Jack was sad. His little doggy had just died. Jack loved his dog; it was his pride and joy. Lala, who had been a small black toy poodle, had been Jack's best friend since the time Jack was a young boy. Now at the ripe age of seventeen, Lala had been quite an old little dog. Jack had known Lala's time was near, but he never wanted to actually think about it. Reality was hitting him hard in the face now, though. It was time to face the truth.
All of a sudden, Jack heard his cell phone ring. It was Jack's favorite song, "Cyclone." Usually, Jack would find himself bopping his head along; he would maybe do a little jig. Today, however, he slowly just flipped his phone open and muttered, "Hello?"
From the other end of the line, Jack heard a lot of laughing and shouting. In a loud, slurred voice he heard his best friend, Sam, shout, "Dude! Where are you? Get over here now. You are missing out!" Jack took a deep breath and straightened out a little bit. Jack, as a freshman and sophomore, had been a starter on the football team. That came with a bit of baggage, and Jack knew that. Jack had a reputation for being the big man on campus; he was quite the partier. Jack knew he should probably go to this party or people would just not know what to do. Jack slipped on his mask, cleared his throat, pushed the image of Lala out of his mind and smoothly said, "Yeah man, I'll be there."
Jack pulled on some nice clothes, sprayed some cologne, and headed out the door. He showed up at Sam's house, still upset and deeply moved by the death of his ear dog, but put on a tough face and sucked it up. Sam answered the door and wrapped him in a man hug. "What is up, my man? Dude, where have you been? People started showing up hours ago!" Jack cleared his throat but did not really say anything back, just let his head fall back with a loud laugh. Jack grabbed a drink and had a great time for the rest of the night, according to everyone else. The truth, however, was that he was miserable the entire night. He missed Lala so very much, but he could not show it. It was a very sad night.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Wednesday, November 24, 2010
"The Pit and the Pendulum" Analysis
Edgar Allan Poe's "The Pit and the Pendulum" is a terrific example of Dark Romanticism. Taking place during the Inquisition, it tells a story of a man who has been thrown in prison for not admitting to a deed he had been accused of. The man wakes up unbound, but he does not know where he is and is afraid to open his eyes. When he does, all of his worst nightmares come true; he is surrounded by complete blackness. He continues to endure many terrible, torturous activities throughout his stay.
The one thing that stuck out to me so incredibly much about this story that was so different from other works we have read is the sense that there is no hope. While at the end, he does talk about finding hope, for the first three quarters of the story the man is absolutely hopeless. Very descriptive, dark, and dreary observations were made by the man, which served as another example of how this story fits the Dark Romanticism theme, and the man gave off the impression that there was really nothing else he could do. He spoke of the stories he had heard of the pit he was assuming to be in, and none of the stories ended well. To confirm my beliefs about his lack of hope, on page 267, he wrote in black and white, "I had little object - certainly no hope" (Poe 267).
In other literary styles, it seems as if the overall theme is overcoming an obstacle. While the man certainly did overcome obstacles in "The Pit and the Pendulum," it was portrayed in a different way. Instead of mentions of God, hope, and love, Poe instead wrote about "Fate" (Poe 264), despair, and unhappy thoughts. It seems that in the previous reading styles we have read, there has been a happier tone; the reader believed the main character would certainly make it out of a situation in a heroic way. However, in this story, the reader has really no inclination to believe the man will make it out alive. Romanticism is known for having a hero, someone that will go against the odds in order to save the day or himself. "The Pit and the Pendulum" is an exemplary example of Dark Romanticism; the man does indeed save himself, yet he is not necessarily viewed as the charming knight in shining armor that is portrayed in previous Romanticism.
Something else in the story I noticed that qualified "The Pit and the Pendulum" as Dark Romanticism was the mysteriousness of the writing and the fact that it could easily be viewed as demonic and improbable. The man speaks of writings on the wall with red, glowing, demonic eyes (Poe 273). This is an example of Romanticism because of the mystical value; it is Dark Romanticism because is sets an almost Satanic tone. It gives off a tone of deep, gut wrenching mysteriousness that is typical for a Dark Romanticism writing.
Overall, it is very obvious that "The Pit and the Pendulum" is an example of Dark Romanticism. There is a "hero," yet he is shown as a hero in a more dark and mysterious way than that of a typical Romanticism hero. He overcomes dark, demonic challenges in which others are trying to brutally kill him, and there is an overall gloomy and dreadful tone. Poe certainly did not fail in writing this mysterious and captivating work of Dark Romanticism.
WORKS CITED
Poe, Edger Allan. “The Pit and the Pendulum” In American Literature. Willhelm, Jeffory, comp. McGraw Hill. Columbus, 2009. Print.
The one thing that stuck out to me so incredibly much about this story that was so different from other works we have read is the sense that there is no hope. While at the end, he does talk about finding hope, for the first three quarters of the story the man is absolutely hopeless. Very descriptive, dark, and dreary observations were made by the man, which served as another example of how this story fits the Dark Romanticism theme, and the man gave off the impression that there was really nothing else he could do. He spoke of the stories he had heard of the pit he was assuming to be in, and none of the stories ended well. To confirm my beliefs about his lack of hope, on page 267, he wrote in black and white, "I had little object - certainly no hope" (Poe 267).
In other literary styles, it seems as if the overall theme is overcoming an obstacle. While the man certainly did overcome obstacles in "The Pit and the Pendulum," it was portrayed in a different way. Instead of mentions of God, hope, and love, Poe instead wrote about "Fate" (Poe 264), despair, and unhappy thoughts. It seems that in the previous reading styles we have read, there has been a happier tone; the reader believed the main character would certainly make it out of a situation in a heroic way. However, in this story, the reader has really no inclination to believe the man will make it out alive. Romanticism is known for having a hero, someone that will go against the odds in order to save the day or himself. "The Pit and the Pendulum" is an exemplary example of Dark Romanticism; the man does indeed save himself, yet he is not necessarily viewed as the charming knight in shining armor that is portrayed in previous Romanticism.
Something else in the story I noticed that qualified "The Pit and the Pendulum" as Dark Romanticism was the mysteriousness of the writing and the fact that it could easily be viewed as demonic and improbable. The man speaks of writings on the wall with red, glowing, demonic eyes (Poe 273). This is an example of Romanticism because of the mystical value; it is Dark Romanticism because is sets an almost Satanic tone. It gives off a tone of deep, gut wrenching mysteriousness that is typical for a Dark Romanticism writing.
Overall, it is very obvious that "The Pit and the Pendulum" is an example of Dark Romanticism. There is a "hero," yet he is shown as a hero in a more dark and mysterious way than that of a typical Romanticism hero. He overcomes dark, demonic challenges in which others are trying to brutally kill him, and there is an overall gloomy and dreadful tone. Poe certainly did not fail in writing this mysterious and captivating work of Dark Romanticism.
