Over the last couple months we've all studied and reviewed quite a few things. In English, we have studied the sociological and philosophical approaches to analyzing literature, and even what it is that makes a piece of literature have any value to it. Sometimes I think, "Where the heck did that analysis come from and who cares!?" Why do we have to read some of these novels or poems that English teachers have us read? What does it matter to us? Over this past school year it all finally clicked. It is true that I still find doing a math problem more entertaining than writing an essay, but thanks to this past year I can finally say that I understand why we read what we read and what value literature really contains. Now, whenever I see a poem I can pick out all of the archetypes and allusions and see the poem in an entirely new light. When I see an analysis of a piece of literature, instead of arguing that the analyzer just made a bunch of "crazy" stuff up that sounds nice, I agree with the analysis and use it to help me continue finding much of the piece's value. So, what is the value of literature and why are we reading and studying it? I have found that for me, above all of the points and arguments being made or beliefs given, literature is a very valuable tool in helping me to think. Now that I am aware of it, as I think back over all my schooling years I can see that after reading and understanding any piece of literature with any value to it, I have used it as a vehicle for thought. I debate with myself about what my own opinion is on the subject being discussed and compare it to everyone else's. I have always just thought that literature had no real purpose other than entertaining those who actually enjoyed reading it, but finally, just as I am about to leave high school, I can see that it does have a purpose. It helps us to think and ponder, to value and consider others opinions, and ultimately to become more enriched people. Thank you Mrs. Elliott! :)
Chad L.
Despicable Us
Sunday, May 15, 2011
Monday, April 18, 2011
The Perspective & South Park Strikes Again
Everyday I hear many complain, "My life is difficult", "Money is a problem", "He/She won't give me the time of day", "I got rejected", "My parents got laid off" etc etc. Now, no one's life is perfect and life can suck. That is just life. One will always have there up and downs, day in and day out. One must appreciate what they have cause it can be worse. At least you are not living in a poverty filled city. Or you don't have to worry about food, water, and shelter. Or at least there is a hospital conveniently located a short distance away. The sooner one accepts this fact, the sooner they can get over their problems. Just look at things from a different perspective and your life will be better.
Recently I watched an episode of South Park that really caught my eye (as well as my funny bone). It was on the novel Catcher and the Rye. The boys decide to write a novel that would make it into the literary cannon. Their book's foundation laid on being vulgar and disgusting. In fact while reading the novel, one would vomit! The book became a hit. Why? Cause through the vulgarity the readers found literary merit in the novel, although the boys never intended in the reader finding anything! The point it made was that English enthusiast may look too deeply into a novel. How do we know if an author is actually writing a book for the plot to have a deep meaning? The study we are doing on literary merit made me think about this. I have never actually seen or heard of these "literary cannon" authors saying that their novels are meant to be researched and essay worthy. Maybe the authors are just trying to make a little dough or even just trying to write for fun? I'm not saying that ALL the books we read don't have a theme that is meant to be looked at and researched, but maybe we are scratching too deep at the surface of these novels; in fact so deep that we actually desolate the author's original purpose of having their book read- for the reader to enjoy themselves and jump into another world.
-just my 2 cents, Sasan.
Recently I watched an episode of South Park that really caught my eye (as well as my funny bone). It was on the novel Catcher and the Rye. The boys decide to write a novel that would make it into the literary cannon. Their book's foundation laid on being vulgar and disgusting. In fact while reading the novel, one would vomit! The book became a hit. Why? Cause through the vulgarity the readers found literary merit in the novel, although the boys never intended in the reader finding anything! The point it made was that English enthusiast may look too deeply into a novel. How do we know if an author is actually writing a book for the plot to have a deep meaning? The study we are doing on literary merit made me think about this. I have never actually seen or heard of these "literary cannon" authors saying that their novels are meant to be researched and essay worthy. Maybe the authors are just trying to make a little dough or even just trying to write for fun? I'm not saying that ALL the books we read don't have a theme that is meant to be looked at and researched, but maybe we are scratching too deep at the surface of these novels; in fact so deep that we actually desolate the author's original purpose of having their book read- for the reader to enjoy themselves and jump into another world.
