When I first heard of the blog assignments, I was skeptical. Not only had I never heard of blogger.com, I’ve never experienced writing any form of my thoughts in a “blog.” Needless to say, writing my first blog entries was an interesting experience. As I got more comfortable with blog posting, I realized that it wasn’t that terrible—it was actually a very helpful tool in my analysis of literature.
As I look back at my earlier posts, I can definitely see different qualities to my more recent ones. My earlier posts seemed more structured than my later ones. I also focused more on literary aspects of the works than of my opinions of the meanings. I think this was mainly due to the fact that earlier in the quarter, I did not feel quite as comfortable expressing my opinions about literature. Since I knew the entire class was going to read and comment on my analysis, I think my blogs had a much more professional feel. It was intimidating knowing that people I hardly knew were going to read and comment on my personal thoughts of a literary work.
As I got more and more comfortable with the blogs, I put more and more of my own opinions in the blogs than before. I could definitely tell that the tone of my later blog postings was more casual than my other posts. Because of this, I think my best blog post was “The Flea” by John Donne. It sounds a lot more professional than my later posts. I took more time writing that posts than any others because I enjoy poetry a lot more, and I wanted impress the people reading it. Later in the quarter, on the other hand, I didn’t spend as much time on my writing style and spent more time on my opinions about the works. For this reason, I thought my worst blog post was my comments on “Catastrophe.” I really had no opinions about it and didn’t really enjoy the work. Overall, though, I’m satisfied with my blog postings because they helped me sort out my thoughts about the piece of work, which I believe is the point of these assignments.
Writing and reading other’s blog posts really helped me through the process of
understanding the stories and poems. It allowed me to sort out my thoughts about the readings, as well as forced me to take another look to find the deeper meanings. The blog posts also forced me to incorporate literary concepts we learned in class which I otherwise probably wouldn’t have thought about as much. Reading other people’s blog posts helped me a lot as well. I gained multiple perspectives on the reading, which made me look beyond the literal meaning of the work to see their point of views.
Another way I gained new insight on the readings was through the comments people left me. Especially if they asked me a question, it urged me to think a little more about what I was trying to say or what I believed. I tried to do this on other people’s blogs—to make them think a little harder as well. But even though I tried to cause a little more thinking for others, I think more of my comments were based on agreeing with other’s thoughts because the majority of the time, I really did agree. I didn’t know what else to say to further help them understand so I could work on that a little more.
Writing in the blogs helped me understand the readings we read a lot better. They pushed me to think a little deeper about the works and helped me sort out my thoughts. Sharing my ideas with the class and hearing ideas from the class allowed me to gain new ideas on how to analysis different texts.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
The fix essay
This is most definitely not done. Definitely a rough sketch ha....
Many of us try to see our decisions through God’s eyes-- to improve ourselves by making moral choices. But are we really able to step back and know exactly, “what would Jesus do?” In “The Fix,” Percival Everett plays with this idea by writing the story as a modern day biblical story. Everett comments on man’s obsession with improvement, and with this, his loss of sight through God’s eyes. He accomplishes this through the use of characterization and conflict—while creating a current day setting completely different from the Bible that we can relate to.