WORKS CITED
Poe, Edger Allan. “The Pit and the Pendulum” In American Literature. Willhelm, Jeffory, comp. McGraw Hill. Columbus, 2009. Print.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Literary Criticism of Poe's "The Raven"
"The Raven" might be the poem that made Edgar Allen Poe so famous. An intriguing work of art, it makes the reader have to think about the literal meanings and the figurative meanings in order for him or her to fully understand the overall meaning behind the poem.
According to Harold Bloom, "The Raven" is potentially one of "the most recognizable poems in American literature" (Bloom). Bloom praises the poem in his literary criticism, noting its captivating style that will pull readers in. One thing I think is really interesting in Bloom's criticism is his comparison of Edgar Allen Poe's "The Raven" to other famous works of American literature. For example, he compares the line scheme of "The Raven" to another famous poem called "Lady Geraldine's Courtship." According to Bloom, Poe was a very big fan of the lady who wrote that poem, Elizabeth Barrett, and may have been influenced by her style when writing "The Raven" (Bloom). Another comparison I thought was really intriguing was the comparison between the raven in Poe's poem and other birds that have appeared in other well known poems. Apparently, also appearing in English Romantic poetry was an albatross, a nightingale, and a skylark (Bloom). Poe also may have been influenced by these appearances; the birds were usually very symbolic, and Poe may have found that he liked the idea of the birds. Another thing Bloom mentions that may have influenced Poe to include a raven in his story was the Bible. Bloom mentions the typical symbolance of a raven, saying it is often portrayed in the Bible as "a visitor from the dark external world and an emblem of the darkness of grief within the speaker's soul" (Bloom). I find this to be very interesting. Obviously, things people read, see, and hear about are very influential, but the thought that even worldly, famous poets such as Poe were influenced by other stories that came before them that may not stand out today is a thought I have never really considered in depth before. It puts things in a new perspective.
In his literary criticism, Bloom continues to analyze Edgar Allen Poe's poem, comparing certain settings and events to other poems. For example, Bloom wrote that the setting of the night in which the poem took place was very much like that of "In Drear-Nighted December" by Keats (Bloom). Again, I think it is interesting how alike many poems are and the fact that ideas have been used from other works of art.
While Bloom himself wrote in a tone that implied he enjoyed the poem, he also wrote that he understood that some people were not a fan of "The Raven." Some people, apparently, viewed it as demonic or extremely depressing (Bloom). I understand how this could be said after reading the poem myself. While I do not necessarily think that it is really a big deal whatsoever, the bird does possess qualities that could be viewed as demonic, such as the fact that he randomly showed up one night and would not leave, as if trying to show his power. The raven also did make the poem a bit upsetting; when asked about a one true love, the raven would just keep on repeating "never more," which gave the impression that the one true love would never return. The poem was definitely dark and dreary, but I think it gave off the impression Poe was trying to make. I agree with Bloom when he calls it "haunting." It was certainly a very haunting work of art.
Bloom, Harold, ed. "'The Raven'." Edgar Allan Poe, Bloom's Major Poets. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishing, 1999. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= BMPEAP19&SingleRecord=True (accessed November 23, 2010).
According to Harold Bloom, "The Raven" is potentially one of "the most recognizable poems in American literature" (Bloom). Bloom praises the poem in his literary criticism, noting its captivating style that will pull readers in. One thing I think is really interesting in Bloom's criticism is his comparison of Edgar Allen Poe's "The Raven" to other famous works of American literature. For example, he compares the line scheme of "The Raven" to another famous poem called "Lady Geraldine's Courtship." According to Bloom, Poe was a very big fan of the lady who wrote that poem, Elizabeth Barrett, and may have been influenced by her style when writing "The Raven" (Bloom). Another comparison I thought was really intriguing was the comparison between the raven in Poe's poem and other birds that have appeared in other well known poems. Apparently, also appearing in English Romantic poetry was an albatross, a nightingale, and a skylark (Bloom). Poe also may have been influenced by these appearances; the birds were usually very symbolic, and Poe may have found that he liked the idea of the birds. Another thing Bloom mentions that may have influenced Poe to include a raven in his story was the Bible. Bloom mentions the typical symbolance of a raven, saying it is often portrayed in the Bible as "a visitor from the dark external world and an emblem of the darkness of grief within the speaker's soul" (Bloom). I find this to be very interesting. Obviously, things people read, see, and hear about are very influential, but the thought that even worldly, famous poets such as Poe were influenced by other stories that came before them that may not stand out today is a thought I have never really considered in depth before. It puts things in a new perspective.
In his literary criticism, Bloom continues to analyze Edgar Allen Poe's poem, comparing certain settings and events to other poems. For example, Bloom wrote that the setting of the night in which the poem took place was very much like that of "In Drear-Nighted December" by Keats (Bloom). Again, I think it is interesting how alike many poems are and the fact that ideas have been used from other works of art.
While Bloom himself wrote in a tone that implied he enjoyed the poem, he also wrote that he understood that some people were not a fan of "The Raven." Some people, apparently, viewed it as demonic or extremely depressing (Bloom). I understand how this could be said after reading the poem myself. While I do not necessarily think that it is really a big deal whatsoever, the bird does possess qualities that could be viewed as demonic, such as the fact that he randomly showed up one night and would not leave, as if trying to show his power. The raven also did make the poem a bit upsetting; when asked about a one true love, the raven would just keep on repeating "never more," which gave the impression that the one true love would never return. The poem was definitely dark and dreary, but I think it gave off the impression Poe was trying to make. I agree with Bloom when he calls it "haunting." It was certainly a very haunting work of art.
Bloom, Harold, ed. "'The Raven'." Edgar Allan Poe, Bloom's Major Poets. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishing, 1999. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= BMPEAP19&SingleRecord=True (accessed November 23, 2010).
Sunday, November 21, 2010
"The Raven" Analysis
Literal Meaning:
One night, as I was pondering life, nearly asleep, I heard something knocking on my door.
I thought to myself, "It must just be some visitor tapping on my door."
I remember the details of that December night very clearly.
I wished for tomorrow to come. I was reminded of Lenore, and I missed her.
I heard the curtains rustling, and I grew very excited and anxious. I called out to see who was there, but when I opened the door, no one was there.
I peered out into the darkness, but I saw nothing and heard nothing except for the echo of my own voice as I whispered, "Lenore."
I turned back into the room, upset, and then I heard the noise again.
I thought to myself, "There must be something hitting up against the window; it must be the wind. I'll go check it out."
I flung open the shutter, and there was a raven.
The bird just sat there, perched up upon my door.
I realized the bird was no ordinary raven, and I asked him what his name was.
The raven replied, "Nevermore."
I realized how rare it was to have this raven perched on my door, especially a raven with the name of Nevermore.
That word, "Nevermore," seemed to be the only thing the raven could say.
He sang the word very sadly.
I pulled up a seat in front of the door and sat there with the bird, trying to figure out why he kept repeating that word.
