The Lottery

Plot

I picture the plot of the lottery going a lot like it did in the short story. It would definitely leave the fact that it is a . . . different kind of lottery very ambiguous until the end but I think there would need to be a little more build up. I would probably have it start with a random family and their day before the lottery and have them allude to the lottery in all kinds of round about ways. Then I would have it do this with 2 or 3 more families telling there story because I think that it would make the ending scene a lot more intense if you knew who the people who were going to be involved in the lottery. The actual drawing and scene involving the lottery would definitely be the longest, I kind of picture they’re being the presentation before the lottery and random people would be drawing and it would kind of go in and out of its focus from the people drawing and the families that were introduced. In the end I think that right after the final drawing you would finally find out that the lottery wasn’t for money, it was for who to be killed but then all of the hints would become much more apparent. I also picture a very abrupt ending with the children closing in around the lady who is to be stoned and right before she dies it goes black and you hear her scream. Kind of crazy but I think that would be a cool ending.

Point of View

The point of view would definitely have to change. I would go to third person omniscient I think that would allow a lot more freedom in the plot and in the movie in general. It wouldn’t really be possible to have the different families introduced from the point of view of one person but maybe the point of view could kind of change from one person to another. Like it starts out as a family member in one of the families and then they somehow come into interaction with another person from a different family and the point of view would change. I don’t know how it could change though, I wouldn’t want it to be awkward but if it could work I think it would be kind of cool like maybe some kind of common theme that causes the POV to change like something that happened every time right before the POV switched. I don’t know though I wouldn’t want it to be cheesy or awkward that would ruin the intensity of the movie.

Characterization

The characterization would probably be somewhat ambiguous. I would want the audience to know these peoples lives but not fully. Maybe at the lottery when the camera is going from family to family they could be having flashbacks of bad things they have done in their lives. They could range from small things to maybe like something really bad and it could allude to the really bad guy winning the lottery and the audience would be kind of mad but then they would realize that the lottery isn’t for money and it will all be clear. This would play right into the THEME.



Setting

The setting wouldn’t be too terribly important. It would just need to be a small town that’s pretty close. Other than that I don’t really know what would be necessary. I think it’s obvious that it should be warm outside since it wouldn’t make sense for it to be cold. The place should probably be southern too, it just seems like it’s more likely for there to be a small radically different southern town than a northern one. Maybe there should be a lot of guys with confederate flags and other things such as that. Really though, setting isn’t that important, just like in the short story. It’s more of a plot based story.


Theme

Ahh the theme I think this story could share a valuable theme in an awesome way. I mentioned earlier that the guy or girl who had committed a terrible crime, ooohh another thought, maybe it’s a not punishable by law like he has a really nice wife and when you meet them in the beginning they seem like a really perfect family and his flashback is of his affair he’s having with some girl, that would be awesome, anyway though, the guy would win the lottery and the audience would think that justice would not be served but after they learned what the lottery really was they would see that even if the justice that is served isn’t apparent it is still served.

The Curios Case of Benjmain Button (round 2)

Plot

Well the story and film were actually very different although they did share similarities. The main theme was the same, a man who ages backwards however from the get go many aspects of the plot are different. First off the movie tells the story through a journal that an old lady has. Also in the story the father is very unhappy with his son but still keeps him and raises him. In the film the father dumps Benjamin on the stairs to the apartment of a young couple and the woman decided to take care of him. The lady that takes Benjamin in helps care for the elderly so Benjamin lives in a nursing home. This difference further stresses the comparison between the elderly and the young since they both face many of the same problems. For instance when Benjamin takes his first steps as an old man it is similar to a baby's first steps. In the short story Benjamin plays football in college and in the movie there is no mention of him playing football.

Point of View

The point of view in the movie and the story are COMPLETELY different. The story has an omniscient narrator who simply tells the reader the events that occurred in Benjamin's life without providing much opinion. In the film the story starts with a woman who is presumably on the verge of death and asks her daughter to read a journal to her. Since the journal is Benjamin's the story is told from his point of view however the old lady occasionally adds to his memories since she was married to Benjamin for a time. After Benjamin had aged or gotten younger or, well, he couldn't tell his story anymore the old woman continued his story and this evoked a great amount of empathy since he had such an eventful life but could no longer remember any of it.

Characterization

In the movie Benjamin is both directly and indirectly characterized. Benjamin meets many people throughout the movie but the most important are those he has with Queenie, and Daisy. Queenie, especially later in the movie, makes reveals how much Benjamin cares about his mother and how he is a loyal son, it also evokes pity when he finds out that she has died. Daisy is a small girl when Benjamin and her meet. This relationship is a bit odd because of this since mentally they are the same agae but physically they are not even close. This relationship also makes the audience like Benjamin since he is so in love with Daisy and is willing to do anything for her, even if that means leaving her for the good of their daughter. All of these relationships help reveal how complex Benjamin is and, through the characterization of Benjamin, further stress one of the themes that Benjamin is able to live a relatively normal life despite his reverse aging.

Setting

The movie is set later in the than the story. The old woman who is dying is set in present day and since she was married to Benjamin the movie is takes place from about the 30's to present day. This brings a new set of conflicts into the plot such as WW2. The movie is set in Lousiana although this detail isn't entirely crucial to the plot. The setting does allow for Benjamin to make the clock at the train station since this is really the only time period I feel like they would hire a clock maker to put in a big clock like that. I really think they chose this time period for a few reasons. One so that some of it could be set present day, two so that people would understand more of it. If it were set in say, the 1800's, much of the point would be lost in the different customs and different ways people were.

Theme

Well although the theme was at the most basic level the same, the comparison between the old and young, there were small differences. When Benjamin is really old physically but young mentally he tells people he's different but he's OK with it and he knows its not a bad thing. One of my favorite parts of the movie was the clock. The clock was made to run backwards because thats the way that he wanted to make it. When the clock is revealed everyone sees it as a problem at first but once the maker explains that that's how he wanted it most of the people seem fine with it. It is really a big metaphor for Benjamin's life. I really liked how they had the clock at the end being taken over by the flood waters. It stopped running just like Benjamin's life did.

You're Ugly Too

3. This story makes extensive use of jokes. Discuss the importance of jokes to the characterization of Zoe and to the story as a whole.

Hendricks really liked telling jokes. Her jokes were often sarcastic and a bit pessimistic in a way but were normally pretty funny in my opinion. The story's title comes from a joke about a man who is told by his doctor that he has six weeks to live. The man says he wants another opinion. "You want a second opinion? OK," says the doctor. "You're ugly, too." At first I really didn't think the joke and the story were related at all I thought it was completely unrelated. Thinking about it though, this joke fits the same exact type of jokes that Hendricks tells, sarcastic and a bit evil. It seems like most of the people in the story don't really get her jokes though.

Overall I guess I liked Zoe though, she seemed not to care too much about what other people thought about her and she was pretty kooky and quirky.

The Drunkard

This story is interesting . . . to say the least. I think that the humor and irony is a bit amusing but is almost entirely based on the fact that we wouldn't expect the things that happen. The thought of a 8-12 year old boy stumbling around drunk is funny. I also thought it was pretty funny the way he "cursed" at the women. This story was meant, I think, to point out how it is clearly not okay for anyone to be an alcoholic. The story uses a small boy to show this because although in our society it isn't accepted for people to be alcoholics, it seems that a lot of people kind of turn a blind eye to it. I think that the title might be meant to refer to the son instead of the father as would be expected. I think it is meant to refer to the way the son viewed his father and for this day the son became "the drunkard"

The Lottery

Well this story is disturbing. It almost seems satirical, like its making fun of tradition and how strictly people follow it without thinking about what they are really doing. There are many allusions to the fact that this is a tradition for instance when they say, "Used to be a saying ‘lottery in June, corn be heavy soon’. First thing you know, we’d all be eating stewed chickweed and acorns. There’s always been a lottery.” The last line seems like everyone's justification for why they do the lottery, there's always been one, that's it. However to me the most disturbing line was “Although the villagers had forgotten the ritual and lost the original black box, they still remembered to use the stones.” This statement reminds me of the how people sometimes say that people forget the good things that someones done and remember the bad. I think this statement is meant to say that for all of us and this whole story is supposed to represent a much larger scale of people although it is taken to the extreme so that it points out the flaws in our society.