Through the use of characterization, Everett parallels his characters with those from the Bible. The reader definitely can see a resemblance between Sherman Olney and Jesus. Like Jesus, he can fix things, whether it be a refrigerator, a relationship, or even a life. Olney never acts in selfish ways, and when it was needed, Olney sacrifices himself for the good of others. He says, “You have to be careful what you fix…if you irrigate a desert, you might empty a sea” (143). Sometimes fixing things isn’t the best option—it might ruin something else. Through our imperfections, we may benefit overall. When Jesus was crucified, he suffered for our sins. He realized that people aren’t perfect, but He loved us enough anyway to die for us. Sherman and Jesus both have the same philosophy that perfection sometimes isn’t the best solution. In the story, everyone wants a piece of Sherman—he is “the empty sea” (143). Everyone just keeps taking a part of him each time he fixes something until he is completely empty. When Jesus helps us through difficult times, we are taking a part of him. We look to someone else to help fix us or our problems, just like the crowd of people did to Sherman as he was jumping of the bridge. I think this represents many of followers of Christ when they’re all screaming “fix us” at the end of the story. Everyone has something they need fixing, especially a quick fix, so these crowds of people depended on Sherman for their obsession with improving their imperfections. Like Sherman, people depend on Jesus for a quick fix. When they have a problem or need help, they pray to God to fix things up. Sometimes, these problems can be worked out on their own, without the help of God, so it leads me to believe that some people are just looking for a quick fix for their shortcomings in life.
The conflicts in this story have similar qualities to some conflicts in the Bible. When Douglas told his wife that he invited Sherman to stay at the store, she didn’t trust Sherman at all. She worried that Sherman would be “halfway to Philadelphia with twelve pounds of Genoa salami” (135). Until Sherman proved himself to her by fixing her foot massager, she expected him to steal her savings and take advantage of Douglas’s kindness. This is very similar to Jesus’ conflicts with people. When Jesus was resurrected from the dead, one of his apostles, Thomas, did not believe it until he saw Jesus’ scars and placed his fingers in Jesus’ side. Also, many people didn’t actually believe Sherman could fix everything until they heard that Sherman saved a woman’s life. Everett seems to point out people’s overall distrust in others with this conflict-- people can’t see through God’s eyes because they look at the flaws in other people. An internal conflict with which Sherman deals throughout the story is that he wants to help fix people, but he knows sometimes he shouldn’t. Sherman tells Douglas that “you have to be careful about what you fix” (143)—that sometimes fixing things isn’t the right thing to do. Certainly, Jesus would have loved to help everyone, but it wasn’t the right to do. When we pray to God, it’s in God’s hands because sometimes the perfect option for you isn’t the perfect option for every. God will give people everything they need, but he won’t give them everything they want, just like Sherman. Ultimately, because of people’s obsession with perfection or improvement towards perfection, Sherman decides it’s better for everyone if the temptation of him is gone forever.
“The Fix” by Percival Everett parallels some of the philosophical teachings in the Bible. Everett accomplishes this by creating similar characters in the story from the Bible with similar conflicts.
Many of us try to see our decisions through God’s eyes-- to improve ourselves by making moral choices. But are we really able to step back and know exactly, “what would Jesus do?” In “The Fix,” Percival Everett plays with this idea by writing the story as a modern day biblical story. Everett comments on man’s obsession with improvement, and with this, his loss of sight through God’s eyes. He accomplishes this through the use of characterization and conflict—while creating a current day setting completely different from the Bible that we can relate to.
Through the use of characterization, Everett parallels his characters with those from the Bible. The reader definitely can see a resemblance between Sherman Olney and Jesus. Like Jesus, he can fix things, whether it be a refrigerator, a relationship, or even a life. Olney never acts in selfish ways, and when it was needed, Olney sacrifices himself for the good of others. He says, “You have to be careful what you fix…if you irrigate a desert, you might empty a sea” (143). Sometimes fixing things isn’t the best option—it might ruin something else. Through our imperfections, we may benefit overall. When Jesus was crucified, he suffered for our sins. He realized that people aren’t perfect, but He loved us enough anyway to die for us. Sherman and Jesus both have the same philosophy that perfection sometimes isn’t the best solution. In the story, everyone wants a piece of Sherman—he is “the empty sea” (143). Everyone just keeps taking a part of him each time he fixes something until he is completely empty. When Jesus helps us through difficult times, we are taking a part of him. We look to someone else to help fix us or our problems, just like the crowd of people did to Sherman as he was jumping of the bridge. I think this represents many of followers of Christ when they’re all screaming “fix us” at the end of the story. Everyone has something they need fixing, especially a quick fix, so these crowds of people depended on Sherman for their obsession with improving their imperfections. Like Sherman, people depend on Jesus for a quick fix. When they have a problem or need help, they pray to God to fix things up. Sometimes, these problems can be worked out on their own, without the help of God, so it leads me to believe that some people are just looking for a quick fix for their shortcomings in life.
