Saturday, October 9, 2010

a brief introduction to tone


Tone:
The attitude of the author towards the subject of his work.

Example:
“Had we but world enough, and time This coyness, Lady, were no crime, We would sit down and think which way To walk, and pass our long love's day.” (Line 1-4), “But at my back I always hear Time's winged chariot hurrying near;...”(Stanza 2, Lines 1 and 2), “Now therefore, while the youthful hue Sits on they skin like morning dew, And while they willing soul transpires At every pore with instant fires, Now let us sport us while we may,” (Stanza 3, Lines 1-5)

Function:
In the poem, “His Coy Mistress” by Andrew Marvell, we follow a brazen courtier talking to his mistress. He begins his proposition by complementing his lady. How beautiful she is, and how much he loves her. If he had enough time in fact, he would spend thirty thousand years admiring her body. “An age at least to every part”. However, these promises of love and affection end quite abruptly in the second stanza with, “But at my back I always hear Time's winged chariot hurrying near;...”(Stanza 2, Lines 1 and 2). He is saying that death is coming fast, and there is no way to avoid it. That doesn't make sense, however, without the first few lines of the first stanza. “Now therefore, while the youthful hue Sits on they skin like morning dew, And while they willing soul transpires At every pore with instant fires, Now let us sport us while we may,” (Stanza 3, Lines 1-5). So since they don't have time to be this loving couple because death could come at any moment, they should have sex. This unearths the courtier's true nature. He doesn't really care about the girl, but instead he only cares about the sex he can have with her. The authors objectivity of the woman is irreverent, because he gives her no respect as a person. This tone also changes the way you read the poem. At first it seemed like you started the conversation with them, but after understanding the tone, we can see that the conversation began much before we came in. The courtier seems a little annoyed because he cant get what he wants from the girl. So instead of the talk being clever and biggotory, we can see it as a flustered pleading for sex. The insight we get from that can tell us a lot about Andrew Marvell, who is probably much like his character in the poem. It can also tell us a lot about the time period, and the mans desire to strip away the coyness and formality of sex.

Thursday, October 7, 2010

a brief introduction to diction


Diction is the choice of words the author uses, or more specifically, the effect those words have upon the style and feel of his or her literary work. There are two subcategories that fall under diction, which are denotation and connotation. Denotation is the literal meaning of the words on the page; without diction, nothing would make sense at all. Connotation is the effect those words have upon the reader, and how the reader interprets them. Connotation, in essence, shows how literature isn't written in a vacuum. Without our experiences, slang, and knowledge, no word would hold any significance in our mind.

Example:
The outside pattern is a florid arabesque, reminding one of a fungus. If you can imagine a toadstool in joints, an interminable string of toadstools, budding and sprouting in endless convolutions--why, that is something like it.

Function:
The narrator begins The Yellow Wallpaper by telling us of an amazing summer cottage that her husband and herself have rented for a summer vacation. Her description of the house is one that makes you expect a mystery, speaking of ghosts and abandonment. However, this idea fades away to a discussion of herself. She says that she had been suffering from nervous depression, of which her husband does not believe. As a physician, he scoffed at her idea of the illness, diagnosing her only with inactivity and bed rest. In her boredom she starts a journal, and entertains herself by describing her surroundings. Eventually this comes to the yellow wallpaper in the room. This wallpaper is the cornerstone of the story.

The outside pattern is a florid arabesque, reminding one of a fungus. If you can imagine a toadstool in joints, an interminable string of toadstools, budding and sprouting in endless convolutions--why, that is something like it.”

The key word that Gilman uses is 'fungus'. Dennotatively, the word fungus is “A eukaryotic single-celled or multi-nucleate organisms that live by decomposing and absorbing the organic material in which they grow, comprising the mushrooms, molds, mildews, smuts, rusts, and yeasts, and classified in the kingdom Fungi or, in some classification systems, in the division Fungi (Thallophyta) of the kingdom Plantae.” However, connotatively we get a much different meaning. Fungus is infectious. It lives and survives on dank, damp things, decomposing whatever is near it. With many fungi poisonous to humans, we also get a negative connotation towards fungus. 'Fungus' leaves us with a scathing view of the wallpaper. Imagine how it effects the woman as she interacts with it, rotting her brain and infecting her mental state. The wallpaper is ugly, and disturbing, giving the reader a dank and oppressed feeling when we interact with it. With this single word, Gilman portrays this complex and detailed emotion about the wallpaper, and with it one of postpartum depression. This oppressive, omnipotent feeling is one she wants us to carry about the experience that the narrator and she went through.

