1. Coverage
a) Women < Men
b)The Irony of Freedom
c)Women Finally WON! (well, not really... not "yet")
d)Informal Commentary on the Handmaid's Tale Excerpt
e)Third Person Narration + First Person Narration ~ Free Indirect Style?
f)The Road which we have walked on fastly and furiously
g)Teeny Maggie
2. Depth
3. Interaction
4. Discussion
5. Xenoblogging
6. Wildcard
Friday, December 10, 2010
Teenie Maggie
I’m sensing that your description of a guy shaking hands and knees during the presentation is me (haha). That week I just wanted to get rid of all my stresses but guess SAT was an obstacle that prevented me watching Race to Nowhere.
Okay let me get to the point. I totally agree with your argument that the majority of people end up doing 50% of their potentiality when it comes to examination, asessment except for some nerds. But is stress the only factor that causes people from only “half-assing” the amount of education we get? I think the reason for us not performing at our optimal levels is that we lack skills. Yes, we lack test skills. And you know why, it is because we are only high school babies. We aren’t good enough yet. Education at this stage is the answer. As you have raed Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink, our snap-judgement, thin-slicing, which are basically specific integrals of our experience, skills and knowledge. Gladwell also stated that thin-slicing is not random; it results from years of training and training in one’s specific area of specialisation. Getting back to the point whether education is “fcuked” up or not, I think it is not, even though I want to think it is. We need basic skills to be inherent in our “self” so that doing work outside school can be successful. What we do outside school is a simple application of secondary school education- or even a big gigantic world of secondary schools. Do you ever wonder why you really loved pizza making? I believe it resulted from your education. Moreover, I do not think education does not just limit to scholarship but also extra-curricular activities like playing musical instruments, sports and physical activities, community services/volunteer works, adventuring through wildlife, donation. Most of these are offerred in AES…..!!
Okay let me get to the point. I totally agree with your argument that the majority of people end up doing 50% of their potentiality when it comes to examination, asessment except for some nerds. But is stress the only factor that causes people from only “half-assing” the amount of education we get? I think the reason for us not performing at our optimal levels is that we lack skills. Yes, we lack test skills. And you know why, it is because we are only high school babies. We aren’t good enough yet. Education at this stage is the answer. As you have raed Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink, our snap-judgement, thin-slicing, which are basically specific integrals of our experience, skills and knowledge. Gladwell also stated that thin-slicing is not random; it results from years of training and training in one’s specific area of specialisation. Getting back to the point whether education is “fcuked” up or not, I think it is not, even though I want to think it is. We need basic skills to be inherent in our “self” so that doing work outside school can be successful. What we do outside school is a simple application of secondary school education- or even a big gigantic world of secondary schools. Do you ever wonder why you really loved pizza making? I believe it resulted from your education. Moreover, I do not think education does not just limit to scholarship but also extra-curricular activities like playing musical instruments, sports and physical activities, community services/volunteer works, adventuring through wildlife, donation. Most of these are offerred in AES…..!!
Monday, November 29, 2010
The Road which we have walked on fastly and furiously
To clarify with my heading for this blog, "The Road which we have walked on fastly and furiously", I chose to title it this way because we spent so little time on discussing on this text yet with the aid of Ms Morgan's thorough explication, I am content that this text is another option for my end of semester Individual Oral Presentation.
I found this novel more interesting than other two dystopian novels I read this semester. Unlike 1984, and The Handmaid's Tale, it is set in a "post"-apocalyptic world after the nuclear war in which the dad and the son are the only ones remaining, and has a relatively happy ending. Moreover, the way McCarthy's employs linguistic devices throughout the novel is fascinating:
In The Road, imageries are constantly used in depicting human's regression to a primeval state. Does it not contrast to the notions in We where humans dilapidate to a mechanical state. In other words, people in The Road turn to animals while people in We turn to machines. The fact that these two texts portray the two extremes of human's failing state, I can possibly incorporate this into my presentation.
Similar to We, The Road has a dark, cold, uncanny setting. Even if the responder is implied that there is sunset in the morning, the composer never happens to mention it, "with the first gray light he rose and left the boy sleeping and walked out to the road and squatted and studied the country to the south ... when it was light engouh to use the binoculars he glassed the valley below".
I also noticed how McCarthy does not stick to standard English when using abbreviations- he simply does not include apostrophes. More specifically, I discovered that they are only evident in negative words such as "hadnt", "didnt" and "couldnt". The reason may be that by not sticking to conventional English, he can insinuate or reflect how dyscivilised the society is and how the apocalyptic world has affected him.
Furthermore, McCarthy includes no chapters in the book. It is to suggest that there is no real structure in the society he lives in; there is no rest- the journey is endless.
The style of narration further reflects his state of mind. The use of free indirect style to provide is viewpoint is interesting. By somewhat combining the characteristics of third person with first person, it shows his complicated state of mind. Moreover, through the free indirect narration style, audience sees the stream of consciousness and notice his break of thoughts and actions.
I found this novel more interesting than other two dystopian novels I read this semester. Unlike 1984, and The Handmaid's Tale, it is set in a "post"-apocalyptic world after the nuclear war in which the dad and the son are the only ones remaining, and has a relatively happy ending. Moreover, the way McCarthy's employs linguistic devices throughout the novel is fascinating:
In The Road, imageries are constantly used in depicting human's regression to a primeval state. Does it not contrast to the notions in We where humans dilapidate to a mechanical state. In other words, people in The Road turn to animals while people in We turn to machines. The fact that these two texts portray the two extremes of human's failing state, I can possibly incorporate this into my presentation.
