TWO roads diverged in a yellow wood,
And sorry I could not travel both
And be one traveler, long I stood
And looked down one as far as I could
To where it bent in the undergrowth; 5
Then took the other, as just as fair,
And having perhaps the better claim
Because it was grassy and wanted wear;
Though as for that, the passing there
Had worn them really about the same, 10
And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I marked the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way
I doubted if I should ever come back. 15
I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference. 20
Robert Frost
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Thank Zeus Antigone is Dead
Unfortunately for all (most of all me) it is my turn to write a blog and allow others to comment on it. My blogs are not nearly as funny as Jimmy Steeby’s or as brilliant as Greg Peirs’s. In fact they are not very entertaining at all, and I think the only reason why Mr. Coon comments on them is to make me feel good about myself.
Anyways, I’m getting kind of sick of Sophocles. Though we only had to read two-thirds of the Theban plays, I feel like I’ve learned all I need to know about him: he really enjoyed screwing the characters of his story. Just look at Oedipus for more proof on my brilliant theory. “Antigone” brings up some great discussions on right versus right. I’ve been surprised though by the stance that most people seem to take towards Creon and Antigone. I fully believe Antigone deserves the fair share of blame for what has happened.
First of all, Thebes has been really lacking in the king department. They lost their King to an act of road rage which was probably brought upon by the King himself. Then when it appears as if the city has found its savior in Oedipus, we find out that he has a great deal of problems, which he can only deal with by gouging out his eyes. It turns out Oedipus’s kids are just as messed up as he is as they can not even properly share the throne. I do not know how the older brother, Polynices, loses the throne as he is supposed to be the rightful heir, but to me that displays a lack of leadership on some level. Then the younger brother, Eteocles, displays some terrible judgment by simply banishing the brother. Did he not think that Polynices would not come back for revenge? He should have finished him off if he wanted to avert trouble. Predictably, Polynices comes back with an army and Eteocles and Polynices manage to kill each other. I just hope they didn’t have duel like they did in Troy where both armies just sit still and watch their leaders have a go at it. By the time Creon comes to power, I do not blame him for being so decisive as the city really needs some strong leadership.
Sure, Creon may not have made the soundest law when he declared that nobody could give Pohynices a proper burial, but let us not forget that Polynices just tried to take over Thebes. If I am a regular citizen of Thebes, I would be pissed with Polynices right now considering he felt it was necessary to kill Thebans just to get back a city he lost. I don’t blame Creon for making the law as once Polynices attacked the city he essentially became a foreigner. Some people will argue that he was still family, but to that I say that its probably better of not having a family member who wants to kill his own siblings. Creon put the feelings of the city ahead of his own personal agenda which is what a ruler needs to do. Others wouild argue that Creon had no authority making this law because it contradicted with the will of the gods. To that, I say I am sick of the Gods imposing their will on helpless humans. The Gods are hardly of better moral authority than most humans considering the shady history that many of them have. Now my opinion on the own matter may be a bit biased because I have always been a strong proponent for the separation of church and state, and I feel that Thebes is no acceptance. One of the things I do not like is that the Gods do not judge cases individually. For example, even though Oedipus killed his father, I do not think he should have been punished for it as he seemed to be acting purely out of self defense. As some may point out, religion played a large part in Greek culture to which I must say that is it really worth praying to a God who seems to treat one’s enemies the same as oneself. I mean if Zeus really wants to allow Polynices to travel to some special place where his soul can relax, why does he have to be covered in dirt for that to happen, but maybe that’s just the anti-authoritarian side of me speaking.
So let’s just say that Antigone just had to bury Polynices to let her self sleep better at night. Well I’m fine with that, but then she should have accepted her punishment. I don’t like the fact that I can only drive 65 MPH on the 51, but it is a law. If I get caught going over the speed limit, I should rightfully be punished. Unfortunately, Antigone has no problem breaking the law but she can’t accept the punishment which has clearly been laid out. I would have had much more respect for her if she had just accepted the penalty as opposed to bringing up the fact that she is essentially his daughter in law. She just lost any respectability she had with me. Also, I wish Ismene did not wuss out at first but then try to accept responsibility once the act had already been committed. The only purpose this served was to annoy Antigone, Creon, and me.