To further clarify the constant use of diction, there is a word in the last paragraph specially added to portray a certain emotion.
“'Fungus' leaves us with a scathing view of the wallpaper.”
The word scathing changes how this sentence feels. Although its definition: “bitterly severe, as a remark; harmful, injurious, or searing” can be denotatively imitated with words like 'nasty', 'bad', 'severe', or 'cold', they don't bear the same weight as scathing does. Connotatively, it is much harsher, and almost violent. It brings forth feelings of hate and anger, almost vengeance. This was the meaning scathing was meant to put across: mean and cruel, because Gilman's explanation of the wallpaper is very similar. Without the word scathing, the meaning wouldn't have come across the same way, and the narrator's interaction of the wallpaper could have been interpreted differently.

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

a brief introduction to syntax


in a very literal sense, syntax is the order and placement of words in a piece of writing. However, as the skill of a writer increases, their ability to play with syntax effects the paper's tone. The length of sentences, the use of different words, and the placement of words and sentences completely change how a piece of writing is read, and what it might say.

Example:

I quite enjoy the room, now it is bare again.
How those children did tear about here!
This bedstead is fairly gnawed!
But I must get to work.
I have locked the door and thrown the key down into the front path.
I don't want to go out, and I don't want to have anybody come in, till John comes.
I want to astonish him.” Gilman, The Yellow Wallpaper.

Function:
The narrator begins The Yellow Wallpaper by telling us of an amazing summer cottage that her husband and herself have rented for a summer vacation. Her description of the house is one that makes you expect a mystery, speaking of ghosts and abandonment. However, this idea fades away to a discussion of herself. She says that she had been suffering from nervous depression, of which her husband does not believe. As a physician, he scoffed at her idea of the illness, diagnosing her only with inactivity and bed rest. In her boredom she starts a journal, and entertains herself by describing her surroundings. Eventually this comes to the yellow wallpaper in the room. This wallpaper is the cornerstone of the story. As she interacts with the wallpaper and deals with her illness, we see her slipping into insanity. During the beginning of the story Gilman expresses the narrator's sanity with complete and well thought out sentences. “It is very seldom that mere ordinary people like John and myself secure ancestral halls for the summer.” This sentence expresses a complete thought, and narrator's fluidity of thought gives an air of intelligence and sanity. Towards the end, however, as the narrator's mental health deteriorates, her sentences become less complex. The length of the sentences alone show signs of this.

I quite enjoy the room, now it is bare again.
How those children did tear about here!
This bedstead is fairly gnawed!
But I must get to work.
I have locked the door and thrown the key down into the front path.
I don't want to go out, and I don't want to have anybody come in, till John comes.
I want to astonish him.”

Her statements are short and choppy, and their erratic nature cause the reader to think the narrator is not mentally well. Gilman chooses short words, that seem to follow the narrator's thoughts as soon as they pop into her head. The extreme change at the end gives no doubt of the sanity of the narrator, ultimately proving that her sickness was real in the first place. This transition into insanity was Gilman addressing the issue of postpartum depression. Herself suffering from this condition, she was mostly ignored. The extreme change in the narrator's personality is remnicant of the change a woman can go through, and in the past, postpartum depression was given no heed,leaving women without the treatment they needed.

Sunday, October 3, 2010

Marvel vs DC

 my friend said that Marvel was better because of the costumes.

if the outfit makes the superhero, whatever. I just dont seem to be interested in a superhero that is an absolute clone of the one to his left. At least DC introduces new plotlines to each character. and dont start raving about Xmen having the most origional storyline ever. yes, the Xmen story line is amazing, thats my marvel had to tie every other super hero they had to them through the avengers. DC, however has invintive characters whos only problems arent daddy, government, or girlfriend related.