I sat there for some time trying to figure this out, when I finally caught on.
My thoughts came together.
I yelled at the bird, shouting that the Lord must have sent him to make me forget the memories of Lenore.
All the raven said was, "nevermore."
I accused the raved of being of a higher power, then asked if there was really balm in Gilead.
The raven said, "nevermore."
I then tried to find out if the raven, who had to be of a higher spirit, knew of Lenore.
The raven replied, "nevermore."
I shouted at the bird to leave and go back to his spiritual world, for he had given me no information.
I told him not to leave any remains behind.
I told him to go away.
I told him to make everything he had brought upon me here go away.
All he said in return was, "nevermore."
The bird did not leave; it is still perched there. My soul will never again be lifted.
Poetic Devices:
Poe uses many different poetic devices in this poem. He has a rhyme scheme; the pattern is ABABB. He also uses repetition; at the end of every line he either says, "nothing more," "ever more," or "Nevermore." Alliteration is used in the poem; for example, he says "doubting, dreaming dreams." Similes and metaphors are also used. One example of a simile is when Poe writes, "as if his soul in that one word he did outpour." Poe's use of poetic devices make the poem very much more dynamic; it gives more drama to the situation and allows for a clearer perspective.
Figurative Meaning:
Poe writes of a man that was affected very greatly by his love, Lenore. He thought about her and mourned over her loss all the time. When the man heard the tapping, he immediately thought of Lenore, and when he saw it was a raven that seemed to be spiritual and not of this world, he questioned it about his love, Lenore. The Raven did not answer his specific questions. Instead, the raven just kept repeating the word "Nevermore." The man grew upset and tried to make it leave, but the raven stayed perched on the man's door, repeating "nevermore" over and over. The man realized with a heavy heart that he would never again be with Lenore.
One night, as I was pondering life, nearly asleep, I heard something knocking on my door.
I thought to myself, "It must just be some visitor tapping on my door."
I remember the details of that December night very clearly.
I wished for tomorrow to come. I was reminded of Lenore, and I missed her.
I heard the curtains rustling, and I grew very excited and anxious. I called out to see who was there, but when I opened the door, no one was there.
I peered out into the darkness, but I saw nothing and heard nothing except for the echo of my own voice as I whispered, "Lenore."
I turned back into the room, upset, and then I heard the noise again.
I thought to myself, "There must be something hitting up against the window; it must be the wind. I'll go check it out."
I flung open the shutter, and there was a raven.
The bird just sat there, perched up upon my door.
I realized the bird was no ordinary raven, and I asked him what his name was.
The raven replied, "Nevermore."
I realized how rare it was to have this raven perched on my door, especially a raven with the name of Nevermore.
That word, "Nevermore," seemed to be the only thing the raven could say.
He sang the word very sadly.
I pulled up a seat in front of the door and sat there with the bird, trying to figure out why he kept repeating that word.
I sat there for some time trying to figure this out, when I finally caught on.
My thoughts came together.
I yelled at the bird, shouting that the Lord must have sent him to make me forget the memories of Lenore.
All the raven said was, "nevermore."
I accused the raved of being of a higher power, then asked if there was really balm in Gilead.
The raven said, "nevermore."
I then tried to find out if the raven, who had to be of a higher spirit, knew of Lenore.
The raven replied, "nevermore."
I shouted at the bird to leave and go back to his spiritual world, for he had given me no information.
I told him not to leave any remains behind.
I told him to go away.
I told him to make everything he had brought upon me here go away.
All he said in return was, "nevermore."
The bird did not leave; it is still perched there. My soul will never again be lifted.
Poetic Devices:
Poe uses many different poetic devices in this poem. He has a rhyme scheme; the pattern is ABABB. He also uses repetition; at the end of every line he either says, "nothing more," "ever more," or "Nevermore." Alliteration is used in the poem; for example, he says "doubting, dreaming dreams." Similes and metaphors are also used. One example of a simile is when Poe writes, "as if his soul in that one word he did outpour." Poe's use of poetic devices make the poem very much more dynamic; it gives more drama to the situation and allows for a clearer perspective.
Figurative Meaning:
Poe writes of a man that was affected very greatly by his love, Lenore. He thought about her and mourned over her loss all the time. When the man heard the tapping, he immediately thought of Lenore, and when he saw it was a raven that seemed to be spiritual and not of this world, he questioned it about his love, Lenore. The Raven did not answer his specific questions. Instead, the raven just kept repeating the word "Nevermore." The man grew upset and tried to make it leave, but the raven stayed perched on the man's door, repeating "nevermore" over and over. The man realized with a heavy heart that he would never again be with Lenore.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Journal #24
Many, many years ago, I was a young girl. Living in the capital city, crime was just booming. I was a bright, intelligent girl with a great imagination from reading so many books. The one problem with me was that I never could fall asleep easily. I would sometimes just lay in bed, thinking about my complex and complicated seven year old life. Sometimes I would read an entire book in one night; I was a very cool child.
Anyway, so this one night will stick out to me for the rest of my life. I was laying in bed like normal, and my parents had already gone to bed. Ever night, my mom would come in and kiss me good night before going to bed every night. She had already come in and done that many hours ago, so it was probably around midnight or a little bit after. So there I was, laying in bed, trying to fall asleep, when I heard it. Then I heard it again. There were footsteps coming from my kitchen. The way my house had been laid out was that so most of the house was on the upper floor: my room was next to my brothers' room, and next to that was the bathroom. Straight down the hall was the kitchen, and the room next to that was the living room. My parents' room was the only room that was not upstairs, and it was in the basement, down two flights of stairs.
The footsteps were getting louder. Then they retreated. Then they got louder. Then they retreated. There was someone walking around my kitchen! I had no idea what to do. I just lay there, hiding under my covers, trying not to breathe too loudly in case the man came into my room and saw that I was awake. I had no idea how long I stayed that like; all I know is that I was scared out of my mind. Taking a deep breath, I made a decision. I was going to run into the room my two brothers shared; that way, I was not alone. I closed my eyes, said a quick prayer, and ran for my life. I quietly slammed their door behind me, then stopped short. The footsteps were coming from the room I was now in. Except... they were not footsteps. My brother's snoring had been echoing through the house. I had been deceived by my all too imaginative brain.
Anyway, so this one night will stick out to me for the rest of my life. I was laying in bed like normal, and my parents had already gone to bed. Ever night, my mom would come in and kiss me good night before going to bed every night. She had already come in and done that many hours ago, so it was probably around midnight or a little bit after. So there I was, laying in bed, trying to fall asleep, when I heard it. Then I heard it again. There were footsteps coming from my kitchen. The way my house had been laid out was that so most of the house was on the upper floor: my room was next to my brothers' room, and next to that was the bathroom. Straight down the hall was the kitchen, and the room next to that was the living room. My parents' room was the only room that was not upstairs, and it was in the basement, down two flights of stairs.
