Sport Narrative - 12.16.15

     Experiencing a tennis match is something like no other. Listening to people grunt, cheer, and the "ping" sound that the ball and racket make when they have contact with one another. You may have heard boring things about the sport of tennis. But let me tell you, when you are in those stands, or on that court it is something that you will want to experience. The sport of tennis may seem boring at first, but once you are their for a while you start to cheer on a certain competitor or maybe you are just cheering on someone who comes from your country.
     Tennis is a sport that is played all across the world. I will agree with some that the sport is kind of basic as it is simply two people, two rackets, and a net. However, it is not just that. While playing tennis the competitors have to have precision and accuracy with every hit, not only that, they must be quick on their feet and quick with their hands in order to not let their opponent gain a point. Being a former tennis player, I know some about tennis, but only to an extent. The scores go from "love" and go upwards in intervals of 15 until 40 (which is not an interval of 15) and then onto advantage (which is also known as game point). Being at a tennis match is very exciting, not only does the player feel a sense of emotion and competitiveness, but the spectator also does. As I said before, when you are in those stands or on the court you are definitely going to want to root for someone.
      Being in those stands you listen to the pings of the rackets and the grunts that the competitors make with ever swing of their racket. It is kind of exciting to watch. After every out they will hydrate or wipe themselves off with a towel. Watching them do this you will realize that the sport of tennis is in fact not actually boring, but extremely active. In those stands you watch the player lift their racket into the air, throw up the ball and the match begins. After every hit the player moves back into the center of their area (if it is a singles match, doubles would be entirely different) and back into ready position where they prepare for their next hit and devise a strategy to work with.

Sports - 12.11.15

     Personally, I have had a mix of positive and negative experience of sports in the family, however, I do not play sports at all so it does not directly affect my well-being but rather my sibling’s. 

To begin, when my brother, Glen, was a junior in high school he played a variety of sports. Those sports being wrestling and football but then he had an injury in his wrestling sport more than once.          He had torn his ACL and had broken his collar bone. On the negative side this caused my brother to not play sports ever again in his high school career which obviously was saddening to everyone in the family. But then again, to be more positive at least, he then figured out what he wanted to be when he was older, a physical therapist. By working with a physical therapist for more than once a month he had grown attached to the profession and he later decided to do his senior project on physical therapy. After my brother had figured out what he wanted to do when he was older he got his life together. His first year at college which was at East Carolina University he had no distractions such as sports so he had made all A’s and got onto the dean’s list. 

     My other brother, on the other hand has had no awful experiences with sports. He has been playing lacrosse and football for as long as I can remember. Throughout high school he has been the most sporty one in the family, always getting lacrosse equipment for Christmas and his birthday. This year he is a senior and plans on going to college to play lacrosse and major in psychology. This is really positive as he will be receiving money for both his academic and athletic skills. These scholarships, grants and financial aid will help assist Bryan into having the least amount of debt coming out of school as possible. Therefore causing my brother to (hopefully) being successful. So with all of the financial aid that Bryan will receive I will have more money to go towards where I want to go school! 

     In conclusion, my family has had an obvious experience of positive and negative experiences with sports, mainly positive though. All of the positive experiences have impacted my family and I for the better. 

Responsibility - 12.8.15

     In my opinion I do not believe that someone should have the responsibility to help someone in need. People may feel compelled to help someone but I do not believe it is required to help someone. In some cases if you give money to a homeless person they will go out and purchase drugs and whatnot, so in most cases the person should give food or clothing (durable or consumable items) to someone who needs it. Then again, if a teenager or child sees someone being bullied they will feel like they should step in and take action, but most of the time someone won't. So I guess what I am trying to say is that people should feel compelled towards helping someone but they do not necessarily have to help them, although it would be polite and courteous.

A Letter From Birmingham Jail - 12.1.15

     Personally, I do believe that Martin Luther King Jr's claim that groups of people can be more immoral rather than just individuals can be correct in many circumstances. For example, King talks about how there was a negotiating between he and merchants of Birmingham to remove racist and humiliating signs. The merchant group as a whole had said that they would remove the signs, but they never ended up doing it. The merchants stuck with one another and decided to stick to the immoral ideas that they have come to know as correct. "In these negotiating sessions certain promises were made by the merchants, such as the promise to remove the humiliating racial signs from the stores. we realized that we were the victims of a broken promise. The signs remained. " (King 1) So, in conclusion, King's claim that groups are more immoral than individuals in themselves can be seen as correct through the example of the merchants not fulfilling their promise of removing humiliating racist signs that are inside their stores and/or restaurants.

