How I met My Husband -- Fo' Real.

If I were to adapt a short story we studied in class in to a movie I would probably choose How I Met My Husband. I chose this story because I thought it was one of the better stories we read in class. The ending was overall pretty positive and I didn't fall asleep while reading it. Although I did enjoy the story as a whole, there were a few element I would tweak in the modified film version.

Plot

In regards to plot, there is not much that I would choose to change or edit in the story. Rather than altering what already exists, I would simply add on to the end of the story. The central conflict that exists in the story is Edie's final encounter with Chris Watters and ALice Kellings reaction to this. I would keep this conflict in the film because it adds drama. Movie goers are all about more drama. However, I do not feel the title or the end of the story really reflect the events of the story. There is much more emphasis on Edie's relationship with Chris Watters than that of her husband. Because I feel that movie critics would be upset with this ending, I feel that I would need to expand more on her relationship with her husband. I think that this would improve the overall message and theme of the work because it would unify the story and create a more positive feel. When I read the story I thought the theme was something along the lines of "convenient love". I mean, this girl marries a guy that she spends less than a page to describe whereas she spends the entire story describing a man she just met. ALso, Edie's husband was her first relationship. After reading the story I was satisfied that Edie was finally happy in the end, but I felt that she didn't really love her husband because it appeared that she had more feelings toward Chris. With my modifications, the storyline would still be the same, however, Edie would show much more concern and interest in her husband.

Point Of View

The point of view used in the short story How I Met My Husband was in first person. Edie, the central character, was the narrator for the story. This was very effective because It allowed the reader to channel into her thoughts and feelings. I would keep this element consistent in the movie because it really helps characterize Edie. In the film I would have a narrator speaking as a scene unfolded- sort of like a Morgan Freeman movie. This would assist in expressing the theme of love because it would help the audience understand Edie and how she feels during certain moments in the story.


Setting

This story took place somewhere out in the country. Mr. and Mrs. Peebles live in a nice home with plenty of empty land around it. Although I don't believe the narrator actually describes the surroundings, the fact that Mr. Watters is able to land his plane there implies that there is plenty of space and not much housing around. Also, Alice Kelling stays in a hotel in the city but is offered the opportunity to spend the night in the Peebles' home. The setting would have to remain constant between the two works in order for Chris Watters to leave his plane there. The story does not take place anywhere else besides in flashbacks by the narrator. The setting of the story as well as the movie would not really have a large impact on the message or theme of the work, however, they would greatly influence the plot if it was to change.

Characterization

There were several major characters in this story. In the film version of the story I would cast actors or actresses who exemplify the same qualities and characteristics as those in the story.
Edie- I'm not really sure exactly what actress I would attempt to cast for the role of Edie. I would look for an actress who is young and has a soft and meek voice. Innocence is obviously another key trait of Edie in this story- therefore that rules out most actresses today, sorry Lindsay.
Mrs. Peebles- Mrs. Peebles is like the typical mother figure. She is concerned and protective of Edie when Alice Kelling accuses Edie of being intimate with Chris Watters. Mrs. Peebles character should be a strong willed and older mom figure. Kathy Bates' character from The Waterboy seems like a good comparison to Mrs. Peebles.
Alice Kelling- Alice Kelling is more classy and sophisticated woman. She becomes very jealous of Edie and accuses her of having intimate relations with Chris. Rachel McAdams would be a good actress for this role.
Chris Watters- Chris Watters is a very laid back type of guy. He lives each day how he wants. He is very friendly and doesn't really care what people think. I would like to cast Johnny Depp for this role, mostly because I just like Johnny Depp.
Loretta Bird- Loretta Bird is a very gossipy type of woman. She helps move the story along because she is always present during a conflict. I'm not really sure who I would cast for this role, but it would have to be someone who is very uppity and talkative.

All of these specific characters are important to the plot of the story. Each character acts the way they do because of their personality traits. Edie is very shy and naive which is why she falls for Chris so easily. Chris is careless and doesn't really think anything of his actions. Loretta Bird likes to stir up trouble, which is why there is always a conflict when she is around. All of these characters are vital to the plot therefore in the film version I would not change any of them.

Theme
The theme of this short story was love. However, when I read the story I thought that the fact that Edie doesn't show a great deal of emotion or concern about her husband, Mr. Carmichael, takes away from the theme. I felt that the theme seemed more like "convenient love"- meaning that Edie only fell for the mailman because he liked her in return. In order to keep this perception from reaching movie viewers, I am going to include Edie's husband much more. Hopefully this will enhance the theme because it will make Edie's love for her husband seem like it is more tangible and evident. There are a few other smaller messages included in the story that I would also like to keep consistent within the film. For example, Edie is very naive and believes that Chris really loves her. However, she eventually discovers that he had just said that because he knew she would believe him. Chris took advantage of Edie by telling her she was beautiful and making her feel special. Obviously he did not even care enough about her to write a letter to her.

"I don't shut up, I grow up. And when I look at you I throw up."

Plot

The plot of the short story "The Body" and the film Stand By Me were relatively consistent. Both recounted the adventure of four friends in search of a young man's corpse. In fact, there were very few differences between thew two. The most noticeable difference between the film and the book would probably be the grocery scene. In the story, Gordie enters the grocery store to purchase some hamburger and buns for dinner. When he pays for the food the owner of the store tries to rip Gordie off by charging him extra. Because Gordie is very intelligent, he catches onto the scam and defends himself. In the film however, the owner of the grocery store is very kind to Gordie. Obviously this is not a huge difference. The only effect this tiny change in the story line has is that it hides a bit of Gordie's character.

Point Of View

Both the story "The Body", and the film Stand By Me were told from the point of view of Gordie LeChance. Obviously this impacted the story because it allowed the reader to get a feel for how Gordie was thinking. The film was narrated in the same way the story was. The voice of the older Gordie spoke throughout the movie; explaining things or revealing the characters' feelings. One difference between the film and the book, with regards to the point of view, is that some parts of the film were focused on Ace, Eyeball Chambers, and their crew. These guys were the older guys in the town who liked to cause trouble. Two of the members of the group were brothers to Chris and Vern. The film had a few scenes of these boys causing trouble- hitting mailboxes, drinking beers, and tattooing each other..?. These scenes were added in the film but not mentioned in the story because the film audience was not told much background information as the readers were. Therefore, in the film they actually showed how the older guys caused trouble rather than having Gordie explain it. I don't feel that this really impacted the film very much because although the way the audience gets information about the guys is different, the idea is still the same. The point of view in the short story as well as the film was from the point of view of Gordie LeChance- ultimately making the story seem more realistic.

Characterization

I felt that the characterization between the film and the story was the source of most of the differences. Both films contained the same main characters: Gordie, Chris, Vern, and Teddy. All of these characters seemed the same way they were described in the book, however, there were several things that were inconsistent that I felt affected the overall story. As previously mentioned, the grocery store scene was not consistent between the story and the film. I felt that this really affected the story because I felt that it inhibited Gordie from revealing his true intellect. In the story, I was really impressed with the way in which Gordie caught the store owner trying to rip him off. I was a little disappointed in the movie because Gordie did not need to defend himself. This, I felt, hid Gordie's "smarts" from the film audience. Another difference I noticed was in the character Chris. When I read the story The Body, the character I admired the most by the end of the story was Chris. The speaker (Gordie) talked very highly of Chris throughout the entire story always describing how he was the peacemaker. In the story I felt that the reader was provided with plenty of evidence of this, but I did not feel the same way after watching the film. I was not impacted as much by the character of Chris in the film as I was in the story. One example of this is when Chris tells Gordie about the time he stole the lunch money. In the story Chris never actually tells Gordie that Old Lady Simons really bought herself a new skirt with the milk money; he only implies it. However, in the film Chris cries hysterically and accuses the teacher of buying the new skirt. I believe that the story portrays Chris as a more noble and proud person than the film does.

Setting

The setting between the book and film hardly changes at all. In the book the boys live in Castle Rock, Maine whereas in the film they live in Castle Rock, Oregon. Besides the names of states, there are very few differences between the two. I felt that the town described in the story was not portrayed as well in the film because the audience was rarely ever introduced to characters other than the main four. In the story Gordie provides a brief biography of almost every character and their families. In the film we hardly see any of the characters parents or learn anything about them. I feel like this affected the setting slightly because it made the town in the movie seem bigger and more distanced than that of the close-knit, everyone-knows-everything type of town described in the book. I don't believe this affected the story or the film in any major way.

Theme

I think the theme of the story was probably the most consistent element throughout both the film and the short story. Theme is really the purpose and meaning behind a story. In this case, The theme of the story could not be altered or lost in the film or the story would have been completely different. The theme, I believe, was still that friendships may fade away, but the memories will last forever. In the film this idea was emphasized at the beginning and end of the movie. At the beginning of the movie Gordie is alone in his car reading about the sudden death of his old friend Chris Chambers. That is when he begins to reflect on his best friend from when they were twelve years old. In addition to the beginning, at the end of the story Gordie watches his son and his friend as they play together. Gordie thinks to himself- "I never had any friends later on, like the ones I had when I was twelve...Jesus....does anyone?"