Ultimately, I feel bad for Creon. He turned out to have a weak son who chose Antigone over his family but failed to realize that Antigone had chosen her family as priority. I do not blame Creon for enforcing his laws because otherwise he would have no standing among the citizens of his nations. Then Creon’s wife blamed Creon for both of the deaths even though she failed to consider that the first son was killed by Polynices and that Creon had just taken steps to not dishonor the memory of the dead Thebans. Maybe I just really feel strongly against religion invading our everyday lives or maybe I’m just sick of Sophocles but I feel as if this story gave me a lot to rant about even if not of it makes much sense.
1050
Anyways, I’m getting kind of sick of Sophocles. Though we only had to read two-thirds of the Theban plays, I feel like I’ve learned all I need to know about him: he really enjoyed screwing the characters of his story. Just look at Oedipus for more proof on my brilliant theory. “Antigone” brings up some great discussions on right versus right. I’ve been surprised though by the stance that most people seem to take towards Creon and Antigone. I fully believe Antigone deserves the fair share of blame for what has happened.
First of all, Thebes has been really lacking in the king department. They lost their King to an act of road rage which was probably brought upon by the King himself. Then when it appears as if the city has found its savior in Oedipus, we find out that he has a great deal of problems, which he can only deal with by gouging out his eyes. It turns out Oedipus’s kids are just as messed up as he is as they can not even properly share the throne. I do not know how the older brother, Polynices, loses the throne as he is supposed to be the rightful heir, but to me that displays a lack of leadership on some level. Then the younger brother, Eteocles, displays some terrible judgment by simply banishing the brother. Did he not think that Polynices would not come back for revenge? He should have finished him off if he wanted to avert trouble. Predictably, Polynices comes back with an army and Eteocles and Polynices manage to kill each other. I just hope they didn’t have duel like they did in Troy where both armies just sit still and watch their leaders have a go at it. By the time Creon comes to power, I do not blame him for being so decisive as the city really needs some strong leadership.
Sure, Creon may not have made the soundest law when he declared that nobody could give Pohynices a proper burial, but let us not forget that Polynices just tried to take over Thebes. If I am a regular citizen of Thebes, I would be pissed with Polynices right now considering he felt it was necessary to kill Thebans just to get back a city he lost. I don’t blame Creon for making the law as once Polynices attacked the city he essentially became a foreigner. Some people will argue that he was still family, but to that I say that its probably better of not having a family member who wants to kill his own siblings. Creon put the feelings of the city ahead of his own personal agenda which is what a ruler needs to do. Others wouild argue that Creon had no authority making this law because it contradicted with the will of the gods. To that, I say I am sick of the Gods imposing their will on helpless humans. The Gods are hardly of better moral authority than most humans considering the shady history that many of them have. Now my opinion on the own matter may be a bit biased because I have always been a strong proponent for the separation of church and state, and I feel that Thebes is no acceptance. One of the things I do not like is that the Gods do not judge cases individually. For example, even though Oedipus killed his father, I do not think he should have been punished for it as he seemed to be acting purely out of self defense. As some may point out, religion played a large part in Greek culture to which I must say that is it really worth praying to a God who seems to treat one’s enemies the same as oneself. I mean if Zeus really wants to allow Polynices to travel to some special place where his soul can relax, why does he have to be covered in dirt for that to happen, but maybe that’s just the anti-authoritarian side of me speaking.
So let’s just say that Antigone just had to bury Polynices to let her self sleep better at night. Well I’m fine with that, but then she should have accepted her punishment. I don’t like the fact that I can only drive 65 MPH on the 51, but it is a law. If I get caught going over the speed limit, I should rightfully be punished. Unfortunately, Antigone has no problem breaking the law but she can’t accept the punishment which has clearly been laid out. I would have had much more respect for her if she had just accepted the penalty as opposed to bringing up the fact that she is essentially his daughter in law. She just lost any respectability she had with me. Also, I wish Ismene did not wuss out at first but then try to accept responsibility once the act had already been committed. The only purpose this served was to annoy Antigone, Creon, and me.