The footsteps were getting louder. Then they retreated. Then they got louder. Then they retreated. There was someone walking around my kitchen! I had no idea what to do. I just lay there, hiding under my covers, trying not to breathe too loudly in case the man came into my room and saw that I was awake. I had no idea how long I stayed that like; all I know is that I was scared out of my mind. Taking a deep breath, I made a decision. I was going to run into the room my two brothers shared; that way, I was not alone. I closed my eyes, said a quick prayer, and ran for my life. I quietly slammed their door behind me, then stopped short. The footsteps were coming from the room I was now in. Except... they were not footsteps. My brother's snoring had been echoing through the house. I had been deceived by my all too imaginative brain.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
"Walden" Critical Analysis
Thoreau wrote "Walden" as an account of his time in isolation. Thoreau decided he wanted to get away from the city, away from modern life, and away from technology. In order to do this, he decided to go live in the woods without much to sustain him. He stated, "I wanted to live deep and such out all the marrow of life, to live so sturdily and Spartanlike as to put to rout all that was not life, to cut a broad swath and shave close, to drive life into a corner, and reduce it to its lowest terms (...)" (Thoreau 214). By saying this, Thoreau exclaimed how he wanted to kind of check out from life. He wanted to step back from the normal world in order to self reflect a little bit, which I definitely think is respectable.
Walter Harding wrote a critical analysis of Thoreau's "Walden." He discussed many different thoughts, including his own personal opinion as well as the general opinions of others. Many view Thoreau as hypocritical or not inspirational, but Harding seemed to disagree. He wrote, "In any one period of his life he was usually consistent. Contradictions can be found only if one places in juxtaposition statements Thoreau made at wide intervals of time" (Harding). I think this statement is very true. Many scholars believed that Thoreau was contradictory because of what he did; he spent time in isolation but then returned to a normal city life. Thoreau also would spend time with his sister at her completely modern house during those years. I agree with Harding though; Thoreau did stay consistent. His ideas would certainly change, but whose ideas always stay the same throughout their entire lives? As people get older, it is just human nature for their views to be altered a little bit. Scholars only looked at that one time frame, the time frame that occurred as Thoreau left the nature and returned to every day life. I think Harding worded his opinion very well; there is more to the puzzle than just one individual piece.
One thing Harding wrote stood out to me. It was not necessarily important to one's opinion of Thoreau, but I found it interesting just the same. Harding wrote, "In Walden particularly Thoreau made much of his desire for solitude. But one must be careful not to think him antisocial. When he traveled through the Maine woods and discovered true hermits living miles from any neighbor, he was appalled. He wanted merely to be able to be alone when he felt the need to be by himself, not to dwell in complete solitude" (Harding). I think this is a good point to make. Some readers, when reading "Walden," might think Thoreau had decided to live his life of solitude just because he was capable of doing it and had nothing better to do. After reading Harding's statement though, I found myself relating my life to Thoreau's. It makes me have more respect for the man. I thought about the fact that Thoreau had to live without technology; I did not really think about the fact that he was all alone though. To me, that would make the experience so much more difficult, although it does seem that you cannot live a life of solitude with other people around. Altogether, I think Harding did a very good job analyzing Thoreau's "Walden." He covered many different opinions; he was not biased. Harding also gave new insight to the work. I found it very insightful.
WORKS CITED
Harding, Walter. A Thoreau Handbook by Walter Harding: pp. 131-173 (New York University Press, 1959). © 1959 by New York University Press. Quoted as "Thoreau's Ideas" in Harold Bloom, ed. Henry David Thoreau, Bloom's BioCritiques. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishing, 2003. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= BCHDT05&SingleRecord=True (accessed November 17, 2010).
Thoreau, Henry David. “Walden” In American Literature. Willhelm, Jeffory, comp. McGraw Hill. Columbus, 2009. Print.
Walter Harding wrote a critical analysis of Thoreau's "Walden." He discussed many different thoughts, including his own personal opinion as well as the general opinions of others. Many view Thoreau as hypocritical or not inspirational, but Harding seemed to disagree. He wrote, "In any one period of his life he was usually consistent. Contradictions can be found only if one places in juxtaposition statements Thoreau made at wide intervals of time" (Harding). I think this statement is very true. Many scholars believed that Thoreau was contradictory because of what he did; he spent time in isolation but then returned to a normal city life. Thoreau also would spend time with his sister at her completely modern house during those years. I agree with Harding though; Thoreau did stay consistent. His ideas would certainly change, but whose ideas always stay the same throughout their entire lives? As people get older, it is just human nature for their views to be altered a little bit. Scholars only looked at that one time frame, the time frame that occurred as Thoreau left the nature and returned to every day life. I think Harding worded his opinion very well; there is more to the puzzle than just one individual piece.
One thing Harding wrote stood out to me. It was not necessarily important to one's opinion of Thoreau, but I found it interesting just the same. Harding wrote, "In Walden particularly Thoreau made much of his desire for solitude. But one must be careful not to think him antisocial. When he traveled through the Maine woods and discovered true hermits living miles from any neighbor, he was appalled. He wanted merely to be able to be alone when he felt the need to be by himself, not to dwell in complete solitude" (Harding). I think this is a good point to make. Some readers, when reading "Walden," might think Thoreau had decided to live his life of solitude just because he was capable of doing it and had nothing better to do. After reading Harding's statement though, I found myself relating my life to Thoreau's. It makes me have more respect for the man. I thought about the fact that Thoreau had to live without technology; I did not really think about the fact that he was all alone though. To me, that would make the experience so much more difficult, although it does seem that you cannot live a life of solitude with other people around. Altogether, I think Harding did a very good job analyzing Thoreau's "Walden." He covered many different opinions; he was not biased. Harding also gave new insight to the work. I found it very insightful.
WORKS CITED
Harding, Walter. A Thoreau Handbook by Walter Harding: pp. 131-173 (New York University Press, 1959). © 1959 by New York University Press. Quoted as "Thoreau's Ideas" in Harold Bloom, ed. Henry David Thoreau, Bloom's BioCritiques. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishing, 2003. Bloom's Literary Reference Online. Facts On File, Inc. http://fofweb.com/activelink2.asp?ItemID=WE54&SID=5&iPin= BCHDT05&SingleRecord=True (accessed November 17, 2010).