Popular Mechanics

Well this is a very interesting and thought provoking story despite its length. First off the title is very appropriate for the story. The title "Popular Mechanics" (popular meaning of the people and mechanics meaning how something works) is very applicable because not only are the people in the story arguing in a very human way and the author seems to be insinuating that this is what all people do, but the baby's mechanics are also put to the test in a much more literal way when he is caught in the middle of the couples argument. I also think that the fact that there are no quotes make the peoples words much stronger, possibly representing that they are yelling without thinking since there is "no time" to put the quotation marks. The end of the story though, namely the last line, "In this manner, the issue was decided." is very ambiguous. Although most people think that they tore the baby I still feel like that is assuming too much. Once again though this is probably a story where whether they actually ripped him in half doesn't really matter because regardless of the babies physical condition the first part of his life probably isn't going to be very pleasant.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

PLOT

This story had a very interesting plot. I had heard about the story before when the movie came out but I never seen it. Due to the fact that Benjamin's life is lived backwards it kind of seems to make the plot seem a little awkward in the beginning. The plot starts out with by revealing the way that Benjamin was born. After that much of the plot deals with the obstacles and problems with growing backwards. By being born as an old man the plot causes the reader to see many connections with the old and the young, for instance when says, "And a cane, father.. I want to have a cane." Just as small children have trouble walking so do old people. Another time this happens is when Button is in kindergarden and is "fed on oatmeal and nice soft mushy foods with a spoon." Old people have similar problems eating solid foods.

Point of View

The point of view in this story is 3rd person omniscient. This point of view allows the narrator to tell the story from an unbiased perspective and "let [us] judge for [our] self." (pg 5) The omniscient side of it allows the narrator to let us know what all the characters are thinking which becomes pretty important when Benjamin is first born so that we know what Mr. Button is thinking. "A grotesque picture formed itself with dreadful clarity before the eyes of the tortured man--a picture of himself walking through the crowded streets of the city with this appalling apparition stalking by his side." This insight is only possible with an omniscient narrator, without it we would not truly know the level of disapproval that Mr. Button has for his son.

Characterization

This story starts off with one paragraph that mentions Mr. and Mrs. Button and then follows with some a information packed paragraph that uses direct characterization. It says, "The Roger Buttons held an enviable position, both social and financial, in ante-bellum Baltimore. They were related to the This Family and the That Family, which, as every Southerner knew, entitled them to membership in that enormous peerage which largely populated the Confederacy." It goes on to begin the story but strangely enough the narrator completely shifts into indirect characterization when it comes to revealing Benjamin. We only really find out how he is through his actions and I think this is due to the fact that he is the main character. It doesn't matter as much if we learn about his parents it is easier to just tell us but if the story was just them telling us about Benjamin Button in the same manner it would be extremely short and probably very boring.

Setting

The setting in this story isn't terribly crucial except for a few instances. For the most part the story takes place in Benjamin's hometown in Maryland but really it could be in almost any state and nothing would really change. The few settings that actually matter are when Button is in the Spanish American War and also when he goes to college however the college location doesn't really matter. The various settings also contribute to the main theme of comparing the old to the young. In both of these times in Benjamin's life he is confined mostly to his home due to his physical limitations.

Theme

The theme to this story seemed to mainly be the comparison between the young and old. The story has a very interesting way of doing this however in my opinion it is very effective. I think it is effective mainly because it causes the reader to draw these conclusions without specifically spelling them out point blank. In the second to last paragraph it says, "and then he remembered nothing" the loss of memory is something that is often associated with growing old and Alzheimer's. The continued comparison between the old and the young make me think that this has to be the main theme although one could also argue that it is something like live life to the fullest regardless of your circumstances.

Miss Brill

Well once again a story we read in lit has prostitutes. It seems like almost every story we have there’s that question, “do you think [CHARACTER] is a prostitute?” This time though I don’t think it’s as much of a question as it is a fact. This scene in the story where Miss Brill sees this “pretty lady” demonstrates Miss Brill’s naivety. She assumes the best in everything that is happening around her. That’s why she thinks it’s just a pretty lady talking to some guys and I think that from this the reader can infer that Miss Brill is a lonely lady. She doesn’t have many if any friends and she doesn’t get out much. I think in the end Miss Brill might notice her loneliness and see that she doesn’t really have anyone. I did notice question number 5 also asks what the significance of the lady in the “ermine toque” is and I think that further solidifies the fact that she is truly a prostitute.

Eveline

This story has a distinct theme, decisiveness. It attempts to show just how difficult some decisions can be and I think that it did a very good job in doing so. I am having a hard enough time deciding where I am going to go to college next year and although it will surely effect my life it won’t effect it as much as Eveline’s decision in this story. I’m not really sure what the fact that she never makes her decision means. Maybe it attempts to show that the worst decision is not making one at all. I also thought the way that Eveline was emotionless when she had decided she wasn’t leaving with Frank at least for now. I’m betting that is supposed to mean something too but I had a tough time reading deeper into this particular story. I think that the fact that the way she described her life at home was also striking. For anyone on the outside looking in it seems like such a simple decision, leave, but to Eveline dislike for change is enough to make her stay.

A Worn Path

This story was. . . I guess if I really think about it sad, but still inspiring. The sadness comes, of course, from the fact that throughout the story Phoenix goes through all of these perils and despite all of it, it is still unclear whether or not her grandson is alive or not. It just seems terrible to think that a lady like this could be so far gone into Alzheimer’s or whatever it is maybe just blind love, that she can’t really separate reality from her thoughts or her past. I did like how fearless Phoenix was through it all. When the hunter pulls the gun on her she isn’t even fazed in the slightest, she is willing to die for her grandson to be happy. I didn’t really like how the hunter just assumed she was going to see Santa Clause, sure this story was set in a different time but even still that kind of made me mad.

Once Upon a Time

While I was reading this I kept thinking of the books/movie "A series of Unfortunate Events." There are many parallels between the two. First off, "A series of Unfortunate Events" Satirizes all the happy stories where everything ends up working out for the better and everyone lives happily ever after. "Once Upon a Time" satirizes fairy tales and all the cliché lines in them such as how the author keeps repeating the phrase "happily ever after." I also thought it was a bit ironic that the author says she doesn’t write fairy tales but then when she gets scared she decides to think of a fairy tale (although it is a grim one.) I’m betting that she recognized this irony though and put it in to further satirize fairy tales. Perhaps the most disturbing/ hilariously ironic part is the when the little boy, driven by the wonder of the fairy tale he had heard decides to brave the “thorns” which ends up being barbed wire . . . ok maybe it’s not as funny when you think about it.

Bartleby the Scrivenor part 2

"I would prefer not to" no I'm not talking about whether I would like to watch any of the twilight movies. This phrase is repeated over and over in this story and I am struggling to see it's true significance. I mean sure it is showing defiance but what more? The fact that it is possibly the nicest way to decline someones command has got to mean something right? Maybe it is just showing that Bartleby, while representing going against the norm of wall street is not doing it out of malice or anger, he is simply different than other people in that he is not afraid to share his true feelings. I also felt like the names of the characters were a bit odd. Bartleby for one is an odd name but could have been common or at least not as weird in the time this was written. But what about Turkey and Nippers? What are these names supposed to represent? We are in the Characterization unit so I feel like they've got to have more significance.

