Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Flaubert's Style
A Simple Soul, by Gustave Flaubert, is a text where we can clearly see a style called Free Indirect Style, a style in which the writer is 3rd person omnicient narrator, that describes the emotions of a person without dialogue. In It, the author needs to characterizise, narrate and describe the character and his/ her feelings. Flaubert does this with ease. Felicite is described in a way that we can picture her almost perfectly, feel what she feels, her despair, her love, her emotions, and Flaubert not once specifies what she's feeling, just by the way she is described. Flaubert is very detailed in most of the writing, describing most of the context in which Felicite is in, what happens to her, etc. Another adjective very appropriate to this style is realistic. Flaubert pretty much tries to immitate what life was, how Madam Aubain treats badly Felicite, how she pretends to like her when she inside always thinks that she's lower class and ignorant. I myself have tried this style, and it's very hard to accomplish, because not evreyone has the capacity of making the reader feel the emotion of the character, like Flaubert can.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
The Thoughts Of All Men
While I was reading Poem 17 of Walt Whitman's Leaves Of Grass, it started out as "These are the thoughts of all men in all ages and lands-". I thought of it very curious that a poem starts like that, Then i kept reading and at the end there was another line that caught my attention again, "This is the grass that grows wherever the land is, and the water is;/ this is the common air that bathes the globe." The poem talks about things like if its not as much yours as mine, then it is not the same. It was cool that the guy talked about his thoughts being the ones of all the world, and then comparing it to the grass, because the grass grows wherever there is land, and he says that these thoughts grow wherever there is people.
"These are the thoughts of all men in all ages and lands—they are not original with me; | |
If they are not yours as much as mine, they are nothing, or next to nothing; | |
If they are not the riddle, and the untying of the riddle, they are nothing; | |
If they are not just as close as they are distant, they are nothing. | |
This is the grass that grows wherever the land is, and the water is; | |
This is the common air that bathes the globe." Most of the poems talk about grass, this one is no exception. I wonder what does Whitman mean when he talks about the thoughts of all men. He says "they are not original with me;", which I am guessing makes reference to the fact that he is not the creator of the thoughts, he is just another individual man with the thought, another leaf of grass. |
Monday, November 9, 2009
Badly Written, Mr. Pynchon
While I was reading The Crying of Lot 49, chapter 3 specifically, there were a couple errors I found. For example, in page 33 it says "Report All Obsene Mail To Your Potsmaster", and clearly the word Potsmaster is wrongly written. They do find out in the novel, so it must be there for you to see is at well. There was a cool part which Oedipa starts talking a little french, and says something about her not knowing something, a very weird something! Then, as well, the author suddenly changes the name of the city. He used to talk about San Narciso, who later in the story became San Francisco. I also noticed that the author likes to put funny names on the characters, like Mucho Maas ( a lot more in spanish), Dr. Hilarius (the 'serious' psychotherapist, and now Mike Fallopian, part of the Peter Penguid Society. What's with the names of these people.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
What The KCUF?
I just began reading the book The Crying of Lot 49, by Thomas Pynchon, and it is really weird! The first chapter was like a collection of many different texts put together. It made no sense to me, I don't know if I was not focused enough, but I couldn't make a sense of what it said. I noticed many things, like where the title comes from. KCUF is the radio station at where Mucho Maas wroks at. These are weird things that appear in the book. It's as if the author wanted to show us something, and he does it very straightforward because you can tell he's mocking something. Or just make us laugh, because he has plenty more examples. San Narciso is where Oedipa goes, obviously San Narciso is a mockery of San Francisco, meaning everyone there is narcisist. It might have a relation with gay people, because San Francisco is quite known for having many. Also, the name of the main character, Oedipa, could be metaficcion, having a relationship with Oedipus Rex. Up to now there have been no demosntrations of it, but maybe later in the novel that shall come up. I noticed a guy called Dr. Hilarious, who is a psychotherapist. Very ironical was when he talks about Mucho's job, and says it's an "exquisit torture"(pg 4). Obviously if it's exquisit it can't be torture. Thigs like this make the book funny, I hope it's fun the whole way, because I can't find seriousness in it!
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Something To Talk About...
