I love this stuff! It's so interesting! We have been talking about Freud recently in my Literary Genre class with Dr. Rice, and I'm really glad I got to learn more about his theories. The information I liked the most was about repressed thoughts coming out in dreams, literature, and Freudian slips. I like the idea that we write about characters that may be one of our multiple (repressed) personalities. Amazing!
When reading Frankenstein, I didn't notice the oedipal feelings Victor had. For some reason I have trouble seeing the oedipal thing unless it is blatantly obvious. I suppose you could say it was obvious when Victor dreamed of his Elizabeth turning into his dead, rotting mother, but when reading it, I thought it was a strange dream and probably had something to do with the disgusting creature he just created. I thought it was because he had thought he chose the most beautiful pieces to create it, but it turned out to be hideous. I thought that was just a reflection of it. Did any of you think it was oedipal when you first read it, or did you think it was just a weird dream?
I'm glad there is mention of Victor approving of his creature just before it opens it's eyes on page 285. (I think maybe Victor could have done a better job if he hadn't been so cocky that he could create a human. Just a little more time picking out larger pieces of flesh, and the creature would have looked a lot better, I think.)
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
No Class--Feminist Criticism Post
I want to start by saying that 'criticism' has, at the same time, too many vowels and too many consonants. I could probably win Hangman with that one.
Smith writes that, as children, we create spheres to separate things into. This was confusing at times, but she consistently wrote of how it was connected with masculinity and femininity. On page 313 she writes about what we all think of when we hear 'feminism': the woman stays at home to cook, clean, and take care of the kids while the man goes out and works hard to bring home the bacon. Smith writes, "the man's public sphere of commerce and activity was kept distinct from the woman's private sphere of home and passivity," (313). She goes on to write about different traits that show masculinity and femininity. Examples of these traits can be found in Frankenstein. Victor was our only masculine male character because the others showed a more nurturing and loving side, and the women characters were portrayed as very domestic and caring. I think that if Victor had been a little bit more feminine, he wouldn't have run from the creature when he saw it. Victor's father wasn't very masculine when raising his son, and I believe this may have something to do with why he ran instead of taking charge.
Smith gives the example that Mary Shelley stayed in the private sphere when publishing Frankenstein anonymously in 1818. At that time she allowed her husband to do the editing which is another example of the public/private sphere.
When reading this, I thought of the creature. He spends most of his time in hiding wishing he wasn't alone. He wants family, and he wants to be loved. Do you think the creature is more masculine or more feminine? Since he is a creation of Victor's and isn't human, is he exempt from these particular spheres?
Smith writes that, as children, we create spheres to separate things into. This was confusing at times, but she consistently wrote of how it was connected with masculinity and femininity. On page 313 she writes about what we all think of when we hear 'feminism': the woman stays at home to cook, clean, and take care of the kids while the man goes out and works hard to bring home the bacon. Smith writes, "the man's public sphere of commerce and activity was kept distinct from the woman's private sphere of home and passivity," (313). She goes on to write about different traits that show masculinity and femininity. Examples of these traits can be found in Frankenstein. Victor was our only masculine male character because the others showed a more nurturing and loving side, and the women characters were portrayed as very domestic and caring. I think that if Victor had been a little bit more feminine, he wouldn't have run from the creature when he saw it. Victor's father wasn't very masculine when raising his son, and I believe this may have something to do with why he ran instead of taking charge.
Smith gives the example that Mary Shelley stayed in the private sphere when publishing Frankenstein anonymously in 1818. At that time she allowed her husband to do the editing which is another example of the public/private sphere.
When reading this, I thought of the creature. He spends most of his time in hiding wishing he wasn't alone. He wants family, and he wants to be loved. Do you think the creature is more masculine or more feminine? Since he is a creation of Victor's and isn't human, is he exempt from these particular spheres?
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Contextual Documents
The editor's note at the beginning of today's reading reminded me of the quotation "there are no new stories. Only new ways of telling them" (Clive Barker) because it seems as though Mary Shelly's novel is pieced together from existing thoughts and ideas from other works. I suppose you could say her novel is much like the monster that lives inside it: using the choicest pieces to create a horror.