The Lowest Animal - 12.1.15

     I do not believe that Twain was fair in his commentary on human behavior in The Lowest Animal as he did not give humanity a chance to stand up for themselves. Humanity in all of its glory is very well. Personally, I did not even realize that this was satire until writing this blog post which changes everything, basically. The idea that Twain is trying to get across is that humanity is bad but it is definitely not as bad as it is when he writes it.

H.Finn Vitality to American Literature - 11.19.15

     In my opinion, I do believe that The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn is a vital text to development of American literature. Foster gives the example of that without Mark Twain's writing of this novel that America's satire would not be the same without it. It creates a sort of template for other authors to base themselves off of. Foster also talks about how dialect was the "hallmark of low, low 'comedy'" (Foster 104) He then goes on to tell us that by foster using dialect it brings the reader into the world of the narrator and helps us understand issues from a different social/ethnic perspective. In conclusion to this all, I do believe that Huck Finn is a vital text as it creates a template for future American literature and helps other authors develop their works.

H.F. Evaluation & General Likes and Dislikes - 11.17.15

     The interpretation that I hold of the novel The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain can be summed up as a useless book with hidden satire that is not very recognizable unless you are studying and looking into the text. I claim it to be useless because in the end we find out that Miss Watson had died two months earlier and had left Jim as a free man in her will. So all of that fuss to get Jim into the free states was worth nothing, and to get Jim out of the custody of a man named “Nat” who had a fear of witches. However, I do not find this novel useless by the fact that it is satirical. That being it mocks racism, civilization, and romanticism. It mocks racism and partially slavery by including a friendship between Huck and Jim and also by using the word, ’n*****’  as it is used at least 205 times throughout the entire book. Civilization or ‘sivilization’ is mocked as he dreads going back to the Widow’s house as she civilizes him through religion and proper manners; civilization is also mocked in the family feuds between the Grangerfords and Shephardsons as they are wealthy families (seen by the amount of slaves they own) and how in the process of their feuds several people have died from each family.

     What have I liked and disliked about this novel? Personally, I liked the satirical standpoints that Mark Twain took on by making the narration in a first person point of view, especially by a young boy around the age of 12-13. The age level and the first person point of view makes it so that no matter how ignorant Huck gets or how mature he becomes throughout the novel everything is seen through his eyes and nothing is being altered or left out (unless exaggerated as it should be because children/teenagers like to exaggerate). One thing that I disliked a lot was the character of Tom as he was somewhat immature and his life was strictly about adventuring and the fact that if something was easily done, it was done wrong, and that it needed to be made harder. For example, when they were saving Jim Huck suggested that they should just lift up the leg on the bed to release the chain, but Tom though that they should saw off the leg of the bed and then release the chain which is obviously much more complicated. Another thing that I disliked is how slow the novel went on and how towards the middle of the book it jumped around (partially because Twain decided to stop writing and then continue again). 

     In conclusion, I felt that this book was somewhat useless but I enjoyed the satirical parts although they are not immediately recognizable by the reader unless they are searching farther into the text. I had some likes and dislikes about this novel, those being the satirical standpoints and the character Tom Sawyer as well as the pace of the novel as well as the pace of the book and the random jump towards the middle of the book.

Multi-Genre Journal Entry - 11.10.15

April 10 1834

     My own son lef' me tuhday, he wuhs apparently murdered n' foun' in ye river. Per usual I drown mysef' in liquor n' otha spirits. All these people in this town are blamin' me for his murda as if I wuz the one to do it!! They all is thinkin' that eva sinces I becom an alcoholic that I wuz de one do murder me own son. Allz dis alchohol drowns out the screams in ma head from ever sinc' I was little when my own Pap tanned me in my own room whenevahs I did sumthin' wrong. 

April 12 1834

     It’s uh been two days since ma own son left me here, I is a missin’ my son and keep on wonderin’ when he will b back. I has been drownin’ out the sorrows wit even more liquor than evah’ befor. The alchohol has a been helpin’ me through dese tuff times. Ye townspeople is still blamin’ me for de death of ma son. I plans on leavin’ in the mornin’ to escape scrutiny and becom’ an slave owna and actually have someon’ to beat on so I can rid of mai anger issues. I plan on goin’ to the ol’ state of Arkansas where the n****** is plenty and where I can accualy make a decent livin’. 

