on beauty-ending

I think that Howard was unhappy with how his life was going towards the beginning of the book, and so he messed everything up to start over.  I've already written this, but Howard seemed miserable about his family and job.  He always talked about his job, but he seemed either bored or extremely unhappy with it.  He also was married to a woman who used to be physically beautiful, but wasn't anymore.  He did not get along with his children either, he almost disliked them from this thoughts about them.  I think that is why he committed the affair.  Maybe he just needed a break from his life, or he wanted a way out.  I think it was one of those two things.  It was why he had an affair with a woman who was opposite of Kiki in every way.  Their race, weight, education; they were different in every way.  Then at the party when Kiki saw him with Claire, they were almost flirting at his household in front of his wife; I do not know what else he would expect to happen other then getting caught.  He then fails at the end of the book when he completely blows his speech in Boston.  I think subconsciously he must have wanted to fail, maybe to start off again somewhere else, almost start a new life.

on beauty-wednesday

On page 153 there is a poem that Claire wrote titled On Beauty that is obviously extremely important because that is what the book is titled, but I was wondering what he significance of it was.  I'm not sure if it was important because it was read when the Dean was talking to Claire about the affair, or because of the content, but it is for some reason.  I think maybe that it said that beauty does not take away sadness, nor does not being beautiful.

art and lies: monday

Towards the beginning of class, the subject of trophy wives has been mentioned.  It is funny, because when reading this book I thought Kiki was a type of trophy wife for Howard.  I do not mean a traditional trophy wife, but one unique for Howard.  Howard seems to have some sort of disdain for his parents, specifically his father.  In my mind, I imagine Howard marrying Kiki partly because it was kind of like him revolting against his father, and that is what made her appealing to him.  I think the book said that she was good looking as well.  Now, it has become much more complicated for Howard.  His children have problems identifying with their race (and seemingly annoy him) and his wife has gained a large amount of weight.  A lot of things have happened where it seems like his life has gotten off the track he thought it would be on.  It's no longer just Kiki and him having fun as young adults.   Near the end of the section kipps and belsey, Howard talked about how he still loved his wife when he was 40 when other men had gotten divorced.  I'm not sure if he means he then stopped, or if he still does and for whatever reason had an affair.  

My feelings towards Howard are pretty odd; at least unexpected.  I think it is because I'm a guy, and most girls would get pissed reading this, but Howard seems miserable throughout this book which makes me almost sympathize with him rather then feel anger towards him.  I just finished kipps and belsey though, so maybe Howard comes off badly in the near future stirring  my hate towards him; but for some reason I feel just as sympathetic towards him as I do towards Kiki.  He is in this no-win position with his kids and wife; books and movies like this make me hesitant of wanting to get married.  I can picture him enjoying the fact that he is going to marry someone like Kiki; then there are a lot of side effects that he never considered he would have to deal with.  Now, his children say he is selfish and blow him off while Kiki has let go of her body; it seems to me like Howard is miserable.  He even mentally makes fun of his wife and children, he does it a lot when they see the Mozart concert.  When someone gets stuck in a position like that, what do you do?  I'm not really sure.  I do dislike Howard though.  In this book, I'm not really fond of any of the main characters.  Howard is overly condescending towards everyone, he even looks down on other faculty members.  Kiki is kind of annoying, I think because she acts differently when she is around different ethnic groups.  Mostly because a lot of the book is describing her thoughts, which there so numerous it gets kind of annoying.  Jerome is extremely feminine, and does not add much.  Levi seems absurd.  Zora attempts to act extremely scholarly, but kind of comes off like a doofus, which is how her father describes her.  There are not really any characters that I can relate to, or really like.  The character that draws the most interest from me is Victoria, she seems like she has a lot of sides to her, or at least strikes interest in me.  Especially how she acted with Howard at the end of the section, she had some sort of "coolness" about her that no-one else in the novel has.  She was almost flirting with Howard, and had the nerve to put on rap music at his party.  I feel like she might become more prominent later on in the book.

on beauty-class 1

I'm glad we're going to read this entire book, and talk about it in class.  I really like this book so far, partly because the writing is pretty simple but I can tell there are a lot of underlying themes.  So it will be interesting to hear very intelligent opinions and to gain insight into this novel.  One thought I had when reading this book was that I really do not want to have children.  It was like what I was thinking when I was watching the movie "Dan In Real Life".  In that movie, Dan could do nothing right in the eyes of his children, and I feel like Howard is kind of in that same boat.  Howard is essentially treated fairly badly by Jerome and his wife, and seems slightly annoyed by the youngest son, Levi.  He obviously cares, he had good intentions when he went to the Kippses home when he thought Jerome was going to get married, but got into trouble doing that by his wife and Jerome.  I was also trying to figure out what Kiki was talking about when she talked about the mistake Howard made (43).  I thought she was talking about him going to the Kippses, but then she said, "she had measured a nameless, faceless woman in a hotel room next to what she knew of herself" and said something about one stupid night, and also said, "Your husband will screw somebody else, you will forgive him, you will stay".  It was interesting to me that such a big topic was mentioned so quickly.  And is Jerome mad at his father because of the debacle at the Kippses or because of his father's unfaithful behavior?  

art & lies: chapter reading

Picasso:  These questions came to my mind to ask when reading this chapter closely...

-I wondered why the father would name his daughter Picasso, but then discourage her from painting.  I feel like if you are a painter, and name your child Picasso, it is almost like you want her to be a painter, not the opposite.

-It is also weird that the father doesn't want his daughter to follow in his footsteps.  I thought that this book might be based in an earlier time period, but later on in the chapter it says that some gate is getting torn down in 1995, so I assume it is 1995.  In 1995, I feel like working in a factory is more masculine then painting.  I guess in their setting it is not, but if someone asked me which one of those professions is more masculine, I would immediately answer factory worker.  Most parents try to push their own interests on their children as well.  If a father played basketball, a lot of times he'll try to get his son or daughter to play basketball as well.  I found it weird that the father was so against his daughter following his interest in painting.

-I don't really get the part about there being two different staircases.  I guess one might symbolize (the path she wants to take in life), and how it doesn't align with her families'?

-She is obviously not very fond of her family.  I couldn't tell if there was some sort of sexual tension between her and her brother, or if that is not even close to being the case.  She said something about how they shared rooms through adolescence, and later he wanted her to sit on his lap.  He could just have teased her a lot, I couldn't really figure that out.  On page 43, she said she hated her brother, which did not surprise me, but I was surprised when she said she loved her mother because it seemed as though she was ripping her mother apart for a lot of the chapter.

-Picasso then starts describing a ship like it is a person, and talking about all these different colors, and she painted her body all these weird colors, and I really got kind of lost.  It was like she decided to smoke marijuana, and then continue writing, and all these colors were being described that were kind of perplexing her or something.  It reminded me a little of "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" or some Beatles song.  It kind of confused me as to what exactly was happening.  On the last page of the chapter, her family calls for a doctor because they think she has gone mad, so my guess is that the author was trying to show this maybe?