Similar to We, The Road has a dark, cold, uncanny setting. Even if the responder is implied that there is sunset in the morning, the composer never happens to mention it, "with the first gray light he rose and left the boy sleeping and walked out to the road and squatted and studied the country to the south ... when it was light engouh to use the binoculars he glassed the valley below".
I also noticed how McCarthy does not stick to standard English when using abbreviations- he simply does not include apostrophes. More specifically, I discovered that they are only evident in negative words such as "hadnt", "didnt" and "couldnt". The reason may be that by not sticking to conventional English, he can insinuate or reflect how dyscivilised the society is and how the apocalyptic world has affected him.
Furthermore, McCarthy includes no chapters in the book. It is to suggest that there is no real structure in the society he lives in; there is no rest- the journey is endless.
The style of narration further reflects his state of mind. The use of free indirect style to provide is viewpoint is interesting. By somewhat combining the characteristics of third person with first person, it shows his complicated state of mind. Moreover, through the free indirect narration style, audience sees the stream of consciousness and notice his break of thoughts and actions.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Third Person Narration + First Person Narration ≈ Free Indirect Style?
I found FREE INDIRECT STYLE section the most interesting!!!!:
When I did short story writing in my previous school, my teacher went over different types of narrative style. He once mentioned "free indirect style". I remember him defining this particular narration by stating it is "like" a combination of third person and first person narrations; he then moved on to explain in gibberish. I can also recall one example that he provided me, "How the hell am I supposed to leave the house when my mobile rings? He glanced at women outside his unit and thought." (not exactly this but somewhere along this line) But I did not fully comprehend this concept of fiction writing.
After reading "How Fiction Works", I can now understand what this "free indirect style" really means and how it can be used. Wood mentions that writers are trapped with first and third person narrations because the success of composing a story from second person and first person plural (we) is "rare". Wood describes what we know as unreliable narrator (first person- I) is actually more reliable, and what what we know as omniscient narrator (third person- he/she/it) is not omniscient- omniscience in writing is impossible. By taking an omniscient approach, the perception of narrative then changes to certain character's way/s of thinking and speaking. Thus, it forms a writing style called "free indirect style" by sharing secret.
Let's take some examples from The Road. "He'd brought the boy's book but the boy was too tired for reading. Can we leave the lamp on till I'm asleep? Yes. Of course we can." Notice how this mostly conforms to a third person narration. Because using dialogues in third person is often inappropriate, indirect speech is replaced here instead; it seems to combine some of the elements from first person such as "I" and "we" and speech to this third person narration. Such style is also evident in Wood's "How Fiction Works" when he talks about free indirect style. "He looked at his wife. Yes, she was tiresomely unhappy again, almost sick. What the hell should he say?" In addition to just simple combination of two styles, I can also observe how the responder can perceive the story from character's perspective and the author's perspective. It is as if the narrative byes away from the composer and possessed by characters. Another feature that can be included in this style of narrative is stream of consciousness. Let me fix my phrase here; it resembles so much of stream of consciousness. Similar to Joseph Conrad's colonialist novel, Heart of Darkness, McCarthy's style of narrative is very similar because the audience can see his break in thoughts, state of mind, psychological status, and actions by gathering one's constant thought processes- "I'm scared. I know. But I'll just be a little ways and I'll be able to hear you so if you get scared you call me and I'll right away. I'm really scared. The sooner I go the sooner I'll be back and we'll have a fire and then you wont be scared anymore. Dont lie down. If you lie down you'll fall asleep and then if I call you you wont answer and I wont be able to find you ... The boy didnt answer. He was close to losing his temper with him and then he realised that he was shaking his head in the dark. Okay, he said. Okay.
Though I have found the article below AFTER I posted my first draft of this post, it is interesting how Coates has similar interpretations towards Wood's "How Fiction Works".
Free Indirect ‘Ducklings’
By STEVE COATES
One of the best parts of James Wood’s stimulating little book “How Fiction Works” is its lucid explanation of one of the most powerful tools of novel-writing, the limber and elastic narrative technique known as “free indirect style.” Wood suggests that this style — in which a third-person narrator and the characters he describes intertwine in magical ways — arises naturally from storytelling: “As soon as someone tells a story about a character,” he writes, “narrative seems to want to bend itself around that character, wants to merge with that character, to take on his or her way of thinking and speaking.”
Wood — not only a New Yorker staff writer but a visiting lecturer at Harvard — uses children’s literature as an entree into his discussion. Along the way, he renders up a sentence that I hope he will quote as needed in dismissal of the notion that he is out of touch with “the common reader”:
There is a technical connection, for instance, between “Make Way for Ducklings” and James’s novel “What Maisie Knew.”
Here’s the whole context:
In Robert McCloskey’s “Make Way for Ducklings,” Mr. and Mrs. Mallard are trying out the Boston Public Garden for their new home, when a swan boat (a boat made to look like a swan but actually powered by a pedal-pushing human pilot) passes them. Mr. Mallard has never seen anything like this before. McCloskey falls naturally into free indirect style: “Just as they were getting ready to start on their way, a strange enormous bird came by. It was pushing a boat full of people, and there was a man sitting on its back. ‘Good morning,’ quacked Mr. Mallard, being polite. The big bird was too proud to answer.” Instead of telling us that Mr. Mallard could make no sense of the swan boat, McCloskey places us in Mr. Mallard’s confusion; yet the confusion is obvious enough that a broad ironic gap opens between Mr. Mallard and the reader (or author). We are not confused in the same way as Mr. Mallard; but we are also being made to inhabit Mr. Mallard’s confusion.