Ultimately, I feel bad for Creon. He turned out to have a weak son who chose Antigone over his family but failed to realize that Antigone had chosen her family as priority. I do not blame Creon for enforcing his laws because otherwise he would have no standing among the citizens of his nations. Then Creon’s wife blamed Creon for both of the deaths even though she failed to consider that the first son was killed by Polynices and that Creon had just taken steps to not dishonor the memory of the dead Thebans. Maybe I just really feel strongly against religion invading our everyday lives or maybe I’m just sick of Sophocles but I feel as if this story gave me a lot to rant about even if not of it makes much sense.
1050
Monday, January 21, 2008
Relationships, Money, and Apples
Like Tolstoy’s “The Death of Ivan Illych,” Kafka’s short story “The Metamorphosis,” is short on action but long on thought provoking ideas. The most exciting part of the story happens to take place in the first line of the story. That being said, I guess I am supposed to have reached an age where I should enjoy these types of stories more. While that isn’t to say that I did not enjoy the novel, I still wish something a little exciting could have happened. One thing that is clear is that Kafka put a lot of his feelings about humanity into this book.
The similarities between “The Metamorphosis” and Kafka’s life are definitely noteworthy. Both Gregor and Franz had overbearing fathers, weak mothers, sisters who eventually betrayed their brother, and jobs which they disliked but endured for the sake of their respective families. Kafka suffered from depression and this gave him a bleak outlook on humanity which is expressed throughout the novel. It seems as if no matter what Gregor does for his family, it is not enough. For five years he has been busting his chops in order to pay back some loans taken out by his family even though he does not really like his job. His hard work allows for his father to sit around all day, for his mother to hire a maid, and for his sister to do mostly anything that pleases her. As long as Gregor was making some money his family had no problems with him. The minute he turns into a bug, forcing the others to work they quickly forget about all of his contributions. Kafka’s bleak view on human relationships is quite evident: you are only valued as long as you are of some use. Within a matter of weeks, the family forgets Gregor’s years of hard work just because they are all forced to find work. They become disgruntled because now they have to provide for themselves and Gregor even though he hardly takes up any resources.
Kafka’s story also brings up another important point that humanity revolves around money. In the beginning of the novel, it is clear that Gregor does not enjoy his job, yet he continues to do so in order to pay the bills his family’s lifestyle accumulates. In fact one of Kafka’s main points of disgust was that he felt that writing could not provide enough income to live a comfortable life. After Gregor’s metamorphosis the whole family is forced to take on jobs and their views on each other versus Gregor grows in relation to the amount of money they make compared to him. Nevertheless, the money the rest of Gregor’s family earns still isn’t enough and they are forced to take a subservient position in order to make ends meet. Gregor is forced to sacrifice his own life in order to show his family that there is more to life than just money. Only then does his family take time to step back and realize what is really important in life.
Kafka’s short story raises some interesting points in relation to human bonds and people’s obsession with money. In fact these issues are still apparent today. Money drives the American economy, often putting us into bad situations. Another example is how politicians make promises to millions of people, which they renege the minute they get into power. After writing this blog and expressing some of my idea’s the only major question that still remains is how Gregor’s father pierce a tough exoskeleton with an apple. With a live arm like that, I’m sure the Yankees wouldn’t mind giving him a try.
(608)
The similarities between “The Metamorphosis” and Kafka’s life are definitely noteworthy. Both Gregor and Franz had overbearing fathers, weak mothers, sisters who eventually betrayed their brother, and jobs which they disliked but endured for the sake of their respective families. Kafka suffered from depression and this gave him a bleak outlook on humanity which is expressed throughout the novel. It seems as if no matter what Gregor does for his family, it is not enough. For five years he has been busting his chops in order to pay back some loans taken out by his family even though he does not really like his job. His hard work allows for his father to sit around all day, for his mother to hire a maid, and for his sister to do mostly anything that pleases her. As long as Gregor was making some money his family had no problems with him. The minute he turns into a bug, forcing the others to work they quickly forget about all of his contributions. Kafka’s bleak view on human relationships is quite evident: you are only valued as long as you are of some use. Within a matter of weeks, the family forgets Gregor’s years of hard work just because they are all forced to find work. They become disgruntled because now they have to provide for themselves and Gregor even though he hardly takes up any resources.