Bartleby the Scrivenor

Well first of all I would like to say that I really thought this story was drug out and really just awful. Aside from that though it was great! I first thought it was odd the way it opened up and he said let me tell you about one of my Scrivener's then kind of almost went back and said well wait I have to tell you about the other two first. Honestly think I think telling us about the other two didn't seem very relevant at all. After a little bit of thinking though I think that especially considering the time this was written, that the story is really supposed to show someone finally standing up to the usual happenings on wall street. Wall street was, especially at this time, very heavily involved in various economic happenings concerning our country. I don't get though what Bartleby's eventual death is supposed to represent, maybe that standing up to wall street is a bad idea?

Everyday Use

This story seemed to have a bit of irony. The daughther, Dee or whatever she wants to be called, is trying to get more in touch with her roots however, by doing so, she is stressing her relationship with her closest roots, her family. I also believe that her sister's burns are there simply to physically represent her shy attitude. In the end though it isn't Dee, who I would have expected to maybe realize she was pushing her family away, who changed, it was her mother. Her mother finally realizes that she is essentially being pushed around by Dee and she is sick of it so she changes and is therefore a dynamic character. The boyfriend of Dee is obviously a flat character though. He is there but we barely hear anything about him. I think he is supposed to represent Dee's independance from her family.

Hunters In the Snow

This story's characters definitely seemed to represent more than was really said. I think that throughout the story they became more and more animalistic. In the beginning when they are first introduced they are introduced by some of their more animal like characteristics such as their gluttony. Further into the story they become more and more animal like as they begin to resort to violence. Further yet once they are taking Kenny to the hospital they leave their dying friend freezing in the back of the truck as they eat and go to the bar. Overall all though, I enjoyed this story. It seemed to have more action then some of the others and I think a more thourough point.

A Rose For Emily Pt. 2

Well this was an interesting story and with a little more action I think it could be made into a movie. However, I didn't like the loose end of why the lady decided to kill her husband. I mean, maybe it's just due to the fact that she is crazy or maybe there's something more that isn't said. The ambiguity of what all really happens for sure is part of what makes the story so creepy. This story in a way reminds me of the movie step father. In Stepfather there's this guy who establishes a whole life hoping that it will truly be the life that he like's when he marries into a family with children. When it finally gets to him enough that everything isn't going to be perfect he snaps and kills his whole family leaving no trace of his true identity. In a way that's the way this lady is, everything isn't completely perfect so she snaps and kills her husband.

A Rose For Emily

Question 3. I did anticipate the ending and here's why. First off, no one had entered her house for 10 years. I don't know about you but I can't think of many people I know that have literally had no one enter their house for one year let alone ten! Second, although not as striking she seems to tell the officials to talk to Colonel Sartoris (who is dead) in an non-sarcastic way. Third (and possibly most apparent), when her father dies not only does she keep his body despite the strong odor and the fact that its a dead body but she also firmly believes that her dad isn't dead for three days after his death. Fourthly, Emily buys rat poison and does not give a reason as is required by law. FIFTHLY (this is getting ridiculous), Emily's boyfriend is never seen again after she buys the rat poison (c'mon if you don't see it by now I don't know what to tell you). So, essentially it seemed to become more and more obvious as the story progressed until it was finally almost certain, but the question was there so I answered.

Interpreter of Maladies

This story didn't really seem to have any kind of resounding message, just a story to be told. The wife's not caring about her own kids and marriage is kind of horrible I mean if your own mother doesn't care about you when you're young what kind of effect is that going to have on the kids when they grow up. It seemed as if neither of the parents wanted to be there at all they were just going through the motions of being a parent and taking them on a vacation because they felt like they had too. I don't really see why Mr. Kapasi's attraction for Mrs. Das faded right when she started telling basically what he had been hoping to hear. Maybe it was the fact that she had an affair and therefore was not faithful to her husband and still continued to lie to him about this fact. The address fluttering away as the child is being saved seems to be a kind of symbol that the kids are what is holding the marriage together and therefore keeping Mr. Kapasi out.

How I Met My Husband

Well I would first like to start out by saying that I love the show How I Met Your Mother and while I was reading this that's all I kept thinking about. This story, although much shorter than the overall series of HIMYM is very similar in its structure. In HIMYM one of the first episodes is one where Ted is telling his kids all about how he met a lady who the kids only assume is their current mother since Ted says he’s going to tell them the story of how he met their mother. At the end of the episode Ted says and that is the story of how I met your aunt Robin. The kids are needless to say a bit shocked and Ted says that the story of how he met their mother is very long. Similarly in this story, the story is entitled “How I met my Husband” so the whole time we can only assume that her husband is the man the story focuses on, the airplane pilot. However in the very end the twist is that her husband is really the mailman.

Elegy for My Father, Who Is Not Dead

Well another poem that I think tries to grab some readers with a little shock value. The title seems to me to just be a tool to get people to actually read the poem and I guess its worked since here I am reading it (even though I am forced to the point is still valid.) I've noticed lots of poets like to talk about death. What is it with poetry and death? I mean I get that death is a big topic but other forms of literature don't seem to focus so much on it. Here's my theory; since poetry is a dumb form of literature when people get depressed from death they write poetry, makes sense to me.

Delight in Disorder

Well, this poem seemed pretty straight forward. The speaker gets delight. . . from disorder. I don't really see the point to writing a poem about it but I guess that's why I'm not a poet. Anyway, basically this poems structure matched the theme. Broken rhyme scheme=disorder. I also think that the poem not being divided into stanzas at all and therefore, unorganized is also deliberate. This guy almost seems like he is, and I know this might be an extreme stretch, but maybe even sexually attracted to "disorderly" girls. He says a lot of things that make me think of a woman's clothes like the erring lace and the crimson stomacher, but who really knows.

Edward

After reading this poem this was the only thing I could think of:



I thought of Edward Scissorhands for a few reasons. One, his name is Edward. . .obviously. Also, hes creepy and sadistic. The fact that his mom told him to kill his dad, her husband, and he did even though he seemed to still like his father is probably the creepiest part. Honestly, I know this is an extreme euphemism, but killing your dad because your mom told you to even though you still like him makes me think this guy was kind of a momma's boy. More in the sense that he had some kind of really close and odd relationship with his mother.

Lonely Hearts

This poem is another one of those you read the first time and go, "WHAT?!?!" I've noticed there's a lot of those, I kind of think the poet just likes the shock value. They just want people to recognize their poems and well make them less boring. I know I'm probably just being biased since I don't like poetry and this might be outside the cone zone but sometimes I really just wonder if these poets that write these things are crazy. Anyway, back to the poem. This poem has some irony in that it it lists all of these extremely specific characteristics about someone, then specifies a location and still calls it a "simple" request. Overall though it seems pretty clear that this poem is really just satirizing all of these specific dating requests people have and post in public places.

My Mistress's Eyes

Surprisingly, I actually liked this one! Ok I'll correct that, as far as poetry goes, I liked this one. However the reason I liked this poem is a bit ironic. I liked it because it makes fun of poetry. Not just any poetry though, all those horrible cheesy love poems that for some reason, some girls like. He really starts out saying, look, your not the best thing in the world. In fact your relatively normal. But that's not a bad thing since he still loves her extraordinarily. Basically it's kind of a shocking start to the poem that makes you say wait why is he saying this? But if you read further you realize his point and it gets you thinking a little. Nevertheless it definitely moved Shakespeare up in my book.

Crossing the Bar

I'm not sure if I just don't have a "poet's mind" (Well actually I am pretty sure I don't) or if I just don't quite see things the way these people do but I always have no idea how they would decide to write the poems they do. I mean really who is just sitting at home, writing some poetry, when they think, "hey I'll write about death but I'll use a sand bar to represent it." I mean I can understand a lot of kind of crazy comparisons to death but a sand bar? that one I don't really understand the thought process. Regardless of whether I would have thought to write about a sandbar or not the poem does, kind of, although I regret to say it, make sense. I mean he says that he's leaving (dying) and so he's going out to sea. Then to further represent dying he's going to cross some sand bar. The water gets shallower and all kinds of other symbolic stuff and it's kind of a long and involved process. Much like death can be. Overall this poem seems to me to be just another death comparison.