What happens, though, when a more serious writer wants to open a very small gap between character and author? What happens when a novelist wants us to inhabit a character’s confusion, but will not “correct” that confusion, refuses to make clear what a state of nonconfusion would look like? We can walk in a straight line from McCloskey to Henry James. There is a technical connection, for instance, between “Make Way for Ducklings” and James’s novel “What Maisie Knew.” Free indirect style helps us to inhabit juvenile confusion, this time a young girl’s rather than a duck’s.
Coates, Steve. "Free Indirect 'Ducklings'" Online posting. 8 Aug. 2008. New York Times. 10 Dec, www.2010 papercuts.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/free-indirect-ducklings/.
When I did short story writing in my previous school, my teacher went over different types of narrative style. He once mentioned "free indirect style". I remember him defining this particular narration by stating it is "like" a combination of third person and first person narrations; he then moved on to explain in gibberish. I can also recall one example that he provided me, "How the hell am I supposed to leave the house when my mobile rings? He glanced at women outside his unit and thought." (not exactly this but somewhere along this line) But I did not fully comprehend this concept of fiction writing.
After reading "How Fiction Works", I can now understand what this "free indirect style" really means and how it can be used. Wood mentions that writers are trapped with first and third person narrations because the success of composing a story from second person and first person plural (we) is "rare". Wood describes what we know as unreliable narrator (first person- I) is actually more reliable, and what what we know as omniscient narrator (third person- he/she/it) is not omniscient- omniscience in writing is impossible. By taking an omniscient approach, the perception of narrative then changes to certain character's way/s of thinking and speaking. Thus, it forms a writing style called "free indirect style" by sharing secret.
Let's take some examples from The Road. "He'd brought the boy's book but the boy was too tired for reading. Can we leave the lamp on till I'm asleep? Yes. Of course we can." Notice how this mostly conforms to a third person narration. Because using dialogues in third person is often inappropriate, indirect speech is replaced here instead; it seems to combine some of the elements from first person such as "I" and "we" and speech to this third person narration. Such style is also evident in Wood's "How Fiction Works" when he talks about free indirect style. "He looked at his wife. Yes, she was tiresomely unhappy again, almost sick. What the hell should he say?" In addition to just simple combination of two styles, I can also observe how the responder can perceive the story from character's perspective and the author's perspective. It is as if the narrative byes away from the composer and possessed by characters. Another feature that can be included in this style of narrative is stream of consciousness. Let me fix my phrase here; it resembles so much of stream of consciousness. Similar to Joseph Conrad's colonialist novel, Heart of Darkness, McCarthy's style of narrative is very similar because the audience can see his break in thoughts, state of mind, psychological status, and actions by gathering one's constant thought processes- "I'm scared. I know. But I'll just be a little ways and I'll be able to hear you so if you get scared you call me and I'll right away. I'm really scared. The sooner I go the sooner I'll be back and we'll have a fire and then you wont be scared anymore. Dont lie down. If you lie down you'll fall asleep and then if I call you you wont answer and I wont be able to find you ... The boy didnt answer. He was close to losing his temper with him and then he realised that he was shaking his head in the dark. Okay, he said. Okay.
Though I have found the article below AFTER I posted my first draft of this post, it is interesting how Coates has similar interpretations towards Wood's "How Fiction Works".
Free Indirect ‘Ducklings’
By STEVE COATES
One of the best parts of James Wood’s stimulating little book “How Fiction Works” is its lucid explanation of one of the most powerful tools of novel-writing, the limber and elastic narrative technique known as “free indirect style.” Wood suggests that this style — in which a third-person narrator and the characters he describes intertwine in magical ways — arises naturally from storytelling: “As soon as someone tells a story about a character,” he writes, “narrative seems to want to bend itself around that character, wants to merge with that character, to take on his or her way of thinking and speaking.”
Wood — not only a New Yorker staff writer but a visiting lecturer at Harvard — uses children’s literature as an entree into his discussion. Along the way, he renders up a sentence that I hope he will quote as needed in dismissal of the notion that he is out of touch with “the common reader”:
There is a technical connection, for instance, between “Make Way for Ducklings” and James’s novel “What Maisie Knew.”
Here’s the whole context:
In Robert McCloskey’s “Make Way for Ducklings,” Mr. and Mrs. Mallard are trying out the Boston Public Garden for their new home, when a swan boat (a boat made to look like a swan but actually powered by a pedal-pushing human pilot) passes them. Mr. Mallard has never seen anything like this before. McCloskey falls naturally into free indirect style: “Just as they were getting ready to start on their way, a strange enormous bird came by. It was pushing a boat full of people, and there was a man sitting on its back. ‘Good morning,’ quacked Mr. Mallard, being polite. The big bird was too proud to answer.” Instead of telling us that Mr. Mallard could make no sense of the swan boat, McCloskey places us in Mr. Mallard’s confusion; yet the confusion is obvious enough that a broad ironic gap opens between Mr. Mallard and the reader (or author). We are not confused in the same way as Mr. Mallard; but we are also being made to inhabit Mr. Mallard’s confusion.