This story makes me feel a little disoriented towards Picasso.  The word unconventional does not begin to describe Picasso or her family.  I almost asked "What is going on?" out-loud to myself during this chapter.  The father does not want her to be an artist, but if asked how I would describe her, and the chapter in general, I would probably say very artsy.

art & lies: 3/30

My first thought when I read the chapter name "Handel", I thought it was an artists name, probably because another name of a chapter was Picasso.  I googled Handel after I read a little of the book, and it was an old German man who wrote opera, which Handel does as well (Not sure if this is coincidence or on purpose).  This book is kind of hard to put together, or retain all of it.  It reminds me of a Wes Anderson movie, like "The Royal Tenenbaums" or "The Darjeeling Limited".  I like those movies, but I'm not sure why I like them or why they are good in a cinematic sense.  This book is kind of like that for me.  I'm not sure how to even describe this chapter.  It seems like it is following Handel's mind, almost like a blog.  It is not exactly like a blog, but the writing reminds me of how a mind works.  It kind of jumps all around, it is not perfectly laid out.  I think the "lies" part of the book so far is how Handel is giving his opinions about the realities of the world.  For example, he mentioned the homeless people; and how since it is illegal for them to be on the street, now people do not have as much sympathy for them.  

Handel interests me a lot.  It seems he has no interest in having a relationship with a woman, but loves women.  He talks about being a devout Catholic, yet he went to a brothel.  I wish there were a lot of footnotes explaining what some things mean, or how in DVDs, there are extra features where the director explains a lot of things.  I wish Winterson was explaining some of the depth of this book.  

When I was thinking of Handel though, it reminded me of a conversation I was having with a buddy a while ago.  A Bright Eyes song came on his computer, and it was a very depressing song.  It is a band consisting of one person, Conor Oberst.  He is apparently some kind of prodigy; he is super smart.  We then talked about how it seems like people who are extremely smart who think really deeply into areas of life are a lot of times depressed or cynical about life.  I'm not sure if this is true, but we were thinking of all these people who fit into that category.  I was thinking about how Handel fits into this category as well.  He is obviously very intelligent; he is a surgeon.  He also thinks a lot about how the world works and a lot of the bad in life.  There are a couple of sentences on page 26 that even touched on what I had been thinking.  Handel says he is about to leave his city and never return.  He then says, "This action, my friends conclude, comes out of an excess of what the French call La Sensibilite.  Too much feeling is not welcome in a man."  This is exactly what I was thinking about, that Handel is nagged continuously by these deep thoughts of his.  When Handel's friend asked "How shall I live?" a lot of people would not have pondered the question at the depth or length of time that Handel did.

I really wondered about a couple of things I couldn't answer.  I was not sure about the significance of the very first paragraph.  It is obviously very significant and important, but I'm not sure what that is.  There also seemed to be a lot of references to light.  Handel is always talking about how light is being shown on different objects.  Handel also points out the color white a lot.  He describes how white the shirt is that he wore to the opera, how white his bed is, how white the brothel was.  I think there has to be significance to all of these, but I do not know what it is.  This is why I wish there was some footnotes like I mentioned above, because I'm sure knowing some of these things would really help unravel the book.

3 versions of The Child and Flowers

The three different views of the poem "The Child and the Flowers" by Mrs. Hemans were all very different.  The view I enjoyed the most was the "page image" view.  It looked like 3 pages from a book that you can see on your screen; it was a scanned image of the physical pages.  I could even slightly see the words on the other side of the page.  I liked this the best because it was like I was reading an actual book, which I like more then reading words on a screen.  Getting to the end of a page feels good to me, like I'm progressing through the book.  I have no interest in the Kindle from Amazon, because I would not want to read a book electronically.  The next image I enjoyed was the HTML version.  It looked a lot like a webpage, or what I am writing on this blog.  It is not as easy to read as a book, but it is still organized in a clear, concise fashion.  My weakness is when there are that many words on a computer screen, sometimes they start to blur together and I really need to focus on what I am reading to grasp it and process it so I remember it after I read it.  The worst by far for me was the TEI version.  It was one big riff-raff of words which looked like an elementary student typed it.  It was one big paragraph with no clear spacing.  Not only was it one big paragraph, but there are random words and numbers within the one large paragraph, which made it very hard to read the poem/short story.  I think that version is what people program into computers so it shows up like the HTML version, but just reading that is difficult, as difficult as it probably could be.

Frankenstein-juxta

In the 1818 Thomas version, the two words used most frequently were "deep" and "friend".  Friend was a word that was used the most throughout all three versions, but deep was unique to the Thomas version.  I found all three times deep was used, and the words were not used in the same context or way the others were used.  It seemed to be a common adjective in that time period; it was used to describe the extent of his interests, the night and tone of his voice.  Maybe Thomas made a new friend that said the word deep a lot?  Just kidding, but to me, it did not seem to be a word that had a lot of unique significance to this particular version.

I do not think that these three are completely different novels, but they definitely sound like they have different tones to them, or emphasized different ideas or things.  Shelley edits the 1818 Thomas version, which changes some things, but it is still the story of Frankenstein.  13 years past from 1818 to 1831, so there is naturally going to be differences between them.  13 years is a long time, more then half the time I have been alive, so there is undoubtedly going to be differences.  When discussing the three versions, the word "friend" seemed to still be stressed in all versions though, so I think that all three were getting at the same thing, just had differences in them that time would naturally bring about.  

Heroes

I think there are undoubtedly heroes in modern life.  According to the poem, I think there are; according to me, for sure.  I think that depending on people's interests/geography/ethnicity/race there have been all types of heroes in the recent past and currently.  The person who comes to my mind immediately is Barack Obama.  I think that he is currently millions of people's hero, and will be remembered as one of the prominent figures of our generation, and in history.  One of my best buddies' dad was telling me a story.  He said the day after Obama was sworn into office, he was seeing a patient (he's a doctor) at the beginning of the day who was with her sister, both middle aged and African-American.  They both were just beaming he said, and when he said good morning to them as a kind of greeting, the sister said, "No, it is a great morning."  That really stuck with me.  