The Apparation

This poem took me sometime to get but once we got the ball rolling today in small groups it all seemed so clear. It's a bit of an odd premise, but they haven't broken up yet. However the speaker says that when her "scorn" kills him he's going to haunt her. It's a bit ludicrous but I guess it makes sense? Maybe the speaker is concerned about their relationship so he is trying to threaten her to force her to love him. This doesn't really strike me as the best strategy to pacify a failing relationship but hey it's his relationship, not mine. Something makes me think that it might be logic like this that has gotten him into this kind of trouble but that's neither here nor there. The whole part about when she's with her future lover seemed kind of premeditated and strange too. He is saying that when he is haunting her, if she tries to get her lover to tell her he'll just roll over and pretend to be asleep since he'll think she just "wants some more" for lack of a better phrase.

Getting Out

I am still sticking to my guns on the whole they can't conceive thing. It just seems to make so much sense to me. They're waking like inmates, that beat the walls. Inmates might wake because they're mad they're in jail. However since they say they hardly slept it just makes me feel like they are upset because they can't conceive. the tightening heart also makes me think they aren't really fighting its something outside of their control that is really getting to the core of them. It also, in the second stanza, says "locked into blame, we paced the short hall." How much clearer could it get?!? This seems like the icing on the cake, case closed. Also I definitely don't think this is a sure thing but could the "matching eyes and hair" be referring to their dream of a kid with matching eyes and hair? The entire lawyer part also supports it. They still send a yearly letter, it's like there apart because they have to be not because they want to be. Also they hold hands and cry on the last day when they are presumably getting a divorce. "The lawyer's bewilderment." That's because the lawyer doesn't know why they are getting a divorce!

Next to of Course God America I

First off I would like to say that I think if any of us wrote this poem it would not be considered good. At best I could see it getting a little bit of attention. This is really one reason I'm not a fan of poetry. To me poetry seems like an useless or maybe even obsolete form of literature. Anyway though, to the poem. The satire makes this poem better. I always like a good satirical piece of literature, well better than a non satirical one. I think it's because I like sarcasm even though I NEVER use it in my day to day life (<--Sarcasm) Other than all of that I do like the parallels to government and the constant regurgitation of facts that occurs day to day and nothing gets done.

Sorting Laundry

This poem makes me think of one of those stereotypical crazy ladies who hasn't changed clothes or washed the hand they touched their dream husband with since prom of their senior year. I don't really know if you know the kind of lady I'm talking about but its more or less a crazy cat lady. I especially get this kind of vibe when the speaker talks about the "unsorted wash" on the other side of the bed. This really gives me the image of the crazy lady who doesn't leave the house. In line 27 the word "Goodwill" is capitalized. I'm not really sure if this has any significance but this isn't an Emily Dickinson poem and its the only random word capitalized so it must have some sort of significance.

Batter my Heart three personed God

One of the clearly present themes in this poem is the use of a paradox. Really the whole poem is a bit paradoxical however there are some specific instances in which specific lines are a single paradox within themselves. One example is in line 10 when it says, "But [I] am betrothed unto your enemy." This is a bit of a paradox since why would you marry someone who you want to marry's enemy? Thats confusing but thats a paradox I guess. It makes sense though since (s)he is figuratively married to satan since (s)he is inclined to sin.

Much Madness is Divinest Sense

I really like the message this poem is conveying. It's something that I think happens far too often in our society. Oftentimes people do things simply because thats what everyone else does or that's the way they've always done it. Both of these reasons are invalid to me and obviously to the speaker of this poem. I think even looking in on a smaller facet of society such as a high school the same things happen. I'm not just talking about the students either, sometimes I feel like the administration falls into these habits too. One way I see this happening is with some teachers seeming to lose the essence of teaching. The goal in the end isn't to make the student fail or in some cases struggle the goal is to learn the information and if they do that without needing a test formatted so that it is overly complex and harder than necessary than that shouldn't be a problem.

I Taste a Liquor Never Brewed

This poem definitely has an extended metaphor; the tricky part is determining what exactly the metaphor represents. Clearly the metaphor is based off of the “Liquor never brewed” but what exactly is this liquor compared too? It seems to me that this liquor never brewed is nature. I know that we aren’t supposed to really take into account who the writer is because they are not the speaker but Emily Dickenson seems to let her life STRONGLY influence her poems. Dickenson loved nature and a liquor never brewed could be grapes or really any fruit that hasn’t fermented. Regardless the poem is still confusing to me it seems sporadic and unorganized.

Toads

Toads is a very weird poem also. Just like Bright Star the use of a toad in this poem to represent something that is annoying seems like an odd choice. When I think of something that is bothering me I don’t normally think of a toad as my biggest annoyance. It occurred to me on my first read that maybe the toad represented human greed. The speaker seemed to be saying that in order to succeed, at least in order to succeed in the superficial sense; we must abandon all care for others. Obviously the speaker doesn’t really think we should do this, I don’t think anyone who felt this way would be a poet so the sarcastic tone of the speaker is clearly felt throughout the poem.

February

This poem was . . . well it was different. I’m not exactly sure how I’m supposed to relate to this like the book says I should be able to but regardless it is a very strange poem. I feel like the speaker in this poem is speaking to people, possibly more specifically people in the U.S. It seems this way because a lot of the things that she more or less says through the allusions and metaphors she uses are many of the bad stereotypes of Americans. The speaker at first definitely seems to be a very negative and pessimistic person but near the end she begins to be more optimistic and seems to attempt to invoke change. This shift seems to be the point that the speaker is trying to make through her intricate web of allusions and symbolism.

Bright Star

When I read Bright Star I thought it was an odd comparison to make. A star? It kind of has some loopholes in the analogy. I know that Keats is probably righting this poem with very limited knowledge of stars especially considering that this poem was written pre-1821. All of this granted I still am a bit peeved by the lack of correctness and I felt like a blog would be a good place to let it out. First off he says the star is unchangeable but stars actually change a lot throughout the course of their life. He also says the star is steadfast. The star could have actually burnt out millions of years ago and be completely gone. All of this considered I realize that it really has no impact on the poem or its meaning.

Dream Defered

Dream Deferred is a poem that, like many, gets clearer and clearer every time you read it. After my first read I didn't really have to much of an idea of what exactly it was about I just knew it was talking about dreams and what happens when they are, well, for lack of a better word, deferred. Upon reading it another time, more slowly, I realized what the individual lines dealt with in reference to the dreams. Your dream could shrivel up like a raisin which means if not taken advantage of the best opportunity to achieve your dream could pass. It could fester like a sore, which means if it is not tended to it could bug you and progressively get worse and worse. The one line that really seemed to have a lot of different things that could potentially be in the “cone of meaning” was the last line about the explosion. This lone metaphor obviously needs to have some kind of meaning however what exactly is the most likely solution. Based on the time period the most probable thing that Hughes, as the speaker, would be talking about is civil rights and the possibility of them “exploding” and the possibility of violence.

The convergence of Twain

When I first read this poem I failed to see the subtitle that mentions the titanic. This made the poem extremely confusing and it wasn’t until the second to last stanza that I started to wonder if maybe the poem was about the titanic. When I saw the subtitle I was very relieved that I wasn’t missing the point entirely or that I knew nothing about Mark Twain. For the most part though this poem changed a lot of my view on the titanic, it made me think on a different level from a different perspective, about what happened. Especially since at first I didn’t realize it was about the titanic. In fact, I’m actually glad I didn’t see the subtitle at first. It made me read the poem from a completely oblivious perspective without being completely oblivious, if that makes sense.

