You Now Have 40 Minutes!

2012 AP LITERATURE AND COMPOSITION

FREE-RESPONSE QUESTIONS (FORM A)

ENGLISH LITERATURE AND COMPOSITION 

SECTION II

Total Time - 2 hours

Question 1

Read the following poem carefully. Then, write a well-organized essay in which you analyze the literary devices the poet uses to convey her attitude towards the subject matter. Be sure to recognize the poem's syntax and use of similes as it relates to the poem.

Still I Rise by Maya Angelou

You may write me down in history
With your bitter, twisted lies,
You may trod me in the very dirt
But still, like dust, I'll rise.

Does my sassiness upset you?
Why are you beset with gloom?
'Cause I walk like I've got oil wells
Pumping in my living room.

Just like moons and like suns,
With the certainty of tides,
Just like hopes springing high,
Still I'll rise.

Did you want to see me broken?
Bowed head and lowered eyes?
Shoulders falling down like teardrops.
Weakened by my soulful cries.

Does my haughtiness offend you?
Don't you take it awful hard
'Cause I laugh like I've got gold mines
Diggin' in my own back yard.

You may shoot me with your words,
You may cut me with your eyes,
You may kill me with your hatefulness,
But still, like air, I'll rise.

Does my sexiness upset you?
Does it come as a surprise
That I dance like I've got diamonds
At the meeting of my thighs?

Out of the huts of history's shame
I rise
Up from a past that's rooted in pain
I rise
I'm a black ocean, leaping and wide,
Welling and swelling I bear in the tide.
Leaving behind nights of terror and fear
I rise
Into a daybreak that's wondrously clear
I rise
Bringing the gifts that my ancestors gave,
I am the dream and the hope of the slave.
I rise
I rise
I rise.

Senior Project

My thought towards the whole idea of a senior project was that it was a waste of time. I don't say this because I was lazy in doing it or anything, I just feel like we could've used all that time to focus more on the AP exam itself. What I found helpful in the project was the college, career, and scholarships research form. That forced me to take a deeper look into my future. The whole idea of having a senior notebook was complicated, but I enjoyed my end result. Now I can have something to look back on, sort of like a book of accomplishments.

Moving on to the research paper itself. I didn't enjoy writing it as much as I enjoyed learning all of the new information about my topic. To make the overall project more worthwhile, however, I think that the research paper should be more about plans after high school in order to get to your desired career. Things like how many years of college, what classes to take, your major, etc. Then they can go on to giving a brief overview of that career and mention things such as its growth rate and such. With all the time that was set aside for this project, changing it to this way would make it a whole lot more useful for future references.

Joe Smoe!

Dear Joe,

I've heard about how Pip has been treating you since he receieved his unexpected fortune. I'm here to tell you, don't take it to heart. At the end of the day he really does love and care about you. It's just that, well .. He's still a young boy. His priorities aren't straightened out yet and he believes that all of this new found fortune has opened up many doors for him. He's been blinded and mistaken, but he will come to his senses soon enough. As a father figure to Pip, you have done all that you can possibly do. You even educated yourself for him. You are a great man so there's no need to dwell on Pip.

On other news, I've heard about your marriage to Biddy. I want to personally congratulate you on that. She's a great girl and I bet you guys are great for each other. Best wishes to you and your new bride! Well, it's time for me go go to school now. Take it easy over there :)

Your New Friend,
Sandy Nguyen

The Eternal Struggle

Dear Diagnostic C,

You weren't as difficult to complete like I thought you would be. Compared to the others, you were the easiest. It seemt as though you were more concentrated on the tone, literary devices, etc. of the poems and passages than you were about inferring it. That didn't settle too well with me. For once, I actually understood all of the poems and proses. However, I had trouble when it came down to the vocabulary. There were certain things that I had difficulty remembering like "anaphora", "assonance", "apostrophe", etc. as well as the types of poems. Let me remind you that literature is not my forte. On the bright side, I was able to read all of the poems, proses, and questions with a tad bit of time leftover to run back through a couple of questions.