Popular Mechanics

I was really confused as to what happened at the end of the story. It sounds as if they ripped the baby apart or something..? I don't really know. What I do know is that someone clearly needs to call child protection services because that can't be legal. Alright, so not only did I dislike the end of this story, but I also disliked what I believe is the central theme or idea of the story. So this couple is going through a rough time (maybe a divorce?). Just like in many other similar instances, one of the spouses is left packing up his/her belongings planning to move out. Whenever people separate it seems like there is always that one item that they have to fight over- In my parents case it was the giant painting of my brother, sister and I. Neither one of my parents would give it up, they fought for months over who would get to keep the picture. The same idea happens in this story except instead of an inanimate object that is being fought over, it's a baby. And what really makes me mad is that it doesn't even seem like the parents care about the baby (from the way they are manhandling him). The two of them seem more concerned with the idea of beating the other parent. I mean really, have they never heard of joint custody?

You're Ugly Too

In class Mr. Costello asked us to consider whether or not we liked Zoe as a person. I thought back to initial read and I remember feeling somewhat sorry for her at first. One fear I think a lot of people have (at least I do) is that they won't get married. With that in mind, I had a lot of pity for Zoe because she had a lot of bad luck with men and her younger sister on the other hand seemed to be doing much better. Also, I felt pity for her in respect to how her students felt about her, "...her student evaluations had been slipping the past year and a half.." It really seemed like nothing was going her way. But then I kept reading and realized that just maybe it was her own fault. I'm not really surprised that she had trouble with dating. However, I found it somewhat surprising that the men she dated were the reason (as opposed to herself) why the relationship didn't last. This was surprising to me because honestly, how many men would find a woman attractive that responds to the question "what perfume are you wearing?" saying "room freshener." In addition to that, she has just an odd sense of humor. If someone were to pretend to push me off a ledge 20 stories high I don't think I would find that very funny. Zoe is just a weird person, and no matter how much pity I have on her for her lonely and cynical life, I just really don't like her. Her character is just a little too over the top for me.

The Drunkard

Obviously this short stories is in the section labeled "Humor and Irony" for a reason. I did find the story to be somewhat humorous- I mean as funny as some adults are drunk, I can only imagine what a child must be like. Irony also ties into the story in several different parts. The first hint of irony I noticed is when Crowley says, "He was well liked," about Mr. Dooley. This is ironic because Crowley did not actually know Mr. Dooley, he was just at the funeral in an attempt to get free drinks. Another ironic occurrence in the story is the fact that the child is drinking and the father is not. Obviously (especially considering the father's alcoholism) it should be the other way around. I also found it ironic that as the boy is on his way home he yells at a group of women and thinks to himself "I have never seen such ill-mannered people." I felt this was especially ironic because he is a drunken child who is singing and yelling at his father and he calls someone else ill-mannered. Pretty funny. Finally, at the end of the story the mother is rightfully angry at her husband for shaming their family by "allowing" their son to drink the beer. However, in the last few lines of the story the mother completely forgets about all of that when she realizes that her sons actions ultimately led to the father staying sober and going to work the next day. In turn, the mother thanks the son for his behavior. All of these ironic instances in the story help support the idea that it is an exaggeration. These ironies also make the story a little bit more humorous.

The Lottery

In this blog I am going to sort of combine questions #4 and 6. 4 asks about the significance of the fact that the original box and some of the earlier traditions being lost. 6 asks what the story reveals about human nature.
The fact that the original box has been lost along with many of the earlier traditions verifies the fact that this custom is fairly old. Not to mention the fact that you don't hear of stoning people as a homicide technique much anymore. These facts certainly leave the reader to believe that the village people may not be as serious or as dedicated to the ritual as they once were. The purpose of the ritual (which apparently has something to do with corn..?) may have even been lost as well. In fact, the only really concrete evidence that shows the townspeople really believe in the ritual comes from Old Man Warner. He criticizes the people of the neighboring towns stating that "there's always been a lottery." Though this may be true, it makes the reader wonder that just because there has always been one, does that mean there has always been a need for one? This relates the question #6 because the people are just continuing with the tradition- not really having any other reason to besides the fact that There has always been one. People are ignorant. They do things out of blind faith; not thinking for themselves. In fact, even though the people of the town know that someone is going to suffer from this lottery, they continue to practice it. It has been so long that people forget how the ceremony is even supposed to go, but they know that either way, it "needs" to happen. The only person in the whole story who seems to reject the idea of the lottery is Mrs. Hutchinson- but only after her family (eventually her) is chosen for the lottery that year.

The Body

Plot
As I read The Body, a short story by Stephen King, I didn't feel that there was a central plot or problem. This had a profound effect on the story as a whole because it made the story seem more real and exciting. The story seemed more like the retelling of a childhood memory rather than a a fabricated tale. The central theme of the story was the missing body of Ray Brower and how a group of four kids were determined to find and return his body in hopes of public recognition. This issue interrupts the story about 6 pages in when Vern rushes to the tree house to tell the guys the big news, " 'Holy Jeezum. You won't believe this. Sincerely.' He slapped his sweaty forehead to show us how sincere he was." This big news is what initiates the boys' journey to search for the body. On their search they encounter several obstacles which challenge, frighten, and excite the boys. Ultimately, through their journey, the friendship and bond between the four boys becomes stronger than ever as they work together in pursuit of honor.

Point of View
One thing that was very interesting about this story was the fact that it was told from the point of view of one of the boys; Gordie LeChance. Gordie has grown up to be a writer- which is reflected in many ways throughout the story (especially in the fact that he wrote this story himself). Because this story is told from Gordie's point of view, everything that happens in the story seems twice as emotional and important. In addition, many of the things revealed about Gordie, as well as his friends Teddy, Chris, and Vern are revealed thorough prior knowledge that Gordie already has. This helped progress the story because the reader was never left guessing the actions, thoughts, or motives of the characters. One example of how the point of view effects the story as a whole is the instance when Gordie and Vern are walking across the bridge when a train comes. Gordie describes exactly how he feels; "The steady thump of my heart, the bloodbeat in my ears like a drum being played with brushes, the creak of sinews like the strings of a violin that has been tuned radically upward, the steady hiss of the river, the hot hum of a locust digging into tight bark., the monotonous cry of a chickadee, and somewhere, far away, a barking dog." With every encounter the boys face, the reader is provided with a detailed explanation of how a person feels at that moment in time- ultimately pulling the reader even deeper into the story.

Characterization
Characterization played a major role in this short story. There were a lot of dynamic characters in this story- the main four however were obviously the boys: Vern, Teddy, Chris, and Gordie. I think that the characterization in this story really tied in with the theme (friendship- which I will expand on later). Each one of the characters were very different and yet they all shared a common bond. Through their actions not only on their journey, but also the background information which Gordie provides, the reader is able to learn more about each individual character. Vern was sort of portrayed as the loud ignorant one in the group. I think this is best seen when Gordie is trying to tell his story about The Great Pie Eat of 1960. As he begins his story Vern interrupts several times saying things such as, "Gretna?...What Kind of name is that?" and "Yeah, Pioneer Days, that's a fuckin blast." Both Teddy and Chris must beg Vern to actually shut up to allow Gordie to tell his story. Next there is Teddy. Teddy was treated badly at home and has the tendency to try risky behaviors. One of Teddy's latest stunts was trying to jump in front of the freight train. Although Teddy seemed to have more smarts than Vern, clearly he lacked the common sense. Another member of the group was Chris. Chris is probably my favorite character of the story. Chris was a sort of role model and peacemaker in the group. Whenever there was a fight or and issue Chris was always the one to solve it. The other boys showed a lot of respect for him. This is evident in the way that Chris was able to admit to his shortcomings or fears and yet no one would dare "rag" on him. Another reason why I liked Chris was because he was really intelligent but also very humble. At one point in the journey Chris advises Gordie to stay in school and challenge himself. He encourages Gordie not to let his friends influence his life by saying, "Your friends drag you down, Gordie. Don't you know that?...Your friends do. They're like drowning guys that are holding onto your legs. You can't save them. You can only drown with them." I thought it was really interesting that at only 12 years old Chris had some insight that many adults are lacking. Finally, I liked Chris' character because I felt sympathetic for him. He was always accused of doing the wrong thing because of his family reputation. He stole milk money from the school but decided to return it. But because the teacher knew that he stole it, she took the returned money for herself and still punished him. The last major character within this story is the main character, Gordie. Gordie is a smart and quirky kid. He likes to make up stories and not until recently has he been writing them down and sharing them with his friends. Gordie is a complex character because only the reader (and his best friend Chris) really know what is going on in his life. Gordie's brother died a few years back and ever since then Gordie has become almost invisible to his family. When Gordie does a book report on the book The Invisible Man he suddenly feels as if that story is a reflection of his own life. "This invisible Man is about a Negro. Nobody ever notices him at all unless he fucks up. People look right through him. When he talks, nobody answers/ He's like a black ghost. Once I got into it, I ate that book up like it was a John D MacDonald, because that cat Ralph Ellison was writing about me." Because of the lack of attention Gordie receives at home, he is able to do the things he wants to do with his friends without his parents worrying about where he is or what he is doing. This gives him a freedom he uses to his advantage to hang out with his friends. Gordie is also very smart, smarter than the rest of his friends. At one point during his journey a grocer attempts to gyp Gordie by charging him extra for his groceries. Gordie catches the grocer and even though he is a kid, he stands up for himself. Although he is a well-behaved boy, his parents have hinted that they don't approve of the friends he has chosen (side note: Gordie also grew up to be a high school English teacher).The different characters in this story affect the overall theme of the story because their different personalities are what brings them closer together. Friendship I believe is the overarching theme of this story. This close friendship develops from the mismatched personalities of these four friends because they all complement one another.