At the beggining of chapter 5, there was a metaphor that I really liked. It is a parragraph long, yet it is very impressive so I'd really like to share it. It goes as follows "For instance moles and blackbirds do not eat each other, mate with each other, or compete with each other for living space. Even so, we must not treat them as completely insulated. They may compete for something, perhaps earthworms. This does not mean you will ever see a mole and a blackbird engaged in a tug of war over an earthworm; indeed a blackbird may never set his eyes on a mole in his life. But if you wiped out the population of moles, the effect of might be dramatic" (Page 66). I'd like to apply that to a story I just invented. There are three people in it. Paco, Juan, and Camila. Paco and Camila are good friends, and Juan and Camila are good friends, but Paco and Juan don't even know the other exists. One bad day, Paco had a heart attack and died. Everyone is sad, mainly Camila. Juan didn't know Paco existed, but he is so affected by Camila's sudden sad and depressed attitude that he is kind of manipulated to being similar. His mood is now down, as well as Camila's, for someone he didn't even know. Both cases, the blaackbirds and worms metaphor and mine are similar. It is easy to let ourselves be carried by what we have around us. T.V. is almost always a bad influenze, some radio programs are as well, music, videogames and other people sometimes make us change our mood according to theirs. I don't know if this is bad or not, and I kind of can relate it to the book in the sense that this is a selfish act, because we unconscuosly make others feels as bad and sad as we are. I guess we just need to stop letting ourselves be carried by other's feelings and moods.
What Type Of Book Is This?
I am a little further through The Selfish Gene, and it just seems to me as if I were reading a book assigned to my Pre AP Biology course! All it talks about is DNA replication, genes, nucleotides and those kind of stuff I learned about a moth ago. It's getting a little frustrating for me because I had some trouble learning this info well explained (there is a lot I still don't understand), well less am I going to get it from a book that just barely quickly talks about the topic. I don't like to be reading a science book in english class! I have read these weird kinds of texts before in class and have learned to read them and analyze them, look at them as texts, books, not what they are. It's like when we read the Bible. I read it as a very important english text, not as a religious book to follow. What is wrong about this book is that you cannot analyze things like "A DNA molecule is a long chain of building blocks, small molecules called nucleotides" (Page 22). There's just npthing metaphorical about it, nothing satyrical or ironic. They are just science facts. The funny thing is I remembered about my biology teacher when I started reading the book, and the next day in class asked her if she had read the book, and she said she was reading it just now! So for my english class i'm reading the same book that my biology teacher is reading, a book filled with science facts.. weird!
What Does It Mean?
Reading the first few chapters of Richard Dawkins's The Selfish Gene, there were many words he describes that you need to know to be able to understand the book. A few of those words, some described by the author himself, are:
- Stable (thing): "A collection of atoms that is permanent enough or common enough to deserve a name. It may be a unique collection of atoms, such as the Matterhorn, that lasts long enough to be worth naming." (Page 12)
- Class (of entities): "Such as raindrops, that come into existence at a sufficiently high rate to deserve a collective name, even if one of them is short-lived." (Page 12)
- Selfishness: Increasing one's welfare at it's own interest to achieve one's goals. ( Kind of parafrazed by me, from page 4).
- Alturism: The opposite of selfishness. Increasing the welfare of the rest of the group to help oneself achieve one's goals. ( Kind of parafrazed by me, from page 4).
- Welfare: "Defined as 'chances of survival', even if the effect on actual life and death prospects is so small as to seem negligible." (Page 4)
- Survival Machine: "It embraces all animals, plants, bacteria and viruses"(Page 21) I would add to it 'all living species that have managed to survive over time'.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Why Are We People?
When i started reading Dawkins's The Selfish Gene, in chapter 1 I saw a quote, in page 1, when he says "We no longer have to resort to superstition when faced with deep problems: Is there a meaning to life? What are we for? What is man?". This quote made me remember my first ever Pre AP English class, when the first thing we were asked when entering was: What are we here for?, how did we get here?, and where are we going? What Dawkins says is we are here just because of evolution, not to fulfill any destiny or weird things like those. In my APEnglish class we read things like The Bible, Gilamesh, and many other things like thoser that made reference to God, destiny, and those superstitious things. This books contradics them, saying we're just evolution.
I Agree with most of what Dawkins says in his first chapter. He talks about us having this selfish gene, that makes us be the opposite of altirustic, meaning wanting the best for ourselves. Most animals are alturistic, because our gene wants it to. We don't have to follow our gene's instructions all our live, but we do most of the time because we like being selfish, not alturistic.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
I found this video on youtube. It kind of assimilates to Candide, because the priest is in a mission to kill the leader of the jesuits.
The relationship I found is that Candide wasn't on a mission, but he found the jesuit leader and killed him. I know it is a weird
relationship, but when I saw the video it really reminded me of that part of Candide. Candide does not go on a mission
to kill the jesuit, but he ends up killing him because the jesuit hit him with a sword. Candide has become a rebel! He has killed
three people now, and most without a valid reason. This video as well does not give us the reason why he wants the jesuit
leader killed, he just does. Candide as well, just wants him dead after fighting for Lady Cunegonde and being hit.
Who's Being Mocked Here?
