Twelfth Night

This is by far one of my favorite stories that we read during the semester. One of the parts that describes what is going on in this section best for me starts with line 33 of Act 2 Scene 2:

How will this fadge? My master loves her dearly,
And I, Poor monster, fond as much on him,
And she, mistaken, seems to dote on me.
What will become of this? As I am man,
My state is desperate for my master’s love.

I think this encompasses the chaos that ensues in the story and the twisted love triangle that is in place. I love how intricately woven everything is in the story. The thought that was put into everything from the personalities to confusing names (Olivia, Viola, Malvolio) just feeds into this being such a funny and chaotic story. One of my favorite things was when Maria tricked Malvolio into acting like an idiot to prove his love to Olivia. I felt like she was showing her genius because the “secrecy” of the letter; Malvolio didn’t explain his randomness to anyone to make sure it was kept secret. I always associate Shakespeare with Romeo and Juliet, so I really liked reading this because I don’t think I would have seen Shakespeare in the same light. I thought the play was so funny, and it was witty. It wasn’t just stupidity that makes you laugh; it was well thought out and orchestrated. I think this was also an enjoyable read because it was one of the first times where we were just reading for enjoyment (atleast for me) as opposed to constantly looking for themes, undertones and motifs. It just basically celebrated chaos at its best and poked fun at it.

Utopia: My favorite place in the world

Here is a lovely map of Utopia. The most perfect place in the world. Right. As you all know I thought the story was great, but I think the idea of this place was pretty ridiculous. I always wondered where George Orwell came up with his idea for Animal Farm, and I definitely think that Utopia was a muse. I think that Utopia portrays the epitome of a socialist society where everyone is equal and everything is perfect. Not so much. I mean More stresses this idea of everyone getting treated the same and having the same responsibilities, etcetera. One of the blatant examples of this idea being corrupt in the story can be seen in the way that dinner takes place. The minors have to wait on the elders, and the tranibors (meaning gluttonous) get more food than others. Not only do the minors wait on everyone else, they only get to eat if someone gives them scraps. I mean I guess that’s fair… I suppose the idea sounds ideal in some cases, but for the most part I don’t really see it working. Not everyone has the same personality time, and this type of society calls for everyone to be on the same page all the time. Like I said before I love competition and a society that really doesn’t have any (other than gardening) would fail, because I know I am not the only person that happens to have a competitive personality. Doing everything to be “equal” wouldn’t work, and corruption—which is even implied in his version—would be inevitable. The constant intellectual stimulation would be tiresome, too. It is so relaxing sometimes to just go lay on the beach and think about nothing.

Overall I feel like Utopia is meant to sound ideal, but it really isn’t. The live like sheep, they are herded here and there and all wear the same thing. Even in More’s Utopia the idea of complete equality wouldn’t work. There are constant undertones of how some people receive preferential treatment. Not only that, but there are constantly contradictions. My favorite is that Utopians don’t slaughter animals because it destroys compassion, so they make slaves do it. But how compassionate is it to force people to be slaves? After reading the story again, I almost feel like More, the real Thomas More, doesn’t believe it would work either, but as I said, he is contradictory. Maybe this feeds back into the idea from Book 1 that he really doesn’t know if he feels one way or the other, which then becomes evident in the creation of Utopia.
Let’s be honest, who wants to put in for “vacation time” with the government, then work while you are on vacation in a place that looks exactly like home? Think about it…

Utopia Book 1

I know that Thomas More in the book may not be the same as Thomas More the character. However, I feel like Thomas More is channeling his conflicting emotions/ideas through two different characters. I feel like Hythloday is serving to portray the more exaggerated opinions of Thomas More, and More the character has a more conservative point of view. I think he is trying to send the message that he has mixed feelings about how government and his country should run. Whenever Hythloday (meaning nonsense talker) comes up with a crazy idea, such as enslaving thieves, More goes on to disagree with his ideas and says they won’t work. However, he will still assure Hythloday that he would do well to “engage in public affairs”. To me its saying that More is ambiguous about his thoughts, and is almost trying to write out his thoughts on paper to compare. The fictitious More goes on to support Hythloday’s ideas and decides that with patience they can be implemented and help improve the current system. Hythloday disagrees and says that his radical ideas will cause the government to tighten their ways more than in the past. I feel that this further supports the idea that More is trying to rationalize his mixed thoughts.

Hythloday then states his opinion that:
"As long as there is property, and while money is the standard of all things, I cannot think that a nation can be governed either justly or happily; not justly, because the best things will fall to the share of the worst men; nor happily, because all things will be divided among a few (and even these are not in all respects happy), the rest being left to the absolutely miserable."

I feel like this is one of the biggest moments where the ideas to come in Book 2 are foreshadowed. And we all know how I feel about Book 2…but why not elaborate anyway J

Wife of Bath's Tale. Yeah. I'm playing "catch up".