I think the stories in the contextual documents sound sort of like scripture which makes them difficult to read. The second story we read seemed like it had no point. It was a small narrative on how terrible this young man's life was. Were we even told his name? (I just want to pause to mention that in this paragraph I have already used words associated with talking and not reading and writing like Manguel had written about in the reading out loud section.) And the next story talked of matrices so much, that I couldn't get the movie out of my head long enough to pay attention to what else what being said. Did anyone else have that problem? I even started to hear Laurence Fishburne (the actor that portrays Morpheus) narrate on page 202. I immediately tried to not hear him, but it just switched to James Earl Jones! I am glad we did not get such a deep discussion in The Lion King as we do in Paracelsus.
I think the reason I found this reading fairly boring is because it was written in a dialect that I just cannot relate to. No one talks this way anymore unless they are quoting some old written text. Shelley's writing was much easier to read and more enjoyable. I also found it difficult to find something to talk about in length. Do you agree?
I think the stories in the contextual documents sound sort of like scripture which makes them difficult to read. The second story we read seemed like it had no point. It was a small narrative on how terrible this young man's life was. Were we even told his name? (I just want to pause to mention that in this paragraph I have already used words associated with talking and not reading and writing like Manguel had written about in the reading out loud section.) And the next story talked of matrices so much, that I couldn't get the movie out of my head long enough to pay attention to what else what being said. Did anyone else have that problem? I even started to hear Laurence Fishburne (the actor that portrays Morpheus) narrate on page 202. I immediately tried to not hear him, but it just switched to James Earl Jones! I am glad we did not get such a deep discussion in The Lion King as we do in Paracelsus.
I think the reason I found this reading fairly boring is because it was written in a dialect that I just cannot relate to. No one talks this way anymore unless they are quoting some old written text. Shelley's writing was much easier to read and more enjoyable. I also found it difficult to find something to talk about in length. Do you agree?
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Frankenstein, pages 3- 90
I really like the end of chapter 2 on pages 48 and 49. The author's writing style really brings out the emotions of the narrator. In the first paragraph on page 48, she uses a lot of large words to convey the confusion and frustration the narrator is going through with his failed experiments.
The author then moves on to convey the awe the narrator has in seeing a tree destroyed by lightning. This sense of awe moves smoothly into the short passage about his guardian angel sending him ideas. However, the last sentence of chapter 2 is very dark and Gothic, changing moods dramatically: “It was a strong effort of the spirit of good; but it was ineffectual. Destiny was too potent, and her immutable laws had decreed my utter and terrible destruction.” This sentence just screams 'Gothic novel!' I just can’t wait to find out what terrible path Destiny has chosen for our main character. I like the personification of destiny, also.
I've noticed that the author is very good at conveying feelings. In most of the modern books I've read, it's written simply: "I was so pissed at ...... because ..... ," but Mary Shelley takes a different approach. Did you notice that she didn't state feelings, but created them with her writing? It almost has the feel of poetry. Do you agree?
I changed my settings so there is a pop-up for comments. I thought this would be easier than the other way I had it, so you can see my post and comment. I'm sorry the box won't show up under my posts! I can't figure it out! Please let me know if this way is worse. Thanks!
"...and if my incantations were always unsuccessful, I attributed the failure rather to my own inexperience and mistake, than to a want of skill or fidelity in my instructors. An thus for a time I was occupied by exploded systems, mingling, like and unadept, a thousand contradictory theories, and floundering desperately in a very slough of multifarious knowledge, guided by an ardent imagination and childish reasoning, till an accident again changed the current of my ideas."I'm not sure if these words were more common when the novel was published, but it was tough for me to read.
The author then moves on to convey the awe the narrator has in seeing a tree destroyed by lightning. This sense of awe moves smoothly into the short passage about his guardian angel sending him ideas. However, the last sentence of chapter 2 is very dark and Gothic, changing moods dramatically: “It was a strong effort of the spirit of good; but it was ineffectual. Destiny was too potent, and her immutable laws had decreed my utter and terrible destruction.” This sentence just screams 'Gothic novel!' I just can’t wait to find out what terrible path Destiny has chosen for our main character. I like the personification of destiny, also.
I've noticed that the author is very good at conveying feelings. In most of the modern books I've read, it's written simply: "I was so pissed at ...... because ..... ," but Mary Shelley takes a different approach. Did you notice that she didn't state feelings, but created them with her writing? It almost has the feel of poetry. Do you agree?
I changed my settings so there is a pop-up for comments. I thought this would be easier than the other way I had it, so you can see my post and comment. I'm sorry the box won't show up under my posts! I can't figure it out! Please let me know if this way is worse. Thanks!