Voltaire has many targets he mocks in Candide, but a very clear one in chapter XIII is the nobility, or high class, at the time. When Candide, Lady Cunegonde and the old lady arrive at Buenos Ayres, Don Fernando immediately falls for Lady Cunegonde. He asks if she is married, and Candide says no, so he declares his passion to her and asks for her hand in marriage. This is something very commonly seen, rich people handing out marriages thinking everyone will marry them because they are important and have money. This is not only back then, you still see it alot.
What is worse, Lady Cunegonde goes for advice to the old lady, ans she says 'yes marry him, he has money and is important'! So even though the guy thinks he's cool because he has money, she continues his flow and is about to say yes! She's a heartless b**ch! It's the second time she is with somebody for their money. Voltaire's making fun of both of them here.
On chapter 14, to see the target is even easier. Just by reading a couple pages I found it. It is again the high class, aristocracy. They think they are superior because they have money and power. In page 62 they say "An excellent dinner was served in gold plates, and while the paraguayans ate their maize on wooden dishes in the open field in the full blaze of the sun, his reverence the Colonel retired to the shade of his arbour". The Colonel makes his army eat simple things on simple plates in the hot sun, while he, in the shade, eats in golden plates. I kind of assimilated this to the way many people treat their maids, drivers, workers, ect. Give them inferior things, not let them even try to be higher class. Seems to me like things haven't changed much since.
Old Lady's Story
"Where shall I find more Inquisitors and Jews to replace them" (Page 46, Candide). Heartless. This is the only word to describe the 'lovely' and 'innocent' Lady Cunégonde that Candide is in love with. How would someone even think of something like that. HThis is a true picture of humanity, of how some women are. They just look for people because of the money, because they need something. It's what in spanish we would call 'descaro'.
I was very impressed by the old woman's behaviour. She helped Candide, gave him food, shelter, and even the love of his life back. She gave him advice, accompanied he and Lady Cunégonde everywhere and was very helful, but we don't know why. Then I kept reading, and she started telling them her life-story. It is horrible. Her first years were the life everyone wishes for, but then they started to get worse and worse. She had her parents slaughtered in front of her, was raped by a negro, was sold to a governor and then had to live a plague. Her life was a misery back then. She had one but-cheek cut off and have to live as a fugitive bartender in bars. She said "I have never forgotten that I am the daughter of a Pope"(Page 57).It's ironical that Voltaire says that, because popes can't have daughters, but deeper than that, you must never forget where you came from, this will always help you move on and continue with your life. This might be why the old lady is so kind, she remembered what had happened to her, so many people helped her, so she decided to help others.
Thoughts about Candide
There is a sentence in chapter 5 that really caught my attention. It is when Pangloss says to the sailor/ thief that was on the ship with them. To understand the context, Pangloss, Candide, James the anabaptist and the thief were on a ship, it sank, there was an earthquake and when they got to the destroyed land, the thief finds money and buys the pleasures of a girl. Pangloss grabs him and says to him "This will never do, my friend; you are not obeying the universal rule of Reason; you have misjudged the occasion." Obviously the other guy turns back and says "Bloody hell" (Page 34, Candide). If we see it from Pangloss' side, then obviously he's right. There is a disaster, everyone is dead or dying and this guy just comes in, steals money and has sex. It has no reason, as Pangloss said. Without even helping anyone he just comes and abuses. But, though, if we see it from the thief's view, well he was just on a ship for some time, was in a natural didaster, and who knows how much time since the last time he did it, so as a good low class person, he looks for the first easy sex he finds. It's kind of hard to see who Voltaire is mocking here, if he's mocking someone at all.
There was a part which reminded me a lot of a book I just read. In page 35, a man besides Pangloss says "for if all is for the best, there can be no such thing as the fall of Man and eternal punishment." I laughed and thought to myself 'this guy certainly hasn't read Dante's Inferno (haha)'.
Monday, October 12, 2009
Candide- Chapters 2-3
Voltaire has many different topics that he makes fun of in his book Candide, like war, romance, church, and many others. One he focuses a lot on is kings. He mocks them many times. There was a part I found that I consider it indirectly tries to mock the king. In page 23 he says "but what we want to know is wether you are a devoted admirer of the King of the Burglars... Oh but he is the most amiable of Kings..." (Pg 23, Candide). What I thought is they must be mocking all kings. They steal everyone's money, yet do some good things for the people. Voltaire might be indirectly mocking them by calling him the King of the Burglars.
Irony is a strong characteristic in satire. There is a lot of irony in Candide. In page 27 a minister says "Do you believe the pope is antichrist, my friend?" What the church says is that the pope is the messenger of God in Earth, so why would he be considered antichrist? Voltaire kind of mocks the church here by saying 'you're the ones who chose him', which leaves them with no one to blame. Candide says something to avoid answering the question, so the minister immediately falls on him telling him to leave immediately, what the church does in many cases. It's funny how each person can interpret satire how he wants.