Kafka’s story also brings up another important point that humanity revolves around money. In the beginning of the novel, it is clear that Gregor does not enjoy his job, yet he continues to do so in order to pay the bills his family’s lifestyle accumulates. In fact one of Kafka’s main points of disgust was that he felt that writing could not provide enough income to live a comfortable life. After Gregor’s metamorphosis the whole family is forced to take on jobs and their views on each other versus Gregor grows in relation to the amount of money they make compared to him. Nevertheless, the money the rest of Gregor’s family earns still isn’t enough and they are forced to take a subservient position in order to make ends meet. Gregor is forced to sacrifice his own life in order to show his family that there is more to life than just money. Only then does his family take time to step back and realize what is really important in life.
Kafka’s short story raises some interesting points in relation to human bonds and people’s obsession with money. In fact these issues are still apparent today. Money drives the American economy, often putting us into bad situations. Another example is how politicians make promises to millions of people, which they renege the minute they get into power. After writing this blog and expressing some of my idea’s the only major question that still remains is how Gregor’s father pierce a tough exoskeleton with an apple. With a live arm like that, I’m sure the Yankees wouldn’t mind giving him a try.
(608)
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Ilych and the greedy, self-serving Russian culture
I just want to start off by saying that “The Death of Ivan Ilych” was quite a long story. The author could have cut out about ten pages and still have given the same message, as nothing really happens for most of the story except for Ilych lying down and either complaining about his life or coming to the understanding that his life he lived was unfulfilling. That being said, I believe Tolstoy includes some cultural criticism which can not be overlooked. While most of my peers like to continually bash Ilych, I don’t blame him as much as I do the society of which he is apart of.
Ilych displays a trait, which is found in everyone of the bourgeois culture of Russia: self-interest. While that does not mean that people do not need to look out for themselves, Ilych takes it too far. Just like everyone else, his whole life is consumed with trying to get into the upper class society. An example of this is how he tries to decorate his house as do the upper class (a task he truly believes he succeeds in), only to be slammed by the narrator for making a house similar to most other houses. In his effort to become unique he becomes just like everyone else. In the process, he loses sight of the importance of human relationships. As Ilych sits on his deathbed he comes to the realization that he does not have any true friends, and most of his closest “friends” and family are only looking for ways they will gain from his death. For example, each friend thinks of how their life will be better once Ilych is finally dead, and his wife’s main concern is how to milk the most amount of money out of her husband’s death.
The sad part about this whole ordeal is that Ilych would not come to this conclusion without the help of his only true companion. Every time thoughts on his relationships come up, he pushes them aside until he meets Gerasim. Ironically, the only person who understands and empathizes with Ivan is a servant from the lower classes. While the rest of his family and friends try to stay away from him or act in a superficial manner, Gerasim actually listens to and tries to comfort Ivan. Through Gerasim’s feelings and sacrifices, Ilych is able to see what he has been missing his whole life.
Ivan Ilych is not entirely to blame for his problems. The culture in which he grew up in prompted a change in his ideas as can be seen when the narrator claims “all the enthusiasms of childhood and youth passed without leaving much trace on him…” (287). Indeed, Ilych’s fondest memories are from his childhood and he really cannot find much to love in his adult life. This suggests that Russia’s problems at that time went deeper than just one man. Tolstoy despised the attitudes of a new generation of materialistic, self-centered Russians, which was probably the reason why he fled that type of lifestyle to go live out in the country. Tolstoy is left with no choice but to voice his displeasure through the use of his artistic gifts.