What happens, though, when a more serious writer wants to open a very small gap between character and author? What happens when a novelist wants us to inhabit a character’s confusion, but will not “correct” that confusion, refuses to make clear what a state of nonconfusion would look like? We can walk in a straight line from McCloskey to Henry James. There is a technical connection, for instance, between “Make Way for Ducklings” and James’s novel “What Maisie Knew.” Free indirect style helps us to inhabit juvenile confusion, this time a young girl’s rather than a duck’s.
Coates, Steve. "Free Indirect 'Ducklings'" Online posting. 8 Aug. 2008. New York Times. 10 Dec, www.2010 papercuts.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/free-indirect-ducklings/.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Informal Commentary on The Handmaid's Tale Excerpt
Draft Two:
Margaret Atwood, throughout the excerpt, portrays Offred's past and specifically describes two different notions of "love" Although Offred initially hesitates in bringing past events, as story moves on, she feels more comfortable with her past because she feels necessary to talk about what love really is. Through the use of stream of consciousness, and diction, she communicates to her responder with the difference between "falling in love" and "falling from love".
Let's firstly examine how stream of consciousness is used to deliver the composer's message. "Falling in love, I said. Falling into it, we all did then, one way or another. How could he hav emade such light of it? Sneered even. As if it was trivial for us, a frill, a whim." Notice how you are confronted with Offred's break in thoughts, mental process, and even psychological status. The key phrases/clauses here are "falling in love" and "falling into it". I think Atwood tries to distinguish between two notions of love. One is when you, as used in common English, fall in love. Another one is when you fall/break down from love. Moreover, this part of stream of consciousness is evident in the beginning of extract, "I don't want to be telling this story... I don't hav eto tell it. I don't have to tell anything, to myself or to anyone else. I could just sit here, peacefully. I could withdraw. It's possible to go so far in, so far down and back, they could never get you out." Bit of a contrast in two stream of consciousness huh?
Diction is another literary element that contributes the author's message that women fall in love and that women fall for men. The register such as "falling in love" and "falling for him; we are falling women" demonstrate how women fall in love to fall for men. In other words, after they fall in love, they make sacrifices for men, which is unreasonable. Atwood uses language that lists something cumulatively for enhanced rhetorical emphasis. An instance from the excerpt is "the more difficult it was to love the particular man beside us, the more we believed in Love, abstract and total. We were waiting, always, for the incarnation."
Margaret Atwood, throughout the excerpt, portrays Offred's past and specifically describes two different notions of "love" Although Offred initially hesitates in bringing past events, as story moves on, she feels more comfortable with her past because she feels necessary to talk about what love really is. Through the use of stream of consciousness, and diction, she communicates to her responder with the difference between "falling in love" and "falling from love".
Let's firstly examine how stream of consciousness is used to deliver the composer's message. "Falling in love, I said. Falling into it, we all did then, one way or another. How could he hav emade such light of it? Sneered even. As if it was trivial for us, a frill, a whim." Notice how you are confronted with Offred's break in thoughts, mental process, and even psychological status. The key phrases/clauses here are "falling in love" and "falling into it". I think Atwood tries to distinguish between two notions of love. One is when you, as used in common English, fall in love. Another one is when you fall/break down from love. Moreover, this part of stream of consciousness is evident in the beginning of extract, "I don't want to be telling this story... I don't hav eto tell it. I don't have to tell anything, to myself or to anyone else. I could just sit here, peacefully. I could withdraw. It's possible to go so far in, so far down and back, they could never get you out." Bit of a contrast in two stream of consciousness huh?
Diction is another literary element that contributes the author's message that women fall in love and that women fall for men. The register such as "falling in love" and "falling for him; we are falling women" demonstrate how women fall in love to fall for men. In other words, after they fall in love, they make sacrifices for men, which is unreasonable. Atwood uses language that lists something cumulatively for enhanced rhetorical emphasis. An instance from the excerpt is "the more difficult it was to love the particular man beside us, the more we believed in Love, abstract and total. We were waiting, always, for the incarnation."
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Women Finally WON! (well, not really... not "yet")
Successful FEMINISM resulted women being equal to men. Well, it seemed to be. Women had "made it", cheered Madison Avenue, because they could accomplish lots of things that they couldn't before. They have enrolled at "any" university, joined "any" law firms, and applied for credit at "any" bank. According to corporate, company leaders (I'm assuming they were male leaders who said this), there is no need to have women's equal opportunity policies. The reason is that they have become equal. Lawmakers (also male lawmakers I assume) also mention similar issue; an Equal Rights Amendment does not mean much.
But there are always HOWEVER's. I do not know whether you have noticed me foreshadowing this "however" by using parenthesis- more specifically, to indicate that they men are usually the ones who make such "comments". Some examples I can provide with can include: Childless women are depressed and bewildered; high powered women suffer from stress-inducted disorders, hair loss, and alcoholism; independent women have major health problems these days. Is this not ironic? I mean this is more than just ironic; it is more paradoxical than ironic. Women are in so much trouble these days- perhaps in more trouble than those who lived before the rebirth of feminism- yet they are supposed to celebrate. Their status has never been higher yet their emotional state has never been so much lower. Here's why!!:
The reason I believe comes from their ""EXPECTATIONS"". More specifically, it is their expectations of being equally granted with the men. For instance, the percentage of women complaining because of unequal employment opportunities jumped more than 10 per cent from the 70s. This can suggest that despite more women being employed, and more women being employed into better career, men who graduate with high school diploma are equally likely to get into job that women can get into with university degree.