April 14 1834 

     I sincerely hav’ no clue if it are actually the day that I dun’ put in the top on tis piece of papah. But if it are then boy do I has a story fo’ yous! I left a yesterdah’ mornin’ n’ as I wuz leavin’ I wuz gettin’ attacked by a mob of people!! I dun threw my empty liquah’ bottles at them and den dey were on their ways back. I brought all da alcohol I cud carry onto mai raft and set sail down de river!!! I fell asleep afta’ drinkin’ mebbe three whole bottels of whisky and passed on out, so das why I not even sure if it are the fourteenth, but I suppose I will dun find out when I arrive In Arkansas. 

Huckleberry Finn, Friendship - 11.9.15

     In the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain, I would characterize the relationship between Huck and Jim as a relationship beyond words. Partly for the time period this book takes place which relates to the racial difference between the two, and also for the part that they are two entirely different people. The book takes place in the 1830’s which is essentially known as the antebellum period before the Civil War when slavery, racism, and prejudice were prominent in the Americas. Another also notable characteristic about the two characters are their racial differences and the age difference between the two. Huck is a young white boy around the age of twelve (I’m assuming) while Jim is a middle-aged (also an assumption) African American with a wife and children that are also in slavery. They also have different aspirations. Huck aspires to be an adventurer while Jim just wants to be a free slave and purchase his daughter and wife out of slavery. Despite their differences of where they come from and their aspirations of this journey they still show to be great friends as seen in the quote, “Jim won’t ever forget you, Huck; you is de bes’ fren’ Jim’s ever had; en you is de only fren’ ole Jim’s got now.” (Twain 92) 

     A few things that I find surprising about the relationship between Huck and Jim are the fact that the two actually get along together. This is surprising to me because as I said before they have so many differences between one another — race, age and aspirations. One thing that I find extremely surprising about the Huck and Jim is how they are not in a panic that they are traveling further and further down south on the Mississippi river. I believe that Twain’s purpose in developing this odd friendship is to show that no matter where you come from or who you are that every person is still human and can get along even if they have a large mass of differences.

     In conclusion to this blog about the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, the two characters of Huck and Jim have developed an odd yet remarkable relationship that I personally described as beyond words based on the time period that the novel takes place in. There are many surprising parts about this relationship but the final thing that Mark Twain was most likely trying to get across to his readers is that no matter who you are or where you come from you can overcome your differences and be friends.

America - 11.5.15

In my opinion America has some great aspects and it also has some issues. A few of the great aspects to America can be seen in our very own Bill of Rights. Most importantly, freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is one of the most important aspects to America as it has contributed to creating and maintaining our future and past. Without freedom of speech we wouldn't have journalists & photojournalists. [I'm doing my capstone project on Photojournalism] An issue that I see as prevalent in America today is the issue of equality. Equality in the lines of race, sexuality, and sex. Racism and prejudice (also stereotyping) have become prevalent, however I do not see it on a daily basis as my friends and family are not racist. Inequality can be seen all over the place, it has gotten a lot better within the past couple of years as it has become more of a regular thing for people to open up about themselves and talk about if they are homosexual or transgender. Many people, mainly in the south, are against homosexuality as it is seen as a sin in the bible. Another issue that is seen on a daily basis is on the matter of sex. That being between man and woman as women are treated as if they cannot do all the tasks that a man can do, and they are payed less than a man. However, all of these issues are getting worked on and improved on a day to day basis.

The N-Word - 11.3.15

     The “n-word” used throughout the book The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain contains a negative connotation to it. Personally, I do not prefer the use of this word and I react with some surprise when it is used around me. The n-word does not mean much to me as people today use it to describe someone who is their friend. For example, “Hey thats my nigga!” Or something around that context. When it is used like that I do not react as harshly as I would when it is used with the -er ending as I find that much more offensive, and I am sure many others do too. The word in its entirety has a lot of historical meaning as it has been used for years on years most recognizably in the eighteen-hundreds with abolition and the Civil War.

     I was not surprised encountering the word in my readings because of the time-period the book was set in, that being the 1830’s. I had already been used to reading some literature containing the word through my A.P. United States History class last year. Although, I was extremely surprised on the amount of times the word was used throughout the book. Just by searching how many times the n-word is used throughout the entire book I found that it was used a total of 205 times; and in chapter two alone it was used eight times. 

