Parallelism between homosexuals and aliens

The Host by Stephanie Meyer makes a valid point when it comes to a major discussion in America: if a human and an alien can fall in love and it is accepted by their community, than why can’t gay couples be allowed to legally marry one another? It is a far fetch from directly portraying each other, but is the same theory: an unusual couple that does not meet up to society’s norms. This was obviously not Meyer’s point of creating the novel but the correlation still exists. In the book, Ian the human is made fun of by his cave community and even made into an outcast just because he is obviously falling in love with Wanda, the alien stuck in a human’s body. The human body makes no difference to Ian or the community, because they all consciously know that Wanda is purely a soul who took over the girl’s body. This is why their love could be considered forbidden. Yet, the community has never encountered this type of situation before which may be why they don’t whole-heartedly accept the relationship. Is this why America cannot allow gay marriage to be legal, because of their fear of the unknown? Or is it because they are purely mean, such as Ian’s brother, Kyle? (Hence, why Kyle tries to kill Wanda multiple times.) Yet, in the end of the book, Kyle also falls in love with an alien and finally accepts Wanda and Ian’s relationship. Maybe this is what America needs to do to: experience falling head over heels with their own sex than be tortured by their society, their family, and their friends. I wonder how they would feel then. Probably like loners, depressed, furious with America, and a variety of other emotions. Exactly the way Wanda and Ian felt when their relationship was exposed to the rest of the members of their community. This is why America should legalize gay marriage instead of downgrading the people who mean no harm. And The Host’s love story is just one step closer to doing just that. 

Yay for Elderly Ladies

Within the book Beautiful Creatures by Kami Garcia and Margaret Stohl, the main character Ethan has a mentor who guides him throughout his troubling life. This character is very similar to the Alex Cross series by James Patterson. Both of these characters are elderly ladies who have been with the family for an infinite amount of time. Amma, from the Beautiful Creatures series, is not even related to Ethan, she is simply just the housekeeper. Nana Mama is at least Alex Cross’ grandmother who acts as the housekeeper. Both of these mentors have the same duties: take care of the children, cook the meals, and try to clean up the house. But their most important job is giving the main protagonist(s) advice, that may or may not be taken seriously.  If it wasn’t for their stubborn beliefs and their want of stating their opinions, the main characters may have veered off in a different direction. For example, in Beautiful Creatures, Amma scolds Ethan for not having listened to her earlier when warning him to stay away from the new girl, who is apparently a witch. Obviously Ethan did not follow Amma’s directions because he is a hormonal teenager who would subconsciously want to be with the new girl more since it is forbidden. If Ethan did follow Amma’s advice though, there may have never been a plot and the new girl would have turned toward the “dark” witches. So even though Amma is not a major character within the story, her impact has indirect costs within the storyline. This is the same situation with Nana Mama except Alex Cross actually obeys his grandmother’s counseling. Since the Alex Cross series has at least twelve books, it is hard to provide an exact example of the impact of Nana Mama’s advice but she appears in every single dilemma, encouraging Alex Cross to do the right thing. It usually has to do with a situation between Alex Cross’ children or at his detective job for the Washington D.C. police/FBI. The point is that both of these New York Best-Sellers books have minor elderly characters whose advice has a major impact on the protagonists and the solution to the complication.  

Going for the Gold

So while I was in Germany this past quarter of school, I finally read Divergent by Veronica Roth. The main character Tris, has to undergo a serious initiation process to get into her societal faction: the Dauntless. This process testes a person's endurance, their physical aptitude, and their psychological strength. Throughout the entire book, I soaked up every detail. Not because it was so good (it actually was a good read) but because it reminded me exactly of the military. The thing is that I decided to join the United States Air Force around the same time. So I used this remarkable book as a sneak-peek of how this upcoming summer will be for me during boot camp. For example, toward the beginning of the book, Tris’ initiation friend Christina, was forced to hold onto the side of the railing for two terrifying minutes while an enormous waterfall was stumbling on top of her. Can you imagine the fear? Or the mustered strength that Christina had to face? Physically and psychologically, Christina told herself to hold on tight otherwise her life would come to a tragic end. Another event in the book includes Tris’ very first test to be a Dauntless: jumping off the roof to who knows where. Tris purposely volunteered to be the first initiate to prove her worth. After gathering up her nerves and racing to leap off of that skyscraper building, Tris was deemed as the most courageous of that group.  I need to be labeled that way too because Tris and I are both such tiny people compared to most of the troops. This is how it is going to be for me for a long six weeks: torture of my muscles and of my mental state; late nights and early mornings of instructors screaming in my face for no good reason; pointless workouts that are structured to make me quit. Who would want that? Apparently Tris, Christina, the other initiations, and I all do. The fact is at the end of the day, when there is finally a moment of peace, you realize how much stronger you are and you’re just proud of yourself. You do it; you’re still in the running to be a soldier for something that you believe in. It’s only a few weeks of strenuous endurance and then it is all over for a lifetime. Tris and I both must experience something difficult before we are able to obtain the grand treat. And the best feeling in the world is acknowledging the fact that you worked hard to earn your precious spot. Either in the Dauntless faction or in the USAF. 