(536)
Ilych displays a trait, which is found in everyone of the bourgeois culture of Russia: self-interest. While that does not mean that people do not need to look out for themselves, Ilych takes it too far. Just like everyone else, his whole life is consumed with trying to get into the upper class society. An example of this is how he tries to decorate his house as do the upper class (a task he truly believes he succeeds in), only to be slammed by the narrator for making a house similar to most other houses. In his effort to become unique he becomes just like everyone else. In the process, he loses sight of the importance of human relationships. As Ilych sits on his deathbed he comes to the realization that he does not have any true friends, and most of his closest “friends” and family are only looking for ways they will gain from his death. For example, each friend thinks of how their life will be better once Ilych is finally dead, and his wife’s main concern is how to milk the most amount of money out of her husband’s death.
The sad part about this whole ordeal is that Ilych would not come to this conclusion without the help of his only true companion. Every time thoughts on his relationships come up, he pushes them aside until he meets Gerasim. Ironically, the only person who understands and empathizes with Ivan is a servant from the lower classes. While the rest of his family and friends try to stay away from him or act in a superficial manner, Gerasim actually listens to and tries to comfort Ivan. Through Gerasim’s feelings and sacrifices, Ilych is able to see what he has been missing his whole life.
Ivan Ilych is not entirely to blame for his problems. The culture in which he grew up in prompted a change in his ideas as can be seen when the narrator claims “all the enthusiasms of childhood and youth passed without leaving much trace on him…” (287). Indeed, Ilych’s fondest memories are from his childhood and he really cannot find much to love in his adult life. This suggests that Russia’s problems at that time went deeper than just one man. Tolstoy despised the attitudes of a new generation of materialistic, self-centered Russians, which was probably the reason why he fled that type of lifestyle to go live out in the country. Tolstoy is left with no choice but to voice his displeasure through the use of his artistic gifts.
(536)
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
The End of Love, Time, and Cholera
Finishing books always leaves me a bit sad inside. I guess after investing so much time and energy, I feel like I have become a part of the story and know the characters intimately. With that being said, I had an especially difficult time ending Love in the Time of Cholera. For some reason, Florentino’s pursuits and Fermina’s mood swings left me entranced, and I seem to have a void (which will probably be gone with in a few minutes).
Though magical realism plays a large role in this novel, I felt that there were plenty of realistic aspects throughout the novel. One of the aspects of life Marquez best portrayed was marriage. Dr. Urbino sums it up best when he says, “Always remember that the most important thing in a good marriage is not happiness, but stability” (300). Maybe I’m a cynic, but I do not believe that every person ends up marrying the person he or she truly loves. Often times there are certain advantages to getting married, and the love eventually increases over time. In addition, Marquez also portrays the constant mother in law/wife tensions which are sure to keep any man on his toes, and Dr. Urbino tries his best to appease both sides, often not really helping out either. In addition, Marquez remarked how Fermina’s children took up the majority of her time and that this was something Dr. Urbino eventually had to get used. I see the same thing in my own family, as I know that my sister and I come first to both of my parents. That’s not to say that Dr. Urbino and Fermina did not have any love. Their love was just different from that of a character like Florentino in that it was based on more than just passion.
While I liked Marquez’s representation of marriage, a few aspects of Florentino ended up disappointing me. I think he acted very selfishly when he ended up using too many women in his singular drive for Fermina. Sometimes his actions were ok, but other times lead to disastrous consequences. One example I remember is his rendezvous with Olympia Zuleta. While the whole she gets killed by her husband part isn’t entirely his fault, (how could she not remember she had pain on her body?) the way in which he acts after that is terrible. Instead of feeling remorse, he is only scared that he will get killed, or worse—that Fermina will find out about his love affair. In addition, Florentino seems to show little grief when America dies, failing to consider that he is not the only person who can be madly in love with others. Also, his attempts at winning over Fermina’s heart are cheapened in my eyes when he sends that slanderous article regarding Dr. Urbino and a love affair.
In the end, Love in the Time of Cholera starts just as it began: having elements of love, time, and death. All three are essential parts of the human experience though it’s nice to see the contrast between the two scenes. A love ends in the first section, only to have its place taken by a more passionate love in the last chapter. A couple learns to ward off the ravages of time, something Jeremiah de Saint-Amour was too scared to do. Fermina Daza learns to accept and move on from a death seen in the first chapter. In the end, Marquez’s novel can be seen as encouragement to keep on living life because you never know what can happen. (599)
Excuse my blog for being late, apparently I misunderstood you in class and I thought you had said our blog is due sometime during the week.