Setting
The setting impacts this story in several ways. The story takes place in a small town called Castle Rock, Maine. Because the town is so small everyone knows everybody's business. This is seen in the way the narrator (Gordie) provides a great deal of background information on all of the characters as well as their families. This helps the reader learn more about each character as well as the reason for why they act the way they do. Another way in which the setting impacted the story was the fact that the town was small and news traveled fast. The news of the missing boy from the neighboring town had made its way to Castle Rock where the boys first heard the story. It wasn't until Vern overheard his brother talking about the location of the body that the boys decided to go search for it. Because the town was so small the boys were fairly familiar with the land and were able to make a journey to Harlow on their own. However, the land between the two towns was undeveloped and deserted which added unknown expectations to their journey (such as the mysterious screaming in the middle of the night and the leeches). "In those days it was still possible to walk into the woods and lose your direction and die there." This obviously impacted the story because it not only provided the boys with the opportunity to go on an adventure, but it also gave them the means and the information to do so. I also really liked the time era that this story took place in. This story took place in the mid 1900's (late 1950's - early 1960's). During this time people were still much more relaxed and carefree. Kids hung outside until dark and parents generally didn't have to worry. Kids were always active, running around and getting into trouble- just like the four main characters in the story.

Theme
I felt that the overall theme of this story was friendship. At first, this story appears to be about four guys' attempt and fame. However, in the end, it isn't the body of Ray Brower that struck them the most, it was the journey as a whole. Repeatedly throughout the story the narrator mentions how the scent of different things or the feel unbearable heat will always bring him back to that summer in 1960 when he made the adventure of his lifetime with some of his best friends. Although the friendships Chris and Gordie had with one another were great, "We were clinging to eachother in deep water.", their friendships with Teddy and Vern slowly diminished, "Teddy and Vern slowly became two more faces in the halls or in three thirty detention." Overall, I think this story had a lot of insight about life and friendship. Some friendships stay strong and others fade away, but the memories last forever.

Eveline

Q2: What in Eveline's present circumstances make it desirable for her to escape her home? Characterize her father and Miss Gavan, her supervisor. What does the memory of her mother contribute to her decision to leave?
Eveline has met this man named Frank whom she believes she is in love with. He asks her to run off with him to Buenos Aires. Growing up, Eveline was mistreated by her father a lot. He is described as a strict parent who criticized her for how she worked and spent her earnings. Eveline is given a lot of responsibilities once her mother passes away. Eveline is in charge of taking care of two young children. Although Eveline's father would have been furious if she left (partially because he disliked the fact that Frank was a sailor) Miss Gavan would have been thrilled. I think that Miss Gavan knew of the stress Eveline was under and hoped that one day she would be able to get out of that house. I think that the memory of her mother dying is part of the reason Eveline decided to stay- she did not want to leave her father home alone with all of those kids. Also, rather than running from her pain, Eveline's mother accepted her fate and put her life in the hands of God. Maybe that is what Eveline decided to do at the end of the story.

Miss Brill

So this was another one of those odd stories. Just like A Worn Path, the main character in this story is a lonely elderly woman. What really stood out to me in this story was the fur that Miss Brill obsesses over. The story starts off with her petting this fur and talking to it as if it were alive. The author almost uses an apostrophe here when Miss Brill is speaking to the fur because she is acting like it is a friend whom she calls Dear Little Thing. I really felt sorry for Miss Brill throughout the story because she seemed so lonely. Pages 184 and 185 really convey how lonely she was. Although Miss Brill makes it sound like she is very involved in the lives of others "No doubt somebody would have noticed if she hadn't been there; she was part of the performance after all" I could tell she wasn't because of the way she never really communicated with the other characters- just simply eavesdropped. One of the strangest parts of the story was on pg 183 "They did not speak. This was disappointing, for Miss Brill always looked forwards to the conversation". Obviously when I read this I assumed that Miss Brill enjoyed conversations with these people. However, the next line reads, "She had become really quite expert, she thought, at listening as though she didn't listen, at sitting in other people's lives just for a minute while they talked round her". So basically Miss Brill is so lonely that she doesn't even remember how to have pleasure from being engaged in a conversation anymore. Rather than being in the conversations, Miss Brill eavesdrops on them and cherishes them like they are her own.

Once Upon A Time

Alright, so I am just wondering... do you actually read these stories before you assign them? and if so, Why are they all so depressing? This story was just awful to read however I felt that a lesson could be found in it. I think that the author is trying to convey the idea that paranoia will ultimately lead to your demise. This family was so concerned with the irrational fear of being robbed that they went to some extremes in order to protect their family. Ironically this form of protection led to the death of their son. ANother irony in this story was the fact that the mother gave the child the idea of playing Prince. Though she did not tell him to climb upon the wall, she provided him with the story and background to think to do that. (It was really weird because the narrator refers to the mother as "the witch". I thought that made it seem almost like the mother did this on purpose- although I know thats probably way outside the cone of reason.) Also, I noticed that the wife desired to put up the razors and thorns on top of the wall after seeing footprints. I was wondering if maybe those footprints were the footprints of the son who (as we know) played on pretending to be a prince. Really depressing and disgusting story overall.

A Worn Path

Q 4: Analyze the minor characters. What do they reveal about Phoenix and about the world in which she lives?

Obviously Phoenix, the main character, in this story is somewhat crazy. With old age she loses a lot of her senses and has become somewhat delusional. In the story Phoenix travels away from her home through a forest in order to get to the doctors office to get medicine for her ill grandson. She encounters several minor characters on her way: a hunter, a random woman on the street, a doctors attendant, and a nurse. Although the attendant develops somewhat of an attitude with Phoenix (probably as a result of impatience because Phoenix is unresponsive to her) the rest of the minor characters are very kind and sympathetic towards her. First Phoenix runs into the hunter. He insists that such a journey is too long for her and advises her to go home. He also gives her a nickel (or rather lets her keep the nickel she took). Next Phoenix asks a random woman to tie her shoe. This woman is carrying several bags and she still takes the time to set them down to help Phoenix. I don't know about you, but I tend to avoid talking to strangers. Of course if an old woman asked me for help I would help her- but the hunter went over and talked to her out of his own free will. Also, the nurse Phoenix sees has developed somewhat of a relationship with her. She inquires about Phoenix's grandson and shows that she genuinely cares about him. I think these characters support the idea that Phoenix is living in a safe and kind society. I think this contrasts a lot with the society in which we live today because I feel that no elderly woman in todays society (who is practically blind and deaf and delusional) would be safe.

Everyday Use

Alright, so this story just made me mad. It sort of reminded me of my sister and I. Dee reminds me a lot of my sister because she is sort of distanced from the family (Now even more so because she is at Purdue). It seems like while Dee was growing up she was constantly spending more time and energy focusing on friendships rather than her family. My sister was the same way. On the other hand Maggie seemed to know more about the family history and everything that went on. A good example of this can be found around paragraph 52 when Maggie remembers Uncle Henry (dash). I really felt like Dee was a selfish character because she wanted all of the family heirlooms. And although she claimed they had sentimental value, it is obvious that she barely knows anything about the items she wants. Clearly she just wanted them for show- like everything else she wanted. I think she is very materialistic which clearly contrasts with her mother and younger sister. Dee changes her name to Wangero, admits that she will not bring friends to the house, and takes family heirlooms all to impress others (esp. her uptight husband who thinks he is too good to eat collards or pork).

Everyday Use

(response to question 4)
This question asks if the mothers choice to not give her quilts to Dee shows a permanent or temporary change in character. Personally I don't think it is an indication of either. On the contrary, I feel that her determination to hold on to the quilts and to give them to a daughter who will appreciate their true value and history fits her character. As a hard working African American, I feel like she has a very strong personality. Their family worked hard for everything they had (especially since they have been through so much like the fire). I think it is only fair that Maggie should inherit the quilts because she is not embarrassed of her heritage like Dee is and the quilts are a representation of that heritage. Also, Maggie took the time to learn about her family and how to quilt and since Dee, or Wangero, only wants the quilts for decoration she doesn't really deserve them.

Bartleby

This story was long and boring about a job that seems extremely long and boring. Coincidence? I think not. Alright, so this story was about 4 main characters (and of course the narrator who is the boss guy at this office). (This sort of answers Q1 ) Nippers, Turkey, and Ginger-Nut are all introduced first. In fact, Bartleby really doesn't enter the story until about paragraph 15. I think that the author did this for a few reasons. First of all, Bartleby is new to the business and the others have been at the office longer than he. Secondly, because the story is named Bartleby and focuses on Bartleby, I think this was a good was to separate him from the other characters. Alright, so not only did the length of this so called "short story" bother me, but also the repetition of the phrase "I would prefer not". Just say no. In addition to "i would prefer not" Bartleby also says "I am not particular". This kind of reminds me of something you say just to be nice although you don't really mean it. For example, around paragraph 200 the boss is talking to Bartleby and explaining that there needs to be a change and that he may need to find a new job. Bartleby, in his annoying way, says that he would prefer not to make a change although he is not particular. I can just tell that the way he said it made it perfectly clear that he was particular and he was only saying that to sound more considerate.