Oh Hugh, How You Make my Heart Swoon

Frankly, the title has nothing to do with the idea of this blog post. I just prefer the Hugh Selwyn Mauberly poem by Ezra Pound more than the Cantos. Because honestly, who wants to write about a load of inconsistent ideals? Definitely not a high school senior. So I went with Hugh. I really do not learn anything about this Hugh but the quantity of poetic devices is magnificent and correlates greatly with Ezra Pound's life. For example, allusions are given great emphasize on by Pound. In Hugh part I, Circe is mentioned. In case you did not know, Circe was a minor goddess of magic who murdered her husband and was placed on the island of Aeaea as punishment. So in part I of Hugh, the male character "observed the elegance of Circes' hair rather than the mottoes on sun-dials". This is relevant because it describes how the main character has a sick imagination. Circe is usually taken in a bad light by most of society and the fact that the character would rather gaze at her hair than sun-dials is important. The character obviously does not care what society thinks and sticks to his own way of dealing with life, therefore somehow loving a girl who looks like Circe. This parallels with Pound's life because let me tell you, he most definitely was an independent thinker compared to America/Europe. How many real acquaintances do you know that have been inducted into an insane asylum for the good part of a decade? Exactly. The character in Hugh needs to be sent to an insane asylum too. Another common aspect of Pound's writing was inserting random European language into his primarily English poems. Yet, the additions are not as random as they appear to be. In Part I of Hugh, the third line states "E.P. Ode pour l'election de son sepulchre" meaning "Ezra Pound: Ode for the Choice of his Sepulcher". This translation of the French language adds emphasize to the fact that the poem is written in third person and Pound describes his own hardships in the poem. Without this translation, the fact may have been casually overlooked by the reader and may have obtained the wrong idea about the purpose of this poem. Lastly, Pound usually always adds some type of parallelism to his poems. But for once, part 1 of Hugh does not. Instead it has the rare occurrence of an actual verse form. This is extremely abnormal for the typical Pound poem. The form is very simple: abab cdcd efef and so on. Personally, I think Pound put more effort into the structure of this poem compared to others because he was truly passionate about this particular hate rant toward America. He wanted to insert a more lyrical position of Hugh to maybe gain more readers or maybe add more emphasize on trying to traditional poems. Who knows? Either way, this poetic device may have contributed to the turning point in Pound's career, right before he ran away from England. Hugh definitely has much more biographical details about Pound's personal life which he transcends through his usual poetic devices of allusions, language translations, and typically parallelism but in this case, a real verse form. You go Glen Coco!

Erratic Tone

The erratic tone within the poem A Song of the Degrees matches the author's crazy mind perfectly. The poem is broken into three separate roman numeral sections. Once a different passage starts, the tone grows abstract instead of a crescendo into something spectacular. The first section simply states the fearful problem: "Rest we with Chinese colours, for I think the glass is evil." But then the second section arises into the speaker acting as if they've already known all about this evil, stating that they have seen it for themselves on multiple occasions. During the third section, the speaker suddenly explodes into a fury and persistently asking the glass why it's so evil. The tone changes from neutral to a smart aleck way of dealing with conflicts into an emotional, questioning frenzy. Also, in case one hasn't noticed, the "fearful problem" is simply a glass looking evil. Please tell me why it scares the speaker so much? Given the inconsistent tone and the abnormal subject, I can infer the conclusion that the speaker is certifiably insane. The tone usually reflects the author's mood so the author is obviously in a state of turmoil and anxiety. Of course, this cuckoo author would nevertheless be the extremely famous Ezra Pound. Personally, he must have written this poem in the midst of his mental breakdown when he gave up on preaching to America how perfect they could be post-WWII. Or I'm all wrong and tone is only a minor detail compared to what Pound really wants to master: the Imagist movement. More than likely, this is the correct answer. The tone in the second passage is created by the words "melting", "stone-bright", "silver crashing", etc. These words are more informative, giving the intellectual voice to the poem. The tone in the third passage is made by the parallel questions starting with why, having extremely short phrases, and ending with exclamation points. Obviously, the tone is a sign of distress. The passage also consists of the description words such as "light", "glitter", "powdery gold", and "amber". If writing a poem with an irregular tone was part of the Imagist movement that Pound strives for, I personally think he succeeded. (Even though, I personally find him simply crazy.)