Those winter Sundays

This poem seems to hold somewhat of a general central theme. It seems to me it could be taken a few different ways. First off the obvious approach would be to take the “father” figure to be the speaker’s father which makes sense however it doesn’t exactly explain the Sunday part of the poem. It is plausible, however, Sunday is a day associated with God and the father, in that case, would obviously be God. I think that maybe some of both of these could be the more correct interpretation. Perhaps the father is the father of the speaker but the speaker sees him as a higher power in the same way the speaker sees God. In this case the Sunday morning is just enough of a hint to give this type of identity to the father without making it seem as if the father figure is only God and nothing more. Hopefully of this is in the cone of reason. The tone of this poem seems to be somewhat reserved however it sends a clear message that whoever the father is or is representing he is underappreciated.

I felt a Funeral, in my brain

I think that this poem is filled with symbols because I think that the poem is an allegory. Overall the poem seems to be representing the speaker going insane. The fact that the speaker is hearing and experiencing his/her own funeral speaks enough for itself and how it demonstrates this point but further details also reveal this. In line 8 the speaker says, “My mind was going numb.” This seems to be symbolic of the fact that the speaker is almost aware of their growing insanity but doesn’t do anything to prevent it (maybe because they’re insane.) The way the speaker seems to die, in a way, at the end seems to show that at that point they are beyond the point of no return and have completely gone insane. The poem also seems to be phrased so that it progresses pretty slowly for instance when treading is repeated early on in the poem it makes the poem drag on.

Spring

To me it is interesting how Hopkins chooses to portray the weeds. When I think of weeds I think of them as a nuisance but the way Hopkins portrays them shines an entirely new light on them. When I read Hopkins description it makes the weeds sound much more exotic and makes the whole area seem to be untamed and free. The tone of Hopkins poem seems to be kind of light and carefree. He seems to write without too much direction in the first stanza, just describing things he sees as he sees them. The second stanzas tone seems to change though. Many more of the words have a more negative connotation such as cloy, sinning, strain, and sour. He seems to start to snap out of the ignorant bliss he had in the first stanza and focus more on peoples impurity’s and how we are not deserving of this beauty, at least that’s what the reference to Eden makes me think.

London

In this poem I think it is very interesting how Blake seems to allude to his dislike for Governmental structure. Although he doesn’t directly address it, I get the feeling that in lines such as when he says “I wander through the chartered street” he is indirectly targeting government, since there isn’t any other clear reason for specifying that the streets are chartered. Also, “chartered” is the only word that is defined on the side of the page which leads me to believe it of some sort of importance. The Poem seems to have a very negative tone that is shown in many places such in lines 11-12 when he says, “And the hapless Soldier’s sigh runs in blood down Palace walls.” The diction here holds a very dreary tone and when this tone is associated with the title, it seems very clear that Blake sees something wrong with London. Blake also makes an allusion to the river Thames in line 2. This river flows through central London and I think is simply a reference to the fact that Blake writes this poem as if he is walking through London. This allusion demonstrates Blake’s ethos since many people outside of London wouldn’t know what the Thames is.

The Nature of Proof

As far as Perrine's views on the "correct" way to interpret poetry I would say I partially agree. Only partially because she says that ". . .That all interpretations of a poem are equally valid is a critical heresy. . ." I think that in many cases poets are deliberately ambiguous and, in fact, purposely put things in a poem that can be read 2 or sometimes many more different ways. I definitely agree with Perrine when she says that the solution that relies on the fewest assumptions is probably correct. As simple as that sounds I think that many times people overlook simple things like this when trying to interpret poetry. This concept really struck me when I reread the poems we had previously interpreted because I came up with more than one idea of what I thought the poem meant but when I simply looked at the numbers and which of my ideas had the fewest assumptions I found that interpretation to be correct.

This reading has definitely helped me to better understand poetry that I will read in the future. I used to look at poetry as just kind of a useless form of writing that didn't have any type of real deeper meaning other than to sound pretty. Now I feel like interpreting poetry and realizing that not all interpretations are completely correct, that poetry doesn't simply mean what I see it to mean, can allow me to better appreciate poetry and see it has some worth. I think that Perrine provides some real incite into interpreting poetry. I also like how Perrine looks at it almost from more of a numerical standpoint when she considers the number of details that don't rely on assumptions. I myself am more of a numbers and facts based person. I like science and math and that is something that has really distanced me from poetry since in many ways it seems to be the opposite of the "numbers" way of thinking. Now, however, I think I won't have as much trouble with poetry since I can look at it through more of my own way of thinking.

Final Blog

This book hit me in a few different ways. At first I thought it was pretty decent, hearing a few war stories. Definitely an improvement from the last book. However, then I found out that all of these stories at best are grossly exaggerated and probably mostly fake. This really set me off in a bad way. I don't think that he should need to make up the stories and sure maybe some people will say that we need to read into the fact that they're made up and analyze them. Really though, I hate over analyzing literature. I think that analyzing it is fine but I think there comes a point when you begin to read too far into the literature and trying to see connections that just aren't really there.

221-233

O'Brien relates the story back to the man in Vietnam in a very effective way. He says they have to joke about death and follows this up with a few euphemisms. He says, “And so a VC nurse, fried by napalm, was a crispy critter. A Vietnamese baby, which lay nearby, was a roasted peanut.” I have heard similar stories to these in which at first the soldiers come off as careless and insensitive but in the end are proven to just be trying to cope with the horrible atrocities going on around them. I think that the story about Linda and how he says he should have stopped the boy from pulling off her hat so that he would have had a little practice of courage for Vietnam at first seems like a joke but may in fact be true. Sure the two situations are very different but I think that as a nine year old in that class room it would have been almost as hard to stand up and stop him then as it would be to do some of the things he has to do in Vietnam.

Pgs: 213-221

I think it's interesting how this story is told. He talks of his first date, and true love and then you find out they were only nine. He talks about how he went on a double date and then you find out it was with his parents. Most importantly, I think, hes told this story and that she died but we still haven't found out how she died. The point of this story is to console the fresh new soldier, O'Brien. He is really comparing this little nine year old girl who died to an old man in Vietnam. It is almost a stretch to compare the two but it justifies the mans experience with painful death. Perhaps now that he has given himself some credibility he will attempt to use it to console the grieving O'Brien. It is also a little funny how he builds things up as if there was going to be a very important moment but then there isn't like when he says, “Nine years old, yes but it was real love, and now we were alone on those front steps. Finally we looked at each other. 'Bye,' I said. Linda nodded and said, 'Bye .'”

195-212

From here on out I am just going to assume the stories are true because if I don't then I just keep wanting to rant about the pointlessness of it all. Kiley says at one point, “This whole war. You Know what it is? Just one big banquet. Meat, man. You and me. Everybody. Meat for the bugs.” (212) I think the way this sentence is written shows more of O'Brien's [SYNTACTIC FLUENCY.] Kiley is going crazy and O'Brien has to show us this, not just tell us. He does this very effectively by making his speech very choppy and almost random. It shows the randomness of his thoughts and his paranoia. The sentences are all appropriately short and simple because Kiley isn't having any long, complex thoughts. The moral of this story, I think, is just to demonstrate how much pressure soldiers are put under. Even now with soldiers still over in Iraq we hear about soldiers going kind of crazy. It's a serious problem.

181-194

In this section O'Brien incorporates a bit of [FIGURATIVE LANGUAGE]. When describing the new medic, Bobby Jorgenson. He says, “He was green and incompetent and scared.” If you interpret literally that he is “green” it doesn't quite come off the way it is intended. Green is a term used to describe someone who is new to something. A lot of times I've heard the phrase green horn to describe a first year worker for many jobs. I'm pretty sure it is derived from plants and the fact that if you have say wood that is green then it is very fresh. Here it isn't extremely important or particularly helpful it just helps to get the point that O'Brien is making across more effectively.