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
A History of Reading, pages 225 - 319
READING WITHIN WALLS
pp 227 - I like the quote from Saint Teresa: "I became accustomed to reading them, and that small fault made me cool my desire and will to do my other tasks. And I thought nothing of spending many hours a day and night in this vain exercise, hidden from my father. My rapture in this was so great that, unless I had a new book to read, it seemed to me that I could not be happy." I am just like this! I am constantly reading instead of doing what I should be doing, and I am always buying new books.
pp 230 - Manguel writes of Japanese court women "At court, the women's days were spent mostly "gazing into space" in an agony of leisure." This quote makes me think of my sister in her dorm at West Georgia. She often sends me the same text: "im bored." I cannot imagine how terrible it would be to sit in a room filled with pretty things and do nothing all day. My sister would probably go mad.
STEALING BOOKS
pp 241 - "According to the 17th century gossipmonger Tallemant des Réaux, stealing books is not a crime unless the books are sold." Oh, how I wish this was true now. I think it sounds ridiculous, though. I love the story of Libri stealing and selling books, though. I imagine him to be a dashing gentleman with a lot of charm. He would have to be to steal all those books!
pp 243 - "Bibliokleptomania" Oh, Manguel! You slay me! Next time a friend borrows one of my books and takes too long to return it, I will call her a bibliokleptomaniac! I cannot wait!
THE AUTHOR AS READER
When reading this chapter, I continued to think of how I always read a paper out loud before I print the final copy to hear my mistakes. I learned this in ENGL 1101, and I wish I had learned this trick in high school. Reading out loud helps me find not only grammatical errors and typos, but it also helps me hear how pointless some sentences are. I've never read in public, but from what this chapter says, it would probably help me find "weak places" (pp 255) and have reader feedback.
I don't know why, but I also thought of how there are extra pages at the end of books because of the printing process. They print a certain number of pages per sheet of paper, and at the end, there are some blanks. I thought of this while reading this chapter, so I flipped to the back to see how many leftovers Manguel had, and, lo! There is a cool timeline in the back! I'm surprised the previous owner of this book hadn't ripped it out! This gave me ideas for my narrative. I only hope I can fit them in!
THE TRANSLATOR AS READER
I like the barbershop story on 263. It's funny and endearing. I can't understand why they wouldn't call the hotel. Did they treat him that way because of his accent? Because he wasn't one of them?
pp 265 - Labé writes, "but when we happen to put our thoughts in writing, how easily, later on, does our mind race through an infinity of events, incessantly alive, so that when a long time afterwards we take up those written pages we can return to the same place and to the same disposition in which we once found ourselves." I love this quote because it is so very true that we can remember so much detail from things written down. Writing down certain thoughts or events is almost better than a picture. When looking at a photo taken two years ago, you remember the place and the people in it and what you were doing, but in a journal about the same event, you have recorded your feelings and details that you would have forgotten otherwise. Do you agree with this?
I am so glad Manguel included the Bible in this chapter. Even in church, someone is still translating the scripture and helping us to understand what is being said. I think that many things were lost in the original translation from Hebrew into German, and we can probably never change that now because of such strong beliefs in the book we have today. I would love to be able to read and understand one of the earliest Bibles.
FORBIDDEN READING
pp 285 - Manguel writes about this ridiculous man Anthony Comstock who not only has an unfortunately funny last name, but he is, in fact, ignorant. You would think that grumpy old men had better things to do than arrest shopkeepers for selling the wrong kind of books in 1868. Maybe he could have spent his time more wisely going for a drive in the park to be seen where he would not be "lead astray and corrupted by disease." With all this running around destroying things, he probably had no time to read. I bet he would try to destroy or ban my blog if I put the word HEINY in it.
THE BOOK FOOL
pp 301 - Manguel writes, "it is curious that glasses have never lost this unworldly association. Even those who wish to appear wise (or at least bookish) in our time take advantage of the symbol; a pair of glasses, whether prescription or not, undermines the sensuality of a face and suggests instead intellectual preoccupations." This reminded me of an episode of Boy Meets World where Eric is trying to look smart. One of the key things is to put on a pair of glasses while thinking. He managed to look smarter! Do you think glasses make someone look smarter or "bookish"?