Allusions at The Lake Isle

After reading The Lake Isle by Ezra Pound, it is obvious that the poetic device of allusion plays an important role in the poem. From the very first line, the speaker is pleading with these Gods for a little tobacco shop: "O God, O Venus, O Mercury, patron of thieves". The tone is full of such hope and for longing, the reader instantly feels sympathetic toward the speaker. Personally, I felt pity for this man because of the act of him begging to these gods. If it was not for this act of desperation, I do not think it would as emotional and using the ethos way of persuasion. The gods themselves are deemed more powerful in society, making the speaker's pleading also seem more worthy of his calling the "great" gods. For example, Mercury was a major Roman god and the patron of financial gain, communication, and luck. These are the main three events that the speaker severely seeks. Financial gain will let the speaker's dream tobacco store become a reality and also obtain prosperity from the profits; communication is needed in order to even persuade the other gods to listen to his prayers; and of course, pure luck is always a necessity when aspiring for a hard goal such as securing a tobacco shop. Also, in the beginning of the second stanza in this short poem, the speaker repeats his original plea of : "O God, O Venus, O Mercury, patron of thieves" to address the main reason for even wanting a tobacco store so much. The reason is that the speaker passionately hates his job of writing that requires too much effort. Once again, the speaker frantically prays to these majestic gods for their dominant patrons and hope for answered wishes. Simply, the allusion of these three gods and the speaker craving for their help, dramatically add to the whole aspect of the poem. If not, it would simply be a poem with an image about a tobacco store and the random hate for a profession. The allusions puts the entire content and subject into a better explained perspective.

Pound's Views on America

Within the poem Salutation by Ezra Pound, I first thought the content was just the narrator's observation on society. But after learning more about Ezra Pound's absolutely crazy life, the poem definitely represents Pound's hostility toward America. When he did not know any better, Pound thought America had the potential to achieve perfection, especially when it comes to lyrical poems that consist of art. Yet, during post-WWII, Pound was declared insane. His reaction to America being cruel to Germany and Japan is reflected within Salutation. For example, the very first line consists of "O generation of the thoroughly smug and thoroughly uncomfortable," one can instantly see Pound is speaking to an audience that includes America and her undesirable qualities. Hence, the negative connotation of the words "smug" and "uncomfortable". Although, the people that habitat in America are ignorant of the corrupt engagements going on in their country: "I have seen their smiles full of teeth". Pound thinks society could care less which is why they still go on in life acting pleasant. But Pound knows the truth about America which is why he has the illusion that he is better than everybody else in this country, given the line "And I am happier than you are". Basically, Pound addresses the Americans who are full of fake laughter and Pound gains a persona of righteousness. This short poem concludes only a small part of the unhinging that is happening within Pound's disabled mind. Soon after, Pound is declared legally insane after broadcasting anti-American propaganda in some European countries. Obviously, Pound has an attachment to America's society as reflected in the Salutation poem. Given the title itself, Pound is making a farewell to America's morals and standards. Luckily for Pound's readers, this is only one of many, many, many poems that represent this author's wonderful and depressing feelings toward America.

Why Ezra Pound, Why?

Because of Ezra Pound's declared insanity in 1945, he has forced me to declare insanity too. His poems often consist of inconstant ramblings about how America could be oh so perfect if poetry was taken more seriously. Pound had many economist theories. Funny, considering he was a very controversial POET, not an ECONOMIST. Yeah, makes total sense. Pound participated in both Imagism and Vorticism. Which, morally are completely different from one another. One is about how language should create a clear-cut example of art while the other is employed in abstract art. Just like his brain, Pound has no clue what to do. He wants to be everything, yet be absolutely nothing. This is killing me. How am I suppose to find common themes in his poetry when he is not consistent? It doesn't even say WHY he became crazy. So dead end there. Can I change my poet? I can't write a five page paper about Ezra Pound before I leave for Germany in 18 days. I would like to graduate, get a job, and be in my mid-50s when I become crazy, just like Ezra Pound, not when I'm 17 years old. *Note: this is just a rant, not an actual blog so please don't grade this because I can't afford anything under a B. Otherwise I'll loose my scholarship to college. I blame Ezra Pound for my current problems so just like Ezra Pound blamed America for his problems (maybe?). Who really knows for sure why he became crazy- crazy people don't have a sane basis for what they believe in. He was hardly a poet, definitely more of a critical analysis of other poets. HE COPIED SO MANY POEMS, THERE'S NO ORIGINALITY TO WRITE ABOUT. I should just write about Robert Browning instead since Pound paralleled so many of his literary techniques and imagery in Cantos. So yes, it's only been two hours of researching Ezra Pound and I hate him. The end.