The Wife of Bath was a really fun and interesting story for me. The prologue portrays her as this woman who knows the ins and outs of men and relationships. I felt like the Tale sent a different message. In the beginning I think you see where the story is heading as far as the lesson that has to be learned, etcetera. I do think it is funny when she prefaces his task by talking about Midas and the asses ears, then tells everyone they have to read Ovid to figure out how it ends. I think this is Chaucer taking a jab at her social class and her actual intelligence, basically he is saying she doesn’t really know how it ends. I really want to focus on her feelings about men and how she expresses them in the story.

Line 1044-1046: “Wommen desiren to have sovereyntee
As wel over hir housbond as hir love,
And for to been in maistrie him above.”

So basically she is saying that women want to be in control of their husbands and have the freedom to make their own decisions in the relationship. Obviously here I feel like she is expressing her desire to be considered superior to men. Later when he is judging the old woman based on her looks and social status—saying she is nowhere near nobe, she responds with:

“For, God it woot, men may wel often finde
A lords sone do shame and vileinye;

So she is saying that men of nobility have definitely done wrong (HINT HINT: You raped someone and you are supposedly “noble”). Basically that nobility doesn’t come from your parents and your possessions, it comes from God and grace. To support her idea of “wearing the pants” in the relationship, she is pointing out the faults of men. Up until this point I have considered her to have a feminist point of view. Then he wins in the end. I think it is really funny (as in ironic) that he learns his lesson by giving her the final decision of her physical appearance and giving her sovereignty in the relationship. By doing this she gets what she wants—what every woman wants—and is extremely pleased. However, did he really learn the lesson? I mean I really feel like in the end he is definitely still superior because all he had to do was give her what she wanted and he is cleared of the fact that he flat out raped someone. So let’s break this down.

Man rapes women
Women puts man to the test
Man passes the test only because of a woman
Man “learns lesson” and ends up with a beautiful wife.
Man really doesn’t learn lesson, woman really isn’t in control

…there’s my humble opinion on that.
With that being said I feel like it shows that the Wife of Bath pretends she likes to be in control, but really she still likes for the man to have superiority in the relationship.

The Lowdown on Oroonoko

I found this story to be very different almost bordlerine Romeo and Juliet with the plot if you actually sit and think about it. The story start of with Oroonoko, who is the grandson of an African king, who falls in love with Imonioda, the daughter of that king's top genreal.
But guess what the king, Oroonoko grandaddy falls in love with the same girl! The king gives the sacared veil, basically making her his wife. She really didnt want to be there with the king and so she decided to choose Oroonoko. Bad Choice! because the king sold her as a slave and Oroonoko was tricked and captured by an English slave captain. Both Imroinda and Oroonoko are carried to Surinam. Surinam is a sugarcane colonoy that the English established in the West Indies. Well anyways the two lovers are reunited therem under new names Caesar and Clemene. But the trouble doesnt stop there, Imonida is so beautiful that she caught the attention of the governor Byam.
Well in the mean time, Oroonoko organizes a slave revolt. That didnt work out to his advanatage because even though Byam promised ammnesty when he was captured he was beat. So of course you know that Oroonoko wanted his revenge because his pride was hurt, he decided to kill Byam. So he decides to kill Byam and in the process he decided to kill Imoroinda as well because he doesnt want her to suffer any injustices, that might happen from his actions. Now, here is where it starts to sound Romeo and Juliet, she agrees that she will go thorugh with this plan. As you are well aware in Romeo and Juliet they did something similiar but it dealt with a misunderstanding and poison. Ok, so Oroonoko really doesnt really want to kill her, because of the love that he has for her, but when he stabs her to death she dies with a smile on her face. He is captured mourining over her body, they kept him from killing himself because they wanted him to get excuted publically. But the crazy thing about the ending is that that while being dismembered, Oroonoko calmly smokes a pipe and he doesnt even make a noise. That takes a lot of courage to stay that calm.
I found that novel is written in a mixture of first and third person. It has been said that narrotor is Aphra Benn herself becuase of how pesrsonailzed the experiences are, but who really knows! In the story the narrotor presents herself as a lady who came to Surinam, with her father, which nobody knows his name, and that they basically came to because her father was supposed to be the new deputy governor of the colony. But in the process of the trip traveling to the new colony the father dies and the narrotor and the family still settles there in Surinam.
There is so much going on with this story. The theme is centered around lust, sex, and slavery.

Delight in Disorder

"A sweet disorder in this dress" what would the disorder be? It has to be a physical characteristic being the dress causes it. Maybe he is saying that attractiveness is a disorder? The way he words the poem, it seems very sexual to me, like the lady wearing the dress is very atractive. The clothes have a "wantonness" Which seems to be loose fitted and excessively luxurious. I think the shoestring line is the most interesting line "a careless shoestring, in whose tie i see a wild civility" It's like he's speaking bad of the shoes not being tied, but then goes to say but that's a daring statement/action i like it. That's a flaw the shoe not being tied correctly, but then after that he says that things like this "bewitch" him more than "when art is too precise", Maybe he's saying flaws are a nice thing everyonce in a while?

Review!

I am going to bed, Must I say this is a good review though! I'm reading all these stories and making sure i know it for the exam, will finish all of them first thing in the morning!