The conflicts in this story have similar qualities to some conflicts in the Bible. When Douglas told his wife that he invited Sherman to stay at the store, she didn’t trust Sherman at all. She worried that Sherman would be “halfway to Philadelphia with twelve pounds of Genoa salami” (135). Until Sherman proved himself to her by fixing her foot massager, she expected him to steal her savings and take advantage of Douglas’s kindness. This is very similar to Jesus’ conflicts with people. When Jesus was resurrected from the dead, one of his apostles, Thomas, did not believe it until he saw Jesus’ scars and placed his fingers in Jesus’ side. Also, many people didn’t actually believe Sherman could fix everything until they heard that Sherman saved a woman’s life. Everett seems to point out people’s overall distrust in others with this conflict-- people can’t see through God’s eyes because they look at the flaws in other people. An internal conflict with which Sherman deals throughout the story is that he wants to help fix people, but he knows sometimes he shouldn’t. Sherman tells Douglas that “you have to be careful about what you fix” (143)—that sometimes fixing things isn’t the right thing to do. Certainly, Jesus would have loved to help everyone, but it wasn’t the right to do. When we pray to God, it’s in God’s hands because sometimes the perfect option for you isn’t the perfect option for every. God will give people everything they need, but he won’t give them everything they want, just like Sherman. Ultimately, because of people’s obsession with perfection or improvement towards perfection, Sherman decides it’s better for everyone if the temptation of him is gone forever.
“The Fix” by Percival Everett parallels some of the philosophical teachings in the Bible. Everett accomplishes this by creating similar characters in the story from the Bible with similar conflicts.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Essay Assignment
For the essay assignment, I am t thinking of using the story "The Fix" by Percival Everett. In this story, Sherman definitely has some qualities that are relatable to Jesus. He can fix things, and everybody wants a piece of him. Just like Jesus, people around him are constantly asking him to fix them. Everett comments on the way some people are... they are constantly trying to be perfect and are looking for a quick fix for everything.
I think "The Fix" is an interesting story because he put Jesus in our shoes today. Everybody always asks "what would Jesus do?" and I guess Everett answers it in his story. Fixing things is a tricky business and he ends up sacrificing himself for the good of others. I think this will be an interesting essay topic—to touch on the philosophical aspects of the story. By comparing Sherman as Jesus, I think Everett comments on the relationship some people have with God, and by looking at the quick fix aspect, I think Everett is commenting on people and their obsession with perfection.
I think "The Fix" is an interesting story because he put Jesus in our shoes today. Everybody always asks "what would Jesus do?" and I guess Everett answers it in his story. Fixing things is a tricky business and he ends up sacrificing himself for the good of others. I think this will be an interesting essay topic—to touch on the philosophical aspects of the story. By comparing Sherman as Jesus, I think Everett comments on the relationship some people have with God, and by looking at the quick fix aspect, I think Everett is commenting on people and their obsession with perfection.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Dead Man Laughing
"Dead Man Laughing" by Zadie Smith is about comedy, mainly comedy that focuses on things that people normally don't find funny.
The author jokes about her father's death a lot, which, I think, shows that is how she deals with tough situations. To me, this seemed kind of odd. If I put my father's ashes in a tupperware container, I would not be laughing about it. Especially if I ate my own father's ashes-- I thought that was pretty strange. I don't really understand the humor the author seems to appreciate,which is probably why I didn't really find this essay that funny or interesting.
Throughout the essay, the author made many references to different comedic acts, but since I know nothing about comedy, I had no idea what she was referring to. Because of this, it made the essay a hard read for me.