He's not a hero just to the African-American population though.  Our family had an exchange student when I was a baby.  For the next 5 years or so he came and lived with us every summer, and we've remained really close; he's like a brother to me.  After Barack was elected, he sent us an e-mail saying how happy he was that the United States elected him, and how Europe was essentially congratulating the United States for being able to do this.  I think it was really a transcendent moment for a lot of people, and our generation, and he really is a hero to so, so many people.  I think he's a hero to a lot of people as well because he showed the world how far our country has come.  It was so significant to me because I think it was the defining moment of my generation, kind of what our generation will be remembered for.  A lot of people in our grandparents' generation were pretty racist, and I think some of that trickled down to our parents' generation.  But I truly believed for a while that our generation is a lot more liberal in a sense, a lot more open-minded.  This is the first decision that our generation swayed, kind of decided for our country.  Instead of electing a wealthy, old white man, we elected a younger African American man.  He's younger, loves talking about sports, and is going to be on Jay Leno's late night show.  I'm not sure if I would say he is my number one personal hero, but definitely a hero.  I'm really proud that he's our president, I know I'm witnessing history, and the fact that he is the man (in the sense that he is just cool; he even filled out a bracket and put it on espn.com), and that he is our president is awesome.

end-lifted veil

If Latimer could read people's mind, I would have thought that he would have seen that Bertha was going to poison him.  When he thinks that he can read people's mind, he is just being perceptive.  I'm not sure why he wants to be able to do this, but he does manufacture it in his imagination.

read girls minds

The blonde on the right looks like she is thinking, Wow I really wish you were not taking my picture right now.  Ok I'm smiling, now leave me alone and let me go to my car.  

I do not think that the blonde woman, who turns out to be J.K. Rowling, looked that ditzy.  She is blonde, but I think that she looks like a normal person.  I would not have labeled her as a ditz, but I definitely would not have thought she is extremely intelligent, or extremely wealthy either. 

I had no idea that Latimer self-proclaimed being a mind-reader.  I now see what he talking about, but I'm not sure if he actually is in fact reading minds; I would probably say that he was not.  I think that some people are better then others at reading people's emotions and what they are thinking by their expressions and body language.  Latimer might be very good at this, but probably not reading minds.  Although maybe, I am not very sure.      

www.tagcrowd.com -go to project gutenberg

lifted veil

The language in this book is difficult, so it is hard for me to grasp everything that is going on, but Victor does not remind me of Latimer much at all.  They are both from Geneva I believe, and both had one really good friend.  They both also loved, and lost their mothers.  Their personalities do not remind me much of each other though.  Latimer is not good at science, whereas that was Victor's love; their minds worked differently.  I pictured Victor as being a pretty strong-willed character, wheras Latimer seems like the opposite.  He even faints at the appearance of Bertha.  Latimer really reminds me of the character Owen Meany in the book A Prayer for Owen Meany by John Irving.  Latimer and Victor had some similarities, but when I read both of them, I was not close to thinking, "Wow Victor and Latimer really remind me of each other."

frankenstein conclusion

I think Victor's advice to Walton does change, but not completely; it is kind of contradictory.  Victor tells Walton of his tale I assumed to teach him a lesson.  Near the end of the book he also tells Walton that he wishes he had never made the monster.  But then, right before he dies, he asks Walton to kill the monster for him.  He also has this rousing speech where he tries to convince the sailors to continue to find the north pole instead of going back home to safety.  I think he had his own intentions though; I think he wanted the crew to help him find the monster, and he did not have the strength to do it on his own.  I think his advice did change to Walton, but his own passion got in the way of his full advice.  His actions showed differently, but his words told Walton not to become obsessed with pursuing what he wants.  Victor was obsessed with creating life; and it ended up taking over his life, ending the lives of the ones he loved, and eventually took his life.  Walton has become obsessed with finding the north pole, and Victor did not want Walton's life to follow a path like his own.

I was thinking of the question "Are Victor and the monster the same person?" while finishing this book.  Victor was repeatedly called "a wretch", once by the monster (160), and Walton describes Victor's eyes as wretched (165).  What was even more evidence of them being the same person was that Walton said in a letter that Victor showed him the letters of Felix and Safie.  But the monster was there, not Victor.  So at this point I thought they were the same for sure.  Walton even said Victor, "is thus noble and godlike in ruin."  The footnote says this echoes Milton's description of Satan in Paradise Lost.  Throughout the whole book the monster was not only being called a wretch but also compared to Satan in Paradise Lost.  So I was quite sure at this point that they were the same person.  But later, Walton talks to the monster, who was hovering over Victor's dead body on the ship.  So then how could they be the same?  

I have no idea if they were the same or not.  In my opinion, I think that a part of Victor is in the monster like a father and a son.  The father and son are not the same, but they have a piece of each other in them.  That is why I think Victor is at times referred to as a wretch.  I still cannot explain how Victor showed Walton the letters of Felix and Safie though.

superhero

2.5b5*m2*William*Hair:Standard,swoop1,FFF700,FFFFFF,100,100,24,Eyebrows:Standard,eyebrows4,FFF700,FFFFFF,100,100,22,Eyes:Standard,newplain,0000FF,0000FF,100,100,21,Nose:Standard,thinbroke,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,28,Mouth:Standard,stern,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,19,Beard:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,27,Ears:Standard,boxer,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,20,Skin:Standard,blank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,7,Mask:Standard,goldenage,20c9ff,3d9cff,100,100,23,Headgear:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,2,Undershirt:Standard,long,0000FF,36B9EF,100,100,8,Overshirt:Standard,tee,FFF700,6C4D9B,100,100,9,Coat:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,26,RightGlove:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,18,LeftGlove:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,17,Insignia:Standard,bolt,FFF700,0073a6,100,100,10,Neckwear:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,25,Belt:Standard,dagger,8D6531,5A3410,100,100,16,Leggings:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,11,Overleggings:Standard,blox,0000FF,FFFFFF,100,100,12,Pants:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,15,RightFoot:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,14,LeftFoot:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,13,Back:Standard,shortcape,FF0000,FF0000,100,100,4,Wings:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,5,Tail:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,6,Aura:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,3,Companion:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,31,Background:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,1,RightHand:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,30,LeftHand:Standard,fraBlank,FFFFFF,FFFFFF,100,100,29,#

My superhero was the child William.  I know this is probably kind of a weird choice.  Initially I was going to make a super-hero of Elizabeth because I thought she was the most righteous character.  She was overly kind and understanding in every way.  She believed Justine that she did not kill her brother, and then stood by Victor when he was miserable to be around, which eventually cost her her life.  But I do not picture her as a superhero.  I was thinking of who in the book would be a superhero.  For some reason, I could see an older William being a superhero based on how he was described and how he acted.  He was the only one in the book that I can remember standing up to the monster.  Yes he died, but before that he stood up to the monster and kind of scolded/warned him about his father.  He was also described as being a cute kid, which most superhero's are.

Frankenstein-up to pg 153

This book is good, I like it, and I just stopped reading it pretty much in the peak of the good part, where Victor just got married but has not seen the monster yet.  I was wondering why Victor thought he was going to die on his wedding night, and not Elizabeth.  This was jumping out of the page at me, and I would guess that Elizabeth is going to die in the near future.  This would hurt Victor much more then his own death.  Although for as sad as Victor seems, he is also very scared of his death.  He has avoided it with the monster, and when he was in danger of dying out at sea, he was really scared as well.  I am not sure, but I would think that if you were in that much self-caused pain, that it might be weird to still be terrified of death, almost as if he likes being in this misery and turmoil.

