reading for others if they happened to come across the interpretation. Additionally, I know numerous students, including myself, who has read the secondary documents because of the unwillingness to work hard, and this leads to cliche comments about beautiful texts. I don't think this should be prevented completely, but I do think it should be very limited. What I completely disagree with is that "a writer will be so uneasy before the naked power of his art that he will install within the work itself [...] the clear explicit interpretation of it" (pg 8). A writer may feel this uneasiness because he/she has readers over interpret his/her work or even not interpreting their work enough. The writer isn't overwhelmed by their power and tries to limit it, but instead they want to have the reader imagine what they imagine exactly. They are stripping the power away from the reader because of the reader's limitation, causing the author to have more power. Thus, his power isn't making him uneasy; he's attributing more power to himself.

#professorclaman

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Untitled