"Derby spoke movingly of the American form of government, with freedom and justice and opportunities and fair play for all. He said there wasn't a man there who wouldn't gladly fie for those ideals." pg 164 Vonnegut
I've got to say this book wasn't that bad. It was fairly easy to read and moved along quite quickly. It also made an interesting social commentary about the harsh realities of war. But overall I was left underwhelmed. There was no big climax or exciting scene. Even Vonnegut admitted that the closest moment to one was when poor old Edgar Derby stood up and defended America and its values. The author could have added some description of the bombing or some more interesting stuff about his alien encounters. Instead he chose to focus on the moments in a person's life and how they were effected by war. I understand he did this so as not to glamorize war by describing big action scenes and focusing on the despair of the people, but it was kind of boring. Maybe I'm just not deep enough to enjoy the social commentary, but I just didn't like it. Maybe I'm not supposed to like it though, because people aren't supposed to like war. Just maybe that was the point all along.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Slaughterhouse Five Anti-War
"I take it you find war a very comical thing... Did you expect us to laugh?" pg. 151 surgeon
So this book makes it very apparent just how terrible war is. It highlights all the awful deaths and bombings. It forces people to look at the harsh realities of war. But does this mean war should be done? And if there is never any war then what is the solution? World peace would be ideal but that probably will never happen. In fact, as sad as it is, I feel like war is inevitable. However I think that people cannot be so quick to jump to bloody, violent wars every time they have a dispute about something. If people would stop being so aggressive and focus more on finding peaceful solutions instead of focusing on making war machines then maybe a solution could come about. There will always be war but war doesn't always have to be going on. This book wants to force people to see how bad war is in hopes that people will be less likely to resort to war.
So this book makes it very apparent just how terrible war is. It highlights all the awful deaths and bombings. It forces people to look at the harsh realities of war. But does this mean war should be done? And if there is never any war then what is the solution? World peace would be ideal but that probably will never happen. In fact, as sad as it is, I feel like war is inevitable. However I think that people cannot be so quick to jump to bloody, violent wars every time they have a dispute about something. If people would stop being so aggressive and focus more on finding peaceful solutions instead of focusing on making war machines then maybe a solution could come about. There will always be war but war doesn't always have to be going on. This book wants to force people to see how bad war is in hopes that people will be less likely to resort to war.
Slaughterhouse Five Characterization
"There are almost no characters in this story, and almost no dramatic confrontations, because most of the people in it are so sick and so much the listless playthings of enormous forces. One of the main effects of war, after all, is that people are discouraged from being characters. But old Derby was a character now." pg. 164 Vonnegut
Even Vonnegut admits in this book that there is not a lot of characterization. He says this is because in the war everyone is so sick, tired, hungry, and worn out to be characters. However some do stand out that he focuses on. These include Billy Pilgrim of course, Lazarro, and Poor Old Edgar Derby. Billy Pilgrim represents all the soldiers that are driven mad because of the war. They lose their minds, and though they try to re-enter society they find that because of what they experience they can't. Lazzaro represents all the soldiers who are angry because of the war. Their hearts are full of anger and hate which is the source of the war. Edgar Derby represents the ideal soldier who does not want to fight, but steps up to protect freedom and the citizens of America. I believe that all those soldiers that aren't characterized actually stand for something as well. They represent the millions of soldiers everyone tries to forget about when they think about war. They become nameless casualties who no one wants to believe died so horribly. If society was forced to recognize their names and their life stories they would realize how terrible war is and wouldn't be so quick to resort to it.
Even Vonnegut admits in this book that there is not a lot of characterization. He says this is because in the war everyone is so sick, tired, hungry, and worn out to be characters. However some do stand out that he focuses on. These include Billy Pilgrim of course, Lazarro, and Poor Old Edgar Derby. Billy Pilgrim represents all the soldiers that are driven mad because of the war. They lose their minds, and though they try to re-enter society they find that because of what they experience they can't. Lazzaro represents all the soldiers who are angry because of the war. Their hearts are full of anger and hate which is the source of the war. Edgar Derby represents the ideal soldier who does not want to fight, but steps up to protect freedom and the citizens of America. I believe that all those soldiers that aren't characterized actually stand for something as well. They represent the millions of soldiers everyone tries to forget about when they think about war. They become nameless casualties who no one wants to believe died so horribly. If society was forced to recognize their names and their life stories they would realize how terrible war is and wouldn't be so quick to resort to it.
Slaughterhouse Five Tone
"There were hundreds of corpse mines operating by and by. They didn't smell bad at first, were wax museums. But then the bodies rotted and liquefied, and the stink was like roses and mustard gas. So it goes." pg. 214 Vonnegut
The tone of this book is very understated and almost sarcastic. Vonnegut always downplays the significant and horrific deaths of people in the book. He does this through the use of phrases like "so it goes". He also moves on quickly after bringing something up. It kind of seems like he doesn't even care or he's bored. However, there is an undertone of sympathy that shows up in the book. For instance Vonnegut calls a character "Poor Old Edgar Derby" and references the soldiers' shriveled stomachs. Though these tones may seem conflicting they actually compliment the meaning of the book. The book is trying to force people to see how awful war is, but it also wants people to understand how so many people think of war nonchalantly and how wrong that is. His regular tone throughout the book represents how most people glaze over the bad things in war. However the more sympathetic parts of the book highlight how he truly feels war should be looked at. My using these two varying themes he instills a sense of sympathy and guilt in people who condone war.
The tone of this book is very understated and almost sarcastic. Vonnegut always downplays the significant and horrific deaths of people in the book. He does this through the use of phrases like "so it goes". He also moves on quickly after bringing something up. It kind of seems like he doesn't even care or he's bored. However, there is an undertone of sympathy that shows up in the book. For instance Vonnegut calls a character "Poor Old Edgar Derby" and references the soldiers' shriveled stomachs. Though these tones may seem conflicting they actually compliment the meaning of the book. The book is trying to force people to see how awful war is, but it also wants people to understand how so many people think of war nonchalantly and how wrong that is. His regular tone throughout the book represents how most people glaze over the bad things in war. However the more sympathetic parts of the book highlight how he truly feels war should be looked at. My using these two varying themes he instills a sense of sympathy and guilt in people who condone war.
Slaughterhouse Five Setting
"You lads are leaving this afternoon for Dresden-- a beautiful city, I'm told." pg 146 an englishman
There are several settings in this book but most of them are either in Illium, Germany, and Tralfamadore. Illium represents what most people view as real life. It is your average American town where people have average jobs such as optomitrists. However, this life doesn't show the real cruelty of humans and the harsh reality of life. Dresden and the other parts of Germany represent that true reality. It shows all the death and despair humans are capable of inflicting on one another. This is a place far from home and unfamiliar. No one is clean or happy, and they are all on edge. These circumstances represent the truth about life in war and the truth about terrible reality. Tralfamadore is obviously not real, but it represents one of the most realistic aspects of life. Tralfamadore represents life as a whole and its overall value instead of what we see in each part of it. It also introduces life as everlasting. Even though they say they aren't very interested in Jesus Christ their ideas about life most resemble that of the Christian faith. All of these settings show a different aspect of life and how it's viewed in different situations. All have elements of realism, but also offer a different prospective of it.
There are several settings in this book but most of them are either in Illium, Germany, and Tralfamadore. Illium represents what most people view as real life. It is your average American town where people have average jobs such as optomitrists. However, this life doesn't show the real cruelty of humans and the harsh reality of life. Dresden and the other parts of Germany represent that true reality. It shows all the death and despair humans are capable of inflicting on one another. This is a place far from home and unfamiliar. No one is clean or happy, and they are all on edge. These circumstances represent the truth about life in war and the truth about terrible reality. Tralfamadore is obviously not real, but it represents one of the most realistic aspects of life. Tralfamadore represents life as a whole and its overall value instead of what we see in each part of it. It also introduces life as everlasting. Even though they say they aren't very interested in Jesus Christ their ideas about life most resemble that of the Christian faith. All of these settings show a different aspect of life and how it's viewed in different situations. All have elements of realism, but also offer a different prospective of it.
Monday, April 23, 2012
Slaughterhouse Five: Connection Between Kurt Vonnegut and Billy Pilgrim
"Billy answered. There was a drunk on the other end. Billy could almost smell his breath—mustard gas and roses. It was a wrong number. Billy hung up." Kurt Vonnegut Pg. 73
I've heard a lot of theories about just how Kurt Vonnegut as a narrator and Billy Pilgrim connect. Some people think that Billy and Kurt know each other somehow and he's telling Billy's story that Billy told him. Other people think that Billy is famous for being the crazy nut and that Kurt just wrote down the stories he heard. Then other people suggest a much more far out theory. Some people think that Billy Pilgrim and Kurt Vonnegut are actually the same person. I highly doubt that though because there are certain times in the book where Kurt will mention that he was at the same place where Billy was. They can't really be at the same place doing different things if they are the same person. Even if they aren't the same person they must be connected somehow, but how? Why does Vonnegut feel the need to tell Billy's story? Clearly it's important to him but why? Hopefully it will be revealed later in the book, but I know I can at least rule out that they are the same person.
I've heard a lot of theories about just how Kurt Vonnegut as a narrator and Billy Pilgrim connect. Some people think that Billy and Kurt know each other somehow and he's telling Billy's story that Billy told him. Other people think that Billy is famous for being the crazy nut and that Kurt just wrote down the stories he heard. Then other people suggest a much more far out theory. Some people think that Billy Pilgrim and Kurt Vonnegut are actually the same person. I highly doubt that though because there are certain times in the book where Kurt will mention that he was at the same place where Billy was. They can't really be at the same place doing different things if they are the same person. Even if they aren't the same person they must be connected somehow, but how? Why does Vonnegut feel the need to tell Billy's story? Clearly it's important to him but why? Hopefully it will be revealed later in the book, but I know I can at least rule out that they are the same person.