Hunters In The Snow

The word "friendship" definitely does not come to mind when thinking about this story. When I started to read this story I thought, "okay, this is a story about a group of friends (somewhat sarcastic ones) are going on a hunting trip together. sounds nice." Well, I was wrong. There are three main characters in the story: Tub, Kenny, and Frank. Tub is described as overweight and picked on probably the most throughout the story. However, there are a lot of "shifts" in the story. At some points it seems like Tub is being picked on (for example paragraph 34 where Frank and Kenny make fun of Tubs weight). At other points in the story however Tub is trusted. (for example pages 197 and 198 when Frank creepily admits to having a secret love for his 15 year old babysitter). In response to question 4 I don't think any of the characters really underwent a major change in the story. If i did have to choose one character I think I would say Kenny. This is because before he gets shot he seems to have a lot more insulting and argumentative dialogue. However, after he is shot he sort of just goes with the flow listening to whatever Frank and Tub tell him to do. I thought the characters in this story were just unrealistic and rude. I would never go on a hunting trip with people who were so hateful towards one another(i hate hunting anyways so it doesnt really matter).

How I met My Husband

So I know I just spent my whole last blog complaining about this story, but I really did like it. It was really unexpected. The curve-ball at the end was kind of cute. I really liked the main character in the story because she seemed really relatable to a younger girl- she was a little naive and curious. I especially liked the ending because I think the mail-man suited her much more. What I was thinking was if this Chris guy has a fiance and leaves her for a little girl (which I pretty much had the feeling was close to illegal) how in the world could she believe that he actually loved her? It was really sad that Edie was so gullible to believe what he said. Even worse than that is the fact that she didn't have a doubt in her mind he was lying to her; for months she just waited by the mailbox hoping to hear from him. I like happy endings (and legally appropriate ones) which is why I really liked the fact that she ends up falling for the mailman. However it does make you wonder if she really did love him or if he was kind of a rebound. I mean the girl never had a boyfriend and she practically had her heart broken by some stranger and then this guy comes along and she just falls for him like that. Quick enough that it really only requires one sentence to explain it.

How I met My Husband

This story was kind of cute and annoying at the same time. I really disliked the authors organization/structure in this story. This story jumped around way too much. At every new paragraph i felt completely thrown off. Line 80 for example starts with "The yard and borders didn't get trampled, it wasn't as bad as that." This line really comes out of nowhere and doesn't even seem like a complete thought to me. I had to do a double take the first time I read this to stop and think "okay, we are shifting thoughts now". I felt like I was doing that a lot throughout the story which is weird because unlike "A Rose for Emily" the whole story is in chronological order. Another thing that I disliked about this story was the syntax. Some sentences (like the one previously mentioned) didn't seem like complete thoughts to me. On the other hand, a great number of the sentences seemed like run-ons.. for example at the bottom of page 146 "So I said yes, and I went out with him for two years and he asked me to marry him, and we were engaged a year more while I got my things together and then we did marry." Not only is this sentence really long, but it has a lot of information in it. I just think it is weird that the speaker spends the whole story talking about the few encounters she has with this one man but then only dedicates a paragraph to her husband- most of which is summed up in this one sentence. Personally, if I were her husband I would be rather insulted.

Interpreter of Maladies

At the end of this story question #5 really stuck out to me "How do the characters' views of one another differ from the way the reader is encouraged to view them?" I think this question stuck out to me because I thought it was really weird the way the characters interacted with one another. First of all, it was odd how Mr. Das referred to Mrs. Das as Mina when talking to their daughter. Sometimes my brother calls my mom Karen and I honestly don't think there is something in the world that upsets her more so I really found it strange that the father actually set an example to call the mother by her first name. Next there is Mrs. Das who obviously does not care about her family quite as much as she does Mr. Kapasi. The way she talks to him about his job being romantic is really odd. I think there was much more dialogue (or mention thereof) between Mrs. Das and Mr. Kapasi than there is between Mr. and Mrs. Das. Mrs. Das seems very cold and distant the way she wore her glasses almost throughout the story. Also, I didn't really like the way in which she ignored her children (like when her daughter was asking her to paint her nails). Finally Mr. Das seemed very indifferent to everything. He never really showed any authority or concern for his children. When they were playing with the goat or making noise in the cab he simply acted as if nothing was wrong. In conclusion I thought the characters in the story made the story seem pretty far-fetched or unrealistic (not to mention the crazy monkeys jumping on the car).

A Rose For Emily

Alright, this story is right up there on the creepy factor with the poem "Edward". Also what struck me about the story was the unique structure. I felt like the story really didn't flow very well but the author did make an attempt to put it in some kind of order. The whole story is basically like a flashback or a retelling of events that happened in the past. I noticed a lot of the paragraphs started with phrases such as "the next day.." "when..." "the day after.." "So the next night.." etc. To me it seems like the author was trying to progress the story as well as give the reader a heads up that time was passing. I didn't really like that because it felt like nothing in the story really flowed or blended together.
One of the questions at the end of the unit in the book was "Compare the effectiveness of first-person in any of the following stories". I think that the use of first person is really helpful in this story because it helps the reader understand the story a little better. As I was reading the story I obviously thought the woman was crazy, but because the speaker describes the pity and sorrow the community felt for her I could understand more why no one ever really tried to bother her or question her about the smell coming from her house (although they should have since a dead body was rotting away). Over all, creepy story.

That Time of Year

So, I may be completely wrong, but i felt like the overarching theme in this poem was love. The speaker in this poem describes the changes outside as the seasons change as well as the changes outside when night comes. I felt that these two things symbolized distance or separation. I got this impression after I read the poem through once and read the final lines "This thou perceivest, which makes thy love more strong, To love that well which thou must leave ere long". To me this meant that- like in the changing of the seasons and daytime- we miss what we had before. The desire and appreciation of something always seems stronger once you have to go without it. To me it's like when the summer fades to fall and fall fades to winter all I can think about is summer and how much I miss it. It's from that separation that my appreciation of summer is strengthened. I feel like the whole meaning of the poem is summed up in those last couple lines. I could be really off, but that's just how I interpreted it.

Edward

Well, I don't really even know what to say about this poem. I was really confused a lot of the time. First of all I really disliked the repetition. That stupid "O, Mother, Edward, Mother, O" crap was driving me nuts and keeping me from concentrating. In addition to the repetition (haha that rhymed) I was completely thrown off by the mention of the hawk and the steed. After I read through the poem once I felt like I had a grasp of the main idea: This Edward fellow killed his father and his mother knows about it and possibly convinced him to do so. That much I understood; however, I really didn't see the significance of the first two and a half stanzas. And although I feel like I understand what actually happened/ took place within the poem, I feel like I'm missing a lot of background information. If the author had implied why Edward chose to kill his father than I missed that completely- and I feel like that is something that should be mentioned. I thought the overall tone of the poem was creepy and sinister. The mention of blood several times was creepy- but I also thought the mother seemed really creepy too. I don't know if she influenced Edward to kill his father, but she seemed pretty content with the fact that he did it.

Elegy For My Father Who Is Not Dead

This poem reminded me of "Crossing the Bar". Rather than the speaker being optimistic and ready for death in this poem, it is the speakers father who is waiting to die. In this poem the speaker is hesitant and somewhat fearful about the "world after this world". The first question that came with the poem asked "Why does the speaker eligize his father if he is not dead?" I thought about this question the moment I read the title before I even read the poem. Automatically I assumed that the father was probably mentally unstable or changed in someway that his family did not recognize his personality. This came to my mind first, I think, because one of my friends grandpa had Alzheimer's. My friend hasn't visited him since he was diagnosed with the illness because he is afraid to see what he is like. My friend always says that his grandpa is dead to him. Now, this may be far from the cone of reason, but it's really the only explanation I could really think of to explain why someone would eligize another person who isn't actually dead. Basically, I feel like the speaker wrote this poem to express his fear of death in contrast to his father's calmness.

Delight in Disorder

When I read this I really thought that Shakespeare would enjoy this poem. In a way it sort of reminded me of "My mistress' eyes" because it didn't falsely compare women to flowers or the sun. This poem seems to point out all the flaws in the way this woman is put together (not so much her physical characteristics, but her clothes). The speaker does point out negative things; however it seemed to me that they were sort of mentioned in a more positive light. This poem reminded me of the song "Best I Ever Had" by Drizzy Drake . In the song Drake says: "Chillin' with no make-up on that's when you look the best." I felt like this sort of summed up the speakers thoughts in this poem. ALthough the speaker uses words such as disorder, thrown, here and there, confusedly, and careless when describing the woman, he always pairs these words with more positive ones. Such words include: sweet, fine, enthralls, and deserving. This use of diction helps convey the real tone of the poem- which is that he loves the woman although she isn't perfect. I really liked how the final lines sort of tied the whole poem together- "Do more bewitch me than when art Is too precise in every part". Basically the speaker is saying that yes, sometimes she looks like a mess, but he is more attracted to her when she looks sloppy than when she is all put together.