Similar notion, although not very conspicuous, is evident in The Handmaid's Tale. The Gilead tries to manipulate and deceive fertile women by distinguishing them from infertile women. People in the positions of authority of the Gilead do this by assigning different tasks to fertile from infertile women. Or, wives of commanders are distinguished from "Of" women and infertile women who exist in the low hierarchy of the society. However, wives are still being gullified by the state because how devastating is it to see a random woman having sex with one's husband?
But there are always HOWEVER's. I do not know whether you have noticed me foreshadowing this "however" by using parenthesis- more specifically, to indicate that they men are usually the ones who make such "comments". Some examples I can provide with can include: Childless women are depressed and bewildered; high powered women suffer from stress-inducted disorders, hair loss, and alcoholism; independent women have major health problems these days. Is this not ironic? I mean this is more than just ironic; it is more paradoxical than ironic. Women are in so much trouble these days- perhaps in more trouble than those who lived before the rebirth of feminism- yet they are supposed to celebrate. Their status has never been higher yet their emotional state has never been so much lower. Here's why!!:
The reason I believe comes from their ""EXPECTATIONS"". More specifically, it is their expectations of being equally granted with the men. For instance, the percentage of women complaining because of unequal employment opportunities jumped more than 10 per cent from the 70s. This can suggest that despite more women being employed, and more women being employed into better career, men who graduate with high school diploma are equally likely to get into job that women can get into with university degree.
Similar notion, although not very conspicuous, is evident in The Handmaid's Tale. The Gilead tries to manipulate and deceive fertile women by distinguishing them from infertile women. People in the positions of authority of the Gilead do this by assigning different tasks to fertile from infertile women. Or, wives of commanders are distinguished from "Of" women and infertile women who exist in the low hierarchy of the society. However, wives are still being gullified by the state because how devastating is it to see a random woman having sex with one's husband?
Monday, November 8, 2010
The Irony of Freedom
Despite the active involvement of advocates of feminism for two decades that led to the "rebirth" of feminism in the 1970s, women, today, ironically, are not better off than those who had lived before the rebirth of feminism. First and most importantly, women have gained reproductive and legal rights. Furthermore, they have been more likely to pursue higher education which have resulted them entering trades and professions. However, problem arises here. Women who are more "loaded", "educated", and most importantly, "liberated" are not as free as before. In other words, women can now enjoy freedoms that were unavailable to them in the past, yet they feel more restricted than ever before. Very ironical is it not? Let me explain why this is not ironical but is actually paradoxical.
Before women were granted freedoms in the 1970s, they were free from many of things. Women were restricted in terms of legal rights, progressing to tertiary or quaternary educations, and entering trades. Today, women have freedom in terms of legal rights, educational rights, and trade union rights. Yet, they feel less free because they are preoccupied with appearance/image. They are concerned with bodies, facees, hair and clothes. They value the "surface" more than the "matter" itself. As a result, it causes stress to those women. Eating disorders have been rising exponentially to keep their "hot looks"; comestic surgery has become the rapidest growing medical industry, again, to improve "looks". Here is one example of eating disorders that happen during model contest. Some contestants suffer from anorexia nervosa to keep their minimal wieght. In Korea, many women's lack of confidence in their appearance results in the nation's rate of cosmetic surgery being the highest in the world. Today, the "self" restricts freedom rather than some forces external from the self. (NB: Carl Rogers, one of the humanistic psychologists, once said people are free to do anything or at least have the capacity for individual freedom to do anything if they are fully integrated beings- the gap between their actual selves and ideal selves should be minimised.)
Relating this notion of ironical (or paradoxical- the fact that women does not seem to be more free than before though they gained more freedom from the society) freedom to The Handmaid's Tale, the ironical part is that Offred is not aware whether she is more or less free than before. Completely by the corrupted state, Gilead, and under constant surveillance from the Eyes, she does not fully motivate herself to engage in activities that can change the way the society treats her. Instead, she seems to be motivated by Nick, who at the end of the novel, guides her to the Mayday.
Before women were granted freedoms in the 1970s, they were free from many of things. Women were restricted in terms of legal rights, progressing to tertiary or quaternary educations, and entering trades. Today, women have freedom in terms of legal rights, educational rights, and trade union rights. Yet, they feel less free because they are preoccupied with appearance/image. They are concerned with bodies, facees, hair and clothes. They value the "surface" more than the "matter" itself. As a result, it causes stress to those women. Eating disorders have been rising exponentially to keep their "hot looks"; comestic surgery has become the rapidest growing medical industry, again, to improve "looks". Here is one example of eating disorders that happen during model contest. Some contestants suffer from anorexia nervosa to keep their minimal wieght. In Korea, many women's lack of confidence in their appearance results in the nation's rate of cosmetic surgery being the highest in the world. Today, the "self" restricts freedom rather than some forces external from the self. (NB: Carl Rogers, one of the humanistic psychologists, once said people are free to do anything or at least have the capacity for individual freedom to do anything if they are fully integrated beings- the gap between their actual selves and ideal selves should be minimised.)