Though magical realism plays a large role in this novel, I felt that there were plenty of realistic aspects throughout the novel. One of the aspects of life Marquez best portrayed was marriage. Dr. Urbino sums it up best when he says, “Always remember that the most important thing in a good marriage is not happiness, but stability” (300). Maybe I’m a cynic, but I do not believe that every person ends up marrying the person he or she truly loves. Often times there are certain advantages to getting married, and the love eventually increases over time. In addition, Marquez also portrays the constant mother in law/wife tensions which are sure to keep any man on his toes, and Dr. Urbino tries his best to appease both sides, often not really helping out either. In addition, Marquez remarked how Fermina’s children took up the majority of her time and that this was something Dr. Urbino eventually had to get used. I see the same thing in my own family, as I know that my sister and I come first to both of my parents. That’s not to say that Dr. Urbino and Fermina did not have any love. Their love was just different from that of a character like Florentino in that it was based on more than just passion.
While I liked Marquez’s representation of marriage, a few aspects of Florentino ended up disappointing me. I think he acted very selfishly when he ended up using too many women in his singular drive for Fermina. Sometimes his actions were ok, but other times lead to disastrous consequences. One example I remember is his rendezvous with Olympia Zuleta. While the whole she gets killed by her husband part isn’t entirely his fault, (how could she not remember she had pain on her body?) the way in which he acts after that is terrible. Instead of feeling remorse, he is only scared that he will get killed, or worse—that Fermina will find out about his love affair. In addition, Florentino seems to show little grief when America dies, failing to consider that he is not the only person who can be madly in love with others. Also, his attempts at winning over Fermina’s heart are cheapened in my eyes when he sends that slanderous article regarding Dr. Urbino and a love affair.
In the end, Love in the Time of Cholera starts just as it began: having elements of love, time, and death. All three are essential parts of the human experience though it’s nice to see the contrast between the two scenes. A love ends in the first section, only to have its place taken by a more passionate love in the last chapter. A couple learns to ward off the ravages of time, something Jeremiah de Saint-Amour was too scared to do. Fermina Daza learns to accept and move on from a death seen in the first chapter. In the end, Marquez’s novel can be seen as encouragement to keep on living life because you never know what can happen. (599)
Excuse my blog for being late, apparently I misunderstood you in class and I thought you had said our blog is due sometime during the week.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Love in Love in the Time of Cholera
I find Love in the Time of Cholera to be a much more enjoyable read than The Sound and the Fury, though that should not take anything away from Faulkner’s work. The story line has been captivating enough that I usually have to force myself to not get ahead of the assigned reading. I thought that the discussion in class today was particularly interesting, and after listening to others and taking a little more time to reflect on the work, I have decided to write about my views on love in the story.
Starting in chronological order, Florentino is the first to fall in love just by laying eyes upon Fermina. Some people are skeptical as to whether or not he really loves her based on first glance, but I believe that if a person truly loves someone they will find out relatively quickly. Usually there is just something about a person that makes them attractive to someone else, and I think Florentino found it quickly. He seems really passionate about Fermina as can be seen through his letters written to her and the way he feels about her such as his willingness to die and endure jail time. Another interesting debate the class had is whether or not Florentino is obsessed with Fermina or really in love with her. In regards to pure romantic love, I believe that in order to truly love the other person you must be somewhat obsessed with him or her as is the case with Florentino. However, I do not believe Florentino takes his obsession to the extreme, and I applaud for him for his continued loyalty toward Fermina.
Next, I want to move on to Dr. Urbino because he is the exact opposite of Florentino. Florentino is proactive in his love, whereas Dr. Urbino is content to let his love grow over time. Personally, I do not like Dr. Urbino’s point of view and I am disappointed that he married her due to “some vanity on his part.” I think that he only likes her because she is beautiful, and he did not seem to have the same attraction towards her that Florentino had. I feel like he does not really deserve Fermina, and that she only marries him due to his social standing. Indeed Fermina does not really seem to like anything about him, and only gives into the marriage because he has been so persistent. I am glad to know that by the end of his life he can say he loves Fermina. In the end, the readers find out that he really did love Fermina, it’s just that he went about acquiring his love in a different way that Florentino. Neither way is right, but if my personal opinion, I prefer Florentino’s way, no matter how unrealistic and idealistic it may appear.