To Penshurst

Is Penshurst really beautiful? "Thou art not," "built to envious show" is saying that it was not built to show off. It also says that "nor boast a row of polished pillars, or a roof of gold". So is it beautiful? He is saying that it doesn't have polished pillars or a gold roof, right? I am confused by the lines 5 and 6. It says that it stands on an ancient building "and, these grudged at, art reverenced the while." grudged is to have an ill resentment towards something and reverenced is to have deep respect for something. How can their be both?

I do think that line 7 is saying that if you go for the natural characteristics of the place that it would be "fair" of you to go. Many people go there to walk and play sports. The place is described very beautifully, although i still get the feeling that the author doesn't like the place. It seems to me that he has a "grudge" for it, it's a little too perfect. The fish that jump in your hands and all the people are welcolm? Too perfect for me! He shows some sarcasm around line 82 when he says "what (great i will not say, but) sudden cheer" showing some negative feelings. Then he goes to say what he finds a wonder at the palace, the fact that the king's children are his (obviously it's common for them not to be), his lady is beautiful and that he raised his children the right way. They will be well rounded children and have good moral behavior. I like the last few lines

"when they see Those proud, ambitious heaps, and nothing else, may say, their lords have built, but thy lords dwells", I think this is saying that if you pass down your knowledge and it will show in your children, even later one, the lord will still dwell because he is reflected in the way the children are.

Friendship's Mystery

<--- Katherine Philips as "Orinda"

This is a poem written to Katherine's friend Anne Owen. The first thing I wonder is who is she speaking of when she says "To the dull angry world let's prove there's a religion in our love."? Is she speaking of the women and men; or is she speaking of her and Anne? Maybe she is speaking of a friendship love between her and her friend? She seems to be telling of their mutual feelings and situations. That they, as women, were "designed t' agree". Their "election is as free as angels"? She must be speaking of electing friendships, since women couldn't elect anyone or even make decisions then. Even as they "diffuse and both engross" they still remain together at heart. I think she says that they are alone all the time and they date their "captivity", but that it's not confinement or restricted but that they are there for looks, they are there for an "ormament" on their men's arms. That if they feed the friendship it will never die. Their hearts are both the same, they both have been hurt and share their pain, but they give love to each other to keep theirselves going on.

A Married State

This is a very interesting poem. I have never viewed marriage as a bad thing, still really don't but I do understand what Philips is saying. She is saying to keep your focus on your spiritual or religous beliefs you must keep your virginity and stay away from the wild ways of marraige. If you son't marry, you won't have to worry about cranky husbands or crying children. You will only have to worry about your prayers. My favorite line is "Supress wild nature is she dare rebel."

Twelfth Night

One thing that I find interesting is that Malvio is normal and isn't under the influence of love until he recieves the letter from "Olivia" reveiling her love for him. When he gets a glimpse of "Olivia"'s love he does whatever it takes to get her, including the foolish things the letter says. He ends up being locked up in a dark room and forgotten about. I think that this is showing how love can drive you crazy, it can make you go mad!

And also the fact that Orsino still called Viola by her male name, Cesario, even after she revieled herself as a woman! Obviously he wasn't straightout gay, but did he have a fetish for males?

Twelfth Night

The twelfth night is one of the most original stories that we have read so far. The love triangle in this is almost like a soap opera. This is also another story that shows how women were treated at one point. A woman could not get a labor job, so Viola disquised as a man went to work for Olivia, who later falls in love with Cesario (Viola as a man). Although Viola has her sights set on Orsino from the start. I think that Viola knew that Orsino had money, since he was the duke of Illyria and all. So she begins asking questions about Orsino and Olivia before she sets off to Olivia's place in search of a job. Why would you like a man you have never seen before? There is only one thing, if you are interested in something they have. This total chaotic love triangle is showing how these people are fools for love. The only person who isn't a fool when it comes to love ironically is the fool, Feste!

Utopia Book 1

First off Utopia means U-no & Topia- place; So this is No where, this place is not real. It is something this man has made up. But why would you make this up, form an entire story about this imagined society?

My Galley

A Galley is a ship or boat usually propelled by oars. We have discussed that the ocean is usally portraited as someone's life. Well this journey the galley is on, must the the author's life journey. Through the rocks, tough times, and over sharp waves, getting over the obsticles in lifes path. But The "Lord" has steered his path, according to him, and he seems upset at the way it has turned out. He even seems to be accusing the "Lord" to be "mine enemy". "endless wind doth tear the sail apace" He is the ship, so the wind, life, is tearing him apart. He uses human emotions in speaking of the conditions at sea, letting us know that he is talking about himself, the "rain of tears, a cloud of dark disdain". He is torn with "error and eke with ignorance", he made bad choices and lead him to bad situations, and he has abandoned all "reason" that maybe he should join. He ends the poem being mad at the world "despairing of the port".

i find no peace

<---Sir Thomas Wyatt~

This poem is about the feelings this man is having inside. It seems to me like they are hidden feelings, he acts normal but on the inside something is eating him alive. He is done with it but there has been no solution, no positive outcome. He burns mad but feels cold as ice, maybe like he's been abandoned left out in the cold. He's so full of sorrow he cannot get up but mentally is flying. What has kept him close has entrapt him. But now that the grip has loosened he can't get away, he's stuck there, mentally or physically? I wonder what the line "with out eyen I see, and without tounge i plain" means? Maybe he "wasn't" seeing this woman it was a secret love, so he couldn't talk about her or even look at her when other people were around. To me it seems he could be a married man and there are two sets of feelings. The ones he has about loving another, that's where he burns and freezes like ice, he can not arise, he finds no peace. Maybe he got a divorce for this other woman, maybe that's why the "war is done" but he finds no peace because he has wronged his wife. The "death" of his marriage and the "life" with this new woman. He thought he would be happy with this new woman that's why his "delight is causer of this strife".