Relating this notion of ironical (or paradoxical- the fact that women does not seem to be more free than before though they gained more freedom from the society) freedom to The Handmaid's Tale, the ironical part is that Offred is not aware whether she is more or less free than before. Completely by the corrupted state, Gilead, and under constant surveillance from the Eyes, she does not fully motivate herself to engage in activities that can change the way the society treats her. Instead, she seems to be motivated by Nick, who at the end of the novel, guides her to the Mayday.
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Women < MEN
In The Handmaid's Tale, Women are the ones who are oppressed by the men, and thus, the men are able to take over them however they want. This applies in both Hook's Talking Back and Thao's Sins of Silence. In Talking Back, Hooks are born in to the world where women are "craving to speak, to have a voice" in order to have individuality or independence from men- in order to be identified as "belonging" of self rather than as possession of men. For women to speak is to make "soliloquy". However, it is not the medium to distinguish themselves as a belonging of self. It is nothing more than just talking to the plain air and is nothing more than just talking where no one listens. In Sins of Silence, the author communicates about women's internal torture because they cannot express what they really have in their mind. In the society she has grown up where patriarchy still dominates, women only live to serve men. They always have to be "good, obedient, and smile silently" as they swallow the bitterness that men give them. One painful example is when Thao smiles to elder men giving her kisses on cheek. From her perspective, it is more like a "wet, slow licks".
Unfortunately, though not as extreme as before, the gap between men and women still exists today. One instance is within the teenagers. There are many boys whistling to "chicks" who walk past by. However, girls do not- let me fix the phrase- girls cannot respond in a same way as the boys do. Another prime example is evident in workforces. There are so many rights reserved for women but barely any for men. Again, what does this suggest? It suggests women are still not free from men to the extent that they sometimes feel unsafe surrounded by men in the labour force. We still hear news about men sexually or physically harrassing women. We still live in a society where women is still > men, instead of women being = to men.
Unfortunately, though not as extreme as before, the gap between men and women still exists today. One instance is within the teenagers. There are many boys whistling to "chicks" who walk past by. However, girls do not- let me fix the phrase- girls cannot respond in a same way as the boys do. Another prime example is evident in workforces. There are so many rights reserved for women but barely any for men. Again, what does this suggest? It suggests women are still not free from men to the extent that they sometimes feel unsafe surrounded by men in the labour force. We still hear news about men sexually or physically harrassing women. We still live in a society where women is still > men, instead of women being = to men.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Blog Portfolio
1. Coverage
Ms Morgan wrote not to worry about the coverage aspect. She has already graded them.
2. Depth
http://jackjcaus.blogspot.com/2010/10/cell-world.html
3. Interaction
http://jackjcaus.blogspot.com/2010/10/george-orwells-world-of-english.html
4. Discussion
http://jackjcaus.blogspot.com/2010/10/cell-world.html
5. Xenoblogging
http://elizengblog.blogspot.com/2010/09/gulags-of-north-korea-and-weakness-of.html
6. Wildcard
http://jackjcaus.blogspot.com/2010/09/adventuring-novel.html
Ms Morgan wrote not to worry about the coverage aspect. She has already graded them.
2. Depth
http://jackjcaus.blogspot.com/2010/10/cell-world.html
3. Interaction
http://jackjcaus.blogspot.com/2010/10/george-orwells-world-of-english.html
4. Discussion
http://jackjcaus.blogspot.com/2010/10/cell-world.html
5. Xenoblogging
http://elizengblog.blogspot.com/2010/09/gulags-of-north-korea-and-weakness-of.html
6. Wildcard
http://jackjcaus.blogspot.com/2010/09/adventuring-novel.html
Monday, October 4, 2010
The Cell World
Actually, there was nothing new after reading the article, “Born and Raised in a North Korean Gulag”, because I knew these sorts of stuff before (having learnt Korean history when I was in primary school). North Korea is a society which the government totally shuts down the communication from the exterior world. Thus, the government is able to absolutely control its people’s mind throughout their entire life (unless, like Shin, one is told about the outside world). According to Shin, he had thought he was living in an ideal world before one of his friends told him about the world outside North Korea. Shin had “thought it was natural that [he] was in the camp because of [his] ancestors’ crime, though [he] never even wondered what that crime was... [he] did not think it was unfair.”
In North Korea, people from their childhood to death, unless they become aware of the outside world, praise Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il their entire lives. Their fundamentality is that both Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il have created utopia. When people in North Korea refer to both Kims, they say “Uobouy Suryong” and “Abouji” respectively (pretty much equivalent to calling “my Lord” to God in Christianity).
I also think that it will be hectic if there is a revolt after decent number of people find out about the outside world and realise that they actually live in dystopia not utopia. The concept will be similar to the revolt that happens in WE.
In North Korea, people from their childhood to death, unless they become aware of the outside world, praise Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il their entire lives. Their fundamentality is that both Kim Il-sung and Kim Jong-il have created utopia. When people in North Korea refer to both Kims, they say “Uobouy Suryong” and “Abouji” respectively (pretty much equivalent to calling “my Lord” to God in Christianity).