When the monster was telling his tale, one of his actions jumped out at me, and I think it happens in real life a lot.  In sociology, they call it something like the labeling theory.  The monster wanted to be loved by his "protectors," and wanted to be good to them.  After the family sees the monster, Felix moves the family away from their cottage in fear of another encounter with the monster.  The monster then continues to light the cottage on fire until it burns downs.  The family would have heard about the cottage burning down, and thought they were right about moving away and the monster being awful.  I think this happens a lot in general.  If a teacher labels a kid a trouble maker, then a lot of times the kid figures that if he is already a trouble maker, why not be funny or whatever and cause trouble.  Or if kids in a bad part of town are not expected to go to college, then there is no consequence if they put no effort forward and drop out of school.

Are Victor and the monster the same person?  If so, why does Victor want to kill his loved ones?

-The word "wretch" is first found describing Victor by Walton when they find him n the beginning on the sled in the ice

-he describes the monster as a "wretch" as well

-he then describes that he spent the night wretchedly

-he uses the word a lot in general, now there are words like that too like "cool" ,"sick" or "gross".  That dead thing is gross, or That's a gross hoody (means cool)

-his father describes the environment (which was created by the monster) that Victor would come home to as wretchedness because William died

-when Victor is going home, he says that he is destined to become the most wretched of human beings

-Elizabeth is described as thinking that she caused the murder, and that made her very wretched

-It seems to me that the word wretch follows the murderer around, so maybe they are the same person?

This is a very interesting thing to think about.  Part of me thinks that there is no chance this is the case that they are the same person because of the fact that the monster tells about how he watched that family for a year, and things like that.  Although Victor I guess could just imagine this, and imagine in is head some part of his inner self could be scaling mountains, which seemed like kind of a stretch anyways.  The real flag to me though is his mother hurt him by dying.  So why would Victor kill other people close to him?  I do not think he would be protecting himself by killing loved ones since that is the way his mother hurt him so bad.  I feel like he fears that the most, so I'm not sure why he would do that.  I would think it would be better for him to just run away forever, or something like that.

monster's tale

How does the Monster's tale make you feel?

Initially, because of what happened to Justine and William, I hated the monster just as Victor did.  I then felt bad for the monster, though, as he was telling his tale.  I never thought about what the monster was thinking or feeling.  I guess I assumed that the monster awoke, and was just a man because of how big he was.  I never thought that when he awoke, he was essentially a baby who knew nothing, and initially could not even see, hear, or talk.  I feel what has happened is Victor's fault, but not completely because he created it, but more so because of the fact that he abandoned the monster.  If he had stayed with the monster, he could have essentially raised it almost like a child.  Instead he left the monster, and as a result of a chain of events, all the gloom surrounded Victor.

Frankenstein, 2 class

There are a couple of things in this novel so far that I really was curious about, and I'm sure I might have missed something in the book that may have explained these things that came to my mind.  Victor created the monster, and then as a result got very sick and had to be nursed back to health by his friend Clerval until the spring.  It seemed that once he got better though, he kind of forgot about this monster, which struck me as odd.  If he had been sick for months by having a nervous breakdown and had been hallucinating about this monster, I would have thought that once he got better he would have taken action in finding the monster.  Before he received a letter from his father, Victor even said, "My own spirits were high, and I bounded along with feelings of unbridled joy and hilarity."  I guess I wondered how he forgot completely about his creation, and did not try to find him or alert people of his presence.  

I also really could not comprehend why Victor didn't step up in Justine's defense and tell everyone he knew who killed his brother.  Victor said he would have stepped forward and confessed to the murder, but he was not in town and people would just think he was insane.  But I was thinking it through and it does not make sense to me.  Victor was gone for 6 years, so if he was in school for a year or two, and after creating the monster then had to get nursed back from health and also went on a trip with Clerval before going home, then I think he would have spent at least two years creating the beast.  So if Victor was working day and night on this monster for two years, I would think he would have so much evidence of his work.  He would have those spare body parts laying around and he'd have his lab or working space where there would have to be all his work.  I would guess there would be countless formulas and drawings and all of his workings documented somewhere.  Why could he not bring his work that would have been documented and showed the court this?  I like reading this book a lot, but it was really hard for me to get over this last point of mine as I was reading about Justine getting put to death.  I just saw the movie "Jerry Maguire" the other day and was having the same thoughts.  At the end of the movie, Cuba Gooding Jr gets injured in the end zone in an evening game.  Somehow Tom Cruise gets from the media area onto the field in like 17 seconds, which would have realistically taken like 45 minutes if possible at all .  He then goes from an evening football game (that typically go from 8:00-11:30), and has to fly from Phoenix to his home, gets his bags in the airport, and drive home.  He gets home and there is some sort of divorced woman support group meeting there that his wife is a part of.  There is no way he could get home before 3 or 4 AM, yet they are meeting as if it is 8 at night.  Most sports movies are kind of absurd in some way, but this ten minute period of Jerry Maguire was hard to get over.  I really like the movie, but there was blatantly just no conceivable way.  This is how I thought about some of the things in Frankenstein I said above, and especially how Victor does not help Justine.  I really like the book so far, but I do not understand why Victor thinks no one would believe him when he would have so much evidence of the creation of the monster.  I guess it could be kind of like The Scarlet Letter, in that he has this secret that he does not dispose to others and is just eating him alive inside, but it seems to me he wants to tell people but can't for some reason.

Victor vs. Walton

So far, I think that Victor and Walton are very similar characters, but have a couple major differences.  They at first seem very similar in their actions, and Walton seems like he is a younger Victor.  He is on the same path, and that is why Victor is telling him this story.  They both were in pursuit of greatness, and both basically would live in isolation, or away from family and friends, to achieve this greatness.  I think Victor was in more pursuit of greatness though because of his love of science, whereas Walton is in pursuit of fame.  Victor was intrigued by science, and it was his passion, whereas it seemed to me that Walton was just trying to find a field to gain fame by.  Victor was gone from home I think it said for 6 years, so he was probably working for 4 of those years, where Walton quit poetry after only one year, and then went on to be a discoverer.

Frankenstein intro

Walton-poet, discoverer  \         both 

Victor-scientist                  /         artists

I am very curious to see how Walton's mindset changes from the beginning of the novel to the end.  Walton has this intense desire for fame, by trying to be a poet, and now trying to get to the north pole.  He then finds Victor chasing what is assumed to be his creation, and aids him back to health.  Victor goes on to tell Walton his tale, because it is evident to see the obsession Walton has that Victor once had.  There are a lot of examples in the media about how characters obsessed with meeting some goal eventually ruins them, or produces very bad results in their life.  Although there are so many examples of this,  the example that immediately came to my mind (probably not a good thing) was an example in the TV show Entourage.  