Whoso list to hunt

This poem is about a man who knows where a female deer is, in the woods? One thing that doesn't make sense is that a female deer is not the objective in hunting. The males always have more muscle on them, and the females breed so hunters never kill does, unless that's all there is. So, I think that this is about a woman. A woman that he lusts over. He refers to her as a doe because he is hunting her in a way, watching her, waiting for her to come. But she belongs to another, the landlord of the woods. "Noli me tangere" means don't touch me. So it is a forbidden love. It will always be a unsatisfied hunt. He will return knowing where the deer is but unable to touch her.

~The wife of bath's Tale~

It's weird how much this story seems like sir Gawain and the Green Knight! It's a little bit odd. When I first read this story I thought that what the Knight took from the lady was a hat or something, but when reading back over the prologue, I realized that it was her virginity. Makes more sense! i was wondering who Ovid was, well I looked it up and Ovid is a Roman poet that wrote about love, seduction, and mythological transformation! And the Wife of Bath tells that the knight comes upon a lady that is magical! He sees 24 women when he is riding up but once he gets to the edge of the woods, there is only one old lady. She magically transformed. well, the whole point to the story I thnk is that , the knight must find out what women really want. Which is what the wife of bath wants, to be in charge of their husbands. When the knight has to marry the old lady, he is completely horrified, hates it, he pretty much says kill me now. In the end the old lady gives him the choice of her being ugly and loyal or beautiful and unloyal. He says "put me in your wyse governance" (just like the wife of bath says she governed her husbands). This pleases the wife, and she becomes both, young and good! I think this is saying that it may be the best for a couple to be governed by the wife sometimes. Maybe thats why the wife of bath loved her last husband so much, because they both governed, he let her govern sometimes, shile he was still in charge.

~Wife of Bath 2~

The Pardoner is almost, should i say, persuaded into not marrying his soon to be fiance because of what the Wife of Bath says. To me it's almost like she is saying that marriage is a sentence, and each person must keep up their parts. The wife must rule, in her eyes, and the husband must use his "instrument" well. Which is exactly the opposite of what was real in that time. The wife of Bath is playing the normal man's role. Maybe it is a mockery of the way that women were dominated?
She says that the good husbands were old and rich, she made them work at night, sexually i assume. Although what is her duty? She says that she made them work at night so that would be a payment from them as well as they gave her their land and money. My favorite line she says is:

I governed hem so wel after my lawe

Here she shows her dominance of the men. Of all the husbands the wife of bath had, the last husband has left a mark on her. He reversed her normal role of her being in charge. He had the control, he was the only one to stand up to her, although violent, and got to her. She shows that he had the most impact on her because of the fact that she talks about him more than the other four husbands. She admits that she loved him, would that be because he had the power to reverse the role? This 5th husband was marred for love, but the others were because of money and superficial things. She admits it herself by saying that "the bren, as I best can, now moste I sell" she uses sex to get the men to leave everything to her. As said in class she is a "gold digger"!

~Wife of Bath's Prologue~

She starts off with the word "Experience". She has it in many things. Throughout her marriages she has learnt trades and qualities from her 5 husbands. So she feels she is qualified to speak on the "woes of marriage". It seems she is justifying herself for marrying so many times, since people tell her that "crist ne wente nevere but onis to wedding". She says that "God bad us for to wexe and multiplye" but how can she use this? She never speaks of children, so she must not have married for this reason! But she continues to give more and more excuses for marrying more than once. She says that God never said marry only ONCE, she gives examples of people in the Bible that she believes to have more than one wife.

She says that she married the best of men, because of their "nether purs and of here cheste". She married them because of the sex and their money! So surely she doesn't care about them. Which she proves when she says:

Whan myn housbond is fro the world y-gon

Som cristen man shal wedde me anon;

For thanne the'Apostle seith that i am free

to wedde, a Goddes half, where it lyketh me.

So she definately doesn't care, there is no way, if she is prepared to wed as soon as one dies, there is no emotions involved. What really makes me wonder is that she feels he must "paye his dette". What does he owe for? The marriage? The companionship? Her "instrument"?

The man of Law's Epilogue

What is a Lollard? Well dictionary.com gave this meaning:

Lol·lard
(lŏl'ərd) n. A member of a sect of religious reformers in England who were followers of John Wycliffe in the 14th and 15th centuries.