Monday, September 28, 2009
Satire in Voltaire's Candide
Voltaire's Candide is satyrical in the sense that it has the four main satire characteristics. In page 19, It says "The baron was one of the most influential noblemen in Westphalia, for his house has a door and several windows and his hall was actually draped with tapestry. Every dog in the courtyard was pressed into service when he went hunting, and his grooms acted as whips."
It is hyperbolical that 'every dog in the courtyard was pressed into service', because it is an exaggeration. Irony is found in the part of teh door and windows, because obviously it is ironical that someone with a house with a door and windows is an important person, that is very common. This is in the literal sense, but analitical I think it is that the guy is mocking the people who think they can be important because they have an armored car with two motorbikes stoping traffic for them. The target, as said before, are those type of people who think that if they have expensive things then they have more power. As of absurdity, the whole parragraph seems absurd to me. There is a guy who think he's cool because his home has windows and a tapestry, and hunts with many dogs. *Newsflash*, your'e not cool! You are not cool if you live in a 5, 000 square meters house, unless you act cool with other people, be humble and respectful. This is a huge problem we have in our culture, the rich opressing the poor. It seems that this has been around for long, because Voltaire noticed it 200 years ago!
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Dear Robert Frost:
I am a stoic philosopher, also known as Epictetus. I write this letter from the heaves, because searching the internet I found one of your poems, The Road Not Taken. I found it great, it follows many of the advises I give in my own book, Handbook. In my book I talk alot about choices, about things thatr are up to us and things that aren't. Your poem has to do alot with that, in many aspects. I took my time to close-read your masterpiece, and interpreted that when you were young you had to do a very tough choice, obviously you couldn't take both paths, so you tried peeking (or foreseeing) into one, which then turned to the underworld. You, fairly enough decided to go through the other one, all by yourself, and now, in the third age, you tell your story with a sigh. You know, there are some things that are up to us, and some aren't. Destiny is not, and you couldn't avoid taking a desition. It must have been a lot of pressure, but you took control. A very important thing I like to teach is to not let the appearances trick you. You saw a bad thing coming through one path, and immediately took the other. The one you chose was bright, with treeas and grass and pretty. This could have been a fatal error, because appearances could have tricked you, thank the gods beside me that nothing happened. Well, I was just writing to say thankyou for sharing with the world such a great masterpiece. See you (hopefully) up here when your time comes, and may the gods bless you. Sincerely,
Epictetus.
Monday, September 21, 2009
I Don't Need To Prove You
In section 25 of Handbook, I realized one very important thing. You don't need to prove anything to everyone. If someone payed 1 million dollars for a Ferrari, and comes to you saying he has a Ferrari that cost him 1 million dollars, well you still have the 1 million dollars he spend them in a car. It might be stupid for you to spend them on a car, but if that's what he likes, it's his money. This relates to Epictetus because He states that you don't need to prove yourself enough to anyone. If you know you are honest, responsible, and have the same than the other guy, it is his problem if he doesn't like you. I once heard two people fight for something stupid, and one of them said something like "Judge Me All You Want, It Wont Make A Difference, Because I Know Who I Am And I Am Not On This Planet To Proove To You Why I Do What I Do. I Have My Reasons..". This is similar to what Epictetus said because he states that we don't need to prove why we do things, why we don't. He uses a great example, that is if someone is invited to a party and I am not, it is because I didn't work to get invited, therefore I kind of don't deserve it, but I don't need to feel bad for that. If I do something for someone, he will reward me in return, if I'm not interested, then I don't need to prove to anyone my reasons.
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Don't Let Appearances Carry You
One of the most important messages that Eptictetus's Handbook is that we can't "be carried away by the appearance" (Section 18, Handbook). This is a life-lesson, because many times, when we do let ourselves be carried, we end up losing something. It can be a girl we fell for, and she ends up going with someone else, because she was only in for the money. This line is repeated many times throughout chapters 1-20, and that is why I think he really wants us readers to have it clear. There are many other things he repeats, like when he says that somethings are up to us, and some aren't. He talks about death as an easy subject, and it isn't anything near to easy, but he does say something very important, which is "You are foolish if you want your children and your wife and your friends to live forever, since you are wanting things to be up to you that are not up to you, and things to be yours that are not yours.
As well, there are things that I disagree. He talks about death, or the loss os something as 'giving it back'(Section 11). I disagree especially the part that if someone dies you shall say he was just taken back. Death is just too harsh to create an excuse like that, because that is what it is: an excuse. There are some things that might pass that excuse, like things of less spiritual value e.g. a house, a cell phone, things like that, but not a life, it is far too valuable.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Handbook and 'Etica Para Amador'
Just by reading the first few chapter of Handbook, I noticed that, despite the name of the author (Epicteus) you can tell the book was written long ago. There are many clues to this, for example when he states "Our bodies are not up to us, nor are our possessions, our reputations, or our publoc offices" (Section one, Handbook). It is long ago since public offices were assigned. These days you choose what to study, what to work on, what to do in life. There was another part that was quite obvious, when he says "and will blame both gods and men" (Section one, Handbook). It has been a while now since the last time we praised many gods. I guess there are still some people who do so, but they wouldn't write about it in a book. The most obvious one, though, is at the beggining of the book, in the introduction, when they say "Epicteus (A.D. 50-130)" (Introduction, Handbook).