Case and point:
Batman wont kill, but he would save more peoples lives by killing. This problem was created because he doesnt want others to go through the same pain he did.

Green lantern was a pacafist who got drafted into the military for WW2. He killed a man to save his own life after his plane crashed and was then introduced to the Green lanterns. Now, with the constant guilt of betraying his own character, he defends his planet, so others dont have to make the same choice he did.

Flash: hated by the entire world, not because he id anything wrong, but because he could. He defends the people that hate him.

Wonder woman: Cast out of her Amazoness homeland because she was not willing to deal with the death of her sisters in battle. She is introduced into a new world, where instead of being the weakest, she is the strongest and fiercest. She must learn to adapt, and when she goes back home, she has changed so much that she becomes the leader of the island.

Quick run down of Marvel:

Iron man: daddy dies. boohoo. revenge.

Hulk: government screws him up: boohoo. revenge.

Capitan America: Government screws him up. boohoo. revenge.

Fantastic 4: Gamma radiation. Anger. boohoo. conflict

Spiderman: Uncle dies (father). boohoo. revenge

Wolverine: Government screws him up. boohoo. memory loss(which is what makes him so interesting) revenge.


Now lets look at the similarites between the marvel characters and the DC characters (which came first) since apparently marvels powers are SO original and unique.

http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images/users/uploads/18830/Avengers_vs_JLA.jpg

Without DC, marvel wouldnt have existed. They created the concept of the superhero, and they did it better than anyone after them. period.

knowledge

So, i read this on SMBC and it got me thinking about how information is accepted. I mean, we take fire as a natural thing now, but cavemen thought it was amazing. In our day and age, i can type this at my computer in Washington, and somebody can read it in Australia. Thats a miracle!

A book i read recently put it together perfectly with the concept of magic. We love magic shows, because they make us believe that the magician has broken the rules of nature. These rules that he seems to break have been ingrained into our memory. We know that humans dont float, but the magician can fly. We know that things don't dissapear, but my card is gone! Of course people cant survive being cut in half, but there he is with a saw! WE are amazed at every dove, card, coin, rope, wand, and fireball. but it is only because they defy what we already know.

Now imagine a baby going to a magic show. There is no way for it to understand that the magician is doing anything special. why is it so amazing that he put his head in the tiger's mouth? who cares if the dove came out of nowhere. Why are you so astonished when he floats?

knowledge becomes second nature to us, and it sort of amazes me.

Not a review; a brief analysis


 A few days ago my friend asked me a question: "have you ever read a book that had a quest in it, but not like starwars or lord of the rings, but instead one of self discovery? This one was definitely a hard one for me, because I often read books with obvious quests in them. I think the one that popped in my head the most is “The Life of Pi” by Yann Martel. 

Pi's quest is introduced at the beginning, but it is not one of physical nature, but instead one of religion. He begins the story by talking about his first encounter with Christianity. Bring raised Islamic, he is very much intrigued by the ideals of the Christian god. Why should someone worship a god so weak? Eventually a conflict between his dad, catholic priest, and Islamic teacher seem to end the story of religion in the book. At least, on the surface. 

Pi goes through the horrific experience of being shipwrecked, and abandoned to the sea. His interactions with a tiger on this tiny raft propel the story forward, which is so interesting that it may be hard to see the real story going on between the lines. This changed, however, and the end of the book when Pi has to submit his story of what happened to FBI agents on his case. We can see that the story we just read was the one he told the officers. When they question the reliability of the story, Pi tells a new narrative. Where, instead of animals being on the boat, it's people. He wraps his second story up with one idea: that his religion was the factor that made him see it through. And although his religion wasn't pigeonholed into one name like Christianity or Islam, he believed in his god. 

His quest wasn't the cover story- surviving a passage through the Pacific with a tiger. It was his journey through the most traumatic experience of his life, going to the extreme of challenging his faith, and how he had to interact with his 'tiger' of sorts: his despair and hopelessness of losing everything and everyone he cared for.