     If we as a class were to be having a socratic seminar and the word were to be used I would not react with surprise to it, but personally I do not think I would say the word because I feel that it is not in my nature to say it. To put this into simpler words, I would treat the n-word as I would treat the b-word. I would ever just throw it out there, but only use it when needed or required.

     The n-word has a negative connotation: that being negative and derogatory. The word also carries a bit of history with it as used heavily throughout the 1800’s. In conclusion, I do find the word to be offensive unless used in such a way that is not (which can be rare) but seeing it in literature of a time period when it was used with such a negative meaning makes me feel that it is perfectly fine just because that is how people talked then. 

1984 Socratic Seminar - 10.23.15

I would describe the ending of 1984 as a sad ending. I would say that it is a sad ending because Winston's originality and hatred for the Party and for Big Brother have disintegrated and he is now left loving both the Party and Big Brother, as seen in the quote, "He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother." (Orwell 173) It is also sad because the reader had expected originally that there would be a sort of uprising within Oceania, but that ending had not been received and it was the complete opposite of what the reader was expecting and wanting. Furthermore, the ending was sad because his "love" for Julia was gone as he would give her up to death as seen in Room 101 when he was about to be killed by rats he said, "Do it to Julia! Do it to Julia! Not me! Julia!" (Orwell 166) So from all of this, I do believe that the ending was sad.

The Last Words - 10.21.15

     My interpretation by the last statement in George Orwell’s novel 1984 is the very last lines where it says that Winston loves Big Brother, however, I was challenged by a fellow classmate into thinking that his official last words in the book were “We must meet again” (Orwell 170) when he was having a conversation with Julia. So this caused some confusion, but I am going to stick with my interpretation that Winston’s last statement is “He loved Big Brother” (Orwell 173)

     My response to Winston’s last statement relates to just how devastating I thought it was that Winston, Julia and the so called “Brotherhood” could not band together and take down the Party. It also made me feel that there was no hope left for Winston and the world of 1984, and just how crazy it is that the Party could manipulate literally everything, find out the ones against them, and brainwash them into loving the Party once again. If there were to be an alternate ending to this novel then I would have appreciated it so much more. For instance, if he were to have died as a martyr of the Brotherhood’s cause and not given in to giving up his “love” of Julia and his undying hatred of the party.

     Why would Orwell ever end the novel this way though? I think he ended it this way in order to leave the reader thinking about what will continue to happen in the future for Winston and the rest of Oceania. I also think he ends it this way, because as we talked in class about “Orwell versus Huxley” and how Orwell’s version was that what we hate will one day take over us and ruin the world. I believe that he is trying to prove that there is no way you can get behind a government that censors everything and is controlling of every little thing you do, no matter what. 

     In conclusion, I am entirely devastated by Winston’s final “words” in 1984, even if I misinterpreted what the actual last words were. I also believed that Orwell ended this novel just to let the reader think and contemplate about what would happen in the future after the ending of the book. Orwell had left me thinking and wondering if Winston was going to end up being killed by the party, and if he was going to still be “loyal” to Big Brother in the end.

The Role of Conflict & War - 10.13.15

     The role of conflict and war in George Orwell’s novel 1984 goes off of the idea that “War Is Peace.” In chapter seventeen we realize that in fact Oceania is not actually at war with anyone, they are in fact bombing themselves in order make it seem as if they are at war with Eurasia or Eastasia. This tactic is key to maintaining peace among the masses in Oceania. With the “war” going on it helps bring out patriotism and devotion to one’s country. From the massive devotion and sacrificing for their country it contributes to keeping people in control and peaceful. What have we learned about war? We have learned that it helps keep the people at large in check and patriotic to their country.  “The very word ’war’, therefore, has become misleading. It would probably be accurate to say that by becoming continuous war has ceased to exist.” (Orwell 117) This quote is telling us that war does not have the same meaning as it did before. War is defined today as armed conflict between different nations or states. In 1984 it would be defined along the lines of maintaining peace through trickery by pretending to be at war with other nations. 

     With Julia’s assertions on the ongoing war and the government’s activities, I would respond to her with acceptance but I would question whether or not she was brainwashed. She states that she did not realize that the war was a sham when he brings up the subject that only four years earlier that Oceania had been at war with Eastasia, and she also believed that the Party had invented airplanes. I would greet her with acceptance when she says, “It is always one bloody war after another, and one knows the news is all lies anyway.” (Orwell 89) By Julia saying this it makes the reader know that she actually does in fact realize that the Party has been lying to her and that everything she does in her daily life is manipulated by those in charge above her.