Vince was obsessed with making the movie "Medellin".  No studio will make the movie so he buys it from a rich director.  The man who sold the rights to the script to Vince says that he saw a man with that kind of passion once, and it led to his demise.  He gave Vince the advice to not let a movie drive him crazy, that it wasn't worth it.  This advice reminded me of the advice Victor gave to Walton.  Vince sells his home to pay for the script, going broke, and letting everything ride on this movie.  It eventually ends up flopping, and he ends up broke with a struggling career and with his mom in Queens.  I'm not sure if this example is the most scholarly, especially since it's a TV show on HBO; but it was one man telling the other that his obsession will not end well.  I am interested to see if Walton heeds Victors advice, and learns from Victors story, or if Walton is ill-fated as well.

I might have missed this, but I was wondering how Victor came about all these spare body parts.  He said he had this room in the attic or something like that, and it was the place where he kept all these body parts.  I wonder where he went at night to find spare parts for this Frankenstein.  I started reading a little past where we were supposed to, and I was trying to picture the creature he made.  It seemed to me like some morbid Mr. Potato Head.  It had all these random body parts combined to make some horrible looking monster

wuthering heights-class

One source that I kinda wanted to watch, and people have not mentioned, is the movie "Wuthering Heights" made by Mtv in 2003.  It was nowhere to be found so I could not watch it, and the assignment was for a scene or the book to become more clear, when that would not be the case at all.  I'm sure the movie would be completely ridiculous, but that is kinda why I wanted to watch it, and see how closely they are related to each other.  I think it would show how society now shows most things for our generation.  It is described in a blurb about the show:

MTV takes a stab at this gothic love story in its own made for network version. And why not? It’s got all the things the kids like: true love, broken hearts, a little bit of fighting, and dash of kissy kissy. And without Bronte’s elegant prose, we’re left with a story that’s really just a glorified soap opera. And hey…attention span-problems? No problem. Bronte’s epic is slimmed down to less than 90 minutes. And if you like good production values, cool lighting and music… MTV knows how to deliver the goods.

The movie follows the book in a Cliff Notes sort of way, and psychological depth has been eschewed in favor of something more easily digestible. Heathcliff becomes “Heath" (Mike Vogel); Cathy becomes “Cate” (Erika Christensen). Now Vogel (not a stranger to remakes – see Texas Chainsaw Massacre) is no Larry Olivier, but he seems really really committed to playing a man in love and out of control. And he looks hot. So the girls will like that. Christensen is also used to playing characters out of control, from her star making performance in Traffic to her embarrassing portrayal in Swimfan.. I’d say her performance is somewhere in the middle of those two polarizing films. She’s very natural, but at the same time, she tries to find emotions and moments that just aren’t within her range yet.

Heathcliff was the main character of the book, so it makes sense he is the main character in the movie.  He is portrayed as a heartthrob in the movie because he had half the personality of one in the book, and if that part is shown he could be one in the movie.  He seemed to brood a lot, which could be good to show in a Mtv movie.  He also was in the middle of two romances, which would be good for a movie as well.

wuthering heights-last assignment

What does the article "The Unreliable narrator in Wuthering Heights" do that better helps me understand the interaction between Lockwood and Nelly, and the story overall.

I was looking for an article that discussed the two narrators of the book, and how reliable they were.  Something I did not think of until the end of the book is that most of it is told through the eyes of Nelly, and some through Lockwood; not through an author like a more traditional novel.  This became apparent to me as the book went on, and especially near the end of it. When Nelly is discussing young Catherine with Lockwood right before he leaves, she insinuate the only way to save Catherine is through marriage.  Nelly obviously cannot marry her, but Lockwood can.  She also comments on how she thinks Lockwood is/or will fall in love with Catherine.  She was not so subtly telling Lockwood to go for Catherine, then for both of them to go away together. Around this time, I also noticed that Nelly, in her descriptions of Catherine, was really forgiving of her weaknesses and really praised her. This struck me as odd because Catherine seemed very similiar to her mother Catherine, and Nelly was not kind in her description of her.  I thought young Catherine possibly even teased Hareton in a worse way then her mother ever teased Heathcliff, but Nelly makes her out to be much kinder than her mother. This occurred near the end of the book though, and I did not really catch Nelly telling subtle lies earlier in the book.  I thought it was very possible they were there, though, so I searched for an article that discussed this subject.

The article pointed out three possible reasons why Nelly was an unreliable narrator.  The first reason pointed out something that did not even occur to me.  Near the end of the novel, I was able to see a probable gap between the actual reality and her narration of it to Lockwood.  She did not blatantly lie, but told stories in a way that would benefit her goal. I thought that she was deliberatly doing this, but the author said that "her pedestrian approach to the tempestuous characters of the novel manifests her essential misunderstanding of them." This is something I think that is pretty important to think about.  She could misunderstand some events going on because of her education level or how she has been trained to act and think out of function more then reason.  She could then misdescribe events because she was confused or did not fully grasp people's thoughts and intentions rather then the fact that she is stretching events that happened intentionally in her favor.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, a critic named James Hafley believes that Nelly Dean, not Heathcliff, is actually the villian of this novel. Hafely believes that Nelly Dean is trying to gain control of both of the estates, but can only do this after Heathcliff is gone and if she has control over Cathy; or if both are gone. This is also interesting to me because Nelly used to play with Heathcliff when they were younger, but then because of some abritrary class labeling (all the class labeling seems absurd to me in this novel because they are in complete isolation; it seems worthless) she is now a servent to Heathcliff. I could see, from human nature, greed, and jealousy; Nelly wanting to gain control of both properties. This could explain her wanting Lockwood to take Cathy away as well. I think this is unlikely though, but worth thinking about.  

Another possibility the article pointed out was that Nelly only lied to benefit some characters she liked or felt sorry for.  I think this is probable, 99% of the lies I tell fall into this category.  If I go home on break, and lets say go visit a bunch of buddies, my mom might ask if I saw one friend.  Instead of explaining everything I did for 20 minutes, I might just say yes to avoid a worthless conversation.  A better example might be if your girlfriend asks if she looks good at a particular time; you always say yes.  In kind of the same mindset, Nelly lied at times to avoid conflict or improve people's feelings.  So one article discussed the possibility that Nelly just had a misunderstanding of events and the characters which led to inconsistencies, whereas another article tried to persuade us that she told minor lies to benefit other characters she was close to, and the last article talked about the possibility that Nelly was plotting her takeover of both properties which directed the way she told her story to Lockwood.