This book reminded me of a book I am reading for ethics class, in spanish, called 'Etica para Amador', by Fernando Savater. It reminds me because in some way it says the opposite. When Epicteus says "When you are about to undertake some action, remind yourself of what sort of action it is. If you are going out for a bath, put before your mind what happens at baths" (Section 4, Handbook). The book for my ethics class said the opposite. It stated that life is simple and we should not worry about simple things, like those, but do them naturally, because whe are accustomed to it.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Comments on Slaughterhouse 5
You can tell that Vonnegut's novel Slaughterhouse 5 is not ment to be formal. I confirmed it when he says, "She had a Xerox of it" (Chapter 9, SH5).
Xerox: 'A trademark used for a photocopying process or machine employing xerography. This trademark often occurs in print in lowercase as a verb and noun' ( http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Xerox ).
The word xerox in its original meaning is the name of a company, which produce photocopying machines, but has turned into a neologism. It is now two different nouns, and a verb. A xerox can be either a copying machine, or the actual copy, used in Slaughterhouse 5. The verb xerox is to make a photocopy of something. As the word is not very formal, then the text becomes informal/ familiar.
I found an interesting part in the text. My classmates and I have wondered a lot about the 'time travel' that Billy claims to make, but in a part he kind of contradics himself. Billy's daughter says, 'Daddy,' she said tentatively. 'Daddy? ' But Billy was ten years away, back in 1958' (Chapter 9, SH5). This also confirmed my hypothesis, that Billy doesn't time travel, just day (or night) dreams as any other human, but has flashbacks in his dreams. His daughter is there calling him, but he is in the middle of a dream/ flashback. There might be a more metaphorical reason for the 'time travel', but for now i'm quite sure that they're just dreams.
Billy also has a very strange thing, the Tralfamadorians. He is the only one that believes in them, but strangely, one of the Kilgore Trout books is about a couple of humans, 'They were put on display in a zoo on a planet called Zircon-212' (Chapter 9, SH5)This is the same that happened to Billy, so either he is just imagining these things to go out of his world, his problems, or Vonnegut is trying to tell us something, using the Tralfamadorians as transmitters.
Monday, September 14, 2009
Got What He Wanted (Chapter 8)
In chapter nine of Slaughterhouse 5, there is a man called Kilgore Trout. He writes science-ficcion books, but he is not a very popular writer. Long-story short, Billy has the chance of reading a book of his, and becomes a real fan. He starts reading many and many of these Trout books, and one day sees that Trout lives in his hometown. Time passes, and destiny finally brings them together. Billy meets him while the guy needs to hand out newspapers, and as Billy recognizes him, and offers help doing so. Well they become friends, and Billy invites Trout to his 18th marriage anniversary. Trout is a writer, but no one really recognizes him, and in the party everyone finds out that they have a real writer between them. Vonnegut says: 'He was making a great hit. Everybody was ed to have a real author at the party, even though they had never
read his books.' (Chapter 8, SH5) As mentioned before, destiny is present in various scenes of Slaughterhouse 5, and here we see it again. It also relates to karma. He has never done evil (or the book just never specifies), and even though he never was really popular, he finally got what he deserved: to be recognized and 'admired' for what he does best in life.
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Destiny in the Slaughterhouse (Chapter 7)
Destiny is pretty clear in Slaughterhouse, and there is a really strange part, when destiny appears. Has it never happened that you meet someone and kind of hate him but you don't know him enough like to do so, and then he appears to be related in some type? It has happened to me, and it has happened to Billy Pilgrim as well. It says 'They were, in fact, distant cousins, something they never found out.' (Chapter 7) What are the chances! Billy, a typical american studying optometry is related to the german kid who is guarding him at Dresde, being a war prisoner. Sad part is they never find out. It makes me doubt, though, that in the beggining of the book, the narrator sais most things are true. Is this the type of event that he means is not true? I find it very curious that Billy Pilgrim be related to a german kid, but I'm not the one writing the book. Perhaps it is true, and it is destiny and karma that Billy be guarded by his younger, german faraway cousin. Destiny is present in many other opportunities, maybe because Kurt Vonnegut has had his own experiences with it and reflects it in his writing.