     In conclusion, 1984 by George Orwell has a overlying role of war and conflict. We have learned that war is a sham and that everything is manipulated and edited in the media and in the “past”. Also, we have learned that the statement “War Is Peace” is actually factual as the new definition of ‘war’ is maintaining peace through tricking the population by pretending to be at war with other nations and in fact just being at war with oneself. Julia’s assertions about the ongoing war and the government’s activities are somewhat frightening to Winston and to us, the reader, as she does not realize some of the same things that Winston does, such as the war being switched from nation to nation every few years.

Torture in 1984 - 10.12.15

I feel that Julia was pretty accurate in her statement that the Party can torture someone and make them say things, but that does not mean he has to believe it. In my opinion it must be extremely difficult to brainwash someone unless they are gullible, however, governments could use techniques like propaganda to brainwash people. I do think that few governments brainwash their citizens through techniques like propaganda in order to assist the population in going against an idea or group, or maybe to help boost nationalism or prosperity in the country. For example, propaganda in 1984 could be the "Two Minutes Hate" and how everyone is shouting at the image and words of Goldstein. The Two Minutes Hate helps group the citizens of the Party into hating Goldstein even more from his words that are against the party, whether they are true or not. An example of "brainwashing" or propaganda today (or within the past 100 years because that's the only thing I can think of) would be Rosie The Riveter and how that idea helped boost the women workforce before and during World War II. Technically I do not really think that last example is "brainwashing" but it is helping set the mind that women in the workforce can help contribute to the economy and it is also helping women gain more "rights" instead of being a typical stay at home mother.

Invasion of Privacy? 1984 - 10.6.15

     In George Orwell's novel 1984, the reader can see that there is a recurring theme of having your own privacy invaded, even in your own home. “The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard.” (Orwell 2) This quote clearly shows that everyone in the Party is being watched and monitored to see if they will commit thoughtcrime against the Party. In chapter one on page four we find out that Winston owns a diary, and we also learn that he takes very careful measures so that he will not be found with it. He realizes that he should not sit in the range of the telescreen while writing in the diary as he was very possible he would be punished by death if he was caught. So by sitting in the corner of the room by the bookcase he was not able to be seen by the telescreen, only heard. 

     In order to connect this to the modern day invasion of privacy, I would like to connect this to something that Alisyn brought up in class last week. She talked about how Microsoft’s XBOX Kinect could always be listening to you and watching, since it does have a camera and a microphone. In fact, a news article from Daily Mail says that the Kinect device is always listening for a command by the user. Which then means that words, sounds, and actions can be seen as well as heard by Microsoft. Also, that is not all, Apple’s Siri records everything you say but Apple responded saying that all of your words are anonymized. Then again, on Daily Mail they give a reference to the book 1984 saying “Big Brother” and how one of Samsung’s new TV’s are able to pick up on everything said in front of them. I believe that the invasion of privacy is not to the same extent as it is presented in 1984. In 1984 the people are deprived from basic rights, for example, they are deprived of freedom of speech. If they were to speak out they would be killed by the thought police. Today we have freedom of speech as guaranteed in our Bill of Rights, but we are still monitored to protect national security. 

     In conclusion, the invasion of privacy is at a much larger scale in 1984 rather than it is today, even though there are plenty of ways major corporations and the government could look in and listen to our everyday conversations and actions.

Surprising Elements in 1984 - 10.5.15

The most surprising element in 1984 by George Orwell is how they alter the "past" in order to make the Party stand out and seem as if they are always correct. It stands out to me because the whole basis of the Party seems to rely on the idea of perfection, just as they are trying to perfect a language called Newspeak which is basically the shrinking of the English language in order to make it impossible to commit thoughtcrime. I didn't have much of a response other than the fact that I was questioning why they even altered texts and articles in order to make themselves seem perfect.

Orwell's Politics & Language - 9.28.15

Orwell's essay on politics and language is relevant to today's political era as they all use a sense of euphemism to make things sound better than they are. Just like how it sounds better to say pro-choice instead of saying you are for abortion. Something that I thought of relating to the idea of this "euphemism" is when the South Carolinian governor, Mark Sanford, said he was on vacation hiking the Appalachian Trail but he was actually with his mistress in Argentina. So now people use the phrase "hiking the Appalachian Trail" in order to discussions of political scandal. George Orwell's essay is also relevant in the fact that people use "pretentious diction" when talking in order to seem impressive and knowledgable.