To improve our relationship, I think you should make me a list; a list of all of the common literary devices seen on the AP test. Then I could probably create some index cards. I know it sounds very elementary, but we have to start from the ground up if this is going to work out. We can also gear our sponges toward tone/literary device type questions. It's just a suggestion. Next time, I'll be ready for you.

Your Test Taker,
Sandy Nguyen

Oh Oprah!

Sandy Nguyen

Mr. Beddingfield

AP Literature/Composition

March 12, 2012

Beloved

The 1998 movie adaptation of Beloved, directed by Jonathan Demme, wasn’t an overall good portrayal of the novel. The scenes were all very brief and it provided few details and/or moments for the characters to fully develop. 

The first few chapters of the book were presented within the first five minutes of the movie-if even. It starts right at the haunting of 124 when the spirit injures their dog, Here Boy, and Sethe’s two sons, Howard and Buglar, runs away from home. There was nothing much about Baby Suggs or her colors which was one of the main motifs in the novel. 

Eight years later we have the arrival of Paul D. Let me start off by saying that he was not nearly as handsome as I thought he would have been whatsoever! He was an old, hairy, and crusty man . Yuck, Beloved! The “red light” that appears as Paul D is entering 124 was also a bit harsh and unrealistic. I found that and the combination of camera angles, creepy music, and kid voices to be very odd. As for Sethe, I had no idea that Oprah was to play the role. She was a pretty good actor, but I found myself too stuck on who she was (Oprah Winfrey) to concentrate on her acting. 

Denver, on the other hand, was just as I expected her to be-attention hungry. Beloved was a bit too much for me though. She had bugs crawling all over her and that face, those eyes. They were like those of a play doll. When she first opened her mouth it creeped me the hell out. I guess you can say I eventually got use to it. From the novel, I thought that Beloved eventually got herself together and behaved more human-like than she did in the movie. She looked like a zombie or a possessed being with her eerie, baby-like movements. 

Despite the brevity of the movie in comparison to the novel, there were certain aspects of the movie that the book itself didn’t contain; for example, music. Because movies do not have a certain type of diction, they have music instead. The opening scene had some African singing in the background. The carnival had some content music, Sethe’s discovery that Halle was in the barn with her that one night had sad music, there was relief music when her and Amy reached the river, and so on so forth. There were also a couple scenes of trees, nature, and water. 

However, the movie was still a poor portrayal of the novel. The flashback scenes were very quick and back and forth. It just wasn’t as deep as Toni Morrison’s Beloved. There weren’t even any roses when the family went to the carnival. And how would I know that Sethe’s sudden urge to urinate when she first sees Beloved has anything to do with labor? If I were to only watch the movie (having never read the book before), I would be missing out on alot of big key points, motifs, symbols, and themes. The movie is like an animated Sparknotes of the novel. You may get the jist of the plot, but you can’t unfold the hidden layers it’s meaning unless you read it. Literary devices actually do make a difference.

Who Won the Debate?

Haha! The real question is, "Are you seriously asking me that?"

I honestly believe that my group won the debate today. We brought up many valid points and presented them in a firm and precise manner. To me, the other group was very repetitive and doubtful in their presentations. Their information was unorganized and the speaker for their conclusion statement was quite confused herself. How are you going to try to persuade something to us when it doesn't even seem like you're sure of it yourself?

To keep the debate going, however, if prejudice doesn't matter then why are people being bullied or even killed for being "gay" or "lesbian"? Are you saying that that issue is no big deal? If it really didn't matter then there will be no protests, rallies, or even acts such as "Don't Ask Don't Tell." All of these exist because prejudice matters. BAM BANG BOOM!

Yeah, I just wanted to get that off of my chest. I believe we won and I believe that you, Mr. Beddingfield, know that we've won. End of my blog.

Now, about that cookie ...

Make It RAIN!

http://www.whats-your-sign.com/symbolism-of-water.html

Can you guys see the connection between this article and Toni Morrison's Beloved?