Crossing the Bar

As a small group we decided that this poem was a pretty easy one to interpret. My notes, before the small group discussion changed very little. I mentioned that "put out to sea" and "when I embark" symbolized death and the pilot symbolized God. The whole poem basically says that the speaker is nearing death. In my notes i also said that line two "One clear call for me!" Basically meant that the speaker is ready to die; they know it's their time. In our group we noticed a contradiction to this. Line 10 says "And after that the dark!". We felt like this was a contradiction because this person is supposed to be happy and peaceful "sailing off to heaven" and then out of nowhere they mention the dark. We decided the tone was sort of "accepting" in the sense that the speaker is accepting of the fact that it is their time to die. This idea can also be supported in the fact that the speaker wants their to be "no sadness of farewell" when he dies. Grace mentioned that this mirrors the idea in the song "when I'm Gone" by Eminem. I feel compelled to add a few lyrics from the song: " And when I'm gone, just carry on, don't mourn Rejoice every time you hear the sound of my voice"

My mistress' eyes

I'll admit- when I read this I thought "wow, the speaker in this poem is a jerk." I took the poem and a sort of laundry list pointing out all the negative aspects of the speakers mistress. However, after we discussed the poem in our large group I really started to like it. A lot of the time I don't enjoy poetry. Half of the time I feel like what I am reading makes no sense. I feel like the poet just wrote a bunch of different words that sounded really fancy or cool together but didn't have a real meaning to them. I hate reading lines of poetry where the speaker just goes on and on about how beautiful a woman is by comparing her to unrealistic things. The fact that Shakespeare satirizes this concept is awesome. On the other hand, I feel like there had to be a better way to do so than to make this woman sound ugly. Basically the whole poem felt like one of those statements people make when asked "is she pretty?" - if this person is clearly not cut out for Miss America the typical answer is something along the lines of "well, she has a great personality". Even though I don't think that is quite what Shakespeare was going for, it's hard to get little else from the poem. The first 12 out of 14 lines basically explains everything this girl is not. Oh but then he throws in two lines about how shes rare and there's no one who can compare and that is supposed to make up for it? I love the idea of the poem, but I don't really like how Shakespeare did it. But it's Shakespeare....so 400 and some years late my opinion really doesn't really matter. obviously if we are still reading this poem it must be pretty dang good.

The Apparition

The speaker in this poem is speaking to their love indirectly. This poem is more like the thoughts/ plans of a man who is expecting to be cheated on. I got the image of the movie "ghosts of girlfriends past"stuck in my head after reading this. After talking in our small groups (and with help from you of course) we figured out that the speaker was not actually in a relationship with the woman that he is referring to. This made more sense- especially when looking at certain lines such as lines 2-3 "And thou thinkst thee free From all solicitation from me,". I looked up the definition of solicitation, adn though it had several different entries, the one i felt best fit this poem said "To persistently endeavor to obtain an object, or bring about an event; To woo; to court;" Basically how I understood this was that this guy continues to creep on this girl and she avoids him or refuses him time and time again. The speaker then says that when he dies she is going to think that she doesn't have to worry about him bothering her anymore- but this couldn't be further from the truth because he plans to haunt her. He plans to come to her bedside as a ghost to scare her but because she will be with a man "worse" than him, she will be neglected when she turns to him for comfort. We decided that the tone of the poem was revenge... even though the speaker is planning to get revenge on someone who hasn't even done wrong to him yet.

Getting Out

I really liked this poem. Although in my initial reading I thought the tone of the poem would be more negative, it became clear to me that nostalgic would be a better description. From the title I think I automatically assumed that the "break up" taking place in the poem ended rough. Using the term "getting out" instead of something like "going our separate ways" definitely seems very negative. In the poem however, I think there is much more support to the claim that the speaker and her former lover will miss each other. I think the best example is in line 18 where the speaker says "still I'm startled by men who look like you". Another example that manifests the nostalgia for the love they shared can be found in the final lines where the speaker is describing their last encounter together and how they cried in front of the lawyers holding hands, and then finally let go. This seems so contradictory to the beginning of the poem. In the first stanza the speaker describes their relation as being somewhat forced. She goes as far to say that they are like "inmates". When I read that line I immediately got the image that they felt trapped in the bond of marriage even though they weren't in love. By the end of the poem however it's obvious that they still care for one another- but sometimes just caring about each other isn't enough to make a marriage work. I could really relate to this idea because my parents got divorced when I was in third grade. They still care about each other to this day but they felt that they couldn't make their marriage work. After they separated they started to get along much better- which is what I think the speaker and her husband decided to do.

Sorting Laundry

I liked this poem because it was very simple. At first, reading it I thought Really? someone wrote a whole poem about laundry? But after reading the whole thing it really kind of made sense to me. There were two stanzas that I felt stood out; lines 25-27 and lines 49-51. I liked lines 25-27 because I can relate to what the speaker is saying. "And what's shrunk is tough to discard even for Goodwill." It's funny because no matter how old or small something is, if it holds some sort of emotional value to us we are reluctant to give it away. I thought this was the speakers way of relating her love to her clothes/ laundry. She does this again in the final stanza where she says "a mountain of unsorted wash could not fill the empty side of the bed." Basically, what i understood from this poem was that every little thing reminded this woman of her lover. Something as simple as doing the laundry was difficult to do without thinking about the hopes and dreams and memories they shared. She describes how every article of clothing reminds her of her love- from the towels they bought together to take to the beach, or the sheets they used to cover their bed.

Ozymandias

(As noted in question 3) Ozymandias was an Egyptian tyrant. From this, it is easy to understand what the poem is about. What I believe this poem to mean is that Ozymandias was a ruler who really did not accomplish much. And even if he did, people were not likely to remember. They describe him saying (lines4-5) "Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown, And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,". Then the author finishes the poem saying (lines 12-14) Nothing beside remains. Round the decay Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away." What I took this to mean was that the empire didn't last. The only thing that remains of the empire is Ozymandias' reputation as a tyrant and a poor leader. In repsonse to question 12, I think Ozymandias is a symbol. I believe he represents all leaders. He serves as an example that if you are a harsh tyrant, you will not be appreciated by your people. When time passes people will not mention the great things you did, but rather your harsh nature. I think that leaders should keep this in mind because although at times it is important to be firm and strict, you do not want that to be what you are most remembered for.

APO 96225

I thought this poem was very realistic. One thing I really liked about the poem was that you could feel the emotions of the different people in the poem. When reading the poem I could imagine and hear in my head a young man writing to his mom and trying to sound very optimistic. On the other end, i could imagine a worried and scared mother begging to know what her son has gotten himself into. The central theme of this poem can be seen in a variety of different things I think. I thought the main point of the poem was that we always want to know the truth. When we feel like we arent given the whole story we always press people to tell us every detail even when we know we are better off not knowing. Therefore, when they do tell us we regret ever asking in the first place. The mother begs and pleads her son to be honest with her and tell her exactly what's going on, but the minute he tells her she becomes extremely upset. Also, in our small group someone mentioned that maybe the mother just wanted to believe that her son was okay. She wasn't asking him to tell her more because she wanted to know more, but rather she was asking for him to assure her that he is fine. This poem was writtien about the Vietnam War- which got a lot of negative attention. Our small group thought maybe the mother just wanted her son to reassure her that the war wasnt as bad as people made it out to be. Either way, the mother was clearly not ready for the truth.

Barbie Doll

This was probably my favorite poem in this unit because I feel like it sends a really strong message. In response to question 6 (What is the central purpose of the poem?), i think the poet had one central thought/ idea he wanted to get through to her readers. I believe this poem is about how a person "dies" when they do everything they can to change their appearance. The girl in the poem is clearly unhappy with how she looks because people always pointed out the negative things about her. She was smart and healthy but after awhile these things werent enough to satisfy her and therefore she had to change her appearance. lines 15-18 "Her good nature wore out like a fan belt. So she cut off her nose and her legs and offered them up." The final stanza describes her body in a casket and how people are commenting about how pretty she looks. I took this to mean she wasn't literally dead, just figuratively. The old her was dead and she is now this flat unhearty and sad person whose only wish is to please other people through her appearance. I thought the overall tone of the poem was very negative. Basically the author's point is don't let your insecurities change who you are. This girl thought she would finally be happy when she changed how she looked, but she lost herself instead.

Toads

I'm going to admit right now that I really struggled with this unit of poetry. Most of these poems were over my head the first time I read them and it wasn't until the group discussions that I actually got something out of them. The poem "Toads" by Philip Larkin is a great example of one. I honestly have no idea why the author even mentions the toad in this poem. I felt like central theme of the poem was about all the negative things in a persons life. I think the best support for this idea could be found in the second stanza "Six days of the week it soils With its sickening poison- Just for paying a few bills! That's out of proportion." I took this to mean that the speaker is unhappy with his job that he works six days a week just to get by. Another stanza that stuck out to me was the seventh one. It says "For something sufficiently toad-like squats in me, too; Its hunkers are heavy as hard luck and cold as snow." From the word "squat" I got the impression that the speaker is saying that he is holding something back- something that bothers him and weighs him down. It almost seems like the speaker is envious of other people. He mentions the lives of other people a lot by saying "Lots of folk live..." which to me seems like he is longing for something they posses. Another possible support to this idea is in lines 29-32 where the speaker says "And will never allow me to blarney My way to getting The fame and the girl and the money All at one sitting." Im not really sure if thats on the right track or not so i would like to go over this poem in class together!