Thoreau, Henry David. “Walden” In American Literature. Willhelm, Jeffory, comp. McGraw Hill. Columbus, 2009. Print.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Journal #23
It was pitch black outside. Under my hut made of sticks and leaves, I shuddered in the violent wind. It was a chilly November night in the back woods of the Gower forest. More than anything, I wished for a small hand held heater or something to keep me warm, but I had nothing. All modern technology was gone; it was just nature and myself. I did have a few blankets and warm clothing, but it got to the point where I might as well have been wearing nothing, lying in a field of ice. It really would not have been so bad had the wind not been blowing, but the wind was like the ice monster himself blowing his fury all over my hut. In a normal, everyday circumstance, I would have just pulled out my phone or my iPod or something to distract myself from this harsh reality, but I had no technology! I could not do any of those things! I could not even send a status to facebook alerting all of my friends of my unfortunate night! I just did not know what to do. I do not rely solely on technology; I am a very active person and spend much of my time outside. However, this was just going a little tad bit too far. I was frozen solid; I felt like I would probably become some sort of human ice block before too long. It was painful and boring and I felt so helpless. Looking back, I should have done it in the summer or something where my fingers would not have frozen off like they did. In the summer time, the lack of technology really would not have bothered me at all, as I am a pretty free person. I do not need technology to make me happy. Yes, I do enjoy cell phones and facebook, but I can easily get by without them. Apparently that does not apply to when the weather is horrendous.
Monday, November 15, 2010
Thoreau vs. Ghandi
Personally, I think "Civil Disobedience" by Thoreau and Gandhi's "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March" are two incredibly different works. While I did find both writings interesting, I do not think the mindset was necessarily the same. Although the overall meaning was remotely similar, Thoreau and Gandhi are two very different people.
In Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience," Thoreau told the story of a time in which he was thrown in jail for a night because he refused to pay his taxes. He did not feel as if the government was right; he thought it was corrupt and wanted to express his disapproval. Since he did not pay his tax to the government, he was thrown in jail for a night, and he wrote "Civil Disobedience" about his night in jail. While I think it is interesting the way he described it, I also think he kind of just sounds like a new age hippie. Plus he really made no impact on anyone besides himself by doing this. I think he believed he was making an impact, but truthfully I think it was pointless. For example, he states, "Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man?" (227). By saying this, it makes me believe that Thoreau thought he was taking the step further; he was showing the government what he thought to be the right of a man. Put into a bigger perspective, though, he was just one man spending one night in jail. The government most likely did not care at all.
What I thought made Ghandi's writing so much different from Thoreau's is the fact that it actually did impact other people in the world. "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March" is written about Ghandi's testimonial with his followers; it is about how he wants them to make the government see their point of view even after he is gone. Ghandi's plan was to have his followers "protest the salt monopoly" (229) in order to open the eyes of the government. The government would have to notice this being done; they would have to step in and take legal action. Although Ghandi knew he was going to get in trouble for this, he was doing it anyway. He did not do it to find a peace or oneness with himself like Thoreau; he was doing this to make a change in the lives of the people to come after him. One thing Ghandi said that I really thought added to his speech was, "This is my hope and prayer. I wish these words of mine reached ever nook and corner of the land" (229). By saying this, I really think it shows how important it was to Ghandi to get his message across. Yes, I do think that Thoreau was a good man and that he was doing all that he could to go against the government in order to make it less corrupt, but he really did not do much to impact the community as well. He did write this passage, but actions speak louder than words, and I think his actions were more of a whisper than a shout. Ghandi, on the other hand, was shouting to the high heavens. He had come up with a plan that would cause actual tension on the government and would enable a change to actually potentially occur. While Thoreau and Ghandi had the same general idea in mind, Ghandi definitely made a stronger physical impact than Thoreau.
WORKS CITED
"Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau." The Transcendentalists - including Ralph Waldo Emerson - Henry David Thoreau - Others - Dial Magazine. Web. 15 Nov. 2010.
"Famous Speeches Of Gandhiji : On The Eve Of Historic Dandi March." Mani Bhavan - Gandhi Sangrahalaya: Mahatma Gandhi Museum & Reference Library. Web. 15 Nov. 2010.
In Thoreau's "Civil Disobedience," Thoreau told the story of a time in which he was thrown in jail for a night because he refused to pay his taxes. He did not feel as if the government was right; he thought it was corrupt and wanted to express his disapproval. Since he did not pay his tax to the government, he was thrown in jail for a night, and he wrote "Civil Disobedience" about his night in jail. While I think it is interesting the way he described it, I also think he kind of just sounds like a new age hippie. Plus he really made no impact on anyone besides himself by doing this. I think he believed he was making an impact, but truthfully I think it was pointless. For example, he states, "Is it not possible to take a step further towards recognizing and organizing the rights of man?" (227). By saying this, it makes me believe that Thoreau thought he was taking the step further; he was showing the government what he thought to be the right of a man. Put into a bigger perspective, though, he was just one man spending one night in jail. The government most likely did not care at all.
What I thought made Ghandi's writing so much different from Thoreau's is the fact that it actually did impact other people in the world. "On the Eve of the Historic Dandi March" is written about Ghandi's testimonial with his followers; it is about how he wants them to make the government see their point of view even after he is gone. Ghandi's plan was to have his followers "protest the salt monopoly" (229) in order to open the eyes of the government. The government would have to notice this being done; they would have to step in and take legal action. Although Ghandi knew he was going to get in trouble for this, he was doing it anyway. He did not do it to find a peace or oneness with himself like Thoreau; he was doing this to make a change in the lives of the people to come after him. One thing Ghandi said that I really thought added to his speech was, "This is my hope and prayer. I wish these words of mine reached ever nook and corner of the land" (229). By saying this, I really think it shows how important it was to Ghandi to get his message across. Yes, I do think that Thoreau was a good man and that he was doing all that he could to go against the government in order to make it less corrupt, but he really did not do much to impact the community as well. He did write this passage, but actions speak louder than words, and I think his actions were more of a whisper than a shout. Ghandi, on the other hand, was shouting to the high heavens. He had come up with a plan that would cause actual tension on the government and would enable a change to actually potentially occur. While Thoreau and Ghandi had the same general idea in mind, Ghandi definitely made a stronger physical impact than Thoreau.
WORKS CITED
"Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau." The Transcendentalists - including Ralph Waldo Emerson - Henry David Thoreau - Others - Dial Magazine. Web. 15 Nov. 2010.
"Famous Speeches Of Gandhiji : On The Eve Of Historic Dandi March." Mani Bhavan - Gandhi Sangrahalaya: Mahatma Gandhi Museum & Reference Library. Web. 15 Nov. 2010.
Friday, November 12, 2010
Journal #22
Sam was out shopping at Wal Mart. It was a normal day; he had woken up late, but it was a Saturday so it did not really matter. He had realized he had some shopping to do, so he headed out to Wal Mart, obviously, since that is the best place to shop besides Target. Sam only needed a few things: shampoo, shaving cream, and toothpaste. A young man at the ripe age of twenty three, he was finally living out on his own and doing well.
As Sam was pushing his shopping cart, two small children sprinted in front of him, shrieking and laughing. He brought his cart to a halt so that he would not hit them, and he laughed a little bit. He watched with a smile on his face as the two kids ran in a circle around him and then proceeded to take off somewhere else. Sam loved kids; he had a little brother of his own, and he planned to have a few kids himself someday soon.