The biggest mystery in the story appears to be Fermina’s feelings. I really find it difficult to interpret who she loves. When she was with Florentino, she never really let herself go emotionally in her letters. I believe she began to grow more attracted towards him, but she never felt a strong emotional attachment as can be seen by the ease with which she breaks off the relationship. The same can be said about her relationship with Dr. Urbino. As mentioned above, she does not really give a good reason for marrying him, and it seems odd that she agrees to marry him at the height or her annoyance with him. It feels as if she just accepted his proposal just to get marriage out of the way so that her father and Dr. Urbino would not keep bothering her about it. During the marriage, I never got the sense that Fermina is as devoted to Dr. Urbino as he is to her. For example, she was ready to move out of the house due to a petty argument over soap. I am really interested in finding about more about Fermina and her interactions with Florentino after the death of Dr. Urbino. I feel that these interactions will give us a better understanding as to her true character.
(699)
Starting in chronological order, Florentino is the first to fall in love just by laying eyes upon Fermina. Some people are skeptical as to whether or not he really loves her based on first glance, but I believe that if a person truly loves someone they will find out relatively quickly. Usually there is just something about a person that makes them attractive to someone else, and I think Florentino found it quickly. He seems really passionate about Fermina as can be seen through his letters written to her and the way he feels about her such as his willingness to die and endure jail time. Another interesting debate the class had is whether or not Florentino is obsessed with Fermina or really in love with her. In regards to pure romantic love, I believe that in order to truly love the other person you must be somewhat obsessed with him or her as is the case with Florentino. However, I do not believe Florentino takes his obsession to the extreme, and I applaud for him for his continued loyalty toward Fermina.
Next, I want to move on to Dr. Urbino because he is the exact opposite of Florentino. Florentino is proactive in his love, whereas Dr. Urbino is content to let his love grow over time. Personally, I do not like Dr. Urbino’s point of view and I am disappointed that he married her due to “some vanity on his part.” I think that he only likes her because she is beautiful, and he did not seem to have the same attraction towards her that Florentino had. I feel like he does not really deserve Fermina, and that she only marries him due to his social standing. Indeed Fermina does not really seem to like anything about him, and only gives into the marriage because he has been so persistent. I am glad to know that by the end of his life he can say he loves Fermina. In the end, the readers find out that he really did love Fermina, it’s just that he went about acquiring his love in a different way that Florentino. Neither way is right, but if my personal opinion, I prefer Florentino’s way, no matter how unrealistic and idealistic it may appear.
The biggest mystery in the story appears to be Fermina’s feelings. I really find it difficult to interpret who she loves. When she was with Florentino, she never really let herself go emotionally in her letters. I believe she began to grow more attracted towards him, but she never felt a strong emotional attachment as can be seen by the ease with which she breaks off the relationship. The same can be said about her relationship with Dr. Urbino. As mentioned above, she does not really give a good reason for marrying him, and it seems odd that she agrees to marry him at the height or her annoyance with him. It feels as if she just accepted his proposal just to get marriage out of the way so that her father and Dr. Urbino would not keep bothering her about it. During the marriage, I never got the sense that Fermina is as devoted to Dr. Urbino as he is to her. For example, she was ready to move out of the house due to a petty argument over soap. I am really interested in finding about more about Fermina and her interactions with Florentino after the death of Dr. Urbino. I feel that these interactions will give us a better understanding as to her true character.
(699)
Monday, November 5, 2007
Jason Compson: A Closer Look
Generally, when someone thinks the following thought: “Once a bitch always a bitch…” we can assume the character is not a very likable one. Indeed, Jason Compson does have his fair share of problems. He is sexist, racist, and terribly mean to Benjy—his only sibling left surviving and pretty much everyone around him. Yet despite his flaws, I believe we need to take a minute to look at some of the reasons for his behavior and some of his finer aspects.