Who is John Wycliffe? answer.com provided this:

A man who was born in 1324. After his retirement he continued to write and is credited with initiating the first full English translation of the Bible. His followers, called Lollards, are considered forerunners to the Protestant Reformation.

So obviously he is a very religious man, but why is he cut off too? This time the wife of Bath says that he will not preach and speak of God, because they " alle in the grete god". She tells him not to "springen cokkel in oure clene corn." I think this might mean that she doesn't want trouble. You know how when people usually preach things in a group of mixed people, thee are always a few people who don't agree and this causes trouble. The only thing that I wonder is, what does "ther is but litel latyn in my mawe" mean?

The Miller's Tale

The Miller's tale starts out with descriptions of the characters in his story. Like the General Prologue starts out, maybe showing that he too can tell a great story, despite his class. Just like the prologue, the tale is told in such a descriptive and elegant manner, not like he had been pictured as. It all rhymes very nicely too! He says that the Carpenter was told that "Men sholde wedden after hire estaat" showing his concern of social status. The story is a very brawdy or childish story but the way the Miller says everything makes it seem different, not quite as bad or silly as it is. The Miller describes Alisoun in a very natural way, she is described as having a body slender as a "weasel", easier to look upon than a "pear tree", "softer than the wolle is of a wether". This shows how the Miller is very in touch with his natural side. This means that he is a lower class, to actually know what a sheep's wool feels like. The story line, some what like a joke, is showing how he believes that you shouldn't inquire what your wife is doing all the time. Meaning don't question "God's pryvetees". I feel it means everything happens for a reason, so don't worry about what is going on, it will work it's self out in the end.

The Miller cont.

I think that this section is about life. Why take it so seriously? Just like at the end, when chaucer says that he is only relation facts of the pilgramige, for the audience not to be offended by what the tale says. Chaucer says "and eek men shal nat maken ernest of game." meaning don't take a joke so seriously. That's why I think that the miller really is smarter than we think, when he is argueing with the Reve over the tale, his argument is different than he usually speaks. The miller is a free spirit, he does not take life seriously and I think the tale shows that...

The Miller

The miller's Prologue showed whawt type of person that Miller is percieved to be. Everyone thinks that he is a rude man and a bafoon. His rudeness is showed when he cuts off the person about to tell a tale and begins to go on with his tale. He says the he will "requite the knight's tale" maybe because his tale is somwhat of a joke, so it will be better in a way. But then the host says that "som bettre man shal telle us first another" But are they speaking about class or soberness? to be continued...

Oroonoko equal to Feminism?

Aphra Behn speaks of Imoinda in a very positive manner. She even calls her Oroonoko's "Heroic Imoinda". Now, why would she do that? Maybe becaue at this point in the story she has a bow poisoned arrows, she stands up for what she wants. She doesn't do what is told, he takes her choice and shoots the governor. In this time women followed as told and had no choice in the matter, but Imoinda set an example, she goes against the grain therefore is "heroic". This is why I think that Aphra Behn is relating Slavery to Feminine sufferage. Maybe while trying to inform people about how slavery really is, she is throwing in the likenesses of women's treatment in life. Another point is her statement at the begining,

"But his misfortune was to fall in an obscure world, that afforded

olnly a female pen to celebrate his fame".

I think this sentence kind of pops out, like it's misplaced in the writing. It feels like she is purposely making you understand. I believe his "misfortune"is his being enslaved, his treatement that is similar to how women are treated, could only afford a "female pen" to write his story. Only a female since they are so parallel on treatment, they are somwhat equal in rights. So it is fit that she write the story of his life, since she understands how it is, unlike the white men that are over slaves and women.

Samuel Johnson Dictonary and Shakespeare

The dictionary:
The Language most likely to continue long without alteration would be that of a nation raised a little and but a little, above barbarity, secluded from strangers, and totally employed in recurring the conveniencies of life; either without books, or, like some of the Mahometan countries, with very few: men thus busied and unlearned, having only such words as common use requires, would perhaps long continue to express the same notions by the same signs."

What's happening today with language was happening in Sam J's time as well. We have languages like Ebonics and slang talk just like he had in England. I think he wrote this dictionary to more clearly define the classes in England through the written word. Have you ever seen My Fair Lady? (I think Dr. Doolittle was like a Sam J). In My Fair Lady they take a lower class Londoner and make her a lady just by teaching her to speak like the upper class. Inside she was still the same lower class flower girl but because she spoke so sophisticatedly she was now an upper class person. Oh, if that's all it took to change your status, none of us would have to go to college! It just goes to show how defined the classes were in England and how important it was to the citizens, especially the upper class because they were the ones who benefited from the lower class.


Shakespeare:

"Upon every other statge the universal agent is love, by whose power all good and evil is distributed and every action quickend or retarted. To bring a lover, a lady, and a rival into the fable; to entangle them in contradictory obligations, perplex them with opposition of interest, and harass then with violence of desires inconsistent with eachother; etc........."