Slaughterhouse Five: How Crazy Is He?
"I am a Tralfamadorian, seeing all time as you might see a stretch of the Rocky Mountains. All time is all time. It does not change. It does not lend itself to warnings or explanations. It simply is." Tralfamadorian Pg. 85-86
This is the story of a man named Billy who believes he becomes "unstuck" from time and travels to different parts of his life including when he is abducted by aliens. I'm not going to lie, if somebody told me this happened to them I would think they need to be committed. But Billy doesn't necessarily come off as crazy in the story, more like misunderstood. Or maybe the war has driven him to be crazy. It wouldn't be the first time a soldier goes insane, and the book does talk about how unstable Billy is. This sounds like a pretty solid combination to make a man think that he's been abducted by aliens and all his life is flashing before his life, hence the time traveling. Or just maybe he really is time traveling and maybe he really was abducted by space creatures. Maybe... To me it just feels like a stretch which is weird because I like to read books about wizards and hunger games and never once did I question the sanity of these characters. I think because this story is so intertwined with such a realistic event it's harder to think of this story as make believe. Because the story seems so real it's hard to think of time travel and abductions as real. Right now I think he's crazy but only time will tell.
This is the story of a man named Billy who believes he becomes "unstuck" from time and travels to different parts of his life including when he is abducted by aliens. I'm not going to lie, if somebody told me this happened to them I would think they need to be committed. But Billy doesn't necessarily come off as crazy in the story, more like misunderstood. Or maybe the war has driven him to be crazy. It wouldn't be the first time a soldier goes insane, and the book does talk about how unstable Billy is. This sounds like a pretty solid combination to make a man think that he's been abducted by aliens and all his life is flashing before his life, hence the time traveling. Or just maybe he really is time traveling and maybe he really was abducted by space creatures. Maybe... To me it just feels like a stretch which is weird because I like to read books about wizards and hunger games and never once did I question the sanity of these characters. I think because this story is so intertwined with such a realistic event it's harder to think of this story as make believe. Because the story seems so real it's hard to think of time travel and abductions as real. Right now I think he's crazy but only time will tell.
Slaughterhouse Five: Not So Chronological Order
"He is in a constant state of stage fright, he says, because he never knows what part of his life he is going to have to act in next." Kurt Vonnegut
At first this story starts with Kurt writing a book after the war. Then it jumps to him talking about Billy's life in the war. From there everything goes kind of haywire. It jumps from his life in war to his life as a child, to his career, then back to the war, then to his daughter's wedding, etc... Sometimes it can be a little hard to follow but he does a pretty good job of describing which part of his life he jumps to. What I wonder is what is the significance of each of these scenes in his life. Clearly the author wouldn't have Billy jump to random parts in his life that have no significance, but there are some stories I don't understand the significance. For instance when he jumps to infancy he doesn't do anything significant; he just acts like a baby. I'm hoping that as the book goes on I'll understand why he tells these stories. Also why does he jump to these stories in this order? Is there significance in that? Then there's the creepy aliens who don't explain anything, but have a very interesting theory about time. They don't see any time in chronological order, or any order for that matter. They see all moments at one time and take all things in at once. I like this idea because there is no right or wrong timing. There is only the significance of each moment. By not putting the events in the right order I think the author is trying to do the same thing.
At first this story starts with Kurt writing a book after the war. Then it jumps to him talking about Billy's life in the war. From there everything goes kind of haywire. It jumps from his life in war to his life as a child, to his career, then back to the war, then to his daughter's wedding, etc... Sometimes it can be a little hard to follow but he does a pretty good job of describing which part of his life he jumps to. What I wonder is what is the significance of each of these scenes in his life. Clearly the author wouldn't have Billy jump to random parts in his life that have no significance, but there are some stories I don't understand the significance. For instance when he jumps to infancy he doesn't do anything significant; he just acts like a baby. I'm hoping that as the book goes on I'll understand why he tells these stories. Also why does he jump to these stories in this order? Is there significance in that? Then there's the creepy aliens who don't explain anything, but have a very interesting theory about time. They don't see any time in chronological order, or any order for that matter. They see all moments at one time and take all things in at once. I like this idea because there is no right or wrong timing. There is only the significance of each moment. By not putting the events in the right order I think the author is trying to do the same thing.
Slaughterhouse Five: motif
"So it goes." Kurt
The phrase "so it goes" only shows up on every page of the book. He'll tell a particularly horrifying story, then just throw it at the end and move on. The phrase seems to be his way of downplaying all the awful parts of war he's talking about. I think this is weird considering the whole novel is supposed to be an anti-war story. I would think if you were trying to convince people war was bad that you would talk about all the terrible parts of war to convince people how it should never happen again. But then if you think about actual war veterans, they never really like to talk about it because war scars them and brings up awful memories. I feel like this phrase is his way of deflecting all these awful things, but then again why is he writing a book about it if it's so hard to think about? On the other hand I wonder if this mantra is a statement about the way society views war. Everyone thinks war is inevitable but they don't want to think about all the death and despair so they downplay it and ignore the parts they don't want to think about. That's what this phrase kind of does. It might be a little bit of both, but either way I'm kind of sick of it coming up so often.
The phrase "so it goes" only shows up on every page of the book. He'll tell a particularly horrifying story, then just throw it at the end and move on. The phrase seems to be his way of downplaying all the awful parts of war he's talking about. I think this is weird considering the whole novel is supposed to be an anti-war story. I would think if you were trying to convince people war was bad that you would talk about all the terrible parts of war to convince people how it should never happen again. But then if you think about actual war veterans, they never really like to talk about it because war scars them and brings up awful memories. I feel like this phrase is his way of deflecting all these awful things, but then again why is he writing a book about it if it's so hard to think about? On the other hand I wonder if this mantra is a statement about the way society views war. Everyone thinks war is inevitable but they don't want to think about all the death and despair so they downplay it and ignore the parts they don't want to think about. That's what this phrase kind of does. It might be a little bit of both, but either way I'm kind of sick of it coming up so often.
Slaughterhouse Five: Frame Story/ Speaker
"Billy says that he first came unstuck in time in 1944, long before his trip to Tralfamadore. The Tralfamadorians didn't have anything to do with his coming unstuck. They were simply able to give him insights into what was really going on" Kurt Vonnegut pg. 30
In this book there is only one story teller but he's telling two stories. At first he talks about the book he's writing about Dresden and old war buddies and what not. But then he moves into talking about this man named Billy who is an optometrist/ soldier/ time traveler/ alien abductee. Every so often he shows when there stories collide in the war, but mostly he discusses Billy's life. By telling it in this way the reader still gets to know the speaker but also hears the story of Billy's life. However, sometimes I feel like I don't feel that much sympathy for Billy because unlike Frankenstein, Billy isn't the one telling his own story. This makes me wonder how Kurt knows so much about Billy. The way he tells Billy's story sounds like Billy himself told it to Kurt because Kurt doesn't seem to know everything about the situations. But because Billy isn't the one telling the story his story doesn't sound as crazy. Kurt has a very good way of downplaying how insane this story could sound so it seems more believable and is more readable. I may not feel bad or sympathetic for Billy but as of right now, I don't think he's completely bonkers.
In this book there is only one story teller but he's telling two stories. At first he talks about the book he's writing about Dresden and old war buddies and what not. But then he moves into talking about this man named Billy who is an optometrist/ soldier/ time traveler/ alien abductee. Every so often he shows when there stories collide in the war, but mostly he discusses Billy's life. By telling it in this way the reader still gets to know the speaker but also hears the story of Billy's life. However, sometimes I feel like I don't feel that much sympathy for Billy because unlike Frankenstein, Billy isn't the one telling his own story. This makes me wonder how Kurt knows so much about Billy. The way he tells Billy's story sounds like Billy himself told it to Kurt because Kurt doesn't seem to know everything about the situations. But because Billy isn't the one telling the story his story doesn't sound as crazy. Kurt has a very good way of downplaying how insane this story could sound so it seems more believable and is more readable. I may not feel bad or sympathetic for Billy but as of right now, I don't think he's completely bonkers.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
The Final Verdict
"Fear not that I shall be the instrument of future mischief. My work is nearly complete." pg. 165
Overall this book was nothing like I expected. There was no green stupid monster or creepy side kick named Igor. However there was a lot of conflict and interesting commentaries about how society perceives things based on appearance. There were certain parts of the book I found very interesting such as the plot line or these commentaries about society. However I felt like a great deal of the book was spent describing really insignificant details. I got really sick of reading about all the nature scenes and the travels. Victor spent several pages describing his childhood, but there were only two describing how the creature was created. I felt like it dwelled on topics that the movie version obviously cut out for good reason. Still the story has underlying messages of how judgements and obsession can ruin people. So all and all the book wasn't my favorite. It dragged on a little too much. However, I think that I've read worse and it definitely made me think about society more deeply which was probably the point. So in that case I guess it could be considered a success. I still think the creature deserves a name though.
Overall this book was nothing like I expected. There was no green stupid monster or creepy side kick named Igor. However there was a lot of conflict and interesting commentaries about how society perceives things based on appearance. There were certain parts of the book I found very interesting such as the plot line or these commentaries about society. However I felt like a great deal of the book was spent describing really insignificant details. I got really sick of reading about all the nature scenes and the travels. Victor spent several pages describing his childhood, but there were only two describing how the creature was created. I felt like it dwelled on topics that the movie version obviously cut out for good reason. Still the story has underlying messages of how judgements and obsession can ruin people. So all and all the book wasn't my favorite. It dragged on a little too much. However, I think that I've read worse and it definitely made me think about society more deeply which was probably the point. So in that case I guess it could be considered a success. I still think the creature deserves a name though.