It's pretty obvious. That's right, H20! As mentioned by Mr. Beddingfield this novel is drowned in water; figuratively speaking, of course. There's Sethe giving birth and Beloved coming out from a stream. Then there's Paul D escaping from a prison in Georgia because the rain freed him from the underground box he was locked in. Beloved also drinks alot of water when she first appears in the novel and Sethe's mother threw all of her children overboard except for her. Water, water, and more water!

The title of the article that I chose is called, "Symbolism of Water". It basically states that water is a universal undertone of purity and fertility. Furthermore, it also symbolizes one's subconscious, reflection, renewal, blessing, and life considering that 70% of our body is made up of water. This literary archetype has more one than just one specific meaning in this novel; it, alone, has many. In essence, water can be a sort of medium in which we travel back and forth from past to present and birth to death. Circle of life sort of thing going on here.

This article provided me with a more clear and concise definition of water in the literary world thus improving my understanding of this novel. I chose this topic because it's a major aspect in Beloved and because it was the first one that popped into my mind, of course. Oh and for the record, it's raining outside or thunder storming I should say.


Oh, the irony.

"The Past Never Dies" CHOOSE SONG

If the past were to just die, then we wouldn't be able to gradually become the person that we are now. We are who we are today because of our past. It has, in a sense, molded us into ourselves; into our skin. Our past is us.


Although the past is, well, in the past it continues to live on in the form of our memories. That moment in our lives may have already passed by, but it's remnants will forever remain and it is nearly impossible to remove it from history.

For Sethe, her past seems to be colliding with her present. There's a lot of flashbacks that goes on in this novel made almost undistinguishable by Morrison. We, the readers, don't even realize that its a flashback until we're back in the present again. This type of syntax contributes to the idea of Sethe's selflessness. As much as she tries to repress her memories of the past, she only seems to be getting closer and closer to its confrontation; the unexpected arrival of Beloved. In my opinion she is Sethe's past. Not only is she identifiable with Sethe's first born girl (whose now dead), she also effortlessly gets her to share stories about her past that she thought she was already erased from her mind. This just proves the point that the past can not truly die since it still existed in her subconsciousness. And just for the record the past can't die because it is not a living thing in the first place. Haha, take that!

As for the Piano Lesson the past obviously still lives on in the form of ghosts. The whole book (to me) was about the past. The piano was the family's legacy and it was a battle against that versus cold, hard cash. Boy Willie resembled his father while Berniece her mother. Its almost as if they had lived on through these two. But enough about that, this "novel" is nothing compared to Morrison's Beloved.

Just because you can't go back and change it doesn't mean that its not there. Oh, its there all right.

... Forever.

Benchmarks Are So NOT My Thing

.. So why did almost all students miss questions 4, 7, 9, 13, 21, 24, & 54?

Number 4: When I read this question during the benchmark, it really made no sense to me (partially because I was rushing). I chose answer 'E' because I saw the words art and nature; two things the passage was about. Looking back on it, however, the correct answer 'D' makes more sense because it was a roundabout way of simply saying Oxford borrowed that street's name. The question asks us to give a reason to why a character might call a line "vilely phrased". The vocabulary used tripped me up a bit and I didn't thoroughly look through all of the answer choices.

Number 7: The question itself didn't confuse me as did lines 51-53. I actually understood this question. I just didn't exactly know how to express my thought so I chose 'D' instead of 'A'.  The question simply asks for the sentence's purpose. It was more tricky than it was difficult. It may have slightly been the vocabulary that messed me up as well.


Number 9: Now for this question, I actually got it right. YES! It asks us to compare Vivian's two speeches and find a similarity between the two. I found that it repeats the argument that the failures of nature inspire people to create (art & furniture). Many students may have gotten this question because instead of looking at both of the speeches, they only looked at one.


Number 13: Ahh comedy, of course! Obviously we have no sense of humor and that is why most of us got this one wrong. Seeing the answer now I can sort of see why it is what it is. I chose 'E' because it was a conversation between the two speakers, but I guess it wasn't witty. A closer reading of answer choice 'C', however, does make more sense because Vivian's viewpoints of nature is indeed paradoxical inversions of conventional viewpoints. I'll just blame the "comedy" aspect of the question for messing me up, lol.