February

So... this was an interesting poem. When I first read it I honestly didn't think there was much depth to the poem. I thought it was about sex.. and that was pretty much it. Even in lines that may not have been intended to sound sexual I sort of got the impression they were. ex ". . .jumps up on the bed and tries to get onto my head. It’s his way of telling whether or not I’m dead. If I’m not, he wants to be scratched; if I am He’ll think of something" and "He shoots he scores!" The overall tone I got from my initial read was pretty negative. Especially in the lines where it says " It’s all about sex and territory, which are what will finish us off in the long run. Some cat owners around here should snip a few testicles. If we wise hominids were sensible, we’d do that too, or eat our young, like sharks." Basically what my interpretation of the poem was that Margaret Atwood was against reproduction. To me, this poem says that if we were smart we wouldn't be worried about sex or territory because if we do then these things will be our demise. I didn't really understand why she used a cat in this poem until we discussed it in our small groups. Someone in my group said that they thought Atwood was equating male behaviors to cat behaviors (later we established this idea in our large group discussion). After searching for the deeper meanings I really did like this poem better than many of the others in this unit. One thing I noticed about the poem (whether it's really significant or not) is that the first word of the poem is winter and the last word is spring- which to me seem like complete opposites (winter usually symbolizes death and spring new life). I felt like maybe this was a reflection in the tone of the poem because although Atwood starts off by saying if we are wise we will "snip a few testicles" she ends the poem saying "so get going on a little optimism around here". I dont know if that makes sense, but it's just a thought

Bright Star

In response to question 2, the speaker is obviously speaking directly to the star. This literary technique is called an apostrophe. The speaker in this case is a man (we can assume this from line 10 when he says "pillowed upon my love's ripening breast"). To be honest, I didn't completely understand the message of the poem until we discussed it in a large group. This is because I found it to be too contradictory. I could not decide whether the speaker admired the poem- such as in line 1 "Bright star, would I were steadfast as thou art-" or if he did not want to be like the star - such as in line 2 "Not in lone splendor hung aloft the night,". It wasn't until we discussed the poem as a class that I accepted the idea that the speaker really meant both of these things. In my initial reading however I did note several words that I thought really contributed to the theme of the poem. The speaker uses several words which have similar meanings: "steadfast (2x), eternal, sleepless, unchangeable, forever(2x), still (2x), and so live ever" I thought all of these words/ phrases had a specific reason for being in the poem. Obviously the speaker wanted to be with his fair love forever- I just couldn't really relate this idea to star until we put it all together in class. After discussing it in a large group though I understood it to mean that the speaker basically wants to love forever or at least love for a little and then "swoon to death". This he related to the star because a star never changes which is what he wants his love to be like.

Pink Dog

A few members of my small group and I had different opinions on the topic of the poem. While half of us thought the poem was referring to a beggar whereas the other half of the group thought it was referring to a prostitute. I think the argument could go either way because there is evidence to support both opinions. I was under the impression it was about a beggar simply because it describes a dog who goes begging. The second stanza i felt really supported this idea. "Oh, never have I seen a dog so bare! Naked and pink, without a single hair. . . Startled, the passersby draw back and stare". To me, this definitely supported the idea that the dog represents a hobo. First of all the author calls the dog naked and bare. I thought this symbolized a homeless person because they lack shelter and warmth just like this dog lacks its fur coat. Another thing that stuck out to me was the fact that the author mentioned that the "passersby draw back and stare". This reminded me of the way people react the poor begging for change on the street. Most people by and stare in disgust. Other people in my group said that the pink dog represented a prostitute because the author mentions the dog having children and wearing mascara. I'm not really sure which is right, but my personal opinion is that the dog symbolizes the poor.

A Dream Deferred

So, out of all the poems in this unit I would have to say this was my favorite one... And that's not just because it was the shortest and easiest to understand (or so I think), but because when I read it I immediately got the impression that it was written for anyone. To me, the message of the poem was simple "Go for a dream you have as soon as you can. If you wait it could be too late and you will miss out on your opportunity". What I thought was really interesting about this poem was the fact that it was written by Langston Hughes during the Harlem Renaissance so he most likely wrote this for the African American community. Either way, I thought it was a really versatile poem in the way that anyone could apply it to their life. Another thing i liked about the poem was Hughes use of similes to get his point across. Instead of saying something like "you will regret not going for a dream" or "it will always bother you to know that you didn't take that chance" Hughes says "[Does it].. fester like a sore- and then run?" I thought that was a really strong image.

Spring

I thought this poem was almost the easiest one to understand. Obviously it takes place during the springtime (question 5). Everyone knows that spring represents new life- that's when all the flowers are blooming and you get the image of bunnies and ducklings and all sorts of happy things. the author conveys this idea with different words such as "beautiful, blooms, richness, lambs, joy, Eden". The poem therefore is about the innocence of spring. It represents unmarked and pure life. The author is comparing Spring to children because they both posses the innocence of youth. One line that really supports this idea is, "Before it cloud, Christ, lord, and sour with sinning" The author is basically saying that yes everything in springtime (as in youth) is beautiful and pure- but that's only at first. Soon it will "cloud" or become tarnished by sin. I can;t really think of a word to describe the overall tone of the poem, however I would say that the overarching theme of this poem is the idea that springtime is just like youth- beautiful and pure.

I Felt a Funeral, in my Brain

Not gonna lie, this one was kinda creepy. When I first read it I immediately picked up on the idea- this girl is dead and she's talking about what it is like inside the coffin. Weird. But after our large group discussion someone pointed out another way to interpret this poem which i think fits. They said it's almost as if the speaker is going crazy- the mourners then would be the people around her trying to help her and bring her back to reality. One line that really struck me was "My Mind was going numb-" I think the author is trying to tell the reader that she really is losing her train of thought. I think the poem says a lot about who the speaker is: a woman who is slowly becoming delusional and she doesn't realize it until it's too late (question 2). The last stanza, I believe, really supports this thought. it says, "And then a Plank in Reason, broke, And I dropped down, and down- And hit a World, at every plunge, And Finished knowing then". This to me seems like the speaker finally realized (plank of reason) "okay, I'm crazy" but this realization is too much for her to handle and she snaps "broke, And I dropped down, and down.." And that's when her state becomes basically irreversible.

After Apple Picking

So I'm not completely sure if I fully understood what this poem meant. I thought the poem was about a person who has died. Their life therefore is being described as apple-picking. The first line, "My long two-pointed ladder's sticking thorough a tree Toward heaven still And there's a barrel that I didn't fill Beside it, and there may be two or three Apples I didn't pick upon some bough". I thought this meant that the speaker was going up to heaven- like walking up the ladder. He stops and thinks about his life and how it is incomplete: "barrel that i didn't fill". And the next part "and there may be two or three Apples..." I took to mean that there were still a few people he hadn't forgiven in his life that he wanted to before he died. More support I found within the poem are the phrases "Long sleep" and "But I am done with apple-picking now." I thought both of these symbolized death. (question 12) I thought the whole poem was an allegory- the speaker is dead and on his way to heaven. He is looking back and his life at all the things he didn't get the chance to make right or finish. The title "After Apple-Picking" I feel could be interpreted as "After Living" because essentially the poem is about how one feels about their life once they are dead.

"Those Winter Sundays"

I thought that the overall tone of this poem was regret. A lot of people disagree and said that it was sort of like suppressed anger that the author had about his father. I don't think this is true because of the first stanza. He says "...then with cracked hands that ached from labor in the weekday weather made banked fires blaze." I thought the fact that the author took the time to say that his fathers hands were cracked and he was in physical pain from his labor showed that the author noticed and wanted the reader to visualize the amount of work the father did. Also, the author ends the first stanza with the sentence "No one ever thanked him." To me it's like he's saying "My dad worked so hard all these years and we never took the time to notice or appreciate it." The last stanza especially solidified my thought because he says "What did i know, what did i know of love's austere and lonely offices?" (I looked up austere just to make sure and it means strict) Therefore I took this poem to be almost a reflection. This man has grown up and finally realized and appreciated his fathers strictness and his hard work that as a child he really couldn't relate to- he was "indifferent" as he says. I liked this poem just because I think a lot of people can apply it to their lives. They don't appreciate what their parents do for them now because they think they are being annoying or overprotective but when they get older they will be thankful that their parents cared so much for them. The central theme of the poem is that as one grows older they learn to appreciate things they didn't notice while they were young.

"The Widows Lament"

The overall tone of this poem seems negative (question8) . Obviously the widow is upset over the loss of her husband. In our small groups a lot of people talked about the flowers symbolizing a funeral. I don't think that is true. When i read this poem it kind of reminded me of my dad. Recently my dad found his best friend dead in his home. Although my dad was very upset over this loss, he distanced himself from the situation. My dad never shows emotion. This reminded me of the poem because the woman lost her husband- someone who was obviously very close to her. It seemed like both my dad and the widow (and anyone else who loses someone close to them) is torn between two thoughts - she wants to run from the pain and the memories (which i thought represented her mind because she says "sorry is my own yard" her yard is her mind because its where she is confined to and she wants to leave because it reminds her of her husband) - but at the same time I think she would feel bad and that is why she says she wants to sink in the marsh and fall in the flowers. She wants to move on and be happy but she doesn't to be happy because she feels bad about losing him and doesn't want to forget him.

I'm Always Right.... Or Am I?