Is The Creature Truly Evil Or Just Misunderstood?
"I had learned how to work mischief." the creature pg 103
So I guess I'm just confused as to whether or not the creature is an evil, killing machine or if he's just a misunderstood, gentle giant. When the creature was telling his side of the story I couldn't imagine how Victor could think he was so evil. He seemed to be caring and considerate of others. He committed selfless acts for others and only wanted to be loved by people. Sure he was ugly, but that didn't make him such a bad guy right? But then toward the end of the story I was torn. After all how good of a person can you be if you kill people. He killed an innocent child, a kind, gentle man, and a caring woman who never did anything to hurt others. All these people did nothing wrong. They were only unfortunate enough to be the ones Victor cared about so much. I understand the desire for vengeance is strong, but I don't see how you could ever justify killing such innocent people. So now I don't know how to feel about the creature. Maybe he was driven to this point by the way he was treated, but murders are not released simply because someone did them wrong in their life. I understand where the creature was coming from, but I still think it was wrong. In some ways I think the creature personifies people because we all have good and evil in us. It is our choice which side we will allow to move us and which side we will act upon. I think the creature acted on the good inside him in the beginning, but as time went on he allowed the darkness and evil to overcome him. Much like Adam allowed the devil to convince him to sin... hmmm so many connections!
So I guess I'm just confused as to whether or not the creature is an evil, killing machine or if he's just a misunderstood, gentle giant. When the creature was telling his side of the story I couldn't imagine how Victor could think he was so evil. He seemed to be caring and considerate of others. He committed selfless acts for others and only wanted to be loved by people. Sure he was ugly, but that didn't make him such a bad guy right? But then toward the end of the story I was torn. After all how good of a person can you be if you kill people. He killed an innocent child, a kind, gentle man, and a caring woman who never did anything to hurt others. All these people did nothing wrong. They were only unfortunate enough to be the ones Victor cared about so much. I understand the desire for vengeance is strong, but I don't see how you could ever justify killing such innocent people. So now I don't know how to feel about the creature. Maybe he was driven to this point by the way he was treated, but murders are not released simply because someone did them wrong in their life. I understand where the creature was coming from, but I still think it was wrong. In some ways I think the creature personifies people because we all have good and evil in us. It is our choice which side we will allow to move us and which side we will act upon. I think the creature acted on the good inside him in the beginning, but as time went on he allowed the darkness and evil to overcome him. Much like Adam allowed the devil to convince him to sin... hmmm so many connections!
You Drive Me Crazy: Motivation of the Creature to Kill
"Frankenstein! you belong then to my enemy - to him towards whom I have sworn eternal revenge; you shall be my first victim." The creature pg. 102
Throughout the novel the idea of nature vs nurture is a prominent theme. The creature believes that he was not born either. Rather he thinks that the way people have treated him in life has made him turn to his dark side. Sure the way all humans react to his hideous appearance could make him cynical about the human race, but people in general are not what drive him to become a murderous monster. There is one specific person that has been the catalyst for all his wrong deeds. The motivation behind all his bad behavior is seeking revenge on his creator, Victor. The creature was frustrated with William when he was appalled by his looks, but he only killed him because he realized he was related to Victor. Then he kills his best friend Henry to get back at Victor for deserting them. Then when Victor refuses to make him another female creature for him, he gets the worst revenge of killing his true love, Elizabeth. However, if the creature simply wanted to get back at Victor he could have just killed Victor right away and saved himself a lot of time and trouble. The creature was not only trying to make Victor feel the pain of the loneliness he felt, but I also believe he was trying to get Victor's attention. The creature is like a child who acts out in order to get their parents' attention. I believe this need for his creators acceptance or at least attention are what motivates the creature to go on this horrible killing spree.
Throughout the novel the idea of nature vs nurture is a prominent theme. The creature believes that he was not born either. Rather he thinks that the way people have treated him in life has made him turn to his dark side. Sure the way all humans react to his hideous appearance could make him cynical about the human race, but people in general are not what drive him to become a murderous monster. There is one specific person that has been the catalyst for all his wrong deeds. The motivation behind all his bad behavior is seeking revenge on his creator, Victor. The creature was frustrated with William when he was appalled by his looks, but he only killed him because he realized he was related to Victor. Then he kills his best friend Henry to get back at Victor for deserting them. Then when Victor refuses to make him another female creature for him, he gets the worst revenge of killing his true love, Elizabeth. However, if the creature simply wanted to get back at Victor he could have just killed Victor right away and saved himself a lot of time and trouble. The creature was not only trying to make Victor feel the pain of the loneliness he felt, but I also believe he was trying to get Victor's attention. The creature is like a child who acts out in order to get their parents' attention. I believe this need for his creators acceptance or at least attention are what motivates the creature to go on this horrible killing spree.
Victor and The Creature: Foil Characters or Mirrors?letissssopeyppmi
"What I ask of you is reasonable and moderate; I demand a creature of another sex, but as hideous as myself; the gratification is small, but it is all that I can receive, and it shall content me." the creature pg 107
Throughout most of the story it's pretty apparent that Victor and the creature don't always have the best relationship. Victor makes the creature only to see how hideous it is and automatically assumes it is evil. The creature is hurt that his creator would shun and judge him like this, and he can't even understand why Victor would create him. To get vengeance on Victor, the creature proceeds to kill off all the people he loves like his brother, best friend, and the love of his life. This finally pushes Victor to pursue the creature to try to kill him. Clearly these men appear to be sworn enemies. However, they may have more in common than they believe. First they are both very bright and are quick learners. Victor talks about how quickly he was able to learn about philosophers and even created life from nothing in his dorm room. The creature also picks things up quickly such as the language of people and all the other basics of life. He does this all in a matter of the first two years of his life. Also both of them live a life of great solitude. Victor becomes so involved in his work or his emotions that he often shuts himself off from all other people. When he is trying to get over the death of his brother he takes his journey into nature alone. The creature is also very lonely. All people reject him so he is forced to lurk around and live a life of solitude. Even though they appear to be completely opposite, they are actually quite similar.
Throughout most of the story it's pretty apparent that Victor and the creature don't always have the best relationship. Victor makes the creature only to see how hideous it is and automatically assumes it is evil. The creature is hurt that his creator would shun and judge him like this, and he can't even understand why Victor would create him. To get vengeance on Victor, the creature proceeds to kill off all the people he loves like his brother, best friend, and the love of his life. This finally pushes Victor to pursue the creature to try to kill him. Clearly these men appear to be sworn enemies. However, they may have more in common than they believe. First they are both very bright and are quick learners. Victor talks about how quickly he was able to learn about philosophers and even created life from nothing in his dorm room. The creature also picks things up quickly such as the language of people and all the other basics of life. He does this all in a matter of the first two years of his life. Also both of them live a life of great solitude. Victor becomes so involved in his work or his emotions that he often shuts himself off from all other people. When he is trying to get over the death of his brother he takes his journey into nature alone. The creature is also very lonely. All people reject him so he is forced to lurk around and live a life of solitude. Even though they appear to be completely opposite, they are actually quite similar.
Curiosity Killed The Cat... Or The Scientist: Theme
"Yet I fear such will be my fate; the men, unsupported by ideas of glory and honour, can never willingly continue to endure their present hardships." pg. 160
The story of Frankenstein is a tangled web of frame stories and perspectives that follows the journey of three beings: Walton, Victor, and the Creature. These men have embarked on strange and difficult journeys that have worn them down both physically and mentally. However, this whole story would have never happened if these men did not go on a pursuit for knowledge, more specifically to use science to be greater than nature. Walton was on his journey to discover new paths and the secret of the magnet. On this journey he came across Victor who was making him journey to find the creature he created. He created the creature to overcome death and to bring life from nothing. The creature is running from his wrong doings which he committed to avenge the way humans treated him. His attempts to learn about the humans and be accepted as one of their own led people to be frightened of him or reject him. If none of these men had been pursuing greater knowledge so obsessively they would have never gotten themselves into this mess. Therefore I think it could be stated that a theme of this novel could be that Pursuing knowledge obsessively can end up hurting people more than helping them. Victor tells the story of the creature in order to warn Walton from ending up making the same mistakes he did. Victor's story is the epitome of this theme.
The story of Frankenstein is a tangled web of frame stories and perspectives that follows the journey of three beings: Walton, Victor, and the Creature. These men have embarked on strange and difficult journeys that have worn them down both physically and mentally. However, this whole story would have never happened if these men did not go on a pursuit for knowledge, more specifically to use science to be greater than nature. Walton was on his journey to discover new paths and the secret of the magnet. On this journey he came across Victor who was making him journey to find the creature he created. He created the creature to overcome death and to bring life from nothing. The creature is running from his wrong doings which he committed to avenge the way humans treated him. His attempts to learn about the humans and be accepted as one of their own led people to be frightened of him or reject him. If none of these men had been pursuing greater knowledge so obsessively they would have never gotten themselves into this mess. Therefore I think it could be stated that a theme of this novel could be that Pursuing knowledge obsessively can end up hurting people more than helping them. Victor tells the story of the creature in order to warn Walton from ending up making the same mistakes he did. Victor's story is the epitome of this theme.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
From Eloquent Creature to The Monster Mash: Where did it come from?