Number 21: Oh look, grammar!  I remember going back to this question and just guessing on it, but I knew it had something to do with the word lift so 1 point for me. This question asks us for the function of a word. It's difficult because we have to repeatedly go back and forth from the line to the answer choices to see what makes the most sense. After spending so much time on it, you just give it an educated guess and move on.


Number 24: Idio-what? I didn't have much clue to what this question was asking, but I guess 'A' wasn't much of an educated guess. Considering that it was a poem, I should have just chosen "meter" as my answer. I know for a fact that almost everyone got this one wrong because of that word: idiosyncratic.


Number 54: I have no good reason for getting this one wrong besides the fact that I panicked at having 15 seonds left and just randomly marked something that looked right. I dislike the way those questions are phrased anyways: What BESTS describes Joe's speech? With that being said, there's always two choices that seems to be right.


My goals for the rest of the semester are as follows:

For the Benchmark, I plan to go through and review the last two ones that we've taken so far one by one. I'm also going to try to look for some online tools to help me and attend tutorial if my schedule permits. Maybe I'll even read a passage and try to answer the questions 3-5 times a week. Build up some stamina for these things!

For the essays, I plan on reviewing notes that you have previously given us on how to score a '9'. I'm going to look over the tone sheet, literary devices, etc. I also want to try to be able to look at random prompts and be able to spot specific ideas in it, but also tie it to one big one as well. I'll read some of my other classmate's essays and compare them with mine.



Azian student must get uh duh A plus plus in class or no rice uh fo u!

Go Pick On Someone Your Own Size!

The debate today turned out quite interesting. First and foremost I would like to point out the fact that you, Mr. Beddingfield, changed your position a tad bit today. On Friday you said that you were going for the book being banned from all schools and today you were leaning towards it being praised over other books by teaching it in a classroom setting. I feel as though the debate was just beginning to pick up and we weren't able to express all of our great ideas/points with the time given. It was especially difficult given the fact that everyone gathered their own information and we had a limited time to decipher which point would best represent our position. Plus, everyone was throwing ideas left and right so that sorta put a lot of pressure on us to represent the entire class as a whole. You, on the other hand, were able to represent yourself and all of your brilliant ideas independently making it much more easier and concise. 

But if it makes you feel any better, you beat a bunch of teenagers in the debate.

To improve this activity in the future, I think that we should be allowed more time to review all of our ideas with our classmates. You should also not ease drop in our conversation prior to the debate. Oh and you should split the class in half instead. I find that more fair.

That is all.

Literature has left me speechless

The review that I liked, enjoyed, and agreed with the most was the one by T.S. Eliot ... Obviously! And no, its not just because that was the article that I was assigned. I find that Eliot's perspective and ideas about the book was quite interesting and agreeable. For starters, it is a masterpiece. I mean think about it: A whole book was written just to argue if Huck, one of the characters in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, was black (Shelly Fisher Fishkin). That's pretty BOSS if you ask me!

Eliot does a great job with talking about all of the major aspects of the novel. He right away mentions the boy and the river (two key symbols) and states that they are what makes the book great. One of the key ideas that Eliot talked about that stood out to me was Huck's point of view. Twain wrote the novel so that the audience would see it through Huck's eyes. This did indeed give it a more realistic feel. His comparison of the two characters, Tom and Huck, were also quite interesting. Tom is said to have imagination while Huck has vision. This is the result of all the books that Tom has read and Huck's expedite to mature and think as an adult ("unlike other boys, he has to bear the responsibility of a man"). What I really loved about Eliot's article was when he characterized that Huck was a passive observer and Jim was a submissive sufferer. There are many instances in the novel where Huck would just sort of sit in the background when there's action going on and Jim suffering because of that. For example: Huck knew that the Duke and the Dauphin were not who they claimed to be and were very malicious people. However, he just went with the flow and that eventually led to Jim being sold to Silas Phelps. Eliot also talks about how Twain's way of writing lets you experience the river rather than just hear about it. It is a "dictator to the raft/steamboat" that controls the voyage of Huck and Jim. He concludes the article by stating that the novel's ending simply just disappears. There's no tragic or happy ending, it just ends with "I been there before." This reinforces the idea of letting people judge things for themselves similiar to how Huck allows the world to judge him rather than he judge it himself.