Who's It Mocking? (Chapter 6)
There was a part of SlaughterHouse 5 that made laugh a little. It is ironic, stupid, exaggerated and doesn't make sense, also called satire. It is a part that an englishman, in the middle of a war, says: 'If you stop taking pride in your appearance, you will very soon die.' He said that he had seen several men die in the following way: They ceased to stand up straight, then ceased to shave or wash, then ceased to get out of bed, then ceased to talk, then died. There is this much to be said for it: it is evidently a very easy and painless way to go.' (Chapter 6, SH5.) I think it is the most stupid, exaggerated and senseless thing ever said! How could there be people so shameless and insolent. It is amazing how, when there are millions of people being killed, some by him, some beside him. Every day he sees dead people, hurt people, prisoners, and all he can think about is himself and how he looks! Apart from that, I thought the following: Why would a man, being surrounded by hundreds of other men in war, care for how he looks? There must be something wrong with this guy's sexual orientation or something!' I won't say anything else, because I don't want to make asumptions, but this guy really needs to check himself out.
Well, back to the satire, this statement has the four important elements to be considered satire. Irony: what more ironic that a man who cares about his looks in war. Exaggeration: 'If you stop taking pride in your appearance, you will very soon die.', obviously not bound to happen. Absurdity: the whole thing is absurd, doesn't make sense. Target: obviously the englishmen, being mocked for being dirty and smelly. I guess this answers my question, 'who's it mocking?'
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Steal The Heart, Or Steal The Money (Chapter 5)
After (finally) finishing reading chapter five of Slaughterhouse Five, there was a specific part that was stuck on my head. It was the part when Billy Pilgrim was morphined and was dreaming. At the same time he was time-travelling. He was at the hospital, because he was 'crazy' and his fiancee was here to visit him. "Billy didn't want to marry ugly Valencia. She was one of the symptoms of his disease." He described her as "She was as big as a house because she couldn't stop eating." (Pg 38-39, Slaughterhouse 5. Kurt Vonnegut) But before that, he had described her as rich, and her dad was rich, and owned a great company, and gave Billy a great job. This was the part that I kept on thinking on, becuase this is mainly how the greedy human kind works. If they find a fat, ugly, but rich girl, they would spend the rest if their lives with her just because of her money, and because the family has given them a great job of at least 30,000 dollars a year. From my point of view, it is one of the two following options: weather the person really likes their partner in the inside, feels butterflies in the stomach when they are together and would really spend the rest of their lives with because this person treats them the way they like, or they are pure gold-diggers. We can find both cases, and most of the cases are easily distinguishable. If in the news it appears '24 year old man marries a billionaire 70 year old' and the guy says ''I really like her, it's not for the money'', and two days later the lady dies of food poisoning, then our answer is pretty obvious. Maybe Billy Pilgrim did like Valencia, and as he time travelled a lot he said that he had seen everything and it was OK, then it might be that he doesn't mind being with her. I guess I have to finish the book to see what ends up with those two and see if Billy Pilgrim is a gold-digger!
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
And I Quote...Dr. Tralfamadorian (Chapter 4)
Reading chapter four of Slaughterhouse 5, I found a very nice quote I wanted to focus on. Billy claims to have been obducted by these aliens called Tralfamadorians. As their name says so, they come from a planet called Tralfamadore. One night, Billy couldn't sleep. He wakes up, goes to the kitchen, tries to pop some champagne, but it was gasless. He had a strange feeling that he was going to be obducted. This was the night of his daughter's marriage. He went out to his back yard, and out of the sudden a round spaceship came and opened itself, coming out of it, a ladder. Billy knoew he had to grab himself, and he did. The ladder was electrified, to keep him tighly grabbed up to the top. The Tralfamadorians have the capacity to travel through space and time, and this is why they appeared so suddenly. These aliens talked through computer machines, and they talked a little, when one of the green little guys said to Billy: "'If I hadn't spent so much time studying Earthlings,' said the Tralfamadorian, 'I
wouldn't have any idea what was meant by "free will." I've visited thirty-one inhabited plants in the universe, and I have studied reports on one hundred more. Only on Earth is there any talk of free will.' " (Pg 31, SH5. Kurt Vonnegut)
I thought this was a very powerful thought. We just came from reading books about utopias/ distopias, and in most of them there is no free will. We don't know what we have untill we lose it, and even though in this case we haven't lost it (yet), well it made me think a lot about earth without free will. Nobody could say what they like, what they think, no relationships, no choosing careers, no books, no freedom. Could you imagine if earth, or your own country was liek this? I would not like to be a Tralfamadorian, as long as they don't have free will no.