Pgs: 165- 180

I know that I've already written about it a little but I just read a chapter where O'Brien basically told us that all of his stories are made up. I liked this book until I read this. If all of the stories are fake then why am I reading them? My six year old cousin can make up crazy stories! He says stories can “make things present” (172) I just can't really take anything away from a made up war story. In fact, earlier in the book he wrote a chapter entitled “How to Tell a True War Story” . . .WHAT?!?! what is this? Why is he trying to play these stories off as true in the beginning? Maybe because he knows no one would read this if they knew from the beginning it was all made up. I just think that there are true war stories out there that not only, in my opinion are more interesting, but also have a purpose.

Pgs: 155-165

This chapter continues to talk about the mud and the death of Kiowa. All of which could be completely made up and therefore, I believe, somewhat pointless to read about. However I found an example of an [ANTHROPOMORPHISM]. It occurs when O'Brien is talking about the sludge. He says, “. . .how the craters then collapsed on themselves and filled up with mud and water, sucking things down, swallowing things. . .” (162) The use of the anthropomorphism here really helps demonstrate the true power of the sludge. Instead of just saying, it sucked things in, O'Brien gives the sludge a human characteristic, the ability to swallow, making it seem almost that it had a mind of its own and therefore illustrating his point much more thoroughly.

Pgs: 149-154

I'm beginning to think I'm missing the point of this book. I just read the chapter about Norman Baker and how he couldn't muster up the courage to save his friend. Then I read the next chapter and it says that part was all made up? I don't understand the point of reading a story that isn't true but pretends to be. I can make up a story that has a valuable lesson and shows courage or the lack there of, but I feel like the moral or point of the story is completely discounted if the story is made up. I just don't get why O'Brien is making stuff up, it sounds like he's just one of those people who catches a blue gill and over time and tellings of the story it becomes a great white shark. He's a liar, in a way. It's not that the story's are bad or even entirely that they are made up, I could deal with that too. I just don't like that he plays them off as real at first and then decides to reveal that he just made it up.

Pgs: 129-148

In this section I read about a man named Norman Baker. It was odd, in my opinion, because the whole chapter was made up and had no basis. It was all about this guy driving around a lake imagining he was telling a story. However, I did find what I think is a [MIXED METAPHOR]. O'Brien says that the town doesn't know shit. After that the focus is returned to Baker and it says, “ He knew shit. It was his specialty. The smell, in particular, but also the numerous varieties of texture and taste. Someday he'd give a lecture on the topic. Put on a suit and tie and stand up in the front of the Kiwanis club and tell the fuckers about all the wonderful shit he knew. Pass out samples, maybe.” (138-9) This metaphor kind of loses me at some points. At first he is talking literally about shit even though before with the town he was just implying the town didn't know anything. I think, however, that at some point he begins to talk about how Norman Baker knew a lot and therefore he is not talking literally about shit again. Despite this shift he still goes back to talking about physical properties of shit that kind of cause the metaphor to become jumbled.

Pgs: 111-128

O'Brien discusses a particular man's sort of superstition and how the man always would put his girlfriends pantyhose around his neck. This unconventional superstition to me seems a bit more crazy and obsessive than cute or anything else. Even further more when his girlfriend breaks up with him and he continues the superstition. I don't think that the pantyhose would really smell as they were described either, this guy has been wearing them around his neck for months in the hot weather. I think they would smell more like sweat. O'Brien also writes about a man he killed. The chapter is titled “The Man I Killed.” It seems a bit odd to me that if these storys are true that he would focus so much on this man unless it is the only man he ever killed. This would be kind surprising to me if he only killed one person during his time in Vietnam, when I think of WW1 and the sheer number of casualties I would have thought he would have killed a few more people than just one. He says at one point, “The young man's finger nails were clean.” This seems to prove to me that he really did only kill one man if he remembers him in that great of detail.

Pgs: 98-110

In this chapter I found a a [SYNECDOTE] that is a little bit off color so I won't go into to much detail explaining it but it is the first that I've seen. Rat Kiley is on a sort of rant and says, “All that crap about how if we had a pussy for a president there wouldn't be no more wars.” (102) I think its fairly obvious what the synecdote is. I also noticed a bit of irony in this chapter. On page 101 O'Brien interrupts a story to talk about how a guy he knew used to stop his story and interrupt them, it is extremely ironic. He talks about how Rat would stop the flow of the story to give a little bit of pointless detail and that is precisely what O'Brien does with his writing here. The whole basis of this chapter is only valid if we assume that a guy actually did bring his girlfriend to Vietnam which in itself is very hard to believe.

Pgs: 85-97

This chapter describes a story O'Brien heard from a guy named Rat Kiley. O'Brien warns that it may not be true but to me, it seems, we get an awful lot of detail considering were hearing this second hand and 20 years later. It makes me think that this story might be true, but I am of course skeptical about all war stories now that O'Brien told me I should be. I also noticed something in the front cover of the book just before I read this chapter. It says, “In prose that combines the sharp, unsentimental rhythms of Hemmingway with gentler, more lyrical descriptions. . .” This struck me as a bit odd, maybe its not as much of a coincidence that we are reading these two books. I think I foresee an essay or two comparing the writing styles of Hemmingway and O'Brien, I can hardly wait.

Pgs: 73-84

O'Brien recalls something he learned in the war, he says, “. . .you're never more alive then when you're almost dead.” This is clearly a [PARADOX] and is used to illustrate an indelible truth, in less words it; essentially explains how we take life for granted and it isn't until we are very near death that we realize how alive we truly are.

Just a few paragraphs later O'Brien shows what I think is a good example of syntactic fluency. He says, “The old rules are no longer binding, the old truths no longer true. Right spills over into wrong. Order blends into chaos, love into hate, ugliness into beauty, law into anarchy, civility into savagery. The vapors suck you in. You can't tell where you are, or why you're there, and the only certainty is overwhelming ambiguity.” This is a very complex type of syntax that corresponds to the complex message it delivers. It is also so complicated because it is explaining that during war everything becomes its opposite. It would seem that all this is impossible and that is why it is so complex and a little bit difficult to fully comprehend.

Pgs: 62-72

The majority of this section falls in the chapter entitled “How to Tell a True War Story.” O'Brien uses a story about how to tell a story to demonstrate the true maliciousness of war. This is almost like a framing device however I don't think it's a true frame story. I think it's interesting how O'Brien decided to do this, it seems almost like that by doing this it makes you, or at least it made me, a little skeptical of all the story's hes telling. How much of them are true? He says, “A true war story is never moral.” This may be true of the story he proceeds to tell, but some of the story's he has told have been moral. So should we discount them and view them as lies like he says we should? This contradiction kind of rubs me the wrong way I don't like that he generalizes this much about the war it makes me more and more skeptical about what he is writing. Despite my reservations I still like the book so far.

Pgs:51-61

O'Brien finishes telling his story about how he ended up deciding to go to war. It seemed like every logical thinking part of his body said that the best thing to do was jump out of the boat and swim to Canada but it was his moral fiber that made him stay, despite his best effort to make himself go.

Next O'Brien writes a chapter entitled “enemies.” This chapter stands to prove the quote by Abraham Lincoln that “a war on two fronts is impossible to win” Although, I'm not exactly sure this is the kind on two fronts war that he had in mind when he said this. This true story really demonstrates the immense amount of pressure put on soldiers in a war and how close to the breaking they really are. I think that that is why O'Brien chose this story to illustrate this truth with.

Pgs: 37-51

O'Brien revealed a story in this chapter that he is not at all proud of. I think that this shows a lot of character, especially since he revealed this story very early in the book. On page 47 O'Brien uses a strong oxymoron, he says that a man had a “ferocious silence.” This [OXYMORON] is very effective because in essence I think that it attempts to describe the indescribable. It causes the reader to stop for a second and imagine what “ferocious silence” is, this contradiction shows us how complex the mans disposition is while also being very contrite. When I imagine the ferocious silence I see it as both O'Brien and the man both knowing why O'Brien is there yet never talking about it, almost forming a tension that is undiscussed and is therefore almost pliable. So far this book is a lot better than The Sun Also Rises, in my opinion, I feel like the story moves a lot better.