I've come to the conclusion that this novel is indeed a masterpiece. I'm with all of the critics out there that have positively commented on it! Yes it has been a century long controversial novel, but I think that's what's so great about it. There are so many formed opinions, ideas, and views of this novel from so many great literary people that it just can't be ignored. When Twain wrote this book, we can all assume that he did not intend for it to become such a hit as it has. Like Huck, his novel was quite innocent and he wrote it the way that HE believed a child would have given the same circumstances.

Just remember that at the end of the day, it is just a book. Go easy on the guy! He's dead for god's sake, he no longer has a voice. Two thumbs up for the awesome packet that Mr. Beddginfield has put together for us. I'm overwhelmed by all these mind blowing reviews that I no longer have anything to say.

The 5-Year-Old Screenwriter Of "Fast Five"

http://www.theonion.com/video/today-now-interviews-the-5yearold-screenwriter-of,20188/

This video is Today Now!'s interview of the 5-year-old-screenwriter of "Fast Five." Judging from it's title, you can already tell that this video is not entirely true or at least there's something fishy about it. Obviously Chris Morgan was not the real screenwriter of "Fast Five." He's a kindergartner for god's sake! This, however, pokes fun at the movie's simplicity. It may even be suggesting that the story line is so simple even a kid can write it when Jim says, "Now I understand that the movie pretty much stays 100% true to your original script." Note that it says he spent a whole DAY working on the script which is written in crayon ... (cue laughter) Hahaha! Tracy even asks when Chris was writing this were there certain elements that he wanted to include. He replies with, "I want the cars to drive fast and some to explode." Wow, what a complex idea. (See what I did there? Haha!) She then proceeds to talk about the return of Jordana Brewster in which Chris replies "She's a girl and she likes to kiss so she doesn't play with the cars, but sometimes she does; mostly just the boys." She comments by saying, "All the female characters are so strong!" This part of the video pokes fun at how woman are portrayed in this movie and their subordinate roles to men. They are basically just a bunch of "boy toys" next to cars. Next, Jim asks Chris is there any chance that he'll be seeing another Fast & Furious sequel to which Chris replies, "Yes, 600!" Now c'mon guys, what movie have you seen has 600 sequels!? Quite frankly, that's ridiculous impossible. The point they're trying to get at is that there's one too many sequels as if there's no end to it. And before the interview is over, he ends up falling asleep in his chair.

You can pretty much tell that this video is faux from the tone of the speaker's voice. For me, I sensed the sarcasm when they were appraising the movie and talking about how "great" it was. There was also some over-exaggeration which sealed the deal. Oh and did you guys pay attention to the yellow box at the bottom of the screen while the interview was going on? Um, so sarcastic! Instead of coming out and saying how they really feel, they made this video. "Why?" you must ask. Well for starters it's freaking hilarious! Way better than sitting here listening to someone rant about something. On a more serious level though, comedy is a great median for authors to connect with their audiences. By bringing down the seriousness of the subject, it is easier for the audience to relate to and take in the information presented.

[Insert clever title here]

Dear Mark Twain,

Although I've heard a lot about you, I haven't read any of your novels up until now. I must say that you are indeed an excellent writer. Your novel Huckleberry Finn is quite an impressive piece of work. It comes off as a simple story about a boy named Huck and his adventures down a river, but it is sooo much deeper than that (as expected). Props to you for creating layers upon layers upon layers of symbols, themes, and motifs in this novel. Its so "deep" that I don't know what to do with it or where to start. Well, maybe I do ..

So I know you've probably been asked this a lot, but what really motivated you to write a novel such as this one using the language that you did? Moreover, what is your personal take on the "N" word? It is easy to see how this novel can become the center of controversy amongst readers and writers, but more props to you for being different and really challenging the literary world. I mean someone had to do it (eventually). Anywho, back to the novel.