The (Passive) Jungle

The use of pathos is extremely relevant in the infamous novel The Jungle by Upton Sinclair. As many people should know, the publishing of this book caused the United states government to create stricter rules for running a healthy and clean meat factory. Why? It was Sinclair's obvious appeal to make the readers feel emotion. In the historical story, Jurgis has just immigrated to Chicago with his family of twelve. Work is hard to find among the thousands of homeless people during this age. Yet, Jurgis is still full of energy, strength, and youth when he first arrives at the slaughter houses and therefore, easily finds an unskilled job as a day laborer with cheap wages. Before landing this "wonderful" job, Jurgis takes a tour of the meat factory- this is where the pathos argumentation appears. Sinclair's use of loaded images such as "The meat would be shoveled into carts, and the man who did the shoveling would not trouble to lift out a rat even when he saw one—there were things that went into the sausage in comparison with which a poisoned rat was a tidbit." This inhumane and gruesome description is only a minuscule activity compared to the rest of the detailed explanation of the working conditions at the Chicago meat factory. Doesn't this statement just make one want to barf? The fact that rats are the least toxic thing being blended in with the meat, is a troublesome worry. Who knows what worse objects land in the mixture- poison? Lard? Pieces of human flesh? The list of possible bulk of contamination is infinite and just outright disgusting. There is seriously no surprise why the government had to create a healthier environment for the workers and for the production of meat. Personally, if I wasn't already a vegetarian, I would definitely become one after this. Even if I didn't buy from this specific Chicago meat market, what makes any of the other production markets any better? Especially considering the meat monopolies are competing with the top firms in the nation and must make a larger quantity for an increased profit. Sinclair's use of pathos in the novel is definitely a perfect case of argumentation that upturned my already bad view on meat production. So I'm sure these images had a profound affect on other citizens in the United States who have read the novel. Thus, this is truly a fundamental pathos work of literature.

What is Wrong with Society?

I just finished reading the famous short story called A Rose for Emily by William Faulkner. Even though it was written and based in the 1930s, one can see all of the hypocrital gossip that is still in the modern world. Except, during this past decade, it is not nearly as bad as the current times. During this short story, the reader receives all of the information through the mouths of the neighbors: "Emily did this" *speculate* "Oh crap! She did this!" *speculate*. Yet, their imaginative educated guesses were never correct. Want to know why? Because they never heard from Emily's own mouth what was happening in EMILY's world. (Ironically, Faulkner's dry sense of humor shows up at the end of the story with an amusing cliffhanger.) Either way, the endless chattering of the noisy neighbors that kept inquiring about Emily's exclusive life, relentlessly annoyed me the entire eight pages. Probably because I find it very relative on a personal level. When I first transferred to St. Mark's in the middle of sophomore year, I did not expect this type of social atmosphere. See, I have always gone to public school since kindergarten, so at the time, a "Catholic" education was beyond my level of comprehension. As a transfer, I didn't have many friends at first, so I just sat around and listened to the conversations going on around me. Man, I was so disgusted. The nerve some of the kids had at this school, just put me into disbelief. They called themselves Christians, yet they did so many unholy things, that it became totally hypocritical. As I have just now realized, even though I might have thought they were the contradictions in the beginning, I was really the hypocrite at the end. I didn't know these strangers on any personal level; they might have misbehaved this way because they were going through their own troubling times. Who am I to judge? This is the epiphany I wished Emily's neighbors would have come to realize. Obviously, Emily knew they were slandering her actions, but she had the right mind to not saying anything. And for this, I respect her strong character. I just dislike the neighbors that didn't mind their own business. If I learned how to be more open-minded and not judge the kids at St. Mark's during this modern world, the neighbors from a century ago, could have grown up a little bit too.