Saturday, October 2, 2010

Anxiety




6 feet under,
buried in a
casket of
expectations, theirs
and my own. Burried
under tonsof paper, suffocated by piles of notes, crushed
by the work I can not do. I wish
I could get out of that casket. But the earth is too dense.

The longer I stay
under the bigger that casket
gets, and although I
want to live my
life I cant get out of
that hole. I cant rise
above and beyond. It’s
so overwhelming
… it puts me 6 feet under.
 

A poem i wrote like 3 years ago. I was thinking about it this morning. Have you ever had that feeling that you have so much to do, that you cant even start? thats what it was about. that anxiety.

Thursday, September 30, 2010

A question about god

or at least the christian one. Why would he create the universe in all of its complexity, just to tell some cave people how to live? it doesnt make sense.

another one:

could god, being all powerful, create a stone so heavy he couldnt lift it?


why does an all good and all powerful god let people suffer?


post any other questions you have about god, or even try to answer one of these

Wednesday, September 29, 2010

A short one for today: Philosophy

who are your guys' favorite philosophers? why?
mine is probably descartes, because of his structural view of philosophy. or Socraties because of his use of people to refine his own philosophy. remember, as iron sharpens iron, man sharpens man.

thats all, sorry but its been on my mind.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

herman goering

Hermann Goering

The military is a career that awards hard work and courage.  To move up in the ranks you must be determined, self-motivated, and willing.  Some people drop out quickly; many others only serve a term, however there are the few that go beyond that, making the military their livelihood.  As an infantryman, pilot, general and leader, Hermann Goering’s military career is defiantly one of the most successful examples of the ideal soldier.
            January 12, 1893 at the Marienbad sanatorium, Goering was born to Heinrich Goering and Franziska Tiefenbrunn.  His mother, Fanziska, was a Bavarian peasant and Heinrich’s second wife.  Heinrich was the first governor-general of the German territory of South Africa.  (Where Namibia is today) This post obviously brought Heinrich away from his family for months at a time, therefore Hermann Goering saw very little of his father. 
            With the absence of his dad, Goering was greatly influenced by his godfather, Ritter von Epenstein.  Von Epenstein is considered Goering's major father figure throughout his life.  Ethnically, Von Epenstein was a Jew, however he was a practicing Christian.  Growing up with a Jew, Goering was critical of anti-Semitism, greatly contrasting his actions as a Nazi.[1] Paid for by von Epenstein, Hermann was sent to a prestigious and expensive boarding school, which began a long stint of schooling.  He later enrolled in a cadet institute at Karlsruhe.  Finally, he joined a military college at Berlin-Lichterfelde.
            These preparations made him an easy pick up for the Prussian military.  On the 22nd of June 1912, Goering was enlisted to the Prinz Wilhelm regiment, 112th infantry.  He served in the Vosges area, but was hospitalized with rheumatism, due to the damp trenches.  This hospitalization might not have been a bad thing; in fact it is the very reason Goering was part of the Luftstreitkrafte (air force).  His friend, Bruno Loerzer met him in the hospital and convinced him to apply.  Unfortunately, this was unsuccessful; Goering’s application was turned down.
            Like most military men, a simple ‘no’ wouldn’t stop Goering.  He used a backdoor way of joining the air force: he observed for Loerzer in his FFA 25.[2] The punishment for this transfer was 3 weeks confinement to barracks, however it was never administered.  By the time he was caught his application to the crown princes 5th army.[3] They flew bombing missions and ran reconnaissance.  Although he was still an observer for Loerzer, they both got awarded the Iron Cross first class by the crown prince.  This marked the end of Goering's pilot training; he was soon to be a full-fledged pilot.