"If the multitude of mankind knew of my existence, they would do as you do, and arm themselves for my destruction. Shall I not then hate them who abhor me?" the creature Pg. 69
So far this book is nothing like I thought it would be like. I knew going into it that the book would be different from the common idea of Frankenstein but I didn't expect this much difference. First of all Frank is the creator, not the monster which is weird to think about. Also the mental image I had of the creature was this green idiot monster with black plugs for ears. However, after reading the book now I picture the decomposing, sensitive, articulate monster. So where did all these misconceptions come from? How did his image get so morphed that he's become a goofy Halloween costume? There are definitely ties to the original but I feel like the main points the author was trying to make have kind of disappeared. This story has big themes of nature and discovery but the stories now are more about the horror. Much like the people who flee from the monster, today's society is more focused on appearances than on the deeper meaning.
Nature vs. Nurture
"I was benevolent and good; misery made me a fiend." the creature Pg. 69
It's quite apparent that Nature vs. Nurture is one of the big themes of this story. Victor whole heartedly believes that the creature is evil by nature and is therefore destined to commit horrible crimes. However, from what the creature has said thus far it seems like he has always been kind and selfless. However there is mention of him being involved in some pretty shady business. In fact Victor is convinced that the creature was the one that murdered his little brother. At first I thought that was a rash judgement but then with this new evidence I'm starting to wonder if maybe the creature does have a little evil in him. I think though that he was born good but everyone's constant rejection could lead him to do bad things. It has to hurt when the person that created you abandons you at your birth and thinks your hideous. I think Dr. Phil would call that bad parenting which has been known to cause kids to act out. Now to be fair most kids aren't eight feet tall and made from various previously dead body parts. But as the creature pointed out looks shouldn't be the only thing you're judged on. I think that if so many people tell you you're bad you could start to believe it after awhile. If the creature does end up being evil I think it's because of nurture, not nature.
It's quite apparent that Nature vs. Nurture is one of the big themes of this story. Victor whole heartedly believes that the creature is evil by nature and is therefore destined to commit horrible crimes. However, from what the creature has said thus far it seems like he has always been kind and selfless. However there is mention of him being involved in some pretty shady business. In fact Victor is convinced that the creature was the one that murdered his little brother. At first I thought that was a rash judgement but then with this new evidence I'm starting to wonder if maybe the creature does have a little evil in him. I think though that he was born good but everyone's constant rejection could lead him to do bad things. It has to hurt when the person that created you abandons you at your birth and thinks your hideous. I think Dr. Phil would call that bad parenting which has been known to cause kids to act out. Now to be fair most kids aren't eight feet tall and made from various previously dead body parts. But as the creature pointed out looks shouldn't be the only thing you're judged on. I think that if so many people tell you you're bad you could start to believe it after awhile. If the creature does end up being evil I think it's because of nurture, not nature.
What Have You Been Reading? Allusions
"It was as the ass and the lap-dog, yet surely the gentle ass whose intentions were affectionate, although his manners were rude, dserved better treatment than blows and execration." the creature Pg. 81
It seems to me that the shed isn't the only place the creature has been hiding out in. With all the allusions he makes you'd think he'd spent his first two years of life in a library. There is no doubt that he is an incredibly fast learner; I mean look at how much he's learned in just two years! He learns all about the basics of life such as fire, darkness, rain, etc... but he also manages to pick up the english language by simply listening to the family talk. In fact he probably has a better vocabulary than I do. Still I can't seem to figure out how it is he learned about the bible or the folk tale about a donkey and a dog. Either the family he's listening to tells a very wide variety of stories that he was able to pick up the meanings of extremely well or well I don't know? His allusions do make very good points though. His allusion to Adam conveys the idea that Victor is not so much a father as he is a god to the creature. Also the donkey and the dog makes a good point about how people can judge more on appearance than on actions.
It seems to me that the shed isn't the only place the creature has been hiding out in. With all the allusions he makes you'd think he'd spent his first two years of life in a library. There is no doubt that he is an incredibly fast learner; I mean look at how much he's learned in just two years! He learns all about the basics of life such as fire, darkness, rain, etc... but he also manages to pick up the english language by simply listening to the family talk. In fact he probably has a better vocabulary than I do. Still I can't seem to figure out how it is he learned about the bible or the folk tale about a donkey and a dog. Either the family he's listening to tells a very wide variety of stories that he was able to pick up the meanings of extremely well or well I don't know? His allusions do make very good points though. His allusion to Adam conveys the idea that Victor is not so much a father as he is a god to the creature. Also the donkey and the dog makes a good point about how people can judge more on appearance than on actions.
Think Outside the Box: A Frame Story
"Unhappy man! Do you share my madness? Have you drunk also of the intoxicating draught? Hear me, - let me reveal my tale, and you will dash the cup from your lips!" Victor Pg. 12
Though the main focus of this story is on Frankenstein's tale it's important to remember that this is a story inside another story. Because this is a frame story it is told from Victor's prospective. This means that any element of this story could be skewed because he has his own biases and memories. For instance Victor calls the creature horribly ugly and evil. The creature admits he is ugly but nothing about his personality is. This was simply Victor's rash judgement based on seeing him for about two minutes after bringing him to life. Also the idea of the frame story is important because Victor's tale acts as a warning or a sign of caution. Victor admits that through his whole life he was tempted by the idea of discovering more about nature and science. He obsessed over it and spent his whole adolescence chasing this pursuit of knowledge. He claims it was this drive that caused him to make the creature which he believes was a huge mistake. He sees that Walton has this same fascination and obsession with science and hopes that this horrible tale will keep him from making the same mistake. Even though it doesn't really seem like Walton is a super important character now he provided the motivation for the whole story and it reminds the reader of the importance of prospective.
Though the main focus of this story is on Frankenstein's tale it's important to remember that this is a story inside another story. Because this is a frame story it is told from Victor's prospective. This means that any element of this story could be skewed because he has his own biases and memories. For instance Victor calls the creature horribly ugly and evil. The creature admits he is ugly but nothing about his personality is. This was simply Victor's rash judgement based on seeing him for about two minutes after bringing him to life. Also the idea of the frame story is important because Victor's tale acts as a warning or a sign of caution. Victor admits that through his whole life he was tempted by the idea of discovering more about nature and science. He obsessed over it and spent his whole adolescence chasing this pursuit of knowledge. He claims it was this drive that caused him to make the creature which he believes was a huge mistake. He sees that Walton has this same fascination and obsession with science and hopes that this horrible tale will keep him from making the same mistake. Even though it doesn't really seem like Walton is a super important character now he provided the motivation for the whole story and it reminds the reader of the importance of prospective.
Gentle Giant, Ironic Monster
"The gentle manners and beauty of the cottagers greatly endeared them to me: when they were unhappy, I felt depressed; when they rejoiced, I sympathised in their joys." the creature Pg 79
Is it just me or does this horrible, evil being seem to be more of a very helpful peeping Tom whose in need of a makeover? Everyone is so quick to judge the creature based on his appearance. Even his creator thinks he is awful when he's never even taken the chance to get to know him. Everything we've heard from the creature seems to convey the exact opposite. He is selfless in his actions and emotions. When he sees this family suffering he cuts them firewood and shovels the snow for them. He does more than just their chores. He talks about how when the family was upset he was distraught and when they were happy he felt great joy. Is a creature that is supposedly dark and evil truly capable of such selfless emotions/ actions? The irony is is that everyone judges him on his appearance. Even he admits that he is hideous, but that is the exact opposite of his personality. If all these people took the time to get to know him or witnessed all his good deeds, they would realize he really isn't that bad. In fact I think people would grow to love him and respect him. But people, including Victor, never took the time to get to know him because of his looks. Ironic....
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
I'm Just A Little Bit Caught In The Middle: Linda
LINDA: Forgive me, dear. I can’t cry. I don’t know what it is, but I can’t cry. I don’t understand it. Why did you ever do that? Help me, Willy, I can’t cry. It seems to me that you’re just on another trip. I keep expecting you. Willy, dear, I can’t cry. Why did you do it? I search and search and I search and I can’t understand it, Willy. I made the last payment on the house today. Today, dear. And they’ll be nobody home. [A sob rises in her throat]. We’re free and clear. [Sobbing more fully, released] We’re free. [Biff comes slowly toward her.] We’re free… We’re free…
Though Willy's life is falling apart, and he is delusional, it's hard to feel a lot of sympathy for him because he is the one that got himself into all that trouble. His pride kept him from actually succeeding in anything. However the person I feel truly sorry for is Linda. She stayed by Willy's side even when he was depressed or going insane. She tries to comfort him and sticks up for him. She could possibly be the only person who truly believed in Willy all the way until the end. Even though she was a great wife, she still suffered the consequences of Willy's pride. She had to worry about the bills and payments that they couldn't pay because Willy lost his job. Also it couldn't have been easy to be seen as the wife of a crazy man. What frustrates me the most is that no one in the play appreciates what she does and what she puts up with. No one ever notices how strong she is to stay faithful to her insane husband or all the hard work she puts in to try to actually make their household run well. Willy should be so grateful to have such a supportive wife, but how does he repay her? By cheating on her with some random idiot woman. His scandal is in fact the whole reason Biff doesn't go to summer school which causes him to be a failure later in life. This ruins any chance of Biff being able to help his mother out as well. Linda has to deal with all the negative consequences of her husband's actions but never really complains that much. She's the one I feel really sorry for.