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Billy Is Crazy! (Chapter 3)
The other day I was browsing an article about the last veteran of WW1 or something like that, and that he just died. This started a long talk between my father and my oldest brother. In a part of the conversation my dad explains t us that there is this very terrible thing called the after-war syndrome. It is a syndrome that, after you have seen people die, have killed hundreds of people, ruined families, teared down cities, and all the horrible things that war causes, once it is over, you keep having flashbacks. You close your eyes and find yourself back at war, behind enemy lines, but this closing your eyes issue is also called sleeping. What I think Billy is experiencing is after-war syndrome. This quote basically gives him out: "The photographer wanted something more lively, though, a picture of an actual capture. So the guards staged one for him. They threw Billy into shrubbery. When Billy came out of the shrubbery, his face
wreathed in goofy good will, they menaced him with their machine pistols, as though
they were capturing him then. Billy's smile as he came out of the shrubbery was at least as peculiar as Mona Lisa's, for he was simultaneously on foot in Germany in 1944 and riding his Cadillac in 1967. Germany dropped away, and 1967 became bright and clear, free of interference
from any other time. Billy was on his way to a Lions Club luncheon meeting." (Chapter 3, page 21. Slaughterhouse 5, Kurt Vonnegut) This quote might seem a little long, but it is for everyone to understand the context. Billy is thrown to the ground by german soldiers and closes his eyes, and when he opens his eyes, he is driving a car going to a meeting. That is very peculiar. Also in a part, the narrator says Billy suddenly wept. I again think this is because of the stress levels he went through. Various times throughout the chapter and the novel he passes through the same thing, which makes me believe, he has after-war syndrome.
Poor ol' Billy! (Chapter 2)
All chapter two is devoted to the life of Billy Pilgrim. His life seems to be the toughest one I have heard of. He is one unlucky man, that Billy. His real name is William, but his father-in-law/teacher/ boss tells him to be called Billy because: it is an invitational name, a friendly one, it stays in people's minds (tell me about it) mainly because there are not many Billys. The point being, he has had a terrible life. He has seen his death and his birth-date various times, and all the events in between. He says he has no control over time, over where he goes next. He can close his eyes in his marriage day and open them being in the US ARMY lines fighting the WW2. He is a creepy guy. His whole life is surrounded by many unfortunate events. He enrolled in the Ilium School of Optometry and studied there for about six months. Then he payed his military service, well payed. He had to fight in WW2 against the Germans various times, was rescued, became a prisoner, etc. Once he was in a plane, and the plane crashed into a mountain leaving one survivor: Billy Pilgrim. While he was recuperating, his wife died accidentally of carbon-monoxide intoxication. His father, on the other hand, was shot dead by a friend while hunting deer, and his mother dies very old in an old people home. He claims to be kidnapped by Tralfamadorians, little green guys from the planet Tralfamadore. He claims to be able to be there for years and be the equal to less than a second of earth's time. With a life like that, no need for enemies! Also, I found this quote quite funny. "The soldiers' blue eyes were filled with bleary civilian curiosity as to why one
American would try to murder another one so far from home, and why the victim should laugh."(Page 18-19, Slaughterhouse 5, Kurt Vonnegut) Poor ol' Billy. He is given a real tough beat by a fat tough american soldier ( they are from the same side in the war) and right before being killed (literally, because Weary was about to kick his spine, which would probably kill him) the german officers save him just by staring at Weary. Saved by the enemies, how ironic!
P.S.: Mr. Tangen, the citation is on page 18 of my book, which is the PDF file you put online.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
O'Hare's Stories (Chapter 1)
I am not too deep into the book (Slaughterhouse-Five, Kurt Vonnegut), but I kind of have the feeling of what it's going to be like. It seems to me like the author was a soldier in World War 2, who obviously survived. He then goes to college, and then finds out he needs money. What better idea than to write a book about his adventures in the war, one of the many books there are. He thinks he is going to make a lot of money, because it is an interesting topic, so he starts to write the book. His memory starts to fail, and he has nothing more to write about. He starts to research for his veteran friends, and the operator comunicates him with an old friend, which he met and was prisoners with in war. He takes the trip to visit him, and they soon find out they don't remember much. He keeps searching, but nothing appears. He has nothing more to write his book about, and clearly it is not finished. He has some other ideas in mind for fiction books, and maybe some ither book,s but can't finish the book that was most important for him, the one about his past! His idea of the money making business of author starts to faint, when an idea strucks his brain: writing a book about the adventures he went through when he was trying to write the book about his past. Seems to him like a great idea, because he can tell about his past, and about his present, both in the same book. It's like having two stories in a book. So that's what he does. Write step by step his road writing the book, plus he gets to write about the flashbacks he has while he talks about his past. Great idea to make money. Clearly this is only a hypothesis, let's see what really happens!