I must say, so far so good. Although the dialect gets a little hard to read sometimes, it really puts a nice touch to the novel. I really like the concept that you have going on as well; how Huck and Jim (two totally different classes of people) are running away from their problems by traveling down the river of freedom together. They both have their own problems and reasons for running away, but as they spend more and more time together on the raft it seems to me as though they've come together as one. As if to say that they're not that different from each other at all. This leads me to think of the raft as a symbol of unity. See?? Now THAT'S deep!

Other opinions about Huckleberry Finn, hmm .. Well I kind of also feel as though it's a bit contradicting. Or at least Huck is. There's constant battles between what's good, bad, right, wrong, so on and so forth. It really gets me thinking about what is the right thing to do? For example, turn Jim in because (according to society) that's the right thing to do or keep him because he's my friend. No kid should have to make decisions like that, but Huck was forced to which brings about his more mature side. From pulling pranks on Jim to finally standing up for what he believe is right, Huck has really grown as a character which makes the novel a Bildungsroman. Your characters are undoubtedly very round.

As far as criticism is concerned, I sort of feel like certain events in the novel were "staged". What are the odds of the dauphin encountering someone who talks about a recently deceased man leaving behind a large lump sum of money? And what are the odds that he has sent for his two brothers that lives in a different country? It's far too coincidental to my liking. And the way the two con artists pull off their tricks so easily ... What is this, the tragedy of Othello!? Hahaha. No, but overall I'm really enjoying your novel. I'm so looking forward to writing more blogs about you and your novel. Thanks man.

Sincerely,
Sandy Nguyen

To Be Or Not To Be

As the novel progresses, Huck and Jim also progresses (down the river, that is). It seems to me as though with every pit stop that they make, we are placed in scenarios in which we unravel more and more of Huck as a person. It's almost as if layers are being added onto his character as he journeys down the river. The river is a symbol within itself. For Huck and Jim, it represents a path towards freedom. However, all the situations that they've encountered so far has been negative and seems to only get worse with every pit stop they make. This novel reminds me of Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" and how the Congo River was the key to Africa for the Europeans.

Although the duke and the dauphin appear to just be comical characters on the surface of the novel, I picked up a deeper reading from them. First off, they aren't necessarily what we consider "good people." They lie, cheat, steal, and rip people off for their money. Speaking of "ripping people off" .. When the two attempts to put on a nice show called the "Shaksperean Revival" it fails miserably so they end up putting on two, short shows and running off with the money the third time around. I took this scene as them trying to make money the moral way which doesn't work out so they end up turning back to their old, thieving ways. This leads to the fact that nearly everything and/or everyone that Huck encounters so far has been portrayed negatively; this possibly depicts the hardships of life.

A guy that acts as a drunk wanting to ride on a horse turns out to be a performer in the circus. Can this be a depiction of how thin the line is between what's real and what's fake? Oh and what about the man, Sherburn, who shoots an innocent drunk? His actions seem to be unvigilant, but his mind seems to be very bright judging from his thoughtful speeches. It's all so contradicting and hypocritical; a constant battle between good and bad, right and wrong.

Confused yet? Because everyone is this novel seems to be! The fact that the duke and the dauphin use the death of Peter Wilks to collect money shows us how morally messed up society really is. It presents to us a "new low" as if the novel isn't messed enough as it is already.

Ho, I'm dead!

ACT IV


By this time in the play, Iago is able to add circumstantial evidence to Othello's case against Desdemona. The evidence being the handkerchief that Othello gave to her as a symbol of his love. To Othello it symbolizes Desdemona because just like how Cassio is in possession of the handkerchief, Othello believes he possesses her as well. Because it was woven by a female prophet using sacred materials and his mother used it to keep his father faithful, it may also suggest one's innocence/fidelity. The fact that Bianca was flinging it at Cassio just as Othello was looking on seemt a bit "scripted" if you know what I mean. Can we say good timing? Iago's beautifully evil plan falls into place and the belief that Desdemona has slept with other men and is the "whore of Venice" prevents him from being moved by her words. When ordered to her room, she brings up Lodivico's attractiveness which leads the conversation to the thought of infidelity which reveals their true colors. Desdemona proves to be the woman that Othello wants as his wife; someone who is faithful and cherishes her chasity. Emilia, on the other hand, takes infidelity very lightly and even suggests that Desdemona go and find someone who can keep her happy. The dramatic irony most memorable in this act is the scene in which Emilia states that the villain who made her husband think she was cheating on him with Othello may be the same man that is deceiving him. The irony in this is that the "villain" is her own husband, Iago.