The article, then attempts to prove that Nelly is an unreliable narrator. My opinion is that Nelly is not 100% reliable; only Lockwood could have the potential to be that, because he is an outside source. He does not really have emotional feelings that could force him to sway the facts. I think it is impossible for Nelly to be completely objective because she has seen everything that has happened and been close to some characters, and despised other characters. I think human nature would prevent the possibility of her being 100% accurate. My opinion is that Nelly tells lies, but they are to benefit other people. There is history of this in the book as well. Near the middle of the book, she told Linton that Heathcliff was a kind and generous man. She also told Edgar, when he was dying, that Catherine was safe and would be home soon, when that was not the case at all. Neither of these lies really changed anything, and especially not in her favor.  They were more to make the person she was lying to feel better.  So my opinion is that Nelly is a fairly reliable narrator but does not comrehend some actions, thus she cannot retell them accurately. I think she also lies a little, but insignificant lies that save the characters' feelings from getting hurt. I do not think that she alters the story considerably though.  Although it was interesting for me to think about the idea that she was planning her dominance over both properties, I think that this is more humorous then anything near the truth at all.

wuthering heights-heathcliff and catherine

This book is fairly difficult for me to get through, and I think it is because I do not like any of the characters.  There is no real character to root for, or to hope everything works out for them.  We are talking about how Catherine loves Heathcliff more then Edgar, and I think it is both of their faults that they do not end up together.  For some reason that I cannot comprehend, Catherine chose to marry Edgar instead of Heathcliff because of class.  I would not agree with it, but I could see this logic if they were in some city, or a big community, where they were being judged by friends or had some sort of public status.  But they are secluded in this place, so it seems absurd to me to take an insignificant class status that her angry brother labeled Heathcliff with, and make her decision based on this.  Then when Catherine was leaning towards Edgar, I feel like Heathcliff could have won her over, like she almost wanted him to go after her.  I feel like if he was persistent, and told Catherine how he felt, then she might have chosen him; maybe they would have run away together or stayed there and tried to be happy together.  But Heathcliff is always brooding and angry, and he just runs away from the whole situation instead of doing any positive action for getting Catherine.  I dislike both of these characters, and am not sure the direction I hope this novel goes.  We see Catherine die when she has the baby.  At the beginning of the novel Heathcliff is alone, and realizes the love he lost, which is evident by him pleading at Catherine's ghost.  This is almost a just enough ending for me, and do not really know what will go on the rest of the novel.

wuthering heights-class1

When thinking of the scenery of this book, I picture it very desolate and isolated, that is why Lockwood went there to retreat from where he was before, and to get away from everything.  I was wondering what would come up if I googled it, so I did and there were two different images that I thought were pretty accurate/that I liked a lot.  The first one was what I imagined the surroundings to look like.  It was plain and barren.

I really enjoyed the second image because it was so contrasting.  It is a painting where there are bare trees in a barren land quite similar to the first picture, and it is what's described in the book which is exactly how I pictured the scenery of the book being.  But instead of there being snow around the trees, it is essentially just the trees with a real pretty sunset behind it.  I don't know why I like this, maybe because it shows that any place can be aesthetically pretty, or that it is soothing, just like Lockwood wanted it to be when he came there.

 

Catherine seemed to completely change when she stayed with the Lintons.  It was obvious that her appearance had changed, she came back wearing a dress and with her hair combed meticulously.  But I think she became a much weaker person as well.  It seemed to me that she never really stuck up for Heathcliff in a manner that she would have before.  She kind of sneakily tries to help him, but she never stands up to the Lintons and everyone and come to his defense.  She then decides to marry Edgar instead of Heathcliff, because Heathcliff is now essentially a servant, and that was what really showed me the weakening of her character.  

wuthering heights-heathcliff

Heathcliff strikes me as a pretty complex character to figure out.  At first in the novel, Lockwood describes himself as being pretty quiet and keeping to himself, and that is why he is at Thrushcross Grange.  But when he meets Heathcliff, Lockwood is obviously more interested in human contact then Heathcliff, and I almost wondered to myself if Heathcliff had some sort of minor disability or if something like that was wrong with him because of how weird he acted.  After Lockwood comes home from the disastrous visit to Wuthering Heights, Nelly tells him the story about Heathcliff, Hindley, and Cathy's childhood and young adulthood.  This was more complex because, when Heathcliff was a child, Cathy and he were wild, and would run all over the place like wild banshees.  He definitely had a rough childhood though.  He was an orphan, who was then tormented by his brother.  I am now at the part where Catherine is friends with Lintons, and starting to phase Heathliff out of her life.  Heathcliff was jealous when Catherine first came back.  Now they are spending time together, but Catherine is still spending more time with the Lintons.  It has not been stated in the book, and if it has then I obviously missed it, but my guess is that Catherine ends up choosing Linton over Heathcliff, and then Heathcliff's heart grows cold towards humanity, and it builds up a lot of animosity towards others.  Probably why he won't let anyone get close to him as well.  I can tell this is a very deep subject for him because, after Lockwood says he saw a ghost earlier on in the book, Heathcliff is calling out for Cathy.  It will be interesting if Heathcliff opens up to Lockwood, or what kind of transformation his character undergoes as this book keeps going.

class 2/4-wuthering heights/ideology

On my blogs, I have just been writing my thoughts/opinions, but have not been writing those based on ideology.  "The main purpose behind an ideology is to offer change in society through a normative thought process. Ideologies are systems of abstract thought (as opposed to mere ideation) applied to public matters and thus make this concept central to politics" (Dictionary.com).  Now, I'll try to think of that more while writing.  Also, these blogs are not like papers, where a lot of planned thought is worked into it.  The thoughts presented here are given more "on the fly," so some words or phrases are not the best that could be used.  I hope it does not offend anyone.

"Wuthering Heights" is a fairly tough read for me, but not impossible.  So far, I like the story, but the language makes it hard at times to get at what exactly is going on, and I found myself reading a lot of things twice.  Some books flow really well when I am reading them and the book goes really fast, but it takes work to get through this book.  I almost have to muscle through it in a way.  The relationship between the characters is hard to figure out because they are both complex and hard to figure out in general, and some have the same names.  

Something interesting just mentioned in class is that Bronte is compared to a women Shakespeare.  This is the second author (also Woolf) compared to Shakespeare.  I don't know why this leapt out at me.  I immediately just Wikipedia'ed Shakespeare and a thought was that Bronte was pretty close in time to Shakespeare, but they were separated by a couple hundred years.  These female authors were British writers like Shakespeare, and he is known as the best ever, so it is natural to be compared I guess.  I guess what I was really wondering is if these female writers were happy/felt acclaimed by this comparison, or if they were trying to get out of a man's shadow and show that they are great authors and are women.  The media is always trying to appoint the next Jordan (in the NBA), and it seems to annoy the players because they want to be known as being great in their own way, not the second-tier version of someone else.  I guess that's what drew my attention to this, and I wondered if these writers were honored by this comparison, or wanted to be known for their own great works instead of being called a low-grade man.  I wondered if, by being compared to a man these women were being cut down in a way, or being highly esteemed.  Maybe thats dumb to think about, but for some reason it really drew my curiosity.

classroom discussion:rape in cyberspace

In comparing rape to cyberspace, there are some things that are the same?  What?