Pgs: 18-36

O'Brien doesn't really seem to have any path with his writing. It doesn't seem like there is any main plot or end in sight. He just recalls war story's as he remembers them and then all the sudden he also has a story about talking to someone about war stories. Its not that the stories aren't interesting, the book isn't bad so far, I just like a book with a plot that leaves you on edge and you never want to put it down.

Much of this book is made up of short, [ANECDOTAL] stories. An example would be the one on page 34 when O'Brien calls it a “quick peace story.” He ends the story with a quote from the man the story is about that says, “All that peace, man, it felt so good it hurt. I want to hurt it back.” I think that this demonstrates the general mindset of some of the soldiers who fought in WWI. A lot of them were genuinely patriotic and behind what they were fighting for and knew what they were fighting for. Not that this doesn't still exist today but it seemed to be more so at the time of WWI and WWII.

Pgs: 1-18 Part 2

So far it seems like O'Brien has taken a different approach to starting this story instead of introducing the characters by giving background information up front, he slowly reveals what kind of person they are by telling what they carry.

In another part of this chapter I noticed what I think is called a polysyndentone, however, this is not one of our literary terms I think that it's effectiveness helps to demonstrate O'Brien's [SYNTACTIC FLUENCY]. “But Ted Lavender, who was scared, carried 34 rounds when he was shot and killed outside Than Khe, and he went down under exceptional burden, more than 20 pounds of ammunition, plus the flak jacket and the helmet and rations and water and toilet paper and tranquilizers and all the rest plus the unweighed fear.” (Pg. 6) O'Brien is describing that this guy is scared and because of this he carries a lot more supplies than most. He uses this polysyndentone to stretch out the syntax so that it coincides with the amount of weight that Lavender carried.

Pgs: 1-18

The books title seems very appropriate so far I think that the narrator, Tim O'Brien, takes a very realistic stance when he considers the things they carried. I think it is more realistic because not only does he consider the physical weight which seems to be a very practical way of looking at the physical strain involved in carrying such objects, but he also takes in their sentimental or perhaps life saving characteristics. This comparison contrasts the weight of items versus their usefulness for instance when he talks about the rain ponchos he says, “ With its quilted liner,the poncho weighed almost 2 pounds, but it was worth every ounce.” (Pg. 3)

In this Chapter I noticed a very “text book” [METAPHOR]. “. . .the eyes chilly and somber like the ocean in March. . .” (Pg. 8) This metaphor is effective because it aids in the narrators description of Lieutenant Jimmy Cross and his extreme preoccupation with the girl whom he loves. He uses this very detailed comparison to show just how much of Cross's time is spent thinking about this girl. He says “the ocean in March” but it is also important to remember that this is not spring break in Florida; he's talking about the ocean in New Jersey which is still cold and somewhat desolate in March.

Final Thoughts

Overall I think my blog entries have made it pretty obvious that I wasn't entirely thrilled with the book. Who gets to decide what is and is not a “Quintessential novel of the Lost Generation,” as the back cover says. I guess what most of the “hype” I guess about this book is isn't really about the story itself its about the way that its written. I guess that the way it was written was okay. Maybe I'm just biased because the story was horrible though. It just didn't seem that impressive to me, even the style of writing. I just think that there are better authors that are alive today but their books aren't considered by whoever it is that decides we should read this book fore AP Lit because they haven't died yet. I'm really just hoping that The Things They Carried is better because it wasn't fun reading this book. That's probably the main reason I don't enjoy reading for school, if I don't enjoy the book I can't just abandon it and read something else I have to continue to read it and maybe its good for me, somehow. But I don't see how reading about a guy running around Europe with his friends drinking is any better for me than watching Eurotrip (they are essentially the same story just set in different eras, well and Eurotrip has the part with the robotguys fighting but thats kinda like the bull fights)

Chapter XIX Pgs: 231-251

Well its finally over. What a shame. I really don't understand the final chapter, it doesn't tie together any loose ends, it doesn't send us off with any type of ending really. It could have ended in the exact same way about 10 different places earlier in the book and all that would be different is I wouldn't have had to read about them going to another bar and drinking and saying things like “isn't something lovely” or calling things “rubbish.” The final chapter wasn't really anything either he received a telegram, went to the hotel Montana, found out Bret was fine, the end. I don't get it. It was basically a book about a random guy in the post world war era and what he did with the remainder of his boring life. Maybe that's kind of harsh to say but it had no plot, no excitement, just him and his friends running around Europe and drinking.

Chapter XVIII Pgs: 209-228

I think I finally get the separation of the books. Every time Brett leaves he starts another book. I'm pretty sure that's why but it seems kind of dumb he needs to get over Brett. I feel bad for him, well kind of, not really, but he needs to just get over it and stop wallowing around in his depression.

In this chapter there is a simile that is used during the bull fight. Jake is narrating and says, “It was as though he were rocking the bull to sleep.” (221) This simile is actually a little bit different then the conventional simile I guess since it seems like most similes use “like” not “as.” Never the less it is a simile and it is used to describe the degree of control and gentleness of Romero's bull fight.

Chapter XVII Pgs: 192-208 Pt. 2

Another literary term in this chapter was incorporated into the telling of the story of how Cohn fought with Romero. The line of time is interrupted when Hemingway makes use of a [FLASHBACK.] “. . . So the bull-fighter chap sort of rather staggered over to him. Cohn went back against the wall.
“'so you won' hit me?
“'No,' said Cohn. 'I'd be ashamed to.'
“So the bull-fighter fellow hit him just as hard as he could in the face. . .”
This flashback is effective since it illustrates the fight better than simply having mike explain the entire fight in his own words.

The punctuation, namely the quotation marks, seem weird here, it starts with a “ when mike starts talking but then we he mimics the dialogue of the fight they start each line with a “ then a ' but only end them with a ' the double quote marks are never ended.

Also the way that Mike tells the fight and just cuts into it like its happening in the present seems very strange. If someone were to tell you the story in the exact words of Mike then it wouldn't really completely make sense.

Chapter XVII Pgs: 192-208 Pt. 1

In this chapter something that has been brewing throughout the entire trip finally comes to be, Cohn gets into a fight with some of his “friends.” This event has really been [FORESHADOWED] for a long time whenever Cohn says something that makes the others mad they often talked about their dislike for him behind his back. “'That Cohn gets to me,' Bill said. “He's got this Jewish superiority so strong that he thinks the only emotion he'll get out of the fight will be being bored.'” (166) Another time Mike is drunk and a bit more honest about his feelings towards Cohn. “Do you think you amount to something, Cohn? Do you think you belong here among us? People who are out to have a good time? For God's sake don't be so noisy, Cohn!” And then the fight that seemed imminent from the beginning of the trip finally happened.

Chapter XVI Pgs: 173-191

This chapter was somewhat eventful. Jake continues to be reserved and always seems to be saying he feels weird because he's “far behind.” “I was drinking red wine and, was so far behind them that I felt a little uncomfortable about all this shoe-shining.” (177) It seems like Jake is always just feeling sorry for himself and acts like everyone else is always having fun but he's not. He never says anything in the actual conversations in the book to make people feel sorry for him but in his head he always seems somewhat subdued. I don't know if this has any direct correlation with his injury but I do think that indirectly it does since Brett won't be with him and that makes him sad and, well, we all know why Brett won't be with him.

Chapter XV Pgs: 156-173

This chapter is very long although I didn't notice any strikingly well placed literary terms in use. The one I did notice, however, was a [RHETORICAL QUESTION] that is asked to Cohn regarding his preconceived notion that the bull fight would bore him. “I thought he was going to be sick. You weren't bored, were you, Robert?” (169) This question was asked after Mike (the one who asked this question) had already badgered Cohn about his obvious lack of boredom throughout the fight. Mike or technically Hemingway uses the question to make fun of Cohn further since he was so far from boredom that there is no need for an answer.