ENDPAPER PAGES
Did you feel this last part was a little strange? It's like he wanted to wait until there was more history of reading to write about.
pp 227 - I like the quote from Saint Teresa: "I became accustomed to reading them, and that small fault made me cool my desire and will to do my other tasks. And I thought nothing of spending many hours a day and night in this vain exercise, hidden from my father. My rapture in this was so great that, unless I had a new book to read, it seemed to me that I could not be happy." I am just like this! I am constantly reading instead of doing what I should be doing, and I am always buying new books.
pp 230 - Manguel writes of Japanese court women "At court, the women's days were spent mostly "gazing into space" in an agony of leisure." This quote makes me think of my sister in her dorm at West Georgia. She often sends me the same text: "im bored." I cannot imagine how terrible it would be to sit in a room filled with pretty things and do nothing all day. My sister would probably go mad.
STEALING BOOKS
pp 241 - "According to the 17th century gossipmonger Tallemant des Réaux, stealing books is not a crime unless the books are sold." Oh, how I wish this was true now. I think it sounds ridiculous, though. I love the story of Libri stealing and selling books, though. I imagine him to be a dashing gentleman with a lot of charm. He would have to be to steal all those books!
pp 243 - "Bibliokleptomania" Oh, Manguel! You slay me! Next time a friend borrows one of my books and takes too long to return it, I will call her a bibliokleptomaniac! I cannot wait!
THE AUTHOR AS READER
When reading this chapter, I continued to think of how I always read a paper out loud before I print the final copy to hear my mistakes. I learned this in ENGL 1101, and I wish I had learned this trick in high school. Reading out loud helps me find not only grammatical errors and typos, but it also helps me hear how pointless some sentences are. I've never read in public, but from what this chapter says, it would probably help me find "weak places" (pp 255) and have reader feedback.
I don't know why, but I also thought of how there are extra pages at the end of books because of the printing process. They print a certain number of pages per sheet of paper, and at the end, there are some blanks. I thought of this while reading this chapter, so I flipped to the back to see how many leftovers Manguel had, and, lo! There is a cool timeline in the back! I'm surprised the previous owner of this book hadn't ripped it out! This gave me ideas for my narrative. I only hope I can fit them in!
THE TRANSLATOR AS READER
I like the barbershop story on 263. It's funny and endearing. I can't understand why they wouldn't call the hotel. Did they treat him that way because of his accent? Because he wasn't one of them?
pp 265 - Labé writes, "but when we happen to put our thoughts in writing, how easily, later on, does our mind race through an infinity of events, incessantly alive, so that when a long time afterwards we take up those written pages we can return to the same place and to the same disposition in which we once found ourselves." I love this quote because it is so very true that we can remember so much detail from things written down. Writing down certain thoughts or events is almost better than a picture. When looking at a photo taken two years ago, you remember the place and the people in it and what you were doing, but in a journal about the same event, you have recorded your feelings and details that you would have forgotten otherwise. Do you agree with this?
I am so glad Manguel included the Bible in this chapter. Even in church, someone is still translating the scripture and helping us to understand what is being said. I think that many things were lost in the original translation from Hebrew into German, and we can probably never change that now because of such strong beliefs in the book we have today. I would love to be able to read and understand one of the earliest Bibles.
FORBIDDEN READING
pp 285 - Manguel writes about this ridiculous man Anthony Comstock who not only has an unfortunately funny last name, but he is, in fact, ignorant. You would think that grumpy old men had better things to do than arrest shopkeepers for selling the wrong kind of books in 1868. Maybe he could have spent his time more wisely going for a drive in the park to be seen where he would not be "lead astray and corrupted by disease." With all this running around destroying things, he probably had no time to read. I bet he would try to destroy or ban my blog if I put the word HEINY in it.
THE BOOK FOOL
pp 301 - Manguel writes, "it is curious that glasses have never lost this unworldly association. Even those who wish to appear wise (or at least bookish) in our time take advantage of the symbol; a pair of glasses, whether prescription or not, undermines the sensuality of a face and suggests instead intellectual preoccupations." This reminded me of an episode of Boy Meets World where Eric is trying to look smart. One of the key things is to put on a pair of glasses while thinking. He managed to look smarter! Do you think glasses make someone look smarter or "bookish"?
ENDPAPER PAGES
Did you feel this last part was a little strange? It's like he wanted to wait until there was more history of reading to write about.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)