I also think that it will be hectic if there is a revolt after decent number of people find out about the outside world and realise that they actually live in dystopia not utopia. The concept will be similar to the revolt that happens in WE.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
George Orwell's World of ENGLISH
George Orwell, most probably, had written this essay because he would have been so much frustrated with the way people have used English to the extent that they have abused the English language. In the essay, he uses an analogy of preferring candles to electric light, and hansom cab to aeroplane, as people stubbornly stick to archaic writing (using foreign phrases, scientific words, and jargons while everday language can be used).
Though I do not agree with all his opinions, I understand what he is getting at. The reason is that far too many people, by trying to sophisticate their use of language, make their prose a mixture of vagueness and sheer incompetence. This is evident from the five examples that Orwell provides in the beginning of his essay. The first example is from Professor Laski where he uses five negatives in a sentence. The second one, from Professor Hogben uses term in the wrong context. An essay on psychology in Politics contains a number of circumlocutions. The fourth example, Communist Pamphlet, has lots of phrases that are stale. The final one, Letter in Tribune, lacks in detail because words and meanings do not really match. What I disagree with Orwell is some of his "rules" that cover(?) most errors in writing. Firstly, he insists not to use any figurative language which one is used to seeing used often. Well, I just think that he is making an induction. Because figurative languages he had seen are bad, it does not mean all figurative languages that we use are bad. I also do not agree with the fourth one. He says "NEVER" use the passive voice where active voice can be used. This is not always the case. How about this?- 1984 was written by George Orwell.
Though I do not agree with all his opinions, I understand what he is getting at. The reason is that far too many people, by trying to sophisticate their use of language, make their prose a mixture of vagueness and sheer incompetence. This is evident from the five examples that Orwell provides in the beginning of his essay. The first example is from Professor Laski where he uses five negatives in a sentence. The second one, from Professor Hogben uses term in the wrong context. An essay on psychology in Politics contains a number of circumlocutions. The fourth example, Communist Pamphlet, has lots of phrases that are stale. The final one, Letter in Tribune, lacks in detail because words and meanings do not really match. What I disagree with Orwell is some of his "rules" that cover(?) most errors in writing. Firstly, he insists not to use any figurative language which one is used to seeing used often. Well, I just think that he is making an induction. Because figurative languages he had seen are bad, it does not mean all figurative languages that we use are bad. I also do not agree with the fourth one. He says "NEVER" use the passive voice where active voice can be used. This is not always the case. How about this?- 1984 was written by George Orwell.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
The Deception of Truth
Most of guys in the class gave presentations on "OBJECTIVE TRUTH" last lesson. It was actually interesting to find out that no one's argument was very close to the 'objective' end of the spectrum. There is a possibility that there is no objective truth (which will be part of my argument today). So the only way to make something like the "objective truth" is to manipulate it and make it deceiving for others.
In 1984, the official Party of the totalitarian government of Airstrip One manipulates truth by altering historical records in order to match the Party's version of past events. This, from the viewpoint of the citizens in the society, is an "objective truth". There is a similar concept where Japanese students learn in history class that their invasion in Korea for 35 years was not an invasion but was a mean of aiding Korea in order to improve their economic development.
In 1984, the official Party of the totalitarian government of Airstrip One manipulates truth by altering historical records in order to match the Party's version of past events. This, from the viewpoint of the citizens in the society, is an "objective truth". There is a similar concept where Japanese students learn in history class that their invasion in Korea for 35 years was not an invasion but was a mean of aiding Korea in order to improve their economic development.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Adventuring a Novel~~
(Wow I just can't believe I'm doing this during SAISA, in Dhaka- lol!)
Well, the title strikes me first- "The Psychology of the Novel". And the text basically has some points that relate to the topic I am learning now in psychology such as reason versus emotion, sensation and perception. I agree that "The basic substance of imaginative literature is not reason but emotion". Any writer who composes his/her novel should be spontaneous- it should result from his/her natural impulse. If reason is what the author uses during his/her writing for the majority of time, then he/she is an amateur (at least that is what I believe).
When a reader journeys through a novel, he/she must understand that it is not "words" that exist in the book but it is "images with feelings attached" that help the reader with the journey. How boring would it be if one reads just "words" in a story? I'm sure it would be more exciting if one reads "connotations" and "colours" of words employed by author. Also, when we talk about images used constantly throughout the novel, they are not for one reader. The images that the responder perceives are open to interpretation. There are many different images for many different readers in a novel. The reason is that one's way of comprehending a stimulus is no same to another's because we are all different.
One of the crucial elements according to this author is "the qualities of the voice". The voice is present at all times- happy, aloof, friendly, sarcastic, charming and angry. If the reader likes the voice, he/she is more likely to concentrate on the character, theme, scenes and etc. Voice is what establishes initial impressions among responder. It draws, attracts, and builds trust among readers.
Well, the title strikes me first- "The Psychology of the Novel". And the text basically has some points that relate to the topic I am learning now in psychology such as reason versus emotion, sensation and perception. I agree that "The basic substance of imaginative literature is not reason but emotion". Any writer who composes his/her novel should be spontaneous- it should result from his/her natural impulse. If reason is what the author uses during his/her writing for the majority of time, then he/she is an amateur (at least that is what I believe).
When a reader journeys through a novel, he/she must understand that it is not "words" that exist in the book but it is "images with feelings attached" that help the reader with the journey. How boring would it be if one reads just "words" in a story? I'm sure it would be more exciting if one reads "connotations" and "colours" of words employed by author. Also, when we talk about images used constantly throughout the novel, they are not for one reader. The images that the responder perceives are open to interpretation. There are many different images for many different readers in a novel. The reason is that one's way of comprehending a stimulus is no same to another's because we are all different.