Sam continued along his way, finding his shampoo and shaving cream. As he went behind the aisle to grab his toothpaste, he was stopped short by a shocking sight. A young woman was crying and holding on to the two kids while a large, mean looking man whispered something to her. Sam stepped back a little bit, so that he could see what was going on but they could not see him. However, one of the little kids spotted him, and wedged his way out of his mother's arms. When the big scary man turned his back for a brief second, the little boy ran to Sam, crying. Sam pulled the child aside and quietly asked him, "Are you okay?"
The boy shook his head. "That mean man told Mommy that he wanted us to go with him. We don't wanna go with him! He's big and yucky and he hit Mommy and made her cry." The boy's shoulders were shaking with his tears. Sam looked back up towards the boy's mother, other brother, and the man. The man was saying something into his cell phone, with his back still turned. Sam knew what he had to do. It was risky; he had his whole life out ahead of him and he could potentially get in trouble for this. He had to do it though. Sam, a strong man who had been an all-state wrestler and soccer player, quietly walked up to the large man, waited for him to turn around, and punched him in the face. Sam then proceeded to attack the man until he stopped fighting back, and then Sam walked to the woman and the children and embraced them. He stayed with them until security came to take him away.
As Sam was pushing his shopping cart, two small children sprinted in front of him, shrieking and laughing. He brought his cart to a halt so that he would not hit them, and he laughed a little bit. He watched with a smile on his face as the two kids ran in a circle around him and then proceeded to take off somewhere else. Sam loved kids; he had a little brother of his own, and he planned to have a few kids himself someday soon.
Sam continued along his way, finding his shampoo and shaving cream. As he went behind the aisle to grab his toothpaste, he was stopped short by a shocking sight. A young woman was crying and holding on to the two kids while a large, mean looking man whispered something to her. Sam stepped back a little bit, so that he could see what was going on but they could not see him. However, one of the little kids spotted him, and wedged his way out of his mother's arms. When the big scary man turned his back for a brief second, the little boy ran to Sam, crying. Sam pulled the child aside and quietly asked him, "Are you okay?"
The boy shook his head. "That mean man told Mommy that he wanted us to go with him. We don't wanna go with him! He's big and yucky and he hit Mommy and made her cry." The boy's shoulders were shaking with his tears. Sam looked back up towards the boy's mother, other brother, and the man. The man was saying something into his cell phone, with his back still turned. Sam knew what he had to do. It was risky; he had his whole life out ahead of him and he could potentially get in trouble for this. He had to do it though. Sam, a strong man who had been an all-state wrestler and soccer player, quietly walked up to the large man, waited for him to turn around, and punched him in the face. Sam then proceeded to attack the man until he stopped fighting back, and then Sam walked to the woman and the children and embraced them. He stayed with them until security came to take him away.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Emerson and the Work of Melancholia
I think "Emerson and the Work of Melancholia" was actually kind of interesting. Although it was very lengthy, it was quite informative. When reading works by Ralph Waldo Emerson such as "Nature" and "Self Reliance," it seemed very evident to me, and to other readers I am sure, that Emerson was a Romanticist. The flowery way he wrote, the way he related to nature so vividly, and his thoughts on human greatness all contributed to this thought. However, according to Mark Edmundson, Emerson rejected Romanticism later on in his life (Emerson). While Emerson was certainly considered a Romanticism writer, he gradually began to write against it until he rejected it completely (Emerson).
One thing I found interesting was that Emerson started using a Transcendentalist writing style after initially just using a Romanticist style (Emerson). Although Transcendentalism is just a break off of Romanticism, in my opinion it allowed Emerson to expand his thoughts a little bit more than he had, which I think in turn led to his complete rejection of Romanticism. Some might argue this point of view, but it makes sense to me. Since Emerson began drifting the slightest bit away from the general idea of Romanticism, maybe he began to see what it was like to not completely look at the world in a straight Romantic way.
In his later years, Emerson completely began rejecting Romanticism (Emerson). He began to act almost morose, writing about nature not in fact being the most important aspect of life. He wrote that the imagination was so incredibly powerful and dangerous; it was more powerful and compelling than even nature (Emerson). This shows such a change in him because before he had been so in love with nature and everything about it. His realization that imagination was more powerful than nature seemed to make him sad and depressed, and it led to his overall rejection of Romanticism. Emerson writes, "Thus we trace Fate, in matter, mind, and morals,—in race, in retardations of strata, and in thought and character as well. It is everywhere bound. or limitation. But Fate has its lord; limitation its limits; is different seen from above and from below; from within and from without. For, though Fate is immense, so is power, which is the other fact in the dual world, immense. If Fate follows and limits power, power attends and antagonizes Fate. We must respect Fate as natural history, but there is more than natural history" (Emerson)
This passage describes his view on nature as opposed to fate. Again, it is portrayed that nature is no longer the most important aspect of life. Fate is more powerful than natural history, which Emerson had previously ranted and raved about to no end. Emerson reached the dismal understanding that fate and a dreadful imagination can lead one down the wrong road, and it certainly ruined him. I think that "Emerson and the Work of Melancholia" is a sad but accurate representation of the literary life of Emerson, and it is both interesting and very compelling to think about.
One thing I found interesting was that Emerson started using a Transcendentalist writing style after initially just using a Romanticist style (Emerson). Although Transcendentalism is just a break off of Romanticism, in my opinion it allowed Emerson to expand his thoughts a little bit more than he had, which I think in turn led to his complete rejection of Romanticism. Some might argue this point of view, but it makes sense to me. Since Emerson began drifting the slightest bit away from the general idea of Romanticism, maybe he began to see what it was like to not completely look at the world in a straight Romantic way.
In his later years, Emerson completely began rejecting Romanticism (Emerson). He began to act almost morose, writing about nature not in fact being the most important aspect of life. He wrote that the imagination was so incredibly powerful and dangerous; it was more powerful and compelling than even nature (Emerson). This shows such a change in him because before he had been so in love with nature and everything about it. His realization that imagination was more powerful than nature seemed to make him sad and depressed, and it led to his overall rejection of Romanticism. Emerson writes, "Thus we trace Fate, in matter, mind, and morals,—in race, in retardations of strata, and in thought and character as well. It is everywhere bound. or limitation. But Fate has its lord; limitation its limits; is different seen from above and from below; from within and from without. For, though Fate is immense, so is power, which is the other fact in the dual world, immense. If Fate follows and limits power, power attends and antagonizes Fate. We must respect Fate as natural history, but there is more than natural history" (Emerson)
This passage describes his view on nature as opposed to fate. Again, it is portrayed that nature is no longer the most important aspect of life. Fate is more powerful than natural history, which Emerson had previously ranted and raved about to no end. Emerson reached the dismal understanding that fate and a dreadful imagination can lead one down the wrong road, and it certainly ruined him. I think that "Emerson and the Work of Melancholia" is a sad but accurate representation of the literary life of Emerson, and it is both interesting and very compelling to think about.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Journal #21
The views between Ralph Waldo Emerson and Benjamin Franklin were very different. Benjamin Franklin, or as his friends call him, Benjie, believed that we should do all these different virtuous things so that we would better ourselves as well as bettering the community. He believed in things like respect and honor; he thought that we should show these things to other people so that they could see our greatness, and at the same time we would be honoring them and doing good deeds towards the greater good. We would be bettering others and bettering ourselves at the same time! This is a great way to think in my opinion. However, it is very hard to do. Our class had to do a little thing about it where we would demonstrate those virtues every day and then journal about them, kind of like he did. It was not an easy task, I will tell you that. I do not really know how Benjie managed to do it for such a long time; he must have not been a very exciting person.