Dun dun dunnn!


ACT V


I must admit that Iago's plan was quite impressive. However, as with any other tragedy, it doesn't quite work out leading to his downfall and own unmasking. This occurs after the death of Desdemona when Othello and Emilia are in his bedroom discussing the motives for his action. Here, the handkerchief is brought up and Emilia proceeds to tell him the true story behind how Cassio got it from Iago who got it from her. Othello finally realizes the truth and falls weeping as Iago's villainy begins to unmask itself. In my opinion, Othello killed Desdemona out of jealousy and a wish to be a public avenger who punishes. He couldn't live bearing the thought of his wife sleeping with other men, or his men at that. To imagine her giving Cassio what he gave her was what really enraged Othello to the point of murder. He may have also killed her so that she won't be able to sleep with anyone else which can lead back to jealousy; if he can't have her then no one can. To call himself "one that loved not wisely but too well" can mean one of several different things. He can simply be describing himself as someone who falls in love quickly without any second thoughts. In other words, he was someone who loved too much and wasn't wise about it. Othello's speech towards the end was very powerful for it was his last. You can never forget about something that has already happened; especially a fault because no one is perfect, but it may be safe to say that he succeeded in restoring his original dignity and nobility. In the end Othello understood/admitted to his faults and like a true man, he suffered his own consequence-death. It is true what Cassio said, "He was a man great of heart."

Love, Marriage, Death

Since you have failed to give us a topic to blog about, let's go on a ranting rampage!

O-freaking-thello! Why so gullible, huh? This play has been so dramatic that it kind of reminds me of Korean dramas. You know .. The typical "I know what's going to happen, but then again maybe I don't why are you doing this" type of thing. You wanna know what really urks my nerves though? IAGU! That guy, I swear .. Now I see why you said some people now refer to bad guys in literature as an Iagu. He's the epitome of all things evil. I've heard of someone being two-faced before, but Iagu no-doubtly already topped that. I must admit though, he does have a way with words. He's pretty good for a guy that knows nothing outside of war and fighting. Its almost as if he's a little philosopher. Haha! As for Desdemona, she's starting to become a real round character. She definitely knows how to stand up for herself and let her voice be heard; especially with the Cassio issue. Othello, how I wish you were wiser for a man of your position! I certainly feel pathos towards these two lovers knowing that their failure in marriage is inevitable. 

Oh Shakespeare, why you gotta be so deep man? 

Interesting point you got there Dodds!

E.R Dodds' critical perspective on the play "Oedipus" had a few compelling points that I must point out. I like how he characterized Oedipus as a man that is "great in virtue of his inner strengths". I totally agree with that. Especially the part where Dodds said he had the strength to "pursue the truth at whatever cost and to accept it when found" because that is exactly what Oedipus did. The part about our first impulses towards our parents was also quite interesting because people, in general, do tend to love their mothers more than they do their fathers. I guess that's just our natural instinct. As for every man being Oedipus, that is true to a certain extent because everyone is blind to something in their lives. I enjoyed this article more than the other one because I think it contained more ideas than the other one. The article by A. E. Haigh was more of just an explanation of tragic irony (conscience and unconscience) and how it's used.

Yo man, that's your mom!

The prophet Tiresias reveals quite much of Oedipus' guilt. It may have partially been Oedipus' fault for pushing him to that point though, but Tiresias begins questioning him about the truth behind his parents, his marriage, and even his children. It seems to me that it was stupidity on Oedipus' part for taking so long to recognize his guilt and even admitting to the truth. He had an idea of what really happened in the back of his mind. He just kept denying it and prolonging the whole process.