-just my 2 cents, Sasan.
Monday, April 4, 2011
Sprint to the Finish
My high school career is coming to an end in a very different way than I imagined as a freshmen. Four years ago I was still a gymnast. I spent four to five hours a day working at that sport. Many people don't know that gymnastics was terribly stressful and often brought me to the brink of giving up and taking up something else. Something less... five-hours-a-day-ish. I got through freshman year, and sophomore year was a new challenge as I had my first two AP classes coupled with my gym schedule. It was horrible. But I still came to school with the same, if not sleepy, sarcastic enthusiasm everyday. Humor was and still is a way to vent my frustrations and need to be honest, and get a few laughs out of it too. As I entered my junior year, my schedule was overwhelming. I fell asleep behind the wheel and crashed. I fell asleep in literally every class at least once... or everyday (sorry Beckler). It made me question why I was doing it all. Did I really love gymnastics that much. Or was I just doing it for my father who was also a gymnast. I was really good at convincing myself gymnastics was my sport and mine alone. But I really didn't love it. It made me strong and gave me the incredibly useful ability to back-flip at any given time which has yielded so much free stuff over the years its not even funny. In the summer before senior year I decided to tag along at the cross country summer practices. This was the first time I had really done any other sport besides gymnastics. And I loved it. I ran slower than most of the girls team at the time, but I loved it. I was still in gymnastics at the time and I would come to practice already dead tired and my coach would chew me out. But I didn't care. When money became a little tighter, with college expenses looming just around the corner and other expenses cropping up, I decided to tell my father that I thought we should stop gymnastics. At that moment, I realized that gymnastics wasn't my sport. It was my father's. I said "we should stop" for crying out loud. He took it harder than I did. I committed my time to cross country and found that I loved every minute of it. The team was much closer than my gymnastics team. I felt like part of a team for the first time. This was something I chose one my own. It was mine and no one else's. I started senior year with a renewed spirit. I still spent about four hours with sports in the form of running and weight room, but it wasn't nearly as stressful. I often relate my sports to my general thinking. I had regarded gymnastics as the most honorable and toughest sport, and that I was a bettering myself for enduring it. But what I realize is that people must find out what they love on there own, with no one else's opinion. Trust me. you'll be happier for it. The four year race is on its bell lap. This is it. I'm in the final stretch and its the most exciting part of this race. And I think I'm coming out ahead.
Some Thoughts on "The Poisonwood Bible"
Well, guys, in case you didn't notice, I like COLOR. It's my "One Little Word." Go figure. So I just had some thoughts about The Poisonwood Bible that I wanted to share...
- Anyone notice the frequent reference to blood oranges? Blood, well that's a symbol in itself. But why would Kingsolver choose blood oranges over regular oranges or tangerines or something?
- Speaking of blood oranges, Ruth May saw lots of boxes of diamonds in Eeben Axelroot's plane. Hmmm...diamonds in Africa...blood diamonds? Makes sense, right? I haven't seen that movie with Leonardo DiCaprio, but nonetheless, I do know a little about them.
- Adah and the lion: "...signs of stalking, the sign of a pounce, and a smear of fresh blood trailing into the bush." Well, I sure thought Adah was killed by the lion. I didn't expect Kingsolver to throw in "a yearling bushbuck." (Ooohhhh, high literary merit right there.) I was confused after that chapter cause I wasn't sure if Adah was dead or not. But nonetheless, why did Kingsolver choose to have Adah have a scare with a lion? Why not the snakes that are constantly mentioned?
- Summary so far...blood, blood, blood.
- Ruth May falls out of a tree and breaks her arm. No blood, no lions, no snakes. Why? Why did Kingsolver not continue the trend of blood with Ruth May's arm?
Leonardo DiCaprio in "Blood Diamond" (2006) |
"Cheating" on Annotations?!
(Don't be mad, Mrs. Elliott. It's not what you think. Haha.)