I actually enjoyed reading this article because it brought up a question that a lot of people have "How do you know what is right/wrong when interpreting poetry?" I think a lot of times people just assume that you really can't be wrong about how you interpret a poem. I don't agree with this assumption. If a poem is all about flowers and someone decides its really about nuclear warfare, that is clearly wrong. However, I did like the comparison Perrine made in his paper. He compared poems to inkblots - in the fact that it is really up to the reader to decide what they believe the poem is about. Another thing I found interesting in this article was the way in which the poets seemed to react towards the topic of interpretation. Perrine says, "No poet, however likes to be caught in the predicament of having to explain his own poems. He cannot say, 'What I really meant was. . .' without admitting failure, or without saying something different (and usually much less) than what his poem said." This part really stuck out to me, maybe because it reminded me of the ending of The Sun Also Rises in the way that the author uses ambiguity to create more of an effect. After reading this it seemed to me that Perrine says Poets don't want to be too clear on the meanings of their poems so that readers may interpret them however they really want.
In his paper, Perrine lists the two criteria used for interpretation: that the interpretation is not contradicted by any other details within the poem and that if there are multiple interpretations then the most accurate one is the one that "relies on fewest assumptions not grounded in the poem itself." At first i really had no clue what the second one meant. However, after reading the example listed by Thomas Huxley the idea seemed to register. Any interpretation can make sense but the one that is most accurate is the one that is most likely to happen- which almost seems like common sense. After reading these criteria though i wondered how many people really use them when they are reading a poem? I think most people just use word association to determine the subject of a poem. For example, the poem we received in class "THE NIGHT - MARCH" By Herman Melville can be interpreted using just that. When I read it i assumed, because of all the military words, that it was actually about an army: army, salute, ranks.. etc. But, after listening to other people's interpretations- using the same method as I, other people thought that it was about the stars: night, beaming, bright, gleam, twinkling. I really don't believe it is necessary to use the "criteria" Perrine suggests. I think that, as the authors said, whatever way the reader interprets a poem is okay. As long as what you think makes sense and is possible, it may be a correct interpretation. And who is to say it is wrong? As Perrine stated, a poet in unlikely to admit what they really meant in the poem anyways.

Dynamic Character (out of order- should be after Oxymoron)

pg 181 "Do you think you amount to something Cohn? Do you think you belong here among us?" At this point I think it is safe to say that Mike could be considered a dynamic character. Throughout the storythe reader sees Mike as a kind man (or atleast I did). He never says much. Though there have been hints of his jealousy over Brett before, this is the first time Mike ever lets out his real feelings. He finally snaps. His character goes from that of a quietfriend to a jealous man. Though he later goes off to say that he was drunk i believe that he truly meant everything he said to Cohn. He finally had enough and needed to do something about it.

Irony

FINALLYYY!! pg 251 "Oh Jake," Brett said, "We could have had such a damned good time together." okay so when i read books i always cheat and read the last few sentences or so of the book just to see how everything will turn out in the end. When i read this part i thought okay, so Brett and Jake arent going to work out after all. However, when i read the chapter in its entirety i got a new perspective on this. Rather than thinking Brett was talking about her relationship with Jake, i later came to believe that she was referring to her realtionship with Romero. I think this because she kept dwelling on her late relationship with Romero and how right they would have been for eachother. I think this is the perfect example of irony beecause while Brett is talking about her relationship with Romero, Jake and the reader take it to mean her relationship with him. Which triggers his response "Yes," "Isnt it pretty to think so?" So although i really disliked this book... a whole lot, i thought the ending was pretty good. I like how Hemingway added this bit of irony to end the story on a happier note- at least seeing that Jake was somewhat happy in the end.

Unrequited love

pg 243 "Send a girl off with one man. Introduce her to another to go off with him. Now go and bring her back. And sign the wire with love." So i know Cohn did not truly mean what he said when he accused Jake of being a pimp. But here it almost sounds like that Jake is admitting to being one though it is not his fault at all for the way Brett behaved. I really did not like Bretts character for this reason. She seems like a tease. She goes from one man to the next unwilling to commit to any of them. And yet men are still attracted to her. In the story Jake, Cohn, Romero, and Mike all have deep feelings for her, but one by one she plays them all. It seems like this moment in the book is sort of like Jake's epiphany. He realizes that Brett will never settle down with one man, and yet he loves her anyways. What i think is really interesting about this is that I read Hemingway wrote this story based off of one of his own travels. If that is true, i cant help but to wonder if Brett was based off of a woman he loved whom treated him poorly.

Buying Friendship

pg 237 "If you want people to like you, you have only to spend a little money." This quote stuck out at me for two reasons. First of all because of its obvious shallow nature. I think Hemingway added this to prove that Spain is a much better place than France. The people in spain are more easygoing than that of France. It seems like Hemingway is trying to deliver the message that people in France are somewhat shallow and they base friendships off of money. I think it seems pathetic that Jake admits to over tipping people in order for them to create some sort of false friendship with him. Secondly, this phrase stuck out at me because i dont believe it to be true. Basically what this is saying is that a person can buy friendship. And if that were true then why couldnt Jake or Robert Cohn buy Brett's friendship, the only friendship either of them really values. I dont really understand why Hemingway would include this bit of information into the story other than to show the difference between the people of France from the people of Spain. I dont belive he put any truth behind it.

Paradox

pg 226 "We watched the beginning of the evening of the last night of the fiesta. The absinthe made everything seem better. I drank it without sugar in the dripping glass, and it was pleasantly bitter." & "You wouldnt believe it. It's like a wondergul nightmare." I think this page contains several examples of paradox. The first..obvious enouhgto understand simply refers to their last night of the fiesta. This example sort of reminds me of the statement "last first day of school"(which will be monday! yay!) it seems like it doesnt really make sense, but if you think about it, it does. Next is the phrase pleasantly bitter. Im not really sure how something could be pleasantly bitter, but that is how Jake describes his ,drink. Finally the last paradox i found on this page describes the overall trip as a wonderful nightmare. As they reflect upon their time in Spain it seems fitting Hemingway described it as a wonderful nightmare. A lot of things took place during their stay in Spain- some good and some bad. Although a lot of bad things happened, they had the time of their life in the end.

Balance

pg 219 "Because they were against Belmonte, the public were for Romero." This sentence shows balance in how it is written as well as in its meaning. Initially the spectators came to the bull fight to watch all of the matadors. However, the audience becomes greatly displeased with Belmontes performance. Therefore they took all of their attention and excitement from Belmonte and put it on Romero. It is balanced in the sense that they are exactly the opposite- the public is against Belmonte / the public is in favor of Romero. Hemingway goes on to say "Belmonte was no longer well enough. He no longer had his greatest moments in the bullring." Romero has now taken Belmontes place.

Bull Fighting

pg 201 "That's it. All for fun. Fun, you understand." I really liked this quote because it summarized my exact feelings. I dont really understand the fascination with bullfighting, and i imagine that many other Americans don't either. It seems so stupid to risk your life for such entertainment. I think Hemingway adds this perspective on purpose. To a lot of people bull fighting is stupid and reckless and dangerous. However, all of the people attending this fiesta dont see it that way at all. These people dont care if they are risking their lives because they are living in the moment. They are happy with life as it is and partying like there is no tomorrow. I truly feel like Bull fighting is not worth risking one's life, but the people in the story make it out to be such a valiant and noble profession. I find it funny how the waiter says its all for fun, because i dont see the fun in being chased around by a bull. That's because it's not for fun- its for honor.

Epiphany

pg 198 "I just couldnt stand it about Brett. I've been through hell, Jake." this point in the story is when i belive Cohn finally has an epiphany. He has fought two meninan attempt to defend his love for Brett yet she detests him more than ever. Cohn is reduced to tears because he realizes she will never love him. Cohn finally stops following Brett around and moves on. I think it is kind of sad how throughout the novel he follows her around like a lost puppy and she does not give him the time of day. It seems like Cohn should have had this epiphany much earlier in the story- maybe even before the story begins. After all, since she was "with Cohn" Brett shows interest in Jake and Mike. In addition to the two of them, there is a point in the book where Mike mentions that Brett has slept with plenty of better men. Which makes me wonder why Cohn held on for so long? But then again, Jake is still in love with Brett as well. Anyways, im glad Cohn finally has an epiphany- hopefully he will move on from Brett completely and gain some respect for himself.

Dynamic Character

pg 181 "Do you think you amount to something Cohn? Do you think you belong here among us?" At this point I think it is safe to say that Mike could be considered a dynamic character. Throughout the storythe reader sees Mike as a kind man (or atleast I did). He never says much. Though there have been hints of his jealousy over Brett before, this is the first time Mike ever lets out his real feelings. He finally snaps. His character goes from that of a quietfriend to a jealous man. Though he later goes off to say that he was drunk i believe that he truly meant everything he said to Cohn. He finally had enough and needed to do something about it. I think it was really shocking to see a different side of Mike. Most of the characters in this story i felt were sort of one-dimensional. The author tells us about them directly and the way the characters act give us the same kind of information. I feel like Mike is the first character whose actions (at this point in the story) are dramatically different than that of his actions earlier on in the novel. The only other character whom i feel is the same way is Robert Cohn- which is weird because they both sort of push eachother to the edge to force out that other side of them.

Oxymoron

pg 169 "Romero whatshisname is somebody." I think this statement serves as a sort of oxymoron. I say this because i find it to be very contradictory. Mike, at this point, is speaking very highly of Romero. He says he is somebody- meaning someone of importance. However, what i find to be contradictory is the fact that although Mike supposedly holds him in high respect, he cannot seem to remember his last name. But then it got me thinking, maybe Mike didnt just forget Romero's last name. I think that he was trying to talk him down a little out of jealousy. I say this because Mike mentions the way Brett kept her eyes on Romero during the fight. It's easy to see that Mike is jealous. On the other it is not easy to see whether Mike really has a poor memory for names, or if his jealousy causes him to sort of discredit Romero. I think this oxymoron was used on purpose to draw attention to the fact that yes Romero was a highly respected person, however he was not respected as highly by Mike.