One of the crucial elements according to this author is "the qualities of the voice". The voice is present at all times- happy, aloof, friendly, sarcastic, charming and angry. If the reader likes the voice, he/she is more likely to concentrate on the character, theme, scenes and etc. Voice is what establishes initial impressions among responder. It draws, attracts, and builds trust among readers.
Monday, August 30, 2010
Forests: The Shadow of Civilisation
[1] First the Forests
In this chapter, Harrison discusses how humanity has been affected by “forests” from the beginning to the modern civilisation. He uses Rome as a prime example of a society that emerged from forests. More specifically, “when Aeneas travels up the Tiber and comes to the site of the future imperial city,” he ends up in an amazing forest; contemporary Rome is a city that was not so long covered with forests. Rome became Rome because they overcame forests.
The composer then moves on to talk about the story of Vico. Vico describes that the spread of forests across the entire world was caused by the flood- the flood which caused Noah to build an ark. Descendants of Noah imperceptibly lost their humanity and became lonely because they lived under the cover of branches and leaves (forests). Consequently, they became “bestial giants”. Their personalities were introvert, vicious, restive, animalistic, and greedy. Vico calls this “giant’s ‘bestial freedom’”- freedom that originated from forests.
One day, there was this act of thinking something outside the square (of course, it was done by the bestial giants). After thunder rolled, lightning flashed, giants were terrified and raised their eyes above. They became aware of the sky. Though the dense forest limited the beasts from visioning sky both laterally and vertically, they had some sort of illumination. They began to question things- and came up with things like deities, science and law.
(This is a text that makes me think…)
In this chapter, Harrison discusses how humanity has been affected by “forests” from the beginning to the modern civilisation. He uses Rome as a prime example of a society that emerged from forests. More specifically, “when Aeneas travels up the Tiber and comes to the site of the future imperial city,” he ends up in an amazing forest; contemporary Rome is a city that was not so long covered with forests. Rome became Rome because they overcame forests.
The composer then moves on to talk about the story of Vico. Vico describes that the spread of forests across the entire world was caused by the flood- the flood which caused Noah to build an ark. Descendants of Noah imperceptibly lost their humanity and became lonely because they lived under the cover of branches and leaves (forests). Consequently, they became “bestial giants”. Their personalities were introvert, vicious, restive, animalistic, and greedy. Vico calls this “giant’s ‘bestial freedom’”- freedom that originated from forests.
One day, there was this act of thinking something outside the square (of course, it was done by the bestial giants). After thunder rolled, lightning flashed, giants were terrified and raised their eyes above. They became aware of the sky. Though the dense forest limited the beasts from visioning sky both laterally and vertically, they had some sort of illumination. They began to question things- and came up with things like deities, science and law.
(This is a text that makes me think…)
Friday, August 27, 2010
"Questions of Conquest" vs "Freedom and Democracy"
Both "Questions of Conquest" and "Freedom and Democracy" have a common theme of dystopia. While QOC explores dystopia in terms of the conquest of the Tawantinsuyu by Spaniards, FOD encapsulates the theme by incorporating that education restricts one's individuality.
QOC:
Though the Inca Empire was a civilised society that had reached a high level of military, agricultural, and handicraft development that in many ways Spain had not reached, the individuals had no value (even no existence) in the hierarchical society, and thus the society was very fragile. As a result, when the Empire was demolished by the Spaniards, it was unable to function properly.
FOD:
Education, often, results in the loss of individuality. Education eliminates antagonistic reaction to a stimulus, and one is taught to restrain the awareness of hostility and insincerity in others. Original thinking is further discouraged because one is forced to learn knowledge of facts. The knowledge of facts are something that takes up the space for originality.
QOC:
Though the Inca Empire was a civilised society that had reached a high level of military, agricultural, and handicraft development that in many ways Spain had not reached, the individuals had no value (even no existence) in the hierarchical society, and thus the society was very fragile. As a result, when the Empire was demolished by the Spaniards, it was unable to function properly.
FOD:
Education, often, results in the loss of individuality. Education eliminates antagonistic reaction to a stimulus, and one is taught to restrain the awareness of hostility and insincerity in others. Original thinking is further discouraged because one is forced to learn knowledge of facts. The knowledge of facts are something that takes up the space for originality.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Response on the Correlation between “On Language” and WE
Zamyatin is the epic writer of WE. He creates the setting in the text, which seems like an illusion of actual life from the responder’s point of view. Initially, he entices his readers into the world of the “One State”. The One State consists of people who are given numbers for their identification and they are forced to be happy. The language he uses throughout matches with the milieu and period portrayed. A good example is the language which describes the absurdity of killing, “To kill one individual… to diminish the total sum of human lives by fifty years, was criminal.” The average life expectancy at the time Zamyatin wrote the text was fifty and this milieu matches his language. Not only does the writer use language but also creates it. He has created his rules and forms by using authoritative first-person narration, “I shall simply copy, word for word…” By talking directly to the audience, there is intimate relationship between him and the responder. The story is more lively and exciting, “I love- I am certain I can safely say, we love- only such a sterile, immaculate sky.” Furthermore, the use of neologisms adds to the development and enrichment of Zamyatin’s language. One of his created word is “sic”, which adds to his emotion and feelings towards spring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)