Ralph Waldo Emerson had a different way of thinking. He thought that we should basically just live for ourselves. He also had an interesting way of viewing death. His whole idea thing revolved mostly around nature; he said that we were created by nature, we lived in and with nature, and when we died our body would go back to nature. Since he thought like this, death really did not upset him very much. He had some close family members die, but he did not even mourn. He thought that since our bodies went back to nature, it was just how it was supposed to be and it should be thought of more as a beautiful thing than a sad thing. I guess this makes sense to me, but it would be difficult to truly believe that when faced with a challenge. Both men were very different, but they were both inspirational and influential.
Ralph Waldo Emerson had a different way of thinking. He thought that we should basically just live for ourselves. He also had an interesting way of viewing death. His whole idea thing revolved mostly around nature; he said that we were created by nature, we lived in and with nature, and when we died our body would go back to nature. Since he thought like this, death really did not upset him very much. He had some close family members die, but he did not even mourn. He thought that since our bodies went back to nature, it was just how it was supposed to be and it should be thought of more as a beautiful thing than a sad thing. I guess this makes sense to me, but it would be difficult to truly believe that when faced with a challenge. Both men were very different, but they were both inspirational and influential.
Monday, November 8, 2010
Journal #20
I think self reflection is a pretty important thing. One needs to look back on their behavior every now and then just to kind of check themselves out. I think it could potentially be really eye opening. Sometimes, people might not know that he or she is doing something idiotic, annoying, or just plain ignorant, but my doing a little self reflection they might realize it and be able to change. This is definitely a good thing. Self reflection can get out of hand, though. Some people "self reflect" way too often. These people become self conscious; they are forever trying to analyze their every move and it becomes all they can think about. That is definitely not a good thing. Those people usually become extremely insecure and and may suffer all the time. On the mic is a queen, now listen to me sing. This is just not a good thing! Too much self reflection can be destructive and potentially even fatal.
Personally, I do make it a point to self reflect every now and then. I am a really talkative person and I get really annoying. I am aware of this fact, but sometimes I do not realize when I am doing it until it is too late. For me, it is good to self reflect because it allows me to see when I just need to cool it. It also allows me to see what I need to change or what I should keep the same. Sometimes it is hard to do because I am obviously biased, but I still think it is helpful. I write a lot, and for me that is my form of self reflection kind of. I have a little journal thing that I occasionally write in, and that allows me to get my feelings out. Sometimes later I will then read through what I have written, and I will do a little self reflection. I will look back on my feelings and actions and see if I think they were understandable and reasonable at the time. This is a surefire way to make me a better person, and I really think that I benefit from it.
Personally, I do make it a point to self reflect every now and then. I am a really talkative person and I get really annoying. I am aware of this fact, but sometimes I do not realize when I am doing it until it is too late. For me, it is good to self reflect because it allows me to see when I just need to cool it. It also allows me to see what I need to change or what I should keep the same. Sometimes it is hard to do because I am obviously biased, but I still think it is helpful. I write a lot, and for me that is my form of self reflection kind of. I have a little journal thing that I occasionally write in, and that allows me to get my feelings out. Sometimes later I will then read through what I have written, and I will do a little self reflection. I will look back on my feelings and actions and see if I think they were understandable and reasonable at the time. This is a surefire way to make me a better person, and I really think that I benefit from it.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Journal #19
I think the United States is far from being ideal. People try to say that we are this perfect country because we are free and have such a diverse culture and there is no segregation or sweatshops or things that other countries have. We are this free country run by an amazing, powerful man who is going to change the world.
Frankly, I think that is horse poop. People that think like that do not know what they are talking about; they have obviously just been holed up in their own perfect lives or something. I doubt they think about the war that has been going on for almost ten years now. I doubt they consider all the changes that Obama has not made. Everybody hated Bush, and people thought he was our worst president and screwed everything up. Again, those people are idiots. Obama has done absolutely nothing positive for our country; he is just a great speaker and, to be put bluntly, is black. Because of these things, the younger generations seem to be in love with him, which I find ridiculous. We are definitely not living in an idea United States. People are ignorant and uninformed, and even though we supposedly have all these rights and freedoms, sometimes it seems that they do not apply to everybody. Personally I think our government is corrupt and should probably be cleaned up a little bit before our country is in shambles.
In an ideal United States, like I said, everybody would be informed and there would be no blockheads. Honestly though, I do not think the "ideal" United States is even possible to come upon. There is always going to be that one person who disagrees or tries to screw everything up. Just look at a high school class. There really is not an ideal way to be, because you have to be realistic. There is always going to be someone who is disruptive or argumentative, which ruins the "idealness" of it, but then if there was no person to bring upon that second opinion, we would basically be thinking and living in a box. There is no ideal way for the United States to be because we need that differentiation at times, but not all the time.
Frankly, I think that is horse poop. People that think like that do not know what they are talking about; they have obviously just been holed up in their own perfect lives or something. I doubt they think about the war that has been going on for almost ten years now. I doubt they consider all the changes that Obama has not made. Everybody hated Bush, and people thought he was our worst president and screwed everything up. Again, those people are idiots. Obama has done absolutely nothing positive for our country; he is just a great speaker and, to be put bluntly, is black. Because of these things, the younger generations seem to be in love with him, which I find ridiculous. We are definitely not living in an idea United States. People are ignorant and uninformed, and even though we supposedly have all these rights and freedoms, sometimes it seems that they do not apply to everybody. Personally I think our government is corrupt and should probably be cleaned up a little bit before our country is in shambles.
In an ideal United States, like I said, everybody would be informed and there would be no blockheads. Honestly though, I do not think the "ideal" United States is even possible to come upon. There is always going to be that one person who disagrees or tries to screw everything up. Just look at a high school class. There really is not an ideal way to be, because you have to be realistic. There is always going to be someone who is disruptive or argumentative, which ruins the "idealness" of it, but then if there was no person to bring upon that second opinion, we would basically be thinking and living in a box. There is no ideal way for the United States to be because we need that differentiation at times, but not all the time.
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Journal #18
The sun shines so bright.
Does it ever get burned?
Does it ever start to cry
When away it has turned?
A beautiful sight
Until one looks too close
And sees not want they want to.
And although it's supposed
To bring light to the darkness,
Does the sun ever need
Someone's hand to hold onto
Or a shoulder to lean
Its sad, lonely head on?