I thought the author's take on death was interesting. That death is just a place maker, a symbol. In death, one person goes into a room, and none come out. She gives humor to death, which then gives death very little meaning. Her humor of her father's death seems to be a way to escape the pain. Because I know she cares, I know she's not really laughing at her dad in a tupperware container, but at the absurdity of it.
The author jokes about her father's death a lot, which, I think, shows that is how she deals with tough situations. To me, this seemed kind of odd. If I put my father's ashes in a tupperware container, I would not be laughing about it. Especially if I ate my own father's ashes-- I thought that was pretty strange. I don't really understand the humor the author seems to appreciate,which is probably why I didn't really find this essay that funny or interesting.
Throughout the essay, the author made many references to different comedic acts, but since I know nothing about comedy, I had no idea what she was referring to. Because of this, it made the essay a hard read for me.
I thought the author's take on death was interesting. That death is just a place maker, a symbol. In death, one person goes into a room, and none come out. She gives humor to death, which then gives death very little meaning. Her humor of her father's death seems to be a way to escape the pain. Because I know she cares, I know she's not really laughing at her dad in a tupperware container, but at the absurdity of it.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Boys
The structure of this story is very unusual. Every sentence includes "boys enter the house," except the last sentence of the story which is "boys, no longer boys, exit the house." Because of this, I didn't really see it as an actual story, but more flowing like poetry or something. I really enjoyed reading this unusual structure...it seemed to read really well.
Obviously, the repetition of the boys entering the house is important. I think it is supposed to represent all boys, as a whole, who are growing up. It is the most general action...boys entering the house. Throughout the whole story, these boys are doing normal boy things...fighting with each other, tormenting their sister, playing sports, showing their interest in girls. When the sister has cancer, the boys enter the house less and less, until, finally, "boys, no longer boys exit." As they enter the house less and less, they are growing up more and more. After the death of their father, the boys have grown up. I guess it's their turn to be the men, to be grown up and responsible, and no longer the boys who just enter the house.
Obviously, the repetition of the boys entering the house is important. I think it is supposed to represent all boys, as a whole, who are growing up. It is the most general action...boys entering the house. Throughout the whole story, these boys are doing normal boy things...fighting with each other, tormenting their sister, playing sports, showing their interest in girls. When the sister has cancer, the boys enter the house less and less, until, finally, "boys, no longer boys exit." As they enter the house less and less, they are growing up more and more. After the death of their father, the boys have grown up. I guess it's their turn to be the men, to be grown up and responsible, and no longer the boys who just enter the house.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Fiesta
I really liked the story "Fiesta." Yunior, the protaganist in the story, was very loyal to his family...despite his father's terrible behavior. I think that this was one of the main themes to the story. The fact that he was still faithful to his father's behavior told a lot of Yunior's character and values.
Another thing I found interesting in the story was when Yunior threw up. His mom said the car made him sick, but I think there was more to it. He isn't quite used to the United States and new things can make people sick so I think this was a way of showing his assimilation in the United States. The way he spoke also showed his assimilation into the United States because he mixes between Spanish and English.
Another thing I found interesting in the story was when Yunior threw up. His mom said the car made him sick, but I think there was more to it. He isn't quite used to the United States and new things can make people sick so I think this was a way of showing his assimilation in the United States. The way he spoke also showed his assimilation into the United States because he mixes between Spanish and English.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Catastrophe
I didn't catch very many differences in the video versus the play. I caught a few differences in the dialouge, but the dialouge mainly followed the play's. There was one instance in the movie where the assistant pointed the finger of the man, but I don't remember that being in the play. Also, in the movie, the director stood at the back row and in the play, he stood in the front. Those were basically the only differences I could see though. I thought the video did a good job of capturing the idea of the play, with the director being snappy and the assistant being very composed. The tone of the video, in my opinion, was the same as the play.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)