Though Willy's life is falling apart, and he is delusional, it's hard to feel a lot of sympathy for him because he is the one that got himself into all that trouble. His pride kept him from actually succeeding in anything. However the person I feel truly sorry for is Linda. She stayed by Willy's side even when he was depressed or going insane. She tries to comfort him and sticks up for him. She could possibly be the only person who truly believed in Willy all the way until the end. Even though she was a great wife, she still suffered the consequences of Willy's pride. She had to worry about the bills and payments that they couldn't pay because Willy lost his job. Also it couldn't have been easy to be seen as the wife of a crazy man. What frustrates me the most is that no one in the play appreciates what she does and what she puts up with. No one ever notices how strong she is to stay faithful to her insane husband or all the hard work she puts in to try to actually make their household run well. Willy should be so grateful to have such a supportive wife, but how does he repay her? By cheating on her with some random idiot woman. His scandal is in fact the whole reason Biff doesn't go to summer school which causes him to be a failure later in life. This ruins any chance of Biff being able to help his mother out as well. Linda has to deal with all the negative consequences of her husband's actions but never really complains that much. She's the one I feel really sorry for.
Inception Style Play That's Just As Confusing and Intriguing: Style of DOAS
WILLY [turning to Ben]: Business is bad, it’s murderous. But not for me, of course. (Act 1)
Because this play is told through the memories and delusions of Willy it can be kind of hard to follow. He will be talking to what we believe to his son or his neighbor then in walks his brother who we believe to be dead. He will continue to have a conversation with this dead brother but only when his kids try to get him to stop talking to himself do you actually see that it's all in Willy's mind. As if his flashes between reality and delusions and the present and the past weren't confusing enough, sometimes other flashbacks begin to mix in with the others. He will be recalling a memory from the boy's adolescence and then the Woman's laugh with ring out in the memory. If not read carefully (and maybe a couple of times) it can be hard to decipher what scenes belong in which part of Willy's life or if they aren't even real. These confusing scenes though both help to understand how Willy got to this failing stage in his life, and they also show just how much Willy's life is falling apart. At first I wasn't sure if his illusions were causing his life to break down, or if his life breaking down caused the illusions. Then it seemed like it was a never-ending cycle that left Willy trapped in a broken world. It's hard to feel sorry for Willy because of his pride but it seems heartless to look at a depressed, crazy older man and not feel some sympathy for him, no matter how he got this way.
Because this play is told through the memories and delusions of Willy it can be kind of hard to follow. He will be talking to what we believe to his son or his neighbor then in walks his brother who we believe to be dead. He will continue to have a conversation with this dead brother but only when his kids try to get him to stop talking to himself do you actually see that it's all in Willy's mind. As if his flashes between reality and delusions and the present and the past weren't confusing enough, sometimes other flashbacks begin to mix in with the others. He will be recalling a memory from the boy's adolescence and then the Woman's laugh with ring out in the memory. If not read carefully (and maybe a couple of times) it can be hard to decipher what scenes belong in which part of Willy's life or if they aren't even real. These confusing scenes though both help to understand how Willy got to this failing stage in his life, and they also show just how much Willy's life is falling apart. At first I wasn't sure if his illusions were causing his life to break down, or if his life breaking down caused the illusions. Then it seemed like it was a never-ending cycle that left Willy trapped in a broken world. It's hard to feel sorry for Willy because of his pride but it seems heartless to look at a depressed, crazy older man and not feel some sympathy for him, no matter how he got this way.
Too Prideful To Take a Handout: Willy's Tragic Flaw
CHARLEY: You want a job?
WILLY: I got a job, I told you that. [After a slight pause] What the hell are you offering me a job for?
CHARLEY: Don’t get insulted.
WILLY: Don’t insult me. (Act 1)
In this play it is kind of hard to distinguish what is reality and what is a delusion, but one thing that is certain is that Willy is a prideful man. He wants people to view him as being an important, successful figure in society and will do just about anything to convince people of this. However Willy's pride is exactly the thing that hinders him when things start to fall apart. He has cared so much about appearance and the way people view him that he has forgotten to actually be the person everyone views him to be. It becomes apparent to more and more people that his life is falling apart, but Willy will not let the illusion fall apart. He snaps at the people trying to help him and refuses to take a handout. He thinks he is protecting him image when in reality he is ruining his life. He's not only ruining his life though, because he has a family who depends on him. Charely even tries to give him a job but he just pushes him away. If Willy had just accepted the help and worked hard at it, people would have really viewed him as a hardworking man because that's really what he would be. But because his pride blinded him from seeing the value of humility, his life fell apart.
WILLY: I got a job, I told you that. [After a slight pause] What the hell are you offering me a job for?
CHARLEY: Don’t get insulted.
WILLY: Don’t insult me. (Act 1)
In this play it is kind of hard to distinguish what is reality and what is a delusion, but one thing that is certain is that Willy is a prideful man. He wants people to view him as being an important, successful figure in society and will do just about anything to convince people of this. However Willy's pride is exactly the thing that hinders him when things start to fall apart. He has cared so much about appearance and the way people view him that he has forgotten to actually be the person everyone views him to be. It becomes apparent to more and more people that his life is falling apart, but Willy will not let the illusion fall apart. He snaps at the people trying to help him and refuses to take a handout. He thinks he is protecting him image when in reality he is ruining his life. He's not only ruining his life though, because he has a family who depends on him. Charely even tries to give him a job but he just pushes him away. If Willy had just accepted the help and worked hard at it, people would have really viewed him as a hardworking man because that's really what he would be. But because his pride blinded him from seeing the value of humility, his life fell apart.
Monday, February 27, 2012
I'm Just A Little Bit Caught In The Middle: Laura Can't Win
"Mother, when you're disappointed you get that awful suffering look on your face, like the picture of Jesus's mother in the museum!" Laura Pg. 1242
None of these characters have a particularly easy life. Their mother is forced to sell magazines and give up her old, happier life. Tom is forced to work at a job he hates all day long to support his family. But both of them could clean up their lives if they wanted. They both have dreams and aspirations to hold on to. However Laura is stuck at home because she is too scared and ashamed of who she is. Her whole life she's looked at herself as crippled and abnormal. She has no confidence in herself and can't even handle being in a typing business class. She wants so much to please her mother and help her brother, but no one really cares what Laura wants. When her glass animals break no one seems to even care even though she's clearly distraught. Laura just wants to be quiet and invisible. She is most content doing her own thing, but her mother refuses to allow that. Sure she only wants the best for her, but Laura just wants to be left alone. Her own family talks about her like she's a wounded, helpless animal. No one sees Laura as a kind misunderstood young woman, which is what she truly is. She's always given up what she wants to please her mother, but I wish she would have really been allowed to live her life the way she wanted without that guilt in the back of her mind.
None of these characters have a particularly easy life. Their mother is forced to sell magazines and give up her old, happier life. Tom is forced to work at a job he hates all day long to support his family. But both of them could clean up their lives if they wanted. They both have dreams and aspirations to hold on to. However Laura is stuck at home because she is too scared and ashamed of who she is. Her whole life she's looked at herself as crippled and abnormal. She has no confidence in herself and can't even handle being in a typing business class. She wants so much to please her mother and help her brother, but no one really cares what Laura wants. When her glass animals break no one seems to even care even though she's clearly distraught. Laura just wants to be quiet and invisible. She is most content doing her own thing, but her mother refuses to allow that. Sure she only wants the best for her, but Laura just wants to be left alone. Her own family talks about her like she's a wounded, helpless animal. No one sees Laura as a kind misunderstood young woman, which is what she truly is. She's always given up what she wants to please her mother, but I wish she would have really been allowed to live her life the way she wanted without that guilt in the back of her mind.
Misdirected: Not much room for interpretation
As Tom enters listlessly for his coffee, she turns her back to him and stands rigidly facing the window on the gloomy gray vault of the areaway. In light on her face with its aged but childish feature is cruelly sharp, satirical as a Daumier print. Pg. 1250
Unlike Shakespeare there is no questioning what Mr. Williams wanted the characters to be doing. Or what the sets should be like, the lighting, the fabric of the chairs, etc... He leaves absolutely no room for interpretation because he wanted the characters to perform the play exactly the way he wrote it. The only annoying thing is there seems to be more stage directions than there is actual dialogue. Sure I know where all the sets are placed, but what are the characters trying to express? In plays it's more about the dialogue because you don't really know what characters are thinking unless they speak it. It's rather difficult to get into this play because the story line seems to be severely lacking depth. It really just seems like a play of a typical American family. The play is very realistic, but I can't imagine people wanted to pay money to see a play about stuff they experience every day. I'd much rather watch a play about the exciting elements of life or better yet, things that never happen in real life. Reading a play about a nagging mother is like preaching to the choir. The only thing the play does succeed in is painting a very vivid picture of what's happening. Though I think the play would be half as short is there were no stage directions.
Unlike Shakespeare there is no questioning what Mr. Williams wanted the characters to be doing. Or what the sets should be like, the lighting, the fabric of the chairs, etc... He leaves absolutely no room for interpretation because he wanted the characters to perform the play exactly the way he wrote it. The only annoying thing is there seems to be more stage directions than there is actual dialogue. Sure I know where all the sets are placed, but what are the characters trying to express? In plays it's more about the dialogue because you don't really know what characters are thinking unless they speak it. It's rather difficult to get into this play because the story line seems to be severely lacking depth. It really just seems like a play of a typical American family. The play is very realistic, but I can't imagine people wanted to pay money to see a play about stuff they experience every day. I'd much rather watch a play about the exciting elements of life or better yet, things that never happen in real life. Reading a play about a nagging mother is like preaching to the choir. The only thing the play does succeed in is painting a very vivid picture of what's happening. Though I think the play would be half as short is there were no stage directions.