Sam J goes on to say that love is only one passion of life and it has no great influence on the sum of life. I think that's total BS. People do some crazy things for love. I think Sam J is an insensitive prick with to much time on his hands.What's his problem? I think he took this essay writing stuff a little too serious. He writes like he's doing the world a favor by telling them his opinion. What makes his opinion better then anyone else's? Why couldn't he have just enjoyed Shakespeare's plays for what they were and not rip them apart with no thought or reason. He ruined it for me by analyzing Shakespeare the way he did. Love may not be the only passion of the world but that's the point of making a play where it is, so that the audience can escape for the reality of life for 2 seconds and enjoy something for themselves. really you could say that love is the only passion of life in essence because people do what they love. You can test that theory it works everytime.

Samuel Johnson's Arrogance

While I was reading Sameul Johnson's essays and he rendition of his own take on the dictionary, I noticed an arrogant demeanor that Johnson posesses. His outright love for England and his racist thought toward other countries, such as Scotland, are evident in his text. There is a fine line between having pride in your own country and outright arrogance. However, Samuel Johnson's racist behavior is funny to me. I am not saying that racism is funny at all. But how he degrades the Scots in his texts makes me laugh. For example, in his dictionary he compares the Scotish people with the likes of work horses. This can be seen in his dictionary on page 2755 in the text. "Oates. n. A grain, which in England is generally given to horses, but in Scotland supports the people." How funny is that?! I laughed hysterically when I read this. I used to live with a guy from Scotland and I sent him that line in an email. He also seems to have all his definitions revolve around "in England". "In England..." this, "In England...." that! His arrogance and view that the world revolves around England is a true representation of his character!

My Take on "Twelfth Night"

For me Twelfth Night was a love triangle that revolved around the concept of deception and deceit. First, I think that the most obvious example of deception comes from the role of Viola in the play. Viola transforms herself into the cross dressing role of Cesario. She does this in an attempt to gain power by getting in with Orsino. Here is an example of her plot when she asks the Captain of the ship to help her go along with her plan. This quote can be found in Act 1, scene 2. "There is a fair behaviour in thee, captain; And though that nature with a beauteous wall Doth oft close in pollution, yet of thee I will believe thou hast a mind that suits With this thy fair and outward character. I prithee, and I'll pay thee bounteously, Conceal me what I am, and be my aid For such disguise as haply shall becomeThe form of my intent. I'll serve this duke:Thou shalt present me as an eunuch to him;It may be worth thy pains, for I can singAnd speak to him in many sorts of music. That will allow me very worth his service. What else may hap, to time I will commit; Only shape thou silence to my wit. This is one of the most apparent examples of deception in this play. I feel the Viola is a "golddigger". She feels that this is her chance to finally be something. She strikes, and goes all out in order to attempt to accomplish her goal.

The other example of deception in this play comes when Maria forges the letter coming from the Countess Olivia. By doing this Malvolio believes that Olivia is now in love with him. This puts a strange twist by using deceitful tactics that help propell this obscure love triangle. He finds the letter on the path while he is watched by Maria and Sir Toby.

Idler by Samuel Johnson

Saturday November 18,1758
Was sober a real guy? if he was I feel bad for him. How come Jonson's picking on him? Idleness must have really erked him. He looks erked in this picture. That's way he had to pick on other people because he had nothing better to do. He was an Idler. I like how he says, "Many moralist have remarked, that Pride has of all human vices the widest dominion, appears in the greatest multiplicity of forms, and lies hid under the greatest variety of disguises; of disguises, which like the moon's veil of brightness, are both it's luster and it's shade, and betray it to others, though they hide it from ourselves." This just seems to be a really deep statement. i have no idea where to go with it except that maybe what he is saying is that the Idler is a coward. Or like the moon, a facade in place of the sun. The sun is doing all the work but to people who know no better, the moon still gets credit for lighting up the night sky. Johnson is saying that Sober is like the moon, he is reaping the benefit of those around him by pretending to be busy when he is really not. But the world still wouldn't be the same without the moon. it does have a purpose. What is the purpose of the idler?

Beggar's opera act 3

Which way shall I turn me? How can I decide

Wives, the day of our death, are fond as a bride.

One wife is too much for most husbands to hear,

But two at a time there's no mortal to bear.

This way, and that way, and which way I will,

What would comfort the one, t'other wife would take ill.

-Macheath

While reading the beggar's opera act3, I started to hate Macheath. He's a dog and he deserved to die. Especially for the way he treated women. He's no different from some of the guys that are out there today. John Gay was good at capturing the ugliness of people through his characters in this play. it just seems that Macheath is trying to make excuses for himself in the song above. I have no pity for him . If he'd thought with his head and not with what was in his pants then he may not have had so many wives thus, alleviating some unwanted pressure. How come he had so many wives, anyways? . There is much to be said about the type of women that Macheath was involved with. Some of them were like female version of him. Actually, I loved that. I also liked that one of his own boys turned him in. That just goes to show what money will do to people. And it also shows how fake Macheaths life was. He was always surrounded by many people but none of them were truly his friends. I think this play was about love. The love of money, sex and guns. The characters were pretty messed up too. The only one who was slightly sane was Polly and even she was made to look like a fool. It's funny how that works. The same thing happened in 12th night with Malvolio. Except, in my opinion, he deserved to be treated like dirt. Polly really didn't deserve how she was treated. Except for her poor choice in men. so, she brought it on her self and if you want to look at it that way she deserved it too. Her parents seemed to think so. Even know this play was supposed to have a happy ending , I still think it was a tragedy. Polly was still always going to be called a slut by her parents and she ended up with a total jerk.