Labels:
books,
house,
Kurt,
money,
slaughter,
slaughterhouse,
Vonnegut,
world war 2
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Inferno's Messenger
If I continued reading The Inferno, I would think that Dante would have a life of fear. He has seen a great amount of suffering and of pain in others, and by what I inferred today, he has changed. He will live a much careful life, with more caution to do nothing to gain a one way ticket to the Kingdom of Dis. Not only that, he will spread the word to the rest, warning them of how he changed with only watching them. We can see that at the end of the novel he changed and matured a lot, and he is a good hearted man. He will be like the messenger of the Inferno, sent specialy to warns the ones around him what their future awaits if they are sinners.
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
A Perfect World
We all wish we could live in a perfect world, a
One of peace and love. b
A land that doesn't spin and twirl, a
Guarded by the Lord above. b
One place without pain c
And have the typical white dove. b
We all should be a little more sane c
And think of all the people d
Before our world makes the final detain. c
Monday, August 24, 2009
Do They Deserve It?
After seeing Twilight Zone 2, I couldn't really decide wheather they deserved their punishment. There was two characters. They were opponents in the war, yet they were the two only survivers of the town. First the american beats her down and takes her food, but then he comes back and wakes her up, feeds her and introduces. She seems german and therefore does not understand him. To resume quickly, he finds a wedding dress and gives it to her. She was about to put it on when she sees pictures of american war propaganda and decides to shoot the man. She misses, and he stands up and leaves. Days after not seeing her, he gets ready to leave, and does so. He is about to leave when she appears with the dress on, and they are in love and leave together.
To begin with, I interpreted the punishment in the following way: The couple was opposite in war, and they are forced to live together. If this is their punishment, then it is not poetic justice. It is not poetic justice because it is no great punishment, they become a happy couple and leave the town together. They share their food, shave together and stay together for a while. They get mad for a while but then they hook up and get together. Again, they are not punished! They deserved to die, for what I interpred. They could have killed hundredths of people and they just end up in love. It was not punishments. It is not poetic justice.
Labels:
poetic justice,
punishment,
suffer,
Twilight zone
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Daniel Agudelo says: Hey Martin hows it going?
Martin Valencia says: Hey Daniel. Im fine how about you?
Daniel Agudelo says: I'm great!
Martin Valencia says: So glad! I'm doing a very interesting english homework. What are you doing?
Daniel Agudelo dice: Oh that sounds fun. Are you taking the Pre-AP class with Mr. Tangen?
Martin Valencia says: You bet I am! How about you?
Daniel Agudelo says: Of course, how would I miss such a great class.
Martin Valencia says: I thought the same thing! It's so much fun isn't it? I mean, aside from the fact you learn a lot!
Daniel Agudelo says: Yeah! Hey I say we stop talking about school, all this work is getting on my nerves. How was your summer?
MartinvalenciaA says: It was UnBelievable! So much fun at the same time I just couldn't believe it was happening!
Daniel Agudelo says: That sounds amazing! I am dying to hear more about it.
MartinvalenciaA says: I'll tell you whenever you want, Daniel. But enough of me already! How about your summer?
Daniel Agudelo says: OMG! Best summer of my life, no doubts. The only thing that hurt me was all of that summer reading! I mean it was a lot!
MartinvalenciaA says: I couldn't agree more. I spent my whole 11 hour flight Bogota- Madrid reading! But I did like 1984, though. It sure is one interesting book!
Daniel Agudelo says: You got that right it is pretty interesting and amusing, I couldn't stop reading.
MartinvalenciaA says: Same here! You know i'd love to stick around and talk to you Daniel, but it's almost past my bedtime! I'll guess I will see you tomorrow at Ap English class!
Daniel Agudelo says: That sounds great Martin! I can't wait. Sleep tight man see you tomorrow.
Labels:
conversation,
corrected,
english,
fixed,
msn,
msn conversation
Plethorogs!
Blogs are obviously taking the world! Now you don't have to pay for the newspaper to get acces to world news, gossip, sports, entertainment, etc. Everyone prefers blogs because they're free, limitless and can even be anonimous. I would expect media companies to be dropping off journalists. Blogs are better because they are short and to the point. You don't need to prove to anyone that you are a good writer, you don't have anyone watching what you write plus you don't even need to have good writing skills to have a blog. As a reader you can easily post a comment and make the blog better. You have the point of view of many different people on the same subject, you can search for every subject on the web and find thousands of blogs about it, it is practically perfect. There are, though, the bad things about it. Blogs on celebrities tend to do anything to get attention, they will tear the person apart, say lies, anything to get attention. There is even a T.V. show on a gossip blog about "the scandalous lives of Manhattan's Elite". The show is called Gossip Girl and basically people feed her news and she publishes them. That's when blogs become dangerous and mean. But those are only a few, most are dedicated to show the world what we need to know without paying for it!
Labels:
blog,
blogs,
english,
gossip,
gossip girl,
homework,
plethorogs,
post
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)