            Becoming a pilot began a short period of unprecedented and extreme success for Goering.  With two victories under his belt from observing, Goering was posted into the FFA25 in October 1915.  As a pilot, his first kill occurred on the 16th of November 1915.  Later he was assigned to Jagstaffel 5 in February 1917, but was quickly promoted and assigned to command Jasta 27 on May 1917.  Together with Jastas 5, 26, and 27 he got 21 air victories.  He also had 22 confirmed kills.[4] He was said to also have been a good competitor.  "It was part of Goering's creed to admire a good enemy”[5] With the traits of a good competitor, and the skill of an amazing soldier, it isn’t hard to imagine that Goering was dissatisfied by the German defeat.  As a loyal German, when told that he would have to give his planes to the allies he and his men crashed them.[6] To him the German surrender was “a betrayal”.
            After the First World War, Goering stayed in aviation.  For a while he worked for a Swedish airline, however he was quick to learn that his place was in the military.  He Applied to Reichswehr, Germany’s peaceful army after the war.  Just like before, he rose through the ranks.  By 1933 he was a General Major, and by 1935 he was a General Lieutenant.  Late in 1935, Goering was made the general of the Luftwaffe; soon to be one of the most powerful air forces in the world. 
            The Luftwaffe was precarious in its creation.  The Treaty of Versailles banned anything like the Luftwaffe, however, Goering was the head of the Civil Air Transport.  Their job was to screen for excess military aviary machines, so he looked the other way whenever the Luftwaffe came into question.  When Hitler took the treaty away, the Luftwaffe was revealed, with Goering as the field marshal.  This made Goering the highest-ranking officer in Germany.[7] Also, the Luftwaffe was the strongest weapon Germany had at the beginning of World War Two, a valuable resource.  By 1939 the Luftwaffe was one of the most powerful air forces in the world.
            In 1922 Goering joined one of the most powerful political parties of the day, Nazism.  His attitude to the party he later said was, “political love at first sight”.  Very quickly he rose in the ranks of the Nazi regime and took leadership of the Sturmabteilung, also called brownshirts or stormtroopers.  They were a major part in Hitler’s rise to power, a small regiment assigned to protect Hitler from revenge attacks, by preemptive strike or reaction.  Not only did Goering rise in the Nazi party, but also with Hitler.  After having associated with Goering, Hitler accounted his experience thus, “I liked him.  I made him the head of my S.A.  He is the only one of its heads that ran the S.A.  properly.  I gave him a disheveled rabble.  In a very short time he had organized a division of 11,000 men.[8] Goering was with the Nazi leader during the beer hall Putsch, the unsuccessful coup d’etat by the Nazis. 
            Goering was a key component in later Nazi affairs.  He was a driving force in the Gleichschaltung (forceful establishment of Nazi dictatorship).  By banning newspapers that were spouting negative propaganda, and using his secret police “the Gestapo” Goering made it possible for the Gleichschaltung to happen.  Goering was the head of the Forschungsamt, which monitored telephones.  Goering also led the Anschluss, which required political brazenness the likes of Danton or Bismarck.  Goering contacted Schuschnigg (The Austrian Chancellor), and stated his intent to annex Austria.  With the threat of war and major skills in intimidation, the Germans walked into Austria without resistance.
            The beginning of World War Two brought Goering a lot of power, money and success.  September 1st, 1939 Hitler declared Goering his successor if he was unable to fulfill his duties.  This made Goering Hitler’s right hand man.  The Luftwaffe was extremely successful in the beginning of the war, beating polish air forces in 2 weeks.  “Leave it to my Luftwaffe” was Goering's go-to line when good news came in, and when a problem needed solved that’s exactly what he would do: leave it to his Luftwaffe.  On July 19, 1940 Hitler made Goering Reichsmarschall des Grossdeutschen Reiches (Reich Marshal of the Greater German Reich), which made him higher ranking than ell the other
Army commanders.  On September 30th, 1939 Goering was awarded with the knights cross of the iron cross.
            The latter parts of World War Two were horrible for Goering, he lost his dignity, his position, and his rank.  The British were Goering's antithesis throughout the entire war, even with his Luftwaffe.  Goering promised Hitler victory over the British, however it was not so.  Hitler saw his first loss; ‘leave it to my Luftwaffe’ wasn’t good enough anymore.  It was a similar story in the bomb war, in the beginning; Goering was so confident that he said, “The Ruhr will not be subjected to a single bomb.  If an enemy bomber reaches the Ruhr, my name is not Hermann Goering: you can call me Meier!”[9] Again the British set Goering straight.  Two cities were destroyed completely by bombings, and many others were damaged.  Goering's bomb sirens were starting to be known as “Meier’s trumpets” ", or "Meier's hunting horns."
            The end of the war was Goering's death sentence.  Goering was told that he was to negotiate the peace treaty, because Hitler was unable to do so.  Being cautious, he telegraphed Hitler asking – ‘should I take power over the Reich? If you do not respond by 10 pm I will assume that you are incapacitated and I will assume control’ however the telegraph was not taken lightly.  Instead it was seen as a coup d’etat and Goering was arrested on April 25, 1945.  Hitler had his ranks stripped away and his position of power removed.  His Trial looked good in the beginning, a quick tongue, and a few loyal friends seemed to be just enough to get Goering out of the death sentence, however it fell short.  He was sentenced to death by hanging.  When he asked to be shot like a soldier, instead of hung like a common criminal, he was turned down.  October 15th, 1946, the day before he was to be hanged, Goering committed suicide by ingesting potassium cyanide pills.[10] He died a wealthy, fat, and successful man, just one who fell apart in the end.
            Many choose the Military as a job, few make it a career.  To be successful you have to be a courageous, skilled, hard working soldier.  Hermann Goering’s military career was a successful one.  He ended his life an infantryman, pilot, general, leader, and politician.  He was wealthy and donned coveted medals such as the Pour le Me’rit.  He even created his own flag.  Herman Goering's Military career is the perfect example for the ideal soldier. 