Chapter XIV Pgs: 151-155

This chapter is relatively short however Jake does present a philosophy that he comes up with when he is drunk that is actually a [METAPHOR.] the metaphor compares relationships, specifically his with Brett, and the “cost” of these relationships. Jake says that in order to have good things you have to pay for them, whether it be monetarily, physically, or even mentally. He also says that “Enjoying living was learning to get your moneys worth and knowing when you had it” (152)

Chapter XIII Pgs: 131-150

This chapter is a good display of some of the [LOCAL COLOR] that has been apparent throughout the book. In this chapter when they arrive in Spain they stay at the hotel Montoya where bull fighting is a very big deal. “To-night at seven o'clock they bring in the Villar bulls, and to-morrow come the Miuras. Do you all go down?” (136) In the part of Spain that Jake and company are in Bull fighting plays an integral role in all the peoples lives and the good bull fighters who are real “aficionados” are looked on with near God-like status.

Chapter XII Pgs: 117-130

As I suspected it seems more and more likely that the plan for all of them to eventually meet up and vacation together will not come to fruition. Especially since the final line of the chapter is “There was not word from Robert Cohn nor from Brett and Mike. However it seems that despite this Jake and Bill are having a smashing old time together. Hemingway incorporates Litotes into Jake and Bills conversation “'That’s not such filthy wine,' Bill said.” It makes the dialect flow more naturally since this type of negation often occurs in normal conversation. Other than a change of location, the book is remaining relatively streamlined with its continuous wine drinking accompanied by mundane conversations.

Chapter XI Pgs: 109-116

The way that all of them are traveling strikes me as kind of odd, they keep splitting up into smaller and smaller groups leaving one or two people at a stop along their vacation. I kind of have a feeling that they will never all meet up as planned but who knows. It is kind of ironic, however, that during “the big season” (116) Jake and Bill are the only guests at the inn they stay at. They do, of course, continue to drink so much that I don’t know how they walk straight (or maybe they don’t) and at the end of the chapter Jake is saying how, “It felt good to be warm and in bed” strikes me as kind of weird but whatever.

Chapter X Pgs: 96-108

This contains a bit of [DRAMATIC IRONY] it occurs when Bill, Jake, and Cohn are all on the trip and Cohn does not know that Bill and Jake know about his fling with Brett in San Sebastian. This irony adds to sort of conflict that is brewing between Jake and Cohn. This conflict stems from Cohn being thinking he is “superior” to Jake and Bill. “He said it with an air of superior knowledge that irritated both of us.” (101) Despite the minor conflict between Jake and Cohn it doesn’t seem to be going anywhere.

Chapter IX Pgs: 87-95

An insane twist!! They go to Spain to fish . . . so exciting. The book continues to follow the slow . . . boring . . . uneventful pattern that has been unraveling since the opening chapter. Jake continues to be somewhat depressed and reserved as he has been since he met Brett. Brett continues to be spontaneous with her newest fling being with Cohn. Cohn is still kind of the “dumb” one for lack of a better term and the other characters are somewhat unimportant. Perhaps the fact that they had to eat lunch late on the train will lead to something exciting fueled by their outrage, “‘Go to Hell!’ said Bill. ‘Get the sandwiches made and a bottle of wine. You tell him, Jake,’” but I doubt it. I’m finding the book difficult to analyze since all that happens is binge drinking. Well maybe that’s a bit extreme but never the less the book is boring. Also, I’m not really understanding the point of the separation between “book 1” and “book 2.” Nothing drastically changed like the point of view of the narrator and other than going to Spain everything is virtually the same. Maybe the reason for the separation will become more evident as I drudge on through this book.

Chapter VIII Pgs: 75-86

Although it is somewhat trivial in terms of enhancing the writer’s story there is an [OXYMORON] at the very beginning of this chapter. “. . . light heavyweights. . . ” (75) This is said when referring to boxers so despite the contradiction it does make sense. Other than that this chapter, like the rest of the book, is pretty slow. Brett shows up again and despite the fact that she “loved” Jake just a chapter before she is going on a date with Mike Campbell. However Brett did say earlier that she couldn’t marry Jake because she would just cheat on him which makes sense due to Jakes situation however it seems like she needs to be more definitive and not lead Jake on but maybe that’s just me.

Chapter VII Pgs: 59-71

This chapter starts right off with an [ANAPHORA] “I don’t know. He was never here before. He was very large. Very, very large. She was very nice. Very, very nice.” (59) This anaphora helps convey the writers point. However, this anaphora also serves almost as a form of analogy. The concierge, who is the one speaking, compares her opinion of how nice she thinks Brett is to the physical largeness of the Count. The size of the count is not debatable however “large” he really is. This comparison gives the normally somewhat ambiguous word “very” some sort of scope.

Chapter VI Pgs: 48-58

This chapter is filled with literary terms in use. Sarcasm is not on our list; however it is implemented very well here. “‘You must be careful not to mention him, my dear. Poor Frances has had a most unfortunate experience. Won’t it be fun, Robert? Don’t you think it will be fun, Jake?’” Frances is being incredibly sarcastic however she also incorporates two [RHETORICAL QUESTIONS] at the end of her rant that are very effective in conveying her point. She doesn’t need an answer to these questions since she is being sarcastic and by being sarcastic Jake and Robert both know that she firmly believes her trip to England will not be fun.

Chapter V Pgs: 43-47

I would say that despite the length of this chapter it still illustrates the [DIALECT] that has been displayed throughout the book so far. It is fairly simple to tell they are in Europe, specifically Paris, in the 1920's. At one point, at Jakes office, Krum says, “Lucky beggars” when he is referring to the Englishmen that have every Saturday off. This phrase is seldom if not never used in today’s form of dialect and that is what makes it a distinguishable part of the dialect used in this book.

Chapter IV pgs: 33-42

The book is extremely slow so far! I am definitely seeing the pattern start to unfold of him going to a bar and leaving early then going home then doing the same thing the next day. I did think it was kind of odd how he went on about a half of a date with Georgette then ditched her and then within a few pages he is saying he loves Brett. “I told him I was in love with you. True, too.” (41) It also seems odd the way that Brett acts towards him, first she doesn't want to kiss him in the carriage, then she does and then she’s going out with the count guy. Brett seems very indecisive and uncertain of what she wants. Hopefully the book will start to pick up soon!

Pgs: 22-32

This chapter definitely shifted the focus of the book sharply towards Jake, the narrator. When he meets a girl named Georgette and then a girl named Brett it becomes clear that we are very much in the [EXPOSITION] stage of the plot. “‘What are you called?’ ‘Georgette. How are you called?’ ‘Jacob.’” (Pg. 24) This stage of the plot is really unavoidable since it is essential to introduce characters and give some background on them. I am still a little confused as to the main character, now it seems that it is Jake but the first chapter or two were completely focused on Cohn and seem to be almost wasted at this point. Hopefully the book will start to pick up soon!

Pgs: 11-21

Robert Cohn seems to be the main character thus far although he is not the one the book is following. The narrator is a first person narrator [POINT OF VIEW] character in the story that has the eyes that we see the story through. “His going made an awful row I heard, and I think that was where Frances lost him . . .” (Pg. 16) Having Jake as the narrator seems very odd since so far the book is about Cohn however it is effective because it is as if we are Jake watching Cohn. Also having Jake as the narrator allows him to analyze Cohn’s actions and present these analyses in the book. The background on Cohn was very brief and somewhat unfilled in. What happened to his kids? Did he just ditch them with his ex-wife and forget it? Also, they didn’t really say what happened to his 2nd wife/girlfriend, maybe they’ll address it soon but so far they just talked about how he was never really in love and now a lot of other women are paying attention to him and he’s getting cocky about it all. Is she just back in Europe hanging out for now? So far the book isn’t too bad but if they don’t start going somewhere with this then I could see it getting pretty dry. For now, I guess I’ll just cross my fingers and hope some sort of conflict erupts.