Plato's Republic and Utopia

Thomas More's Utopia is about a perfect society where all men, women, and children possess the same amount of goods, make the same wages, and live the same lives. Because of this, they are able to live their lives to the fullest. They reap all the benefits of society because there is no competion for jobs, or wealth, or lust. People have no real desires because they have everything already that they have ever known. There is a problem with this theory of society. It has also been proven that this type of society does not work well. Just ask the U.S.S.R, or China, Vietnam, or North Korea how well this system works. However, to Thomas More's defense, he did not write this story as a real life system of how our society should govern. This was simply a tale of the fluidity of a society without problems. There was however a famous philosopher who did lay out a foundation for how a society should function. His name was Plato and he was a great intellectual thinker with great asperations for successful outcome in society. He has a very different formula than Thomas More for a perfect society. For example, Plato says that "An ideal society consists of three main classes of people—producers (craftsmen, farmers, artisans, etc.), auxiliaries (warriors), and guardians (rulers); a society is just when relations between these three classes are right. Each group must perform its appropriate function, and only that function, and each must be in the right position of power in relation to the others. Rulers must rule, auxiliaries must uphold rulers' convictions, and producers must limit themselves to exercising whatever skills nature granted them (farming, blacksmithing, painting, etc.) Justice is a principle of specialization: a principle that requires that each person fulfill the societal role to which nature fitted him and not interfere in any other business."http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/republic/summary.html I believe that this is the most intriguing difference between the real life philosopher, who had a hands on intellectual approach toward society, and a simple, but great, fiction writer. It is of my belief that classes and structured classes of people who are assigned, by their own free will, to do certain jobs is of the utmost importance when attempting to create a perfect society. Society can never become perfect like in Utopia. Evidence can be found in the text when Guilles writes the letter to Busleiden regarding Utopia.

"The other day a great friend of yours, Thomas More- who is, I'm sure you will agree, one of the glories of our age- sent me the enclosed account of Utopia. At present very few people know about the island, but everyone should want to, for it's like Plato's "Republic", only better- especially as its described by such a talented author." Besides the fact the More toots his own horn really throughout the novel, he also puts down Plato's philosophies.

Is Europe a Utopian Society?

Is Europe a Utopian society? Is there such thing as a true Utopian society? There is a simple response to this question and the answer is most certainly no. However, is Europe "trying" to become Utopian? It seems to me that the continent is slowly moving away from standard U.S morals of working hard, and making an honest dollar through democracy. I visited Germany last summer and I was appalled with the lack of prosperity between the classes of people. In essense, there were no real classes of people. People were neither very rich, nor very poor. This is a similar concept to Thomas More's Utopia. Here is an article that I found while researching this topic online. "Utopia: Europe Vs. Ideal SocietyRealistic Europe VS. Idealistic Utopia Sir Thomas More's Utopia compares and contrasts the social values of the idealistic society of Utopia with that of the realistic society, Europe. Sir Thomas More uses his characters, Peter Giles, Raphael Hythloday, and a fictional character representing himself called More, to criticize the practices of the very realistic society, Europe. Everyday life in Europe is less than idealistic. It is a society where greed and wealth is prevalent, where theft is punished by death, but is also unavoidable, and where poverty makes up the majority of people. Utopia, though impossible to attain, is Sir Thomas More's idea of the perfect society. "They are generally more set on acquiring new kingdoms by hook or by crook than by governing well those that they already have"(p.8). Here, Raphael explains to More the priorities of English royalty, and why he refuses to become a counsellor. "Moreover, the counsellors of kings are all so wise already that they need no other knowledge (or at least that's the way they see it). In other words, the real world makes it impossible for truth in Raphael's mind. http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/85824.html An example from the text can be found on page 19, book one, "Of course, he saw much to condemn in the New World, but he also discovered several regulations which suggested possible methods of reforming European society. These I say, will have to be dealt with later. My present plan is merely to repeat what he said about the laws and customs of Utopia." It is clearly stated that More would like to model Europe after Utopian society. What is fascinating is that in reality, the model is already underway.

Bondage of "Love" in Oroonoko

The final form of bondage in "Oroonoko" is the mental bondage associated with his love for the General's daughter, Imoinda. Because he is so in love with this woman, he cannot perform his civil duties as the Prince. He is so enthralled and captivated with this woman that it leads to his eventual enslavement, and mental of physical forms of bondage. This woman, and his love for this woman, causes him to be enslaved mentally within the bounds of "war", the bondage of "royalty" and the eventual bondage of "love". All of these menatl and physical contraints unfortunately leads to the eventaul bondage of the "self". One of the most intriguing aspects of slave narratives is that eventhough slaves are physically bound by their slave holders, the slave holders cannot take away their mental freedoms. In Oroonoko's case, his mental freedoms are extinguished because of his mental enslavement to Imoinda. While most other slaves at this time are not free physically. They have no physical free will. They do however have free will of the mind. Oroonoko cannot perform this act. He is truely enslaved, regardless of his royal status.