Mother Knows Best: Round Character of Amanda
"Try and you will SUCCEED! Why, you - you're just full of natural endowments! Both of my children - they're unusual children! Don't you think I know it? I'm so - proud! Happy and - feel I've - so much to be thankful for but- Promise me one thing, son!" Amanda pg. 1251
When reading this I can't help but have mixed emotions about Amanda's character. A part of her reminds me of my own mother. Her constant nagging is downright annoying at times and sometimes I can't believe the things she says to her children. However, reading this play makes it more apparent that she really has good intentions. Amanda spends most of her time living in her old glory days. Now she has to spend her time calling people up and pestering them about magazine subscriptions. She longs to be that pretty, successful woman she used to be, but now she is trying to live through her daughter. She is trying to make her daughter a popular outgoing woman when all laura wants is to be invisible and happy. Though it seems like Amanda is being selfish, in reality she truly believes that is what will make Laura happy. Is it kind of annoying at times? absolutely. But does she have good intentions? sure enough.
When reading this I can't help but have mixed emotions about Amanda's character. A part of her reminds me of my own mother. Her constant nagging is downright annoying at times and sometimes I can't believe the things she says to her children. However, reading this play makes it more apparent that she really has good intentions. Amanda spends most of her time living in her old glory days. Now she has to spend her time calling people up and pestering them about magazine subscriptions. She longs to be that pretty, successful woman she used to be, but now she is trying to live through her daughter. She is trying to make her daughter a popular outgoing woman when all laura wants is to be invisible and happy. Though it seems like Amanda is being selfish, in reality she truly believes that is what will make Laura happy. Is it kind of annoying at times? absolutely. But does she have good intentions? sure enough.
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Orlando: The Perfect Boyfriend and Heartthrob
"The worst fault you have is to be in love." - Jaques
"'Tis a fault I will not change for your best virtue. I am weary of you."- Orlando III.ii.
I've got to say, of all the stories we've read Orlando has certainly been the most impressive male character. Sure Iago was brilliantly devilish and Othello was a brave strong guy, but Orlando is the perfect love interest. He wins a wrestling match against all odds, probably to impress Rosalind. Then they fall in love at first sight, and he can't get her off his mind. To distract himself he writes all these sweet love notes to her. Then because that is not enough, he begins to post them on the trees all over the forrest, proclaiming his love for her. He proceeds to tell anyone who will listen how much he loves her. What girl wouldn't want a guy like this? Charming, valiant, probably very attractive... He has all the makings of a perfect love interest. Now in most stories this would be the point where I would say but... However there is no but for this guy. They fall in love, he loves her the whole way through the play, then they get married. There wasn't even a conflict. This sort of bothered me because, frankly in real life couples have to face conflict. Although I've never been in a relationship with a perfect guy, so I guess if he's really that great then he could avoid little relationship squabbles. Overall he gets a perfect ten rating on the cute boyfriend scale. Rosalind however tricks him into wooing her the way she wants, by being disguised as a man. This means their whole relationship is based on a lie, and that can only lead to disaster. That's just me being cynical though. Overall this play was basically one big "and they all lived happily ever after" story. It was a sort of nice change of pace from everyone dying, but I do like stories with a little more conflict or plot.
"'Tis a fault I will not change for your best virtue. I am weary of you."- Orlando III.ii.
I've got to say, of all the stories we've read Orlando has certainly been the most impressive male character. Sure Iago was brilliantly devilish and Othello was a brave strong guy, but Orlando is the perfect love interest. He wins a wrestling match against all odds, probably to impress Rosalind. Then they fall in love at first sight, and he can't get her off his mind. To distract himself he writes all these sweet love notes to her. Then because that is not enough, he begins to post them on the trees all over the forrest, proclaiming his love for her. He proceeds to tell anyone who will listen how much he loves her. What girl wouldn't want a guy like this? Charming, valiant, probably very attractive... He has all the makings of a perfect love interest. Now in most stories this would be the point where I would say but... However there is no but for this guy. They fall in love, he loves her the whole way through the play, then they get married. There wasn't even a conflict. This sort of bothered me because, frankly in real life couples have to face conflict. Although I've never been in a relationship with a perfect guy, so I guess if he's really that great then he could avoid little relationship squabbles. Overall he gets a perfect ten rating on the cute boyfriend scale. Rosalind however tricks him into wooing her the way she wants, by being disguised as a man. This means their whole relationship is based on a lie, and that can only lead to disaster. That's just me being cynical though. Overall this play was basically one big "and they all lived happily ever after" story. It was a sort of nice change of pace from everyone dying, but I do like stories with a little more conflict or plot.
Themes of the play or just deep conversation topics?
"Such a one is a natural philosopher. Wast ever in court, shepherd?" Touchstone III.ii
(PS I'm listening to a very pretty song called Leo by Ludovico Einaudi)
Though this play didn't have suspenseful death sequences or melancholy soliloquies, it did confuse me more than the others. The themes in plays like Othello are very apparent, and the emotions and ideas being portrayed are easy to see. However, in this play I wasn't really sure what the message was. At first I was thinking true love conquers all, but honestly I felt like the characters fell in love within a matter of lines. I'd say that's moving a little too fast. Also I didn't really see a point to the play. The only in depth topics breeched in the whole thing, came from two characters randomly having a discussion in the forrest. Some talk about true love. Others talk about the advantages and disadvantages of living in the city versus living in the forrest. I guess these themes are somewhat apparent in the character's actions, but I just don't get it enough to consider them prominent. Did the mighty Shakespeare just get lazy and decided to write his thoughts in dialogue instead of action? Or is there a purpose in just having the characters discuss it? Maybe it was just to add to the fairly carefree nature of the characters. Though you'd think being banished and living in the forrest would be horrible, they actually all don't seem to mind that much. So I guess he could be saying that if people were to step back from their busy city lives and just live in exile they would find much more love, peace, and happiness. I think this might actually be nice; I mean taking my friends into the woods and doing whatever we please doesn't sound half bad. So maybe this is what Shakespeare was trying to convey all along and the other conversations were just side topics.
(PS I'm listening to a very pretty song called Leo by Ludovico Einaudi)
Though this play didn't have suspenseful death sequences or melancholy soliloquies, it did confuse me more than the others. The themes in plays like Othello are very apparent, and the emotions and ideas being portrayed are easy to see. However, in this play I wasn't really sure what the message was. At first I was thinking true love conquers all, but honestly I felt like the characters fell in love within a matter of lines. I'd say that's moving a little too fast. Also I didn't really see a point to the play. The only in depth topics breeched in the whole thing, came from two characters randomly having a discussion in the forrest. Some talk about true love. Others talk about the advantages and disadvantages of living in the city versus living in the forrest. I guess these themes are somewhat apparent in the character's actions, but I just don't get it enough to consider them prominent. Did the mighty Shakespeare just get lazy and decided to write his thoughts in dialogue instead of action? Or is there a purpose in just having the characters discuss it? Maybe it was just to add to the fairly carefree nature of the characters. Though you'd think being banished and living in the forrest would be horrible, they actually all don't seem to mind that much. So I guess he could be saying that if people were to step back from their busy city lives and just live in exile they would find much more love, peace, and happiness. I think this might actually be nice; I mean taking my friends into the woods and doing whatever we please doesn't sound half bad. So maybe this is what Shakespeare was trying to convey all along and the other conversations were just side topics.
I'm A Real Boy! Oh wait.... The Irony of Cross Dressing
"I pray you, do not fall in love with me,
So there are several things in this play that could be considered strange; but no part is as strange as the cross dressing of Rosalind. At first she just pretends to be a man to keep her safe from robbers in the woods. But then as she continues this act she finds some value in being a man. Conveniently she runs into her heartthrob who she had previously met in the court, and she discovers, alas! He is in love with her too. The only thing is is that Orlando believes she is a he. So she as a he talks to Orlando and sees a valuable opportunity here. It is every girl's dream to tell her man what to do, without him thinking "she's controlling" or whatever guys think. And now here is the strangest, most perfect chance to do just that! So she as he tells him how to woo her, and what to say and do and all that jazz. It's also ironic that she pretends to be herself when she's being a man. Try not to get too confused. But the irony doesn't stop there! No, to all those girls out there thinking cross dressing is a fool proof genius plan, there are a few minor setbacks. Such as having another girl fall in love with your boy self. Unfortunately Phoebe falls in love with Rosalind's male alter ego and now she must convince Phoebe that her love is not true. Talk about an awkward situation. Though I don't really believe the play is all that funny, I do think that there is definitely some humor in some accidental lesbian action. But maybe that's just me....
For I am falser than vows made in wine." - Rosalind III.v.
So there are several things in this play that could be considered strange; but no part is as strange as the cross dressing of Rosalind. At first she just pretends to be a man to keep her safe from robbers in the woods. But then as she continues this act she finds some value in being a man. Conveniently she runs into her heartthrob who she had previously met in the court, and she discovers, alas! He is in love with her too. The only thing is is that Orlando believes she is a he. So she as a he talks to Orlando and sees a valuable opportunity here. It is every girl's dream to tell her man what to do, without him thinking "she's controlling" or whatever guys think. And now here is the strangest, most perfect chance to do just that! So she as he tells him how to woo her, and what to say and do and all that jazz. It's also ironic that she pretends to be herself when she's being a man. Try not to get too confused. But the irony doesn't stop there! No, to all those girls out there thinking cross dressing is a fool proof genius plan, there are a few minor setbacks. Such as having another girl fall in love with your boy self. Unfortunately Phoebe falls in love with Rosalind's male alter ego and now she must convince Phoebe that her love is not true. Talk about an awkward situation. Though I don't really believe the play is all that funny, I do think that there is definitely some humor in some accidental lesbian action. But maybe that's just me....
Monday, February 13, 2012
Reflective Essay: Blog Edition!