Literature Worthy

After reading The Perks of Being a Wallflower by Stephen Chbosky over Christmas break, I have realized why I had the urge to read this teenage story instead of As I Lay Dying by William Faulkner. This is because I can relate to the plot way better. Also, because the diction was much simpler to understand. I am not saying that it was a child's book, but compared to Faulkner, it could be considered that way. The modern plot in TPOBW consisted of a high school freshmen's encounter with drugs, sex, making new friends, having a psychological problem, etc. As a high school student myself, I found it much more exciting to read than Faulkner's story about a traveling family in the early 1900s whose mother just died. But then again, a different reader's view might find my opinion unintelligible. More than likely, it would probably be because the other reader thinks diction and literary devices make a book seem more appealing and award worthy than a book based more on the physical actions that a character decides on. Which comes to my question: what makes a book more literature worthy, plot or diction? Personally, plot creates a spell of enchantment over the reader that only lasts in the short run. How many other modernist plots do you know today that have also written about the same subjects such as sex and drugs? Tons. Yet, diction makes the book more memorable. Trust me, I will never forget my frustration when I first started reading AILD and had no clue what the narrator(s) were discussing. And that is exactly the reason why I will always remember the fifteen contrasting narrators that Faulkner entered into his novel. These specific reasons may be why Faulkner is considered to have wrote many classics such as AILD or A Rose for Emily and why Chbosky is on the New York Times Best Sellers List for writing TPOBW. Even their bragging rights are from a different era. Who knows, maybe Chbosky might be considered a classic author one day, but in reality, he will probably be a nobody after a year or so. These modern books that go through fads, do not have elaborate enough material to make them deserving of endless praise. So even though I thoroughly enjoyed The Perks of Being a Wallflower and stayed up until the edges of dawn reading it, Faulkner will always have a more everlasting impression. Therefore, Faulkner wins.

Parallelism in The Hobbit

So I just came back from the midnight premiere of The Hobbit and it’s currently four in the morning. Let me just say, it was so freaking amazing and lived up to my expectations. Yet, the events were predictable. Not in a boring way, more like parallelism at its greatest. Obviously, it was similar to The Lord of the Rings, considering it was the prerequisite to the trilogy. The stereotypical characters, the reason for the quest, the quest itself, and certain events are all correspondents to the first Lord of the Rings epic: The Fellowship of the Ring. For example, the main character is a hobbit: Lord of the Rings= Frodo, Hobbit= Bilbo. There is a king that accompanies the quest, who is on a search to save their ruined city: Lord of the Rings= Aragorn, Hobbit= Thorin. Kili and Fili in The Hobbit resemble Pippin and Meriadoc in LOTR because both sets of people are brothers that also attend the journey. In a closer depth of Kili, he is equivalent to Legolas in LOTR because they are the only bow and arrow shooters in the company of men. There are also the evil enemies that have great revenge planned for the company: LOTR’s enemy is Sauron, The Hobbit’s enemy is Bolg. Then there are the same exact people in both epics that appear including: Gollum, Saruman, Elrond (Lord of Riverdale), and Gandalf (duh). The reason for the quest in both epics is to solve a conflict. In The Hobbit, it is to restore the dwarf’s homeland; in the LOTR it is to destroy the ring that is found within The Hobbit movie. In the quest itself, both involve the same amount of men in the company (14), both involve the great Wizard named Gandalf, and the framing of the movie is setup in similar ways because they both start and end with the Book of Adventures that Bilbo Baggins writes. In both movies, Gandalf always comes to the rescue and saves the company by doing some wizard awesomeness. For example, in The Hobbit when the company of men are about to be eaten by the trolls, then the goblins, and then the Orcs, Gandalf magically reappears! (Do you see the pattern?) Similar happenings occur in LOTR also. Another important event is when the main hobbit character saves the king from an enemy. In LOTR, Frodo puts up a fight when Aragorn is about to die. In The Hobbit, Bilbo saves Thorin from one of the antagonist’s murdering schemes. Both hobbits end up becoming more beloved by the kings after their heroism. If the reader knows anything about these J. R. R. Tolkien’s books, they know that Bilbo is Frodo’s uncle and reside in the Baggins family. So the parallelism represents how Frodo basically follows Bilbo’s footsteps when they each go on a dangerous quest with a group of strange men and face specific dilemmas on their journey. In a way, The Hobbit almost foreshadows all the events that happen in LOTR. Either way, both epics are amazing thus far and I will forever be obsessed with the trilogies. LONG LIVE THE HOBBITS.