I think one big similarity could be the victims might both feel a kind of shame.  The cyber victims were violated in front of all their peers and could do nothing about it, while victims in real life, it appears, sometimes might feel that way.

Last night I was searching for a term and couldn't grasp one, but heard it today; the people in the MOO were "emotionally invested".  I have read books, or even far away news, or other things that I have gotten emotionally invested in, and then when something other than what I wanted to happen does happen, then it is easy to get sad or mad or whatever emotion they feel.  The same with movies.  A lot of people get really into movies, and leave happy or disgusted after it is over, and cry or cheer during the movie.  When people do get emotionally involved in a book or movie, it is easy for that to stay with us for a while, good or bad.  There have been some movies, books, and even stories that have lasted me for a while in a bad way, but on the other hand there have been movies and books that have stayed with me much, much longer, some even until today that are positive.  I like cycling a lot, and one of my best buddies does as well.  He had a quote that "pain is just weakness leaving the body," and during a grueling ride sometimes that quote or things from movies like "Rocky" or "Remember the Titans" just naturally comes to mind.  So I guess I'm saying that I think it is easy for people to get emotionally involved in books and movies and to be affected both positively and negatively.

rape in cyberspace

Did Bungle commit rape?

I think that this a subjective question, but in my opinion he did not commit rape, although I think he caused emotional strain or inflicted pain on his victims.  I'm not really into computers, and am not exactly sure what this virtual cyberspace is.  I've never heard of a MOO before class on Friday, so I guess what they were talking about in the article is very similar to the example in class on Friday.  When reading the beginning of this article, I at first thought it was kind of silly that people got so emotionally invested into some imaginary place where everyone is strangers.  But I guess it is a lot like a chat room, and verbal insults can definitely hurt people's feelings.  I found it interesting in the article when someone said that "the mind is the body" and that is why it was so hurtful to those people Bungle attacked.  It might sound unsympathetic, but the whole situation kind of reminded me of a video game for adults.  It seemed like people got a little too into what was going on in that "community".  I can understand how those girls were hurt by Bungle's comments.  But the whole part about a bunch of the members deciding to be radical and toad him and all that stuff seemed to go a little overboard.  I don't mean he shouldn't have been kicked out, but I mean the extent of how emotionally involved people were in this community was a little extreme.  It kind of reminds me of fantasy sports as well.  I have a fantasy basketball team, and it's fun to look at and chirp at my buddies who I am beating, but some people get extremely into it.  I really think they have somehow convinced themselves that they are real general managers because of how serious they've let themselves take it.  The main reason I do not think that he committed rape, though, was that I could not help but think what an actual rape victim would think when reading this article, and then when asked this question.  I'm not exactly sure about this, but I would think that a woman who was raped would think of what they went through, and almost be aghast that these women would consider themselves rape victims as well.  I'm not sure that this would be the case, maybe I am completely off, but when I think of what a real rape victim had to endure, and what these victims endured in this cyberspace, I would not consider it equal.  I do not mean to sound insensitive, because I feel bad for these people that Bungle hurt, but I would not consider them rape victims.

virginia woolf

I did not really enjoy "A room of one's own".  I tried to log onto moo, but could not do it.  I then attempted to read "A room of one's own", but was having a hard time understanding it, and having a harder time enjoying it, which I know is because of my lack of ability, not her, so I stopped early on.  I did not think the quiz would be that straight on either.  It would have been interesting to create an ideal room though if I could have figured out that program.  I think my ideal room would definitely be a beach.  When I am in a house, there are too many distractions for me to read for a while unless I am engrossed in the book, and even so it is hard for me to sit still quietly that long.  Whenever I am on the beach, though, I always read because of how relaxed I am.  I love being at the beach and surfing for a while, then laying down and reading because I am all tired and relaxed and out of energy.  Then killing some food, surf some more, then read a tad more and maybe take a nap.  That is a good day, and my ideal room to read in.  And after thinking of that, being in snowy Oxford is slightly depressing.

The history of Virginia, and facts about her discussed in class are more interesting to hear about then her actual writing was for me.  I would write with a chip on my shoulder as well if I was not allowed to walk on grass either, or allowed into a library.  I do not think I would have that much will or motivation to keep on writing and studying if those restrictions were applied to me.  If I was not allowed into any gyms in high school, I probably would have quit basketball.  To me, she must have been a very intelligent and strong person to keep writing and studying.

rights of woman

When reading this, I could not help but think that this is pretty outdated, which is obvious though because it was written in the late 1700s.  She wanted women to be equally educated as men, which I would completely agree with if women were not getting the same chances as men were.  Now I think it is accurate to say both sexes are equally educated.  I think this inequality even would have been much more prevelant even in the 50s, but since then there has been a lot of progress.  I think my parents' generation might still harbor some thoughts about gender inequality, just because of the time period when they grew up, and the same with race.  But I think our generation, for the most part, has put those thoughts to rest.  The presidential race came to my mind when I was trying to think of a tangible example of my thoughts.  I think this presidential race was extremely important.  One part of this was that our country elected an African-American President, and showed the whole world the progress that has been made in this country.  The progress though, I think, has been with our generation, and I think what this election showed that most people have not thought of is that this election was a shift of power from my parents' generation to our generation.  Our country has an African-American President, could have had a women vice president, and was close to even having a female President. 

I think that a lot of groups of people who were not long ago slighted because of their race or gender are now being treated more fairly then ever.  When our generation has children, these thoughts will go away even more, which would be a great thing for society as a whole.

This might not be the most popular opinion, and it might be a little bold, but I think now there is almost more pressure, dealing with careers, on men then on woman.  If a married woman wants a career now, that's perfectly normal, and if she doesn't that is perfectly acceptable as well.  I think that with men though, they are not only expected to have a job, but to have the best job possible making a fair amount of money, and if they aren't, then they are failing or unsuccessful.  Stats/logic have shown that women are attracted to power/wealth/stability, which puts a lot of pressure on men to be viewed as successful now.

The subject of grades causing immortality was one that caught my attention.  I completely agree that this is the case.  I'm a finance major, and the teachers do not care whatsoever what grade they give you; most business professors have not known my name.  The average grade for classes range between a C and a B- depending on if the teacher is easier or harder.  I think the lower the class average, the more satisfied they are.  After freshman year, I had a pretty high GPA, but now it is at a 2.9 because of how difficult it is to do well in the classes.  They only give a couple As out to 40 or so people.  I think this definitely promotes cheating, because the higher GPA, the better job you get, the better grad school you get into.  I, like most other business students, do not have a job right now.  I talked to someone who does have a job, and a pretty good one, and they talked about how they lie about a lot of things in their interviews, and most likely cheat in some way.  If I had cheated and lied (whether I haven't because of morals, fear, or laziness blur), I very well could have a job right now.  So I think that the grading system, and a lot being based on of your GPA, definitely promotes cheating and lying.