Plays versus Novels - 9.25.15

Plays are fundamentally different than novels in the fact that plays are typically written with acts and scenes, and also they can be based off of fact and fiction, while novels are based off of fiction (usually). Plays also can show what a time period was like, they could show the culture and how they speak. Also, plays are short in length, while novels are extensively long and can have more than one book in a series. A storyteller might opt to write a play if his writing has an extreme amount of dialogue and action parts. The writing of a play could help the reader imagine what is going on, plus a play can be manipulated to be played in different time eras, or to present different motifs throughout a story. Just like in the movie Macbeth that was watched in class this week -- I pictured it to be set in a 12th century Scotland and the director of the play set it in 20th century Soviet Union. By the director doing this it made the motif of paranoia caused by guilt ever more present. In conclusion, a play can be easier to write, and they are easier to manipulate to the way you desire.

Relevance of Macbeth in the 21st Century - 9.16.15

     In Shakespeare’s Macbeth there are issues and situations presented that are seen even today in the twenty-first century. Issues and situations such as: corruption in power, war, and psychological issues are all evident throughout the entire play of Macbeth.

To begin, one of the first situations seen revolves around corruption in power, and deception. The witches, who obviously influence Macbeth in rising the ranks from Thane to King, but they deceive him by never saying how to go on doing so. Macbeth’s corruption of power could be seen in several of ways. “That I did kill them.” (2.3.125) In this quote Macbeth is saying that he killed the murderers of King Duncan, however, he never had the permission to kill them. Then again in act three scene one, Macbeth hires three murderers to execute Banquo and his son, Fleance, because Banquo had suspicions of what Macbeth was up to as the witches’ prophecies were fulfilled of him rising in the ranks. In order to connect power corruption to today’s modern society would be with the wealthy and their tax deductions and loopholes. Not everyone happens to know it is going on but we tend to let it slide as when Lady Macbeth fakes a faint when Duncan is found dead to steer the conversation away from why Macbeth killed the servants. 

     The very next example presented in Macbeth is war, and it is seen in the final act when rebel Scottish and English forces fight to overthrow Macbeth’s short reign as King. The English forces who are far more superior than Macbeth’s successfully overthrow Macbeth and his kingship. Personally, when this happened I thought of when Osama Bin Laden died in 2011 and it was a triumph for the American people as of what happened on the terrible day of September 11th. Another connection to modern day war also lies in the Middle East as there is devastatingly a never ending war there between many countries, all of whom have a general dislike for one another. 

     Now, onto some psychological issues throughout the play. They are seen in both Macbeth and Lady Macbeth, and both revolve around the guilt that they have for the deeds they have committed. Macbeth has seen visions twice throughout the book, once in act two, and the second time in act three. The first vision that Macbeth has is of “A dagger of the mind, a false creation.” (2.1.50) In this instance Macbeth is approaching Duncan’s room and preparing to assassinate him and after the deed is done the guilt devours him, so Lady Macbeth has to take over and set up the scene to make it seem as if the servants were the ones who killed Duncan. The second vision that Macbeth has is after he sends three murderers to kill Banquo and his son. The vision is of a bloody ghost, that ghost being Banquo. Only Macbeth is able to see this ghost which goes to show that there is something actually wrong with him. In my opinion I would diagnose him with post traumatic stress disorder or possible psychotic depression. [I did a research paper on depression and other various types of depression last year] Next, we can go on to see an example of psychotic trauma to Lady Macbeth. In act five she is seen sleep walking, and while sleeping walking she washes her hands and talks to herself. Her washing her hands could show of how back when Duncan was killed that she feels some guilt for those actions and how her hands were also bloody from the act of helping killing him. To connect these examples of psychological issues to today’s modern era, it could solely revolve around PTSD and depression. PTSD is often seen in people who come out of war, or have done things that have affected them greatly. An example of something that could affect you greatly is the act of killing a man. So both Macbeth and Lady Macbeth have contributed to the act of killing a man, and in part with this they face the consequences of guilt, or just being partly scarred for life.

     In conclusion, Shakespeare’s Macbeth has show some similarities to today’s modern issues and situations such as corruption in power, war, and psychological issues that could be seen around the globe.