A Role Model for Young Girls

In Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte, the narrator goes on a journey to find her purpose in life in the early nineteenth century. Yet, she’s expecting both love and integrity to not collide against each other during the events. For example, Jane finds emotional substance and love when meeting Mr. Rochester. But right before the marriage ceremony, Jane discovers that Mr. Rochester is still married to his lunatic wife. Even though the wife is certifiably insane, Jane refuses to still marry Mr. Rochester because it would be a disgrace to her. To marry someone who still has a wife, Jane would consider herself a mistress and wouldn’t be able to be happy with a clouded conscious. A year down the road, Jane is offered a marriage proposal by her cousin, St. John Rivers. During this time, Jane is teaching children of the poor and doing God’s substantial work. Yet, she does not love this man and will therefore, not marry him. As one can notice, Jane finds love, but not integrity; Jane finds integrity, but not love. Obviously, she has high standards and intends on sticking to them. This is a very noble aspect in her personality that I greatly admire. In modern times, girls no longer have respect for themselves. On a daily basis, one often hears the scandalous happenings to either someone they know, a famous person, or television events. Often, it’s disgusting events such as having sex with strangers, being arrested for illegal substances, filling out welfare paper work, etc. Unlike Jane Eyre, they do not fight for a healthy job or for true love. They want the easy way out for everything without integrity or emotional attachments. What will become of them? Nothing of importance; just a long list of psychological problems, minimum wage jobs, and death. This is why I personally think that Jane Eyre should be a required reading in schools across the country with an in-depth teaching of Jane’s integrity and how to settle down with only one person: your true love. In this way, maybe young girls will learn how to keep their standards high and only to choose healthy options in life. Jane Eyre is a role model for many young people in the modern world.

Woolf vs. Chopin

After reading A Haunted House by Virginia Woolf and The Kiss by Kate Chopin, I have come to the obvious conclusion that their stylistic usage varies deeply. Woolf is complex, Chopin is simple. In Woolf's short story, her point of view seems to shift at sudden times, with no indication of it happening. I'm pretty sure there there's three (?) different characters she revolves around: the ghost couple, the house, and the living flesh couple that reside in the house. Even after reading the short story three times over, I still do not understand the objective or the resolution of the plot. All I know is that the ghost couple were searching for love aka their buried treasure (?) and the house was keeping it hidden from them aka the repetition of the phrase "safe, safe, safe" (?). On the other hand, Chopin is straightforward. The point of view is easy to follow; the conflict was obviously Harvy kissing the narrator in front of the her future husband, Brantain. Once again, there is also love in this short story and someone (or something) is trying to deprive the couple of that. The conflict is solved after the narrator discusses with Brantain about the misunderstanding and they end up getting married. Simple and only have to read the story once to comprehend all of the events. Both authors lived in the same era (late 1800s-early 1900s) so what gives? The answer is actually quite ironic in a way- they are using contrasting literary devices. Woolf focuses on the actual literary terms such as the parallelism, personification, and harsh imagery. While Chopin makes her plot and message strong, giving it more entertainment. Each author thought literature was something else. The missing link: literature is everything- the literary resources that provoke hard thinking and the sweet happy endings that make a reader have hope. Woolf and Chopin's backgrounds also differ from one another, which may give insight to their literature techniques. Woolf was institutionalized after having nervous breakdowns, therefore, giving her a more stable composure in the strict way of writing. While Chopin grew up reading fairy tales and having to live in poverty, so one may assume, she sometimes wrote short stories with a more peaceful plot and an effortless read. Both authors were equally amazing at achieving literature momentum, especially for deprived women in the early twentieth century. Personally, I don't favor either of the authors over the other one. I respect each of their personal writing choices and I definitely recommend both authors (but if you decide on Woolf, definitely be seated comfortable enough to sit there for an hour trying to decode her five-page story).