Shakespeare portrays these basic human emotions in a way that all different kinds of people can relate to no matter where they are from or what time period they live in. A great example of this is Othello. One of the main themes of the play is jealousy and how it can tear apart even the strongest of relationships. When planted just right, the seed of jealousy can cause the most levelheaded, calculated people to act in barbaric, unbecoming ways. This theme is equally prevalent in two different sources from different time periods. The first is the play “The Phantom of the Opera”. The second is the movie “Moulin Rouge”. Even though the two were created almost one hundred years apart they both reflect the same theme of jealousy and just how destructive it can be, which Shakespeare created perfectly in Othello.
Perhaps a somewhat more modern example of jealousy destroying a relationship is in the movie “Moulin Rouge” which was released in 2001 (IMDb). Ironically the movie is set in the time period of the early 1900s as well but it has a very modern twist, using songs from Nirvana to Madonna (IMDb). The entire cast list and song list can be found here --> Moulin Rouge. Besides being one of the most entertaining love stories with some of the best modern musical medleys, it also offers another great parallel to Othello and it’s theme of destructive jealousy. In this movie, The Duke falls hard for the beautiful courtesan Satine. Satine was more than willing to fake being in love with the Duke because she wanted him to make her a star. Then on the night she is supposed to be seducing him, she ends up accidentally falling for Christian, who she believes is the duke but is really nothing more than a poor writer. They fall in love though, and soon she is caught in a sticky situation. The Duke now believes she is in love with him and is now willing to create a new theater for the Moulin Rouge and back a very large production in which she is the star. The only catch is Satine must exclusively belong to the Duke. Normally the Duke is a quiet well-tempered man, but he reveals a side of himself that is insane with jealousy. The lovers try to hide their forbidden love, but when the Duke catches on he becomes outraged. He hurts Satine, threatens her, and even tries to kill her and Christian too. Though he didn’t really have a great chance of winning her back from the charming, alarmingly attractive writer, he ruined any chance he had by being so jealous. He went from being a calm and collected gentleman, to being a savage out for revenge through death. This is very similar to Othello who in fact did kill Desdemona to avenge his jealousy and her betrayal (1361-462.).
The monologue given in the video above describes the themes of these plays and movie perfectly.
This link sends you to a lyrics page that has the dialogue for it ---> Le Tango De Roxanne Lyrics
Shakespeare plays are considered some of the most timeless pieces of literature ever written. Everyone has heard of his work and most people have read or seen at least one of his plays. Other than the dialogue being kind of hard to understand, his works are well respected and liked by all. Just what makes Shakespeare’s plays so iconic and well accepted? After all today’s culture certainly doesn’t talk that way and there aren’t dukes and lords anymore. No, what really capture the attention of his audiences are the themes of his stories. Almost every person can relate to the basic themes or feelings of the characters. This ability has made his works into legendary standards that have become timeless and emulated by all different forms of art and entertainment. Whether it’s in a play from the 1900’s or a modern 21st century movie musical, his themes are prevalent in all kinds of works throughout time, making his writing truly timeless.
Monday, February 6, 2012
Rumor Has It!
Aside from Adele being one of the greatest singers of our generation, her song "Rumor Has It" fits the motive driving all of the conflict in this play. A rumor of infidelity prompts Iago to seek revenge on Othello. Ironically Iago uses the rumor that Cassio is cheating with Desdemona against Othello to fulfill his evil plans. Bianca is angered when she hears a rumor that Cassio is cheating on her as well. The first chorus of the song perfectly describes how Othello is being manipulated to believe that Desdemona is cheating. It's almost as if Iago is telling this rumor to Othello in the song.
"She made a fool out of you," - She's made you look stupid by cheating on you
"And, boy, she's bringing you down," - She will be what ruins you
"She made your heart melt," - She made you fall in love with her
"But you're cold to the core," - Now you're angered by her and you want revenge
"Now rumour has it she ain't got your love anymore" - Pretty self explanatory
Other parts of the song fit different scenarios from the play. In the bridge of the song there is a line that alludes to Adele fabricating these rumors to hurt her ex lover and his new girl. This mirrors Iago's plan to get back at Othello by doing the same thing. You can read more of the lyrics that fit different scenarios from the play by clicking on this link ----> Rumor Has It Lyrics
Basically this is an awesome song that fits a major element of the play perfectly. To drive my point home I will now post a picture of Adele with her grammys proving she got the last laugh (much like Iago did). :)
Translation of the Chorus
"Bless your soul, you've got your head in the clouds,"- You're blinded by your love for Desdemona"She made a fool out of you," - She's made you look stupid by cheating on you
"And, boy, she's bringing you down," - She will be what ruins you
"She made your heart melt," - She made you fall in love with her
"But you're cold to the core," - Now you're angered by her and you want revenge
"Now rumour has it she ain't got your love anymore" - Pretty self explanatory
Other parts of the song fit different scenarios from the play. In the bridge of the song there is a line that alludes to Adele fabricating these rumors to hurt her ex lover and his new girl. This mirrors Iago's plan to get back at Othello by doing the same thing. You can read more of the lyrics that fit different scenarios from the play by clicking on this link ----> Rumor Has It Lyrics
Basically this is an awesome song that fits a major element of the play perfectly. To drive my point home I will now post a picture of Adele with her grammys proving she got the last laugh (much like Iago did). :)
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Final Verdict On Othello
"A guiltless death I die." Desdemona IV.ii.136
I've got to say that after finishing Othello I feel underwhelmed. I was expecting this huge finish with some epic battle between Othello and Iago. Instead Othello stabs him once, but he doesn't even die. Then Othello just kills himself. Also Desdemona takes way too long to die. It's long and drawn out, and just when you think she died, she comes back with another couple lines. Cassio potentially loses a limb. The idiot sidekick Roderigo finally gets killed off by his own friend. The only interesting part is that Emilia finally grows a pair and tells off Othello for treating Desdemona like crap. Too little, to late though, to have any real effect. The play just lacks a rhythm that would normally create suspense. The little squabble between Cassio, Iago, and Roderigo happens so fast that it seems like it's over before it even began. However, Desdemona's conversation with Othello that eventually ends in her death seems to drag on and on. The rest of the play was ok, but in my mind the rest of the play was supposed to be building up to this awesome dramatic event. Instead it was very anticlimactic and sort of a blur. This could be because the play mainly relies on stage directions or the acting side of it instead of dialogue. But the dialogue alone leaves much to be desired.
I've got to say that after finishing Othello I feel underwhelmed. I was expecting this huge finish with some epic battle between Othello and Iago. Instead Othello stabs him once, but he doesn't even die. Then Othello just kills himself. Also Desdemona takes way too long to die. It's long and drawn out, and just when you think she died, she comes back with another couple lines. Cassio potentially loses a limb. The idiot sidekick Roderigo finally gets killed off by his own friend. The only interesting part is that Emilia finally grows a pair and tells off Othello for treating Desdemona like crap. Too little, to late though, to have any real effect. The play just lacks a rhythm that would normally create suspense. The little squabble between Cassio, Iago, and Roderigo happens so fast that it seems like it's over before it even began. However, Desdemona's conversation with Othello that eventually ends in her death seems to drag on and on. The rest of the play was ok, but in my mind the rest of the play was supposed to be building up to this awesome dramatic event. Instead it was very anticlimactic and sort of a blur. This could be because the play mainly relies on stage directions or the acting side of it instead of dialogue. But the dialogue alone leaves much to be desired.
And then everyone died. The End.
"I kissed you before I killed you. Now, killing myself, I’m dying while I kiss you again." Othello V.ii.375
So I'm sort of confused. I know Desdemona, Roderigo, Emilia, and Othello are all dead. Cassio is seriously injured and Iago was stabbed too but is still alive. Huh. So where do they go from there? Cassio will most likely take over but I can't imagine he'd be too great in battle with only one leg. Everyone FINALLY figured out Iago is a lying scumbag, but he's not dead yet. So do they kill him later or let him rot in a jail cell? I guess it doesn't really matter though because he succeeded in what he was trying to do. I would definitely consider this story to be a tragedy, but what was the point? Most stories or plays have some kind of message but the only thing that happened in this play is that everyone is either dead or unhappy. Is this supposed to mean that even when people deceit you, you'll just end up dead. Maybe that's the point of a tragedy. Maybe the point is everyone has a tragic flaw that we will never really be able to overcome. I have to theories of what Othello's tragic flaw is. I believe it's either he loves Desdemona too much and he is therefore overprotective. Or is it his jealousy? In the beginning of the story he insists he's not a jealous man, but the rest of the story makes it kind of hard to believe that. So which one is it? Or is it both? I'm not really sure. All I do know is that this was one depressing story.
So I'm sort of confused. I know Desdemona, Roderigo, Emilia, and Othello are all dead. Cassio is seriously injured and Iago was stabbed too but is still alive. Huh. So where do they go from there? Cassio will most likely take over but I can't imagine he'd be too great in battle with only one leg. Everyone FINALLY figured out Iago is a lying scumbag, but he's not dead yet. So do they kill him later or let him rot in a jail cell? I guess it doesn't really matter though because he succeeded in what he was trying to do. I would definitely consider this story to be a tragedy, but what was the point? Most stories or plays have some kind of message but the only thing that happened in this play is that everyone is either dead or unhappy. Is this supposed to mean that even when people deceit you, you'll just end up dead. Maybe that's the point of a tragedy. Maybe the point is everyone has a tragic flaw that we will never really be able to overcome. I have to theories of what Othello's tragic flaw is. I believe it's either he loves Desdemona too much and he is therefore overprotective. Or is it his jealousy? In the beginning of the story he insists he's not a jealous man, but the rest of the story makes it kind of hard to believe that. So which one is it? Or is it both? I'm not really sure. All I do know is that this was one depressing story.
Othello Act IV: Chalk full of symbolism and miscommunication!
"What noise is this?—Not dead? Not yet quite dead?
I that am cruel am yet merciful,
I would not have thee linger in thy pain.