As far as the interpretation goes, I agree with it. It's true that he is punished for his ignorance because he doesn't know his true identity and of him slaying his father and marrying his mother. How was he suppose to know that Jocasta was his own mother? And as far as the father is concerned, it was an altercation gone wrong. Maybe he shouldn't have went to the point of killing him, but Oedipus does seem to have some anger issues going on. Things happen .. Oh well.

Now let's talk about Jocasta. I would have to say that she is probably more so an individual with distinctive traits of personality. You can see throughout the play how protective, caring, and calming she is to those she love. For one, she comes up with a list of reasons for why Oedipus shouldn't believe in Tiresias' horrible prophecies to comfort him. She also tries to make peace between him and Creon. When Jocasta realizes the truth about Oedipus she tries to protect him from it, but fails and ends up hanging herself. What a sick and twisted love story.

So what is dramatic irony? Well, let me explain. It is when the character in a play has limited knowledge about what is to later occur, but we (the reader) can foreshadow the events that leads to the downfall of a hero. In short, we know what's going to happen and the people in the play don't. An example would be how we figured out along the way that Jocasta was his mother and he did not. Also that the man he killed was his father. Seems so obvious to us, right? Right, but they have no clue. Dramatic irony helps to show the limit of nature's understanding and causes us to reflect on a certain moment. This can give the play a more intense feel to it. 

The limitation of having the violence and bloodshed take place offstage gives the play a disadvantage. Having it reported to us, on the other hand, is an advantage. Because it is a play there is no narration involved. We, as readers, in order to grasp the whole plot still need to know what happens offstage. The only way of doing this is through another character's dialogue and that is exactly Sophocles does. Both Jocasta and Oedipus' death is reported through the messenger/chorus. Although there's a lack in the description of the events, we get more information on why the characters did what they did through their dialogue. More reasoning, less descriptive action.

Oedipus ends up blinding himself because he's been blinded his whole life to the truth. When he had his physical sight, he couldn't "see" it and now that he does it's "blinding". Haha, get it? Those who are blind ultimately have better vision. The vision being the truth. Take Tiresias for example. He's blind, yet he's a prophet for god sake! Now why would Oedipus use Jocasta's brooches to surgically remove his eyes? Tough question. Well a brooch's job is to hold things together. I would assume that him taking that from Jocasta' dress would make it fall apart similar to his own life. Metaphor type-thing going on here. Oh and cause it's probably sharp, duh! 

As the play ended I felt great pathos for Oedipus. I mean he lost his title, his throne, his family, his sight. Everything. And the worst part is that all of this was his fate. Ouch! As much as I hate to say it this play does end in total gloom. He goes into exile blinded. His chances of survival are zero to none. His wife/mother is also dead and his girls have to live with the family's history. As for the gods, I don't know much of what to make of them. It was Oedipus' fault for trying to avoid his fate by leaving Corinth because by doing so he actually lived his fate. I guess you can consider them tyrannical because they were just carrying out their powers which so happens to be cruel. 

Theme: Power can lead to ignorance of the truth.

Oooo-Edipus!

Unlike the other texts we've read so far in this class, Oedipus the King is a play. The diction used here is very distinctive. Rather than getting straight to the point the characters babble on and on about a simple request/idea. The syntax is also quite interesting. Lots of dashes and dots ...

Anyways! Hamartia is present in many of Oedipus' actions. If he would have never killed the stranger he met (which turned out to be his father), then there wouldn't have been such a problem. It doesn't stop there though. Oedipus begins to create an even bigger problem by seeking to uncover the past. He even sends for Teiresias. What a bad idea! Because he doesn't know who he is, this leads to his downfall.

I believe catharsis occurs when Oedipus thinks back on his past and realizes to himself that he has killed Laius. Although he hasn't yet confirmed it, him and I both know that he did it. Oedipus went through quite some trouble just to find Laius' killer (which was himself) that there must have been some type of relief whether it be good or bad. In this case I would guess bad. He's probably regretting making such a big deal out of the whole thing now.

There was definitely some pathos going on when I finally realized that he was the one who committed the crime. The poor guy is so confused! I mean he killed his father and married his own mother without a clue. They even had children together man. How sickening ..

What does he do now?