Yeah, I somehow managed to cheat the system. I started reading The Poisonwood Bible over spring break. I only got to page fifty or so and unknowingly, I annotated everyone's chapters up to that point. Then, Mrs. Elliott told us to choose one character's chapters to annotate. I chose Leah Price's. After reading all of Genesis, I was really enjoying the novel. And I thought, "Wow. It sucks that I can't just read this book. I have to annotate while I read." Obviously, I noticed Orleanna Price only had two chapters in Genesis and The Revelation. Well, if someone chose to annotate those parts, that would be fairly easy. Though Orleanna's chapters are the most dense, there's only two. Easy. So I decided to change from annotating Leah to annotating Orleanna. Then, I was able to just read The Revelation. I was able to stay focused (because this is a novel I am actually interested in) and I enjoyed the book that much more.
So I want to know, why did you guys pick the character you did to annotate for the first part of our reading? And how are you liking The Poisonwood Bible so far?
-Shelby F.
Yeah, I somehow managed to cheat the system. I started reading The Poisonwood Bible over spring break. I only got to page fifty or so and unknowingly, I annotated everyone's chapters up to that point. Then, Mrs. Elliott told us to choose one character's chapters to annotate. I chose Leah Price's. After reading all of Genesis, I was really enjoying the novel. And I thought, "Wow. It sucks that I can't just read this book. I have to annotate while I read." Obviously, I noticed Orleanna Price only had two chapters in Genesis and The Revelation. Well, if someone chose to annotate those parts, that would be fairly easy. Though Orleanna's chapters are the most dense, there's only two. Easy. So I decided to change from annotating Leah to annotating Orleanna. Then, I was able to just read The Revelation. I was able to stay focused (because this is a novel I am actually interested in) and I enjoyed the book that much more.
So I want to know, why did you guys pick the character you did to annotate for the first part of our reading? And how are you liking The Poisonwood Bible so far?
-Shelby F.
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Philosophy in Invisible Man
In class, we have been researching different philosophies and are comparing those ideals to novels we have read in class. I read Invisible Man, and found existential beliefs to have a significant part in the meaning of the novel. Existentialism is based around the individual, and follows that a single person controls the outcome of their life. The father of existentialism, Kiekegaard, highlights the importance of the "single individual" and personal choice. These values clearly relate to the narrator in Invisible Man, who throughout his whole life was pushed around and told what to do and what to believe. He had no individuality himself; while a part of the Brotherhood, he had to preach the beliefs the Brotherhood had, without the ability to throw in any personal thoughts. He was merely their puppet. By the end of the novel, the narrator began to realize he did not know who he truly was, and therefore ended up underground with tons of lights, mentally making himself seen and stand out. It was here where he found his individuality and began to make his own choices, knowing from past mistakes of trusting the wrong people, that he was the only one he could entrust his future to. This finding of himself gave his life meaning and a purpose, therefore falling under the existentialist philosophy.
Taylor C.
Friday, February 25, 2011
INVISIBLE MAN POEM
What defines invisible?
Can it be metaphoric or
must it be literal
To be invisible
seems like you'd be miserable
metaphoric or literal
One can still be invisible
whether it is metaphorically
or literal
the point is anyone can feel invisible
We as individuals
define what is invisible.
This is my poem on Invisible Man comparin and contrasting what defines invisible and how one can be invisible metaphorically and literally. This relates to the character in Invisible Man because he feels he is invisible and at the end of the novel his invisibility takes a turn to leave him as a permanent outcast leavin him truly invisible.
Can it be metaphoric or
must it be literal
To be invisible
seems like you'd be miserable
metaphoric or literal
One can still be invisible
whether it is metaphorically
or literal
the point is anyone can feel invisible
We as individuals
define what is invisible.
This is my poem on Invisible Man comparin and contrasting what defines invisible and how one can be invisible metaphorically and literally. This relates to the character in Invisible Man because he feels he is invisible and at the end of the novel his invisibility takes a turn to leave him as a permanent outcast leavin him truly invisible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)