From a very young age we can see some of the meanness in Jason’s spirit such as when he destroys the dolls that Caddy and Benjy were playing with. Yet, by examining Jason’s childhood from the limited information we are given, it seems as if he really did not receive much attention from anyone. Quentin and Caddy were a few years older than him and they had already established their own special bond. Benjy received attention from everyone especially Caddy, but that is in large part due to his condition. Father grew progressively worse due to his drinking problem, and his mother was too selfish to think about anyone other than herself. Seeing as how his mother is his favorite character, it is not surprising he follows along her path. Another example of the lack of attention given to Jason is the fact that the family sold Benjy’s pasture of land in order to pay for Quentin’s college but never seemed to do anything significant for Jason. Jason also has to deal with the heartbreak of being promised a job that gets taken away from him due to his sister’s actions. The heartbreak from that moment is enough to make any young person bitter.
Taking everything into account, Jason still provides for the rest of his family. He has grudgingly taken in Quentin (though not without some personal gain himself), and he has been there for mother the most out of anyone in the family. Sure the family may be a bit dysfunctional, but Jason was the only one willing to endure the pain which may be part of what caused him to become hard. Quentin became overly concerned about what others would think of his family without stopping to think of what impact his death would have on the rest of the family. Caddy managed to act out by becoming promiscuous, without managing to think about the effect it would have on her and the rest of the family. Caddy’s situation has become so bad that she cannot even keep Quentin with her. Father eventually drank himself to an early death, forcing Jason to take charge of the house. If it weren’t for him, it is quite possible that his mother and Benjy would not have any place to live. Also, while Jason acts cynically towards mother, it is important to note that he listens to her for the most part, and he must have done something right to earn her love and respect.
Is Quentin a good character? Even I would have a hard time saying yes to that question. Yet it is important to note that he has been burdened with the expectations of providing for the family for a good portion of his career, while not receiving some of the same benefits as his other siblings. In the end, he is there fore his family, which is something that can not be said for any other Compson.
(573)
From a very young age we can see some of the meanness in Jason’s spirit such as when he destroys the dolls that Caddy and Benjy were playing with. Yet, by examining Jason’s childhood from the limited information we are given, it seems as if he really did not receive much attention from anyone. Quentin and Caddy were a few years older than him and they had already established their own special bond. Benjy received attention from everyone especially Caddy, but that is in large part due to his condition. Father grew progressively worse due to his drinking problem, and his mother was too selfish to think about anyone other than herself. Seeing as how his mother is his favorite character, it is not surprising he follows along her path. Another example of the lack of attention given to Jason is the fact that the family sold Benjy’s pasture of land in order to pay for Quentin’s college but never seemed to do anything significant for Jason. Jason also has to deal with the heartbreak of being promised a job that gets taken away from him due to his sister’s actions. The heartbreak from that moment is enough to make any young person bitter.
Taking everything into account, Jason still provides for the rest of his family. He has grudgingly taken in Quentin (though not without some personal gain himself), and he has been there for mother the most out of anyone in the family. Sure the family may be a bit dysfunctional, but Jason was the only one willing to endure the pain which may be part of what caused him to become hard. Quentin became overly concerned about what others would think of his family without stopping to think of what impact his death would have on the rest of the family. Caddy managed to act out by becoming promiscuous, without managing to think about the effect it would have on her and the rest of the family. Caddy’s situation has become so bad that she cannot even keep Quentin with her. Father eventually drank himself to an early death, forcing Jason to take charge of the house. If it weren’t for him, it is quite possible that his mother and Benjy would not have any place to live. Also, while Jason acts cynically towards mother, it is important to note that he listens to her for the most part, and he must have done something right to earn her love and respect.
Is Quentin a good character? Even I would have a hard time saying yes to that question. Yet it is important to note that he has been burdened with the expectations of providing for the family for a good portion of his career, while not receiving some of the same benefits as his other siblings. In the end, he is there fore his family, which is something that can not be said for any other Compson.
(573)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