Raskolnikov's Sufferings

The extravagant novel Crime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky, truly exemplifies the quote “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger”. After murdering a pawnbroker and her sister for the good of humankind, Raskolnikov, a deprived student in Russia, succumbs into a miserable depression full of hallucinations, illusions, and changing moods. He struggles between deciding whether he is part of the “extraordinary” humans, who can kill with moral reasoning, versus “ordinary” humans, who are just plain citizens that must obey the laws. This outrageous theory lets Raskolnikov believe that his criminal activity is justified. Yet, after the action is complete, Raskolnikov realizes a little too late, that he is overcome with guilt and grieves for over a month. (To his dismay, he realizes that he is only an ordinary human.) Within this time, Raskolnikov goes through several trials of hardship including his sister being engaged to a monstrous man, meeting a drunkard with a broken down family, being psychologically tortured by the police investigator, and being blackmailed by a rich man. All of these dilemmas plus his own hypochondria caused Raskolnikov to fall into several horrible, delirious illnesses that lasts anywhere between a few hours to days. What seems like an eternity later, Raskolnikov finally decides to face his suffering and confesses his wrongdoings to the police. He is forced to complete eight years in the Siberian prison, full of hateful criminals and physical labor. Yet, Raskolnikov is not alone. A good thing has come from this suffering: Sonia, the daughter of the drunkard that Raskolnikov met in a bar. Sonia believes in this man who has little hope for life and follows him all the way to the rough prison. After nine months of imprisonment, at the very end of the book, Raskolnikov learns what it means to be loved and wanted. Therefore, at the very end of the book, he looks forward to a new life once he gets out of confinement. After all of these illnesses, dreadful situations, and finally going to prison for his sins; after all of his psychological nonsense talks to himself, going into roundabouts with the police, and facing mental torment every day for many months before, during, and after the murder, Raskolnikov is finally free from his own problematic thoughts. Raskolnikov had to go through his own hell, before he was able to start slowly healing his mental illness. So yes, Raskolnikov was strong enough to say that “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger”. One does not suffer for any simple reason.

Eveline's Relationship with the World

In a way, I can relate with the short story Eveline by James Joyce. Except the big problem was my stepmother, and Eveline's issue was her father. To have someone ridicule you without the other parent present, is a struggle. It does make you feel more isolated in the world even if other siblings are there to help. And once you have become accustomed to the continual arguments and downgrading, you realize there is no escape and to just go with it. So when Eveline is faced with the option to leave the one home she has known all of her life for her first lover, she is undecided. What will she do without the constant fighting that has been a daily ritual in her life? The obvious answer is that of course, she should take her chances and leave. Yet, it is way more complicated than the easy way out. In my personal story, I am faced with the option of leaving my dad's house in Maryland and return living with my mother in Delaware. Obviously, I picked the choice to attend St. Mark's High School in order to obtain a better home life and face the problem of having to make new friends all over again. The doubts will always be present in Eveline's mind. There will be consequences to either action. It will change her entire course of life. What if she makes the wrong decision and something even more horrible happens to her or someone else? Eveline could always just keep facing the dangers of her father and be strong for her siblings. Or Eveline could possibly be happy, if she knew how to. The fear of reaching an agreement is what stops Eveline from marching on to that boat and running away with her secret lover. It's almost unjust how life comes with big changes. These feelings of uncertainty all lead up to how the new criticism is a critical approach to this story. (And sorry if I repeat things that have been previously said, I don't remember which approaches the presenting group did in class) This is because there is universal sense of being confused between choices. I had an extremely similar situation and I'm almost one-hundred percent positive that everybody else in the entire world has or have these experiences. Even though there is a historical approach to this story because it was written in 1914 yet this struggle is global even 98 years later, in a new era with new concepts of life. Eveline's character is also common among the people of the world and could be understood by many generations of people. Basically, this story could be read by numerous communities in order to learn that they are not alone in this big world. I certainly have realized that others may be going through the same dilemmas and need help sorting out the pros and cons of each situation. This book is very beneficial for the readers and is entertaining to comprehend.