But this never could work.
Once the sun's guard is let down,
The world goes berserk.
Everyone needs the sun
To shine bright just for them,
Retreating back to the sky,
The sun is alone once again.
Does it ever get burned?
Does it ever start to cry
When away it has turned?
A beautiful sight
Until one looks too close
And sees not want they want to.
And although it's supposed
To bring light to the darkness,
Does the sun ever need
Someone's hand to hold onto
Or a shoulder to lean
Its sad, lonely head on?
But this never could work.
Once the sun's guard is let down,
The world goes berserk.
Everyone needs the sun
To shine bright just for them,
Retreating back to the sky,
The sun is alone once again.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
"In Peace" Poem Analysis
Literally, the poem "In Peace" by John Greenleaf Whittier is very descriptive. It tells of a riverside blooming with flowers and colors. It describes a very peaceful setting, filled with waterfalls and beautiful sights. Whittier uses many colors to describe the setting, and he creates a very peaceful scene. When reading this poem with a literal on look, one would understand that Whittier finds nature to be peaceful; it is a comfortable place for him. Towards the end of the poem, Whittier writes about death, and he describes it as not terrible, but instead as a way of connecting with nature. He says that if one realizes the beauty of nature, dying is not all that terrible.
Figuratively, this poem can be taken in a different direction. When I read the poem, I had an image of someone finally finding peace in the nature. In a crazy and hectic world, sometimes it is good to just step back and enjoy what God has given you. The waterfalls and beautiful flowers symbolize the serenity and wonder of the earth, and it is important that we realize that. When we see the creations God has given to us, we will learn to appreciate God and maybe see Him as a higher creation; He is someone that can truly create everything. Through this, maybe one could learn to believe in God. If this happens, dying is actually not a bad thing. They will go to Heaven with God and be in peace. Figuratively, I think this poem is about finding peace on Earth so that when it is your time to die, you will have peace with God.
This poem uses many different literary devices. Whittier is extremely descriptive; he describes all the different colors and shapes of the nature. Whittier also uses imagery, which allows the reader to truly see what Whittier was seeing when he wrote the poem. This is incredibly important because otherwise a reader might interpret the poem in a way that was unintended by Whittier.
"In Peace" is a beautiful poem about finding your inner peace both on Earth and with God. Its literal and figurative meanings are somewhat different, yet each portrays a beautiful and peaceful idea.
Figuratively, this poem can be taken in a different direction. When I read the poem, I had an image of someone finally finding peace in the nature. In a crazy and hectic world, sometimes it is good to just step back and enjoy what God has given you. The waterfalls and beautiful flowers symbolize the serenity and wonder of the earth, and it is important that we realize that. When we see the creations God has given to us, we will learn to appreciate God and maybe see Him as a higher creation; He is someone that can truly create everything. Through this, maybe one could learn to believe in God. If this happens, dying is actually not a bad thing. They will go to Heaven with God and be in peace. Figuratively, I think this poem is about finding peace on Earth so that when it is your time to die, you will have peace with God.
This poem uses many different literary devices. Whittier is extremely descriptive; he describes all the different colors and shapes of the nature. Whittier also uses imagery, which allows the reader to truly see what Whittier was seeing when he wrote the poem. This is incredibly important because otherwise a reader might interpret the poem in a way that was unintended by Whittier.
"In Peace" is a beautiful poem about finding your inner peace both on Earth and with God. Its literal and figurative meanings are somewhat different, yet each portrays a beautiful and peaceful idea.
Monday, November 1, 2010
Thanatopsis Analysis
Poems can have many different meanings. A poem can be taken literally. It can also be taken figuratively. These two different methods are incredibly different from each other.
In Bryant's poem, he writes about death and becoming one with the world. From a literal perspective, one will see that Bryant believes that humans die and are buried. When this happens, they become one with nature. It does not matter what your social or monetary status on Earth while you were alive had been; every single person winds up with the same fate. When a person is dead and buried, they are mixed in with the soil and eventually become "one" with the Earth. Therefore, all the nature we see around us today are the remains of those people who have lived before us. I think that this is kind of a beautiful perspective; however, it is also kind of creepy. I think it is definitely an interesting way to look at things. Literally, Bryant writes that we will all become a part of nature one day and live on together forever through its beauty.
This poem can also be taken figuratively. Although it says pretty plain and simple that everyone will be immortal though nature, one might take it even further. When understanding something figuratively, the reader must take the information that is given to them and infer things from it. When I read Bryant's poem, I thought that he meant that since everyone will wind up in the same place anyway, do not spend time worrying about everything around you. Do not waste time trying to be better than someone else, but instead enjoy the life that you are given and make the most out of it while you still can. I also think that, figuratively, the poem is saying not to fear death. While it portrays it as a cold, sad, lonely thing, the poem also talks about how you will never be alone, and you will become of a beauty that people for years to come will enjoy.
There are many poetic devices in this poem. Overall, I think Bryant uses a lot of imagery. He describes the trees and the nature very vividly, which gives the reader a deeper insight and a better image of what he is trying to portray. He also uses metaphors, which I think adds to the overall scheme of the poem; it makes it more interesting and captivating.
I actually enjoyed this poem. I think both the literal and figurative meanings of the poem were insightful and strangely beautiful. It made me think, which I think means that the author did his job well.
In Bryant's poem, he writes about death and becoming one with the world. From a literal perspective, one will see that Bryant believes that humans die and are buried. When this happens, they become one with nature. It does not matter what your social or monetary status on Earth while you were alive had been; every single person winds up with the same fate. When a person is dead and buried, they are mixed in with the soil and eventually become "one" with the Earth. Therefore, all the nature we see around us today are the remains of those people who have lived before us. I think that this is kind of a beautiful perspective; however, it is also kind of creepy. I think it is definitely an interesting way to look at things. Literally, Bryant writes that we will all become a part of nature one day and live on together forever through its beauty.
This poem can also be taken figuratively. Although it says pretty plain and simple that everyone will be immortal though nature, one might take it even further. When understanding something figuratively, the reader must take the information that is given to them and infer things from it. When I read Bryant's poem, I thought that he meant that since everyone will wind up in the same place anyway, do not spend time worrying about everything around you. Do not waste time trying to be better than someone else, but instead enjoy the life that you are given and make the most out of it while you still can. I also think that, figuratively, the poem is saying not to fear death. While it portrays it as a cold, sad, lonely thing, the poem also talks about how you will never be alone, and you will become of a beauty that people for years to come will enjoy.
There are many poetic devices in this poem. Overall, I think Bryant uses a lot of imagery. He describes the trees and the nature very vividly, which gives the reader a deeper insight and a better image of what he is trying to portray. He also uses metaphors, which I think adds to the overall scheme of the poem; it makes it more interesting and captivating.
I actually enjoyed this poem. I think both the literal and figurative meanings of the poem were insightful and strangely beautiful. It made me think, which I think means that the author did his job well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)