Macbeth and the Psychoanalytic Theory - 9.14.15

     In my opinion the play would be a tiny bit different than it is if Lady Macbeth were absent from the text. I believe this because in act two when Macbeth assassinates Duncan he brings back the bloody dagger with him and Lady Macbeth takes the dagger back to Duncan's room and sets the scene for the blame to be placed on the servants. So if she had never done this then Macduff and the others would have found out that Macbeth was the initial murderer of Duncan and not the servants. Then again, if she was absent from the play would Macbeth have taken such immoral measures to kill Duncan, or would he have gone by and waited for something to happen to him and take the place as King without doing anything to the measure of murder. 

     If Lady Macbeth were to play a man, I believe that this story would be no different as it already is. In saying that, I infer that whoever the man is whether it be a close friend or a family member that the person would still have pushed Macbeth to go to such lengths as assassination in order to make way to the throne. 

Macbeth Act II - 9.13.15

     In Act II of Macbeth the assassination of King Duncan is completed by Macbeth and Lady Macbeth. There have been reactions from the all the characters at large. The first reactions seen by the reader is seen in the character Macbeth. His reaction was of guilt and sorrow as he has never purposefully killed an innocent man, nevertheless a king. “I will go no more. I am afraid to think what I have done. Look on ’t again I dare not.” (2.2.65-67) This quote is giving it all away of how Macbeth feels about his deed, and that how he did not want to return to the Duncan’s room and place the dagger to strategically have the death blamed on the servants. Macduff, who is the Thane of Fife arrives at the castle in the morning to awaken Duncan, but instead he finds him dead and says “O horror, horror, horror!” (2.3.73) showing that he is surprised about the death of the king.  Meanwhile, Macbeth also acts surprised by asking “What is the matter?” (2.3.75) in order to play the role of an innocent bystander. When Malcolm and his brother, Donalbain, learn of their father’s death they decide to flee the country. Malcolm flees to England while Donalbain goes to Ireland which will later cause suspicions on the death of the king, and who did it.
     After Donalbain and Malcolm flee the country to Ireland and England, suspicions float in the air of what really happened in the death of Duncan. “They were suborned. Malcolm and Donalbain, the King’s two sons, Are stol’n away and fled, which puts upon them Suspicion of the deed.” (2.4.35-38) Macduff had said this because in act one Malcolm had just been named the heir to the throne, and it could be seen that Malcolm and Donalbain had bribed the servants to kill their father in order for Malcolm to make his way to the throne faster than expected. All of these responses leave Macbeth and Lady Macbeth to go unpunished for the crime as no one suspects that they were the ones who planned, and committed the assassination of King Duncan. It is suspected that Malcolm and his brother were the ones who planned the death of their father, and bribe his servants in order for them to rise in ranks. When there is no punishment afflicted upon Macbeth, the sovereignty will fall on him.

Macbeth Act I - 9.9.15

Prompt #2

     The three witches, or “weird sisters” in Shakespeare’s Macbeth play an important role throughout the play. Without the witches, the story would not have developed and Macbeth would have never known of the witches’ prophecy. The witches prophecy was about how Macbeth would move through the ranks from “Thane of Glamis!… [to] Thane of Cawdor!… [to] king hereafter!” (1.3.51-53) As far as I know the witches are setting up the rest of the play. Not much later after Macbeth is told of the prophecy he will be named the Thane of Cawdor. With him being named the Thane of Cawdor he must absolutely believe that the prophecy is true, and that he is certain to become King of Scotland. Late in act four King Duncan names his son, Malcolm, the heir to his throne. After Macbeth hears of this he then believes he must assassinate Duncan in order to advance as king. So, it is almost impossible to say that the witches have not played an important role in this play as they develop the plot and help contribute to the roles of every other character in the book. 

     To be perfectly honest, I do believe that the witches portrayed in this book do fit the criteria of my view on stereotypical witches. However, the only faulty description of a witch in Macbeth  is how Banquo describes the witches as having “beards” and I have not once imagined that a witch should have facial hair. So yes, these witches do fit their own stereotypical view as they are filthy, almost supernatural, and at the beginning of scene three the second witch says that she was “Killing swine” (1.3.2) therefore giving information that the witch was most likely making a potion of sorts. The supernatural aspect of the witches goes with the idea that they can “predict the future” and how the “Witches vanish.” (1.3.81-82) Lastly, I have believed that witches are manipulative, and in this play they prove to be also. The three witches are manipulating Macbeth into doing things that are out of his nature, like assassinating King Duncan. However, the witches did not say directly that in order to become king he would need to kill Duncan, they just said that he would go from Thane of Cawdor to king hereafter. 