McCarthy's Suspense

In Cormac McCarthy's Pulitzer Prize Winner novel The Road, the entire plot kept reminding me of a song. Specifically, August Burn Red's cover of the traditional Carol of the Bells melody. McCarthy insists on never telling the reader the history of the story that leads up to such a drastic world. Thus, creating an intriguing suspense that is portrayed throughout the novel. Every time a turning point or climax would occur in the story, I would get really excited because I was hoping that a critical detail would finally be revealed. But nope, as always, the event was just a tease. This is exactly how the alternative band plays the traditional piece of music. At one point in the story, the two main characters have finally seen another human in civilization. The father even talked to one of the bad guys. This is where the wavering music introduces repetitive jingles, slowly leading up to the main part. During this interaction with the other human, the bad guy snatches up the son and threatens to hurt him. Cue the guitars strumming in, creating more madness. After a few intense moments, the father shoots the bad guy perfectly and watches him fall dead with no remorse and the child comes sobbing back to this papa. Here, the chords are finally in full rhythm, with obnoxious downbeats that pronounces the scary event. A few weeks or so pass on by, the father and son find a broken down house, covered in gray ash. Once inside,the father finds a locked door and asserts that he must go inside to have a look around. The main chorus starts abruptly in the song, pleading with the father. After some struggles with the lock, the father swings open the door, just to find a bunch of human prisoners, waiting to be eaten by the elite prisoners, who are actually marching back to their haven at this exact moment. Within the song, the rapid scales are climbing on the instruments. The father and son turn around to efficiently run away. Another few months has passed since their last encounter. No people have been seen on the broken down roads leading South, hoping for a group of good guys that still want to survive with humane conditions. The father and son are lucky enough to scavenge some food and supplies. After years of waiting and dreaming to reach the ocean, they finally do! It's not everything they hoped it to be but the duo know how to make shelters work in their favor. Having made a camp at the beach and walking away without second thoughts, they come back with all of their items gone. Yet, the father and son find some footprints and start tracking down the homeless man who stole their cart full of stuff. While running, the music has turned into a drum solo that consists of a lot of bass grinding together and a repeat of the intense harmony. The duo gains their belongings back. Not even two days has passed before the father lies down to rest a while and dies from malnutrition or some other kind of disease. The music correlates with the resolution as the guitar, drums, and violins slow down immensely and fade into the background. Just like the plot of the novel, the music never declares a secret or the underlying story. Only drama happens with a lot of serious turning points, climaxes, and questionable endings. What is The Road even about? What happened to the world? Why is there a chance of cannibalism among humans? Does anybody even know what ever happens?! These thoughts parallel the traditional Christmas song as it slowly gains some detail about the past life but never actually answers the questions. Song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6o-p-OAWmsY

Band Geek for the World

The Desperate Act in the Secret Agent

                  There are several aspects in The Secret Agent that make the plot so addictive to read. One of those is a turning point in the novel when the reader finds out that the person who had been blown up to tiny little pieces by the Observatory bomb was Stevie. He was the poor innocent lad who had to be scraped off the ground by a shovel. Of all the many anarchist characters that have been developed, Stevie would be the last person on the list anybody would have expected to be dealing with bombs. This setback caused Stevie's sister, the psycho Winnie, to stab her husband to death. Thus, creating a humorous scene toward the end of the novel, when a different character, Ossipon, decides to literally jump off of a moving train to get away from Winnie, who is trying to escape the country. The fact that Ossipon was desperate enough to risk his own life to get away from a single woman, is both comedic and depressing because Ossipon resorted to this dangerous choice. I found this piece of literature extremely hilarious due to the classic stereotype of the scene. Honestly, how many tragedies end up with a certain insane twist that is extremely unexpected? All of them.  This act of despair represents how the author, Conrad, has a sense of humor in his personality while creating such a realistic masterwork based off of a true event.

The Purpose of the theme in The Secret Agent

          Within the sarcastic, dry humor that Conrad displays in his masterwork, there has been a recurring theme of philosophy. The main discussion I find the most interesting is the contrasting views of injustice between the Professor and Chief Inspector Heat. The Professor is a chemist who creates bombs for anarchists while Chief Inspector Heat is the head of the Special Crime Lab at the London headquarters. Obviously, they are totally opposite people when it comes to their morals. Yet, they are extremely similar: "The mind and the instincts of a burglar are of the same kind as the mind and the instinct of a police officer." (p.57) How is this possible? Apparently, both criminals and law enforcement have the same conventions and have the same knowledge of each other's working ways.
           According to Chief Inspector Heat, burglars are only doing wrong because of their imperfect education. So maybe if they grew up in a different neighborhood, they would be a "good" guy? Maybe not. On the other hand, the Professor totally throws this image off because he views himself as a "moral agent". The Professor even comes to the conclusion that the revolutionaries are actually finding peace among mankind. Most people would find this very skeptic, but not to a man who thinks life itself is the biggest weakness one may possess.
           Among these tidbits include the meeting between The Red Committee and whether or not if they agree with Mr. Vladimir, the First Secretary, to start blowing up buildings as part of the revolt. This discussion involves cannibalism, optimistic, and scientific views. Another philosophy encounter was between one of The Red Committee members, Ossipon, and The Professor. Here, the argument is about the force of personality, basically meaning the advantages and disadvantages of life and death. As one can tell, The Professor is a very interesting character to have conversations with.
            What I want to know is: which views does Conrad agree with the most? Did he write this book only for the purpose of sharing all of his mixing views of morality? It would be a much better way to put his philosophy within characters of a book than voicing his opinion among hostile nations. So, what was Conrad's purpose in writing so many passages of conflicting morals and ethics among peculiar individuals?