Jan23-cinderella fairytale

A few examples of modern day Cinderella fairytales came to my mind.  I have a couple of little sisters, who have watched the Disney movie called "A Cinderella Story".  It was exactly the same thing as the little kids' version of the fairy tale, but I thought that would be too easy an example.  A movie I saw a little while ago that I liked also came to my mind called "Cinderella Man"  which was about a boxer who defied the odds.  Once this came to mind, there were a lot of sports movies about various characters who were not doing well in life, then defied the odds and were successful in their sport.  There are also a lot of TV shows that have been on the past couple of years that follow the premise of Cinderella pretty closely.  The TV show that comes to my mind is The OC.  

It was about a poor high school student who lives in a bad neighborhood in California, and steals a car with his brother.  After getting arrested, his mom abandons him, but a rich lawyer who was assigned to defend him ends up adopting him.  That kid went from being homeless to living in Orange County in a poolhouse, and dating the hot girl.  I think that this is a modern, Californian version of the Cinderella, rags-to-riches story.  He was abandoned by his mom, just like Cinderella's mother died.  Instead of a prince coming along, a lawyer came along and adopted him.  So it wasn't a love story, but both were saved out of nowhere, kind of by the luck of the draw.  He then goes on to live as comfortable a life as someone can.  This show was the most popular show when I was in high school, so it was an example that I thought both worked well and everyone would know.  

bloody chamber talk

The four stories I read were The Bloody Chamber, The Courtship of Mr Lyon, The Snow Child, and The Werewolf.  I'm not an English major, so I'm not great at picking out a lot of subtle elements in books or poems, and hearing discussions about those things is what makes classes like this interesting for me.  I'm sure I missed a lot in all four stories, but I was definitely a little confused about "The Snow Child."  I had no idea why he said he wanted a daughter, and then when she died he stuck his "virile member" into the dead girl.  Im not sure if he was more longing for a better wife then his current wife, and was describing her or why this happened.

The points about Mr. Lyon made in class are very interesting because I was not sure why she saw him as a kind of beast-like mixture, but then at the end saw him as a man.  A relation I saw between this story and "The Bloody Chamber" was the girls in both books were disgusted by the men in the stories, by the beast and by the rich man.  But when they were away from these men, they for some reason missed them.  I was not sure why this was the case, but the explanations for Mr Lyon in class made sense. 

notes

I am a senior this year, and am going to unfortunately be graduating in May.  Colleen's opinions are very comparable to what I think is going through a lot of people's heads their senior year, especially girls.  There is an idea some people have that everyone is supposed to find their eventual spouse at college, and I have heard a lot of girls especially concerned about this matter, and going out of their way to find a boyfriend because of this notion.  A lot of girls I know have higher gpa's then my buddies or myself, and have jobs whereas neither my best buddies nor I have one, so I am not sure why this is the case, but I think it definitely is the case.

Turning now to weight, the retelling of stories:

In artistic retelling of fairy telling, does art help counteract ideology?

I have not had much experience, or really know what ideology means, but I think that Jeannette is trying to say that art, in some degree, does counteract the facts or the plot in fairy tales.  I think that if fairy tales are retold artistically, it can either stress the main point of the story, or counteract, or lead the reader's focus away from the main point or ending of the fairy tale.  For example, the only versions of Cinderella I have read or seen have been very simple and straight forward.  The versions we have read so far in class have been much more artistic then ones I have ever read, and after reading some of those versions, I remembered different parts of those stories much more distinctly instead of the main lesson of the story.  In some versions I would not have been that sure of what the main point might have really been if I had not read Cinderella previously.  

The part of Weight that I remembered after reading, and what really stuck with me because I really agreed with and have been thinking about recently is when she was talking about how real life has replaced imagination, and how she believes that language is much more than information.  Recently I just read The Rules of Attraction.  There is not much plot at all, but the language in the book combined with the humor made it very enjoyable for me to read and I flew through the book.  A couple days ago I tried to start a book by John Grisham called The Innocent Man, which is a true story.  The book was uncharacteristically very simply written, and just had a bunch of facts in the beginning, and pretty depressing ones at that.  I slightly bored, and kinda bummed, so I stopped reading it and probably will never start it again.  I did not think this thought process through entirely, but when reading Weight, I realized that is why I enjoyed one book so much while disliking the other one, when I expected the opposite.

jan14-meanings

Some words in the two short works about Cinderella definitely caught my attention.  A lot of the words stuck out to me because I did not know the meaning of them, or they were being used in a different way then I am accustomed to.  Cinderella however caught my attention because it was describing the main character rather then being used as her name.  I googled the words that stuck out to me, here are the meanings:

 

Charwoman-a woman hired to do cleaning or similar work, usually in a large building.  I wasn’t sure what this word meant because a woman was described as a “charwoman on the bus when it cracks up,” but it essentially meant a maid who then gets rich by collecting from insurance.

Al Jolson-was a highly acclaimed American singer, comedian, and actor.  His career lasted from 1911 until his death in 1950, during which time he was commonly dubbed "the world's greatest entertainer.” Numerous well-known singers were influenced by his music, including Bing Crosby, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, and Judy Garland.  He enjoyed performing in blackface makeup.  Cinderella was compared to Al Jonson because her face was black from sleeping by the fireplace, and he would paint his face black for some of his performances.

Lentils-kind of a bean, bushy annual plant of the legume family, grown for its lens-shaped seeds. It is about 15 inches tall and the seeds grow in pods, usually with two seeds in each.  In both handouts, Cinderella had to fetch these lentils out of the fireplace.

Pious-having or showing a dutiful spirit of reverence for God or an earnest wish to fulfill religious obligations.  The mother requests that Cinderella remains pious and good after her death, so she wanted Cinderella to remain religious and good.

Smock-A loose coatlike outer garment, often worn to protect the clothes while working.  This is what Cinderella had to wear, except instead of protecting her clothes, this garment was her wardrobe.

Cinderella-One that unexpectedly achieves recognition or success after a period of obscurity and neglect.  I had never heard this word used as anything different then the name of this character, so I found it very interesting when it was an adjective that was then placed on the girl because she was in very hard times, then ends up marrying a prince.

Pitch-any of various dark, tenacious, and viscous substances for caulking and paving, consisting of the residue of the distillation of coal tar or wood tar.  I have heard many uses for pitch, but never when it is a substance, so I had to google the word to find that it is a black, sticky substance that the prince used to make Cinderella’s shoe stick on the staircase so she would leave it behind.