     In conclusion, it is certain that the three witches play an important role in Macbeth as they contribute to the development of the play and characters. The witches also do fit the stereotypical ideal of witches as they are manipulative, almost supernatural, and filthy. 

A Whole Heap of Ashes - 9.4.15

     In Thomas Foster's writing of A Whole Heap of Ashes he talks about how The Great Gatsby is not actually about Jay Gatsby. Before reading this I believed that all of the book revolved around Gatsby, but Foster's points proved otherwise. Prior to analyzing this book as a class I believed it was about Gatsby's love story and his journey to win back Daisy Buchanan. However, in the background Fitzgerald gives away information about the society of the 1920's. So from this, it is to be acknowledged that Foster must be saying that instead of the book being written about Gatsby it is in fact written about society during the 1920's. 

     So to begin, Thomas Foster mentions that, "the 'good' people are terrible, everyone is a cheat or a fraud, and the one person who fully embraces the  principles of success and advancement is destroyed." (Foster 145) This quote is basically telling us that everyone runs rampant and was careless about their morals and others surrounding them. Nick had moved from the West to East full of expectations, all being ruined by the end of the novel. Everyone in this novel is a "watcher" and everyone gets what they need or expect to see from everyone else. In other words, everyone is interpreting each other. For example, Nick lets the reader interpret that Tom is in a way a violent and unlikable character from descriptions like, “..he was a sturdy, straw haired man of thirty with a rather hard mouth and a supercilious manner.” (Fitzgerald 9) Foster describes nick as “stiff and snobbish” (Foster 142) which helps influence the reader that it is easy for Nick to disapprove of everyone, and with his midwestern values it helps contribute to that idea.

    So all in all, I agree with Thomas Foster on the idea that The Great Gatsby was not totally in fact about Gatsby himself. To give more reason behind why this story does not actually revolved around Jay Gatsby, each character represents something different about the 1920 society. Gatsby represents the “American Dream” and that dream was to go from “rags to riches” meaning from poor to rich. Tom represents money and wealth, Daisy represents women of the “elite” social class, and lastly Jordan represents all the changes of women during that decade. The changes of women during that decade included voting rights, and more independence given to women all over the country. Lastly, Nick represents midwestern values which were obviously much more different than eastern values.

Most Despicable? The Great Gatsby. - 8.28.15

In my opinion I think that Daisy is definitely the most despicable character in the Great Gatsby. A despicable character is someone who deserves hatred, and I believe that Daisy falls right into this category. I felt she was most despicable because she led Gatsby on and his love grew larger for her but she didn't return his love at all. Also, when Daisy was driving the car Gatsby took blame for the death of Myrtle. Therefore, I feel that Daisy caused Gatsby's death and she didn't have any light in her to speak up and admit what really happened. Then again she didn't attend Gatsby's funeral, and Nick couldn't even get in touch with her or Tom. In conclusion, I believe that Daisy was the most despicable character.

Reflection - 8.25.15

    I do somewhat believe it is our responsibility to educate others no matter who they are. However, there should be some exceptions to that responsibility. We should educate others of different "real-life" things that are needed to know like language skills and various maths. Education is something special that we as a people generally take granted for. One downside about educating others is how everyone usually has different beliefs and I dislike when people try to force beliefs on one another. I feel that if we were to educate others that we should keep beliefs to ourselves and not try to force others to follow by how we live.
    Whether it be math, language, history or science, everyone deserves to learn and be educated. In conclusion, I believe that education is a right and we should help out and teach others who are in need of it. Education is a great thing and others deserve to have it as we do.

Letter to Teacher - 8.24.15

Dear Mrs. Akelman,

     My name is Andrew Izzo. I'm excited to begin learning about English Language and Composition more in depth than I have in previous years. I will admit that I am a little bit nervous to take this class as English is not my best subject, however, I am determined to change that. Last year taking AP United States helped me realize that challenging classes are the way to go and are worth the extra time to gain satisfaction.

    My goal for this class is to do well and learn more about the English language while still making great grades and maintaining a social life. I do realize that there will be challenges on the way to the finish line. On the bright side I love to read new books which helps fuel my liking for English. I am just hoping that the novels we will read during the course of this year help encourage me to take AP English senior year as well.

    A few concerns of mine are not doing well in the class but I am sure that with a teacher like you there is no need to worry about that. I feel that while the year goes on we will all be able to get to know one another better and learn from mistakes that are made. I look forward to being comfortably uncomfortable!

Sincerely,

Andrew Izzo