So, so." Othello IV.ii.100
In Act IV there is quite a lot of deceit and confusion going around. For one Desdemona can't seem to figure out why her husband who just three acts ago thought she was an angel now thinks she is a lying whore. Then there's Cassio who is wondering why he is suddenly so hated by Othello. Othello is the most confused of all even though he supposedly has the most knowledge of what's going on. He is torn between a hatred for his wife who he believes is cheating on him, and yet still gets angry when he thinks Cassio is speaking ill of her. To me, this indicates that more than anything Othello is hurt by the idea that his love is ruined. Yes, of course he is angry, but if he was really so angry he would have just slashed Cassio and Desdemona's throats when he first heard of their affairs. Instead he is constantly searching for proof of their scandal, even though Iago is providing plenty of it. I believe this is because he desperately does not want to believe this is true. His epileptic episode is a symbol of the war in his mind fighting between whether or not he is more angry or heart broken. Finally there is Iago who has somehow manipulated all the characters throughout the whole play. He has managed to keep his hands clean while ruining everyone's lives. What's most impressive though is that no one has suspected him. Well except for Roderigo but he's too stupid to do anything about it. All his accusations are simply a foreshadow to a bigger reveal of Iago's horrible deeds. The saddest part is if all these characters had just talked to each other about what was going on, they could have found out that this whole situation is a lie created by Iago, and then they could have killed him and all problems would be solved. Instead they hide in cellars listening to parts of conversations and walk around baffled by what's happened. If any of the characters had enough common sense to just talk to one another they would not be in this mess in the first place!
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Despicable Me :)
Just like Iago, Gru shows in this clip how it can sometimes be good to be bad :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82utG7Q3G_k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82utG7Q3G_k
Whose side are you on, anyways? Rooting for the bad guy
"She that was ever fair and never proud,
Had tongue at will and yet was never loud,
Never lacked gold and yet went never gay,
Fled from his wish and yet said "Now I may"
She that, being angered, her revenge being nigh,
Bade her wrong stay and her displeasure fly,
She that in wisdom never was so frail
To change the cod's head for the salmon's tail;
She that could think and ne'er disclose her mind,
See suitors following and not look behind;
She was a wight, if ever such wight were-"
"To do what?"
"To suckle fools and chronicle small beer."- Iago and Desdemona Pg. 1387
In today's world if one were to describe Iago and his behavior he would most likely be called a slew of foul names but most commonly a douche bag. He is insincere and rude and manipulative. He's probably the first guy ever to make a "women belong in the kitchen" joke. And that's him at his best. At his worst he is spiteful and full of rage and a lust for revenge. People are nothing more than pawns to him in this game he has created to take down Othello. You would think hearing all these things that you would hate him, and yet for some strange reason I find myself enjoying his character. He is obviously quite bright to have come up with what so far has been a very elaborate plan. His witty banter, though often times hurtful, is humorous. Though he is real with no one else in his life, it is intriguing to get to know who he truly is. He has all the makings of a typical politician today. His emotion really shines through when he is at his angriest point during a little monologue. His character builds suspense as I wonder what part of his plan he'll reveal next. Sometimes it's good to be bad, and in this play nobody does bad better than Iago.
Had tongue at will and yet was never loud,
Never lacked gold and yet went never gay,
Fled from his wish and yet said "Now I may"
She that, being angered, her revenge being nigh,
Bade her wrong stay and her displeasure fly,
She that in wisdom never was so frail
To change the cod's head for the salmon's tail;
She that could think and ne'er disclose her mind,
See suitors following and not look behind;
She was a wight, if ever such wight were-"
"To do what?"
"To suckle fools and chronicle small beer."- Iago and Desdemona Pg. 1387
In today's world if one were to describe Iago and his behavior he would most likely be called a slew of foul names but most commonly a douche bag. He is insincere and rude and manipulative. He's probably the first guy ever to make a "women belong in the kitchen" joke. And that's him at his best. At his worst he is spiteful and full of rage and a lust for revenge. People are nothing more than pawns to him in this game he has created to take down Othello. You would think hearing all these things that you would hate him, and yet for some strange reason I find myself enjoying his character. He is obviously quite bright to have come up with what so far has been a very elaborate plan. His witty banter, though often times hurtful, is humorous. Though he is real with no one else in his life, it is intriguing to get to know who he truly is. He has all the makings of a typical politician today. His emotion really shines through when he is at his angriest point during a little monologue. His character builds suspense as I wonder what part of his plan he'll reveal next. Sometimes it's good to be bad, and in this play nobody does bad better than Iago.
Love, Hatred, Jealousy, and Deception: All themes that appear in Othello
"And till she come, as truly as to Heaven
I do confess the vices of my blood,
So justly to your grave ears I'll present
How I did thrive in this fair lady's love
And she in mine."- Othello Pg. 1375
(Answer to Question 5)
As Mr. Costello already outlined in our worksheet from the beginning of this week, the main themes of Othello so far tend to be love, hatred, jealousy, and deception. Othello has a love so true for Desdemona, and she for him. They're happily married and totally in love. Roderigo on the other hand is jealous of their marriage because he too believes he loves Desdemona. Iago is furious that Othello gave his new position to a math geek whose never seen battle. He is also angry because rumor has it Othello has been sleeping with his wife. Iago also deceives all the characters when he pretends to be this nice, loyal guy when in reality he is an evil man out to get revenge. These themes enhance the dramatic experience because they help build both the plot and increase the emotion of the play. Iago is currently being honest with the audience, but I have a feeling we don't know the extent of his plot to take down Othello. Also what's to come of Othello's and Desdemona's relationship when it seems everyone is trying to tear them apart? And poor Roderigo is nothing but a heart broken pawn in Iago's game. The reason these themes heighten the pleasure of the thematic experience is because these are all feelings everyone can relate to. At some point in their life everyone has gotten jealous of another's job or relationship, has fallen in love with someone, or has hidden a part of who they truly are. This play's themes are universal and timeless. Even in today's society these ideas are still relevant. The themes stem from the core of our being which connects with the audience and therefore engages them. Shakespeare has done an excellent job of writing a play that outlines all important human concerns.
I do confess the vices of my blood,
So justly to your grave ears I'll present
How I did thrive in this fair lady's love
And she in mine."- Othello Pg. 1375
(Answer to Question 5)
As Mr. Costello already outlined in our worksheet from the beginning of this week, the main themes of Othello so far tend to be love, hatred, jealousy, and deception. Othello has a love so true for Desdemona, and she for him. They're happily married and totally in love. Roderigo on the other hand is jealous of their marriage because he too believes he loves Desdemona. Iago is furious that Othello gave his new position to a math geek whose never seen battle. He is also angry because rumor has it Othello has been sleeping with his wife. Iago also deceives all the characters when he pretends to be this nice, loyal guy when in reality he is an evil man out to get revenge. These themes enhance the dramatic experience because they help build both the plot and increase the emotion of the play. Iago is currently being honest with the audience, but I have a feeling we don't know the extent of his plot to take down Othello. Also what's to come of Othello's and Desdemona's relationship when it seems everyone is trying to tear them apart? And poor Roderigo is nothing but a heart broken pawn in Iago's game. The reason these themes heighten the pleasure of the thematic experience is because these are all feelings everyone can relate to. At some point in their life everyone has gotten jealous of another's job or relationship, has fallen in love with someone, or has hidden a part of who they truly are. This play's themes are universal and timeless. Even in today's society these ideas are still relevant. The themes stem from the core of our being which connects with the audience and therefore engages them. Shakespeare has done an excellent job of writing a play that outlines all important human concerns.
Revenge is a dish best served cold
"I hate the Moor... But I for mere suspicion in that kind will do as if for surety." Iago Pg. 1382
(Answer to Question 3)
The protagonist in the story is clearly Othello. With his strong but calm manner and his true love for Desdemona, it would seem impossible to hate him. Yet, the antagonist, Iago, seems to hate him with the fire of a thousand suns. Iago is nothing like Othello. He lies to and manipulates people in order to carry out his twisted plan to get revenge on Othello for sleeping with his wife. He is deceitful and at times just plain rude. He speaks poorly to the women and uses his friends and companions to help achieve his plan. For instance Casio would generally be considered a good guy. He is nice to the ladies and never drinks too much. But Iago urges him to keep drinking that leads Casio to get in a fight that gets him fired. Afterward Iago even tries to act like he is Casio's friend, when he clearly hates him for getting the job he believed was rightfully his. All the other minor characters fall for Iago's honesty act too as they continue to help him further his evil plotting. I'm not sure whether Othello and Iago could be considered foil characters because up to this point we haven't gotten to know a whole lot about Othello or what he's really been involved in. There are certainly a lot of rumors though...
(Answer to Question 3)
The protagonist in the story is clearly Othello. With his strong but calm manner and his true love for Desdemona, it would seem impossible to hate him. Yet, the antagonist, Iago, seems to hate him with the fire of a thousand suns. Iago is nothing like Othello. He lies to and manipulates people in order to carry out his twisted plan to get revenge on Othello for sleeping with his wife. He is deceitful and at times just plain rude. He speaks poorly to the women and uses his friends and companions to help achieve his plan. For instance Casio would generally be considered a good guy. He is nice to the ladies and never drinks too much. But Iago urges him to keep drinking that leads Casio to get in a fight that gets him fired. Afterward Iago even tries to act like he is Casio's friend, when he clearly hates him for getting the job he believed was rightfully his. All the other minor characters fall for Iago's honesty act too as they continue to help him further his evil plotting. I'm not sure whether Othello and Iago could be considered foil characters because up to this point we haven't gotten to know a whole lot about Othello or what he's really been involved in. There are certainly a lot of rumors though...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)