Personification

pg 158 "the banner danced up and down with them as they came down surrounded by the crowd." Hemingway uses personificatiion to describe the banner as dancing while it blows in the wind.I believe he did thisto help the reader visualize the sense of chaos and excitement that was taking place at the time. It was in the midst of the fiesta where everything was crazy.People are dancingup and down the streets, and fireworks are being set off. Hemingway does a good job of helping the reader visualize this "party scene". Within the same page Hemingway goes on tosay that even when it was quiet "You had to shout any remark to make it heard." Its hard to imagine such an atmosphere lasting for seven days and seven nights, but with the authors detail and description, it becomes much easier.

Similie

pg 146 "Dont sit there looking like a bloody funeral" & "Why do you follow Brett around like a poor bloody steer?" These similies are used as insults against Cohn. Mike says these in a rage because Cohn has silently admired Brett during the whole trip. MIke just cannot put up with it anymore and finally snaps. After seeing the poor, quiet, steers at the bull ring Mike compares them to Cohn. He suggests that RObert Cohn is silent and depressing ressembling a funeral. He also says that Cohn is like a steer in the way that he follows Brett around silently. These similies help the reader see Cohn from Mike's point of view. Hemingway uses these similies to make Cohn seem even more helpless and shy.

Cliche

pg 126 "First the chicken; then the egg." This seems like such a cliche. its funny because the men get to talking abbout this ongoing, never ending question because chicken and eggs are both part of their lunch. I just thought it was clever how Hemingway added this into the story. It was sort of a relief to me because i honestly didnt understand half of the stuff that was going on within the story. this cliche seemed to grab my attention. It was even a little comical because it is a debate that people are still discussing almost a century later. Finally, the people in this story talk about something that i could relate to- rather than discussing fishing, drinking, and bull fighting all of which i take not particular interest in. I think this is a cliche because it is a mystery that has been pondered for years and yet no one is ever to answer the question. I like how Hemingway included it to try to gain his readers interest again.

Analogy

"Well," I said. "a plane is sort of like a tricycle. The joystick works the same way." this could be, i guess, described as an analogy. Though i got sort of confused what they were even talking about (which happens in this book no thanks to the old english diction and the fact that the author doesnt bother to mention who is talking half the time so you really have to pay attention to the dialogue). I know, atleast, that the men were discussing Jakes injury. I think that Hemingway chose to talk about it in this way for two reasons. First of all, because of the nature of the injury it is just easier to talk around the subject rahter than to be blunt about it. Secondly because i dont think he really wanted to say what the injury was in the first place. I believe Hemingway left that up for the reader to determine (which like i said before, i wonder if i would have figured it out). Using these different analogies and symbols the men briefly joke about Jakes injury which apparently doesnt bother him much anymore. Ithink that is probably the weirdest part of the story- Jake acts like he doesnt care about his inury yet it is the only thing that stands between him and Brett.

Alcohol

"Is the wine included?" "Oh, yes" "Well, I said. "Its all right." I thought this bit of dialogue fit perfectly well with the story. My thought so far of this story was that Hemingway emphasizedthe importance of alcohol. This bit of dialogue provesjust how important it was. I think it's crazy how much money they are willinmg to spend on drinks. I guess however that it makes sense within the context of the novel because (as we learned in Spanish class) that Europeans see alcohol as a social drink- and not as a party drink (like americans see it). Although there are several moments withing the story in which characters get drunk- or "tight" they dont act riddiculous as Americans tend to do when they abuse alcohol.

Description

pg 97 "We passes some lovely gardens and had a good look back at the town, and then we were out in the country, green and rolling, and the road climning all the time." Chapter 10 i felt had a great deal of description of the scenery. This sentence is just a short example of why i believe this to be true. ALthough Hemingway seems to invlude a great deal of detail (which i hate: i feel like it takes away from what is happening in the story, makes it too specific and therefore hard for me to visualize, and bores me to death) throughout the novel. I think from this chapter on he really emphasizes the beautiful scenery- and definitely overdoes it. I think he does this because he loves the nature and outdoors fo the places where the characters are traveling. I suspect he described them just as he remembered them from his travels. After all this story is said to have been written after actual events in his life. I almost got the impression that Hemingway preferred Spain because of the beautiful descriptions included within this chapter.

Parable

pg 77 "Injustice everywhere.." I guess this story within chapter 8 may not have been included to serve as a parable, but i though it seemed fitting to deem it one. As all the men are talking about their travels as they sip on their drinks, Bill describes one of his latest encounters. While telling the others about his time in Vienna, Bill tells of a black man he met who took part in a prize-fight. After he won people started a riot because he beat a white person. They refused to give him his prize because he beat a white person. This "parable" seems like it was added to the story to give the reader a glimpse of the prejudice of the time. ALthough it has been nearly a centurey since Hemingway wrote his story and it took place in a nother country- this sort of prejudice and injustice is visible in the world still today. In addition, Bill's attitude towards the events of the evening give the reader the impression that he is a good and honest man.

Ironic

pg 70 "Oh, darling." Brett said, "I'm so miserable.." "The drummer shouted: 'You cant two time' " I felt that this page could be characterized as somewhat ironic because Brett arrives with Mike but as she dances with Jake she claims to be miserable. I thought it was ironic that she said she was miserable as she danced with Jake because for one she chose to go off and dance with him, and for two, it is her fault she cannot have a real relationship with him. Just as Jake and Brett are dancing coincidentally the drummer happens to sing the words "You can't two time-" which i felt were fitting to the certain circumstance. That is because it describes what Brett is doing at that exact moment. She cant make up her mind. She is in love with Jake but because of her selfishness and vainity she wont commit to him. Instead Brett finds herself with Mike. Later in the story though Brett turns her attention to a Bull Fighter named Romero... it seems Jake and Mike arent her only victims.

Motivation

pg 35 "I dont mean fun that way. In the way it's an enjoyable feeling." "No" She said. "I think it's hell on earth." "It's good to see eachother." "No. I dont think it is." So, this part to me was the pointin the story in which i believe Jake is most outright about his certain "injury" in the war (which, if i hadnt been told what it was before i read the book, i wonder if i would have ever figured out what it was.. id like to think so at least). Although Jake has a positive attitude about it, saying "it's supposed to be funny" it is rather depressing what happened to him.I say this because even this early in the book it is obvious that Jake and Brett are in love. However, Vrett uses Jakes injury as her sort of motivation or reasoning to keep away from him and to avoid commiting to him or even desiring a relationship with him. Brett cannot accpet Jake for who he is after his accident regardless of the love she has for him. Jake really does surprise me with his willingness to accept this and not seem upset with the way Brett acts towards him. When she is with him she is in love, but once she remembers why it, in her eyes, will never work out, she wants nothing to do with Jake. Even though Brett describes their relationship as hell on earth i think that Jake is the one who should feel that way, not Brett.

Direct Characterization

pg 11 "He cared nothing for boxing, in fact he disliked it, but he learned it painfully and thouroughly to counteract the feeling of inferiority and shyness he had felt on being treated as a Jew at Princeton." When i first read chapter 1 i concluded that the majority of the chapter served as a direct characterization of Robert Cohn. This chapter gave me a look at his past experiences as well as described him as a shy and insecure man who only feels his best in the boxing ring. Though I didnt think much of this description of Cohn as i read the book initially, i finally saw where in came into play- the last few chapters. Towards the end of the novel Cohn gets into a fight with Mike and Jake. Although he is practically mute throughout the whole story, he finally stands up for himself- using what he learning in his boxing training as his only defense. This chapter really describes Cohns personality, however the rest of the novel unfolds how the others feel about him. I really don't understand why everyone had such a negative feeling towards Robert Cohn. I understand that they felt his silence was annoying and he was sort of like a shadow that followed them around, but what i dont get is why he even joined him on their trip anyways?

Title

"The Things They Carried" - This title is almost misleading especially after reading the first few pages of the novel. "The things they carried were largely determined by necessity. Among the necessitites or near-necessities were P-38 can openers, pocket knives, heat tabs, wristwatches, dog tags, mosquito repellent, chewing gum, candy, cigarettes, salt tablets, packets of Kool-Aid, lighters, matches, sewing kits, MIlitary Payment Certificates, C rations, and two or three canteens of water" (pg 2) After reading this sentnce i thought great, this book is going to be all about the different tangible things soldiers carried with them while in war. But its more than that. This book was about things that weren't tangible- and some that were. It was about the wounds, the deaths, the heat, the memories, the fear, the love, the pictures, and stockings, the jokes, the silence, and so much more. It's about the guilt for a friend's death or the sadness of a lost love. Overall, I liked the novel because I liked what it stood for. It wasnt just a war story, it was like a tell-all from a dozen soldiers. It described all the secret things they carried with them during the war.

Linda

The final chapter really stood apart from the whole book in my opinion. The whole time I was reading this book I felt as if I was getting whiplash the way the story went back and forth from one time period to another and from one story to the other. This last chapter was exactly the same- except the author took his audience back even further- to his childhood. I really loved the innocence in the character Linda. I guess the way O'Brien tied Linda in with the rest of the story was through the fact that she was dead. My favorite line in this final chapter is one where Linda describes what it is like to be dead by stating it is like being inside a book. "...You're safe and everything, but the book hasn't been checked out for a long, long time. All you can do is wait. Just hope somebody'll pick it up and start reading" (pg 232). I think O'Brien relates this and the story of Linda to all the soldiers he knew who passed. Although they are gone, the memories of them live on through stories like this one.