[1] When he was little it has been said that Goering wrote a paper to his very anti-Semitic schoolmaster, fighting for the Jews.   He was hit with a ruler so many times that he had to go to the hospital to they could drain the blood blisters on his hands.
[2] Feld flieger abteilung 25
[3] "Though it seems that they had to steal a plane in order to qualify."- Manvell, Roger (2006).   Goering.   London: Greenhill Books.   p.   29.   ISBN 1853676128.
[4] German kills were scored much more strictly than any other country.   Kills were only awarded to one person, except in the case of a dual seated plane, where they would award a point to the observer.   If a group of planes took an enemy plane down, the victory was awarded to the group, which had their own separate score.   Every kill needed verification.   This was easy if the plane landed on friendly soil, because the kill could be seen on the ground, however over enemy soil it would have needed to be observed by a fellow pilot or an observer.   Once verified the kill would be sent to the commander who would look it over for authenticity, from then on it would be shaken up the ranks, all the way to the top.   If all went well, then the point would be awarded.   This process of scoring made sure each kill was appreciated to its fullest extent, greatly raising morale whenever one came in.   Other countries were much less strict.   Britain, for instance, would award kills made by groups to every member who was there, and needed much less verification for the point to be awarded.   Enemy planes that were forced to land or fly away were also awarded a point.   In France, they didn’t start counting kills until much later in the war.   The stringency that was the scoring system for Germany was unique from the rest of the world.
[5] One story shows this in particular.   Called “The Rise and Fall of Hermann Goering” it begins in 1917.   After a long dogfight, Goering shot down the Austrian Frank Slee.   Herman landed to meet his opponent and gave him his iron cross.   The memento was passed to a friend who died with on the beaches of Normandy.- Manvell, Roger (2006).   Goering.   London: Greenhill Books.   p.   37.   ISBN 1853676128
[6] “If Germany cant have these planes no one can!”
[7] The Luftwaffe did have their own ground forces, however the domination of aviary significance drove the infantry out of the Luftwaffe.   These men became Goering's own personal army, paid for by the government.
[8] Hitler, Adolf (1988).   Hitler's Table Talk, 1941–1944.   Oxford Oxfordshire: Oxford University Press.   p.   168.   ISBN 0192851802.
[9] A common German saying.   Akin to saying, “if I can’t do this, my name isn’t Charlie!” Meier is one of the most common names in Germany.
[10] The day he was to be hanged, they laid his body by the gallows so the people knew he had died.