Beast Fables, and its Role in "The Nun's Priest's Tale"

One of the most common literary themes during Geoffrey Chaucer's "Canterbury Tales" was the concept of beast fables. These tales were important stories that gave animals human like characteristics. Although this practice was not new to writers of the Chaucerian era, it did however become immensely popular in the literature of the time. This idea of beast fables also greatly influenced later works including "Robin Hood", "Uncle Remus' Stories", and George Orwell's political satire "Animal Farm". Beast fables were a way of making a mockery of human nature, and was a literary device that showed the true feelings and motions of human like characters, without offending whoever it was the author chose to represent. This is often an insulting practice and literary device because it represents men with animals. It may also suggest that man often acts like an animal in their everyday life. Examples of this can be seen in The Nun's Priest's Tale, in Chaucer's "The Canterbury Tales".
In this story, there is a male rooster named Chanticleer who is in charge of all seven hens in the henhouse. This includes the most beautiful hen Pertelote, who Chauntecleer is madly in love with. A clever fox named Don Russell is the counterpart to Chauntecleer and tricks him by telling him that he does not want to eat him, he only wants to hear him sing. When the rooster crows, the clever fox snatches Chauntecleer and runs away. The commotion caused by the seven hens causes all of the animals on the farm to go after the fox. Chauntecleer cleverly convinces Don Russell to confront the other animals. When he attempts to confront them, he loosens his grip, and Chauntecleer escapes.
This is a very common idea when it comes to beast fables. This story is very similar to the Joel Chandler Harris stories about Br'er Rabbit and Br'er fox, and the "Tar Baby" story. This is another example where the clever fox attempts to outsmart the rabbit by luring him in by a tar baby. When the rabbit, who, like Chauntecleer, believes he is the dominant rooster, attempts to go after the tar baby, he sticks to the tar baby and becomes an easy target for the fox. Br'er Rabbit, like Chauntecleer must find a way to outsmart the cunning fox. Why are these stories important ideals and concepts in literary history? Joel Chandler Harris wrote his "Uncle Remis collection of Beast fables to help represent the inhumane trials and tribulations of being a black man in the 1800's in American culture. The fox represented the white slave owners who were always out to get the rabbit. The rabbit could be represented by the black man who constantly had to outwit the cunning fox to get ahead in life.
"Reynard the Fox" was a very important medieval literary character. He appears in numerous pieces of medieval literature including Chaucer's The Nun's Priest's Tale. He is a satirical character that emulates human society. "Though Reynard is sly, amoral, cowardly, and self-seeking, he is still a sympathetic hero." (1) He is sympathetic because he displays human-like flaws. In France, the name "renard" has actually replaced the old word for fox called "goupil".
In "The Nun's Priest Tale", the beast epic could be a representation of the separation of classes in Chaucer's time. Could it represent the difference between the upper and lower classes in Chaucerian England? One of the most telling themes of the beast fable in The Nun's Priest's tale" is how the animals could represent the men and women who are partaking on the pilgrimage to Canterbury. All the animals could represent different characters in the Canterbury Tales. Also, the absurdity of animals chasing down the fox represents the different groups of people who chose to travel together.
For example, the Knight could be compared with Chauntecleer because both are strong willed characters who are in a feud with another adversary in the text. Paloman would represent Chauntecleer. Arcite would represent his arch nemesis, Don Russell. Pertolote would represent the beautiful Emilie. All of these characters in The Nun's Priest's Tale, even though are represented in animal form, and are direct representatives to different characters heading to Canterbury on the pilgrimage.
One important aspect of beast fables is the morality issues related with beast epics. "They all tell a story, but unlike most fables, beast epics differ from fable not only in length but also in putting less emphasis on a moral." (1) Uncle Remus' tales use beast fables to tell the tale of distrust by black citizens for the white man. The beast fables used in the Canterbury Tales may have been used to possibly describe a religious attraction. For example, Chauntecleer could represent God, and Don Russell could represent the devil. They have a rivalry going in the same way the God and Satan do. Chauntecleer is an all knowing, overseeing entity, who is in charge of the seven hens and the roost. He is in fact, a God-like figure. Don Russell is a cunning, Satan-like character who is in a constant struggle to take down Chauntecleer. This story is also told by the Nun's Priest. This man has a direct relationship with God. This may have been his inspiration for telling this beast fable. Religion, may have been the underlying theme of the story, but it was not intended to be a moral to the story of the "Nun's Priest's Tale".
Beast Fables were important literary tools when attempting to tell powerful stories that describe the flaws of mankind. All of these tales were written for a purpose. This purpose may be widely and commonly debated in classrooms and lectures. Was the point of the beast fable in the Canterbury Tales religiously inspired? Was it inspired to point out Chaucer's displeasures for the upper class? No one really knows the answer to this question. The answer is actually not even that important when attempting to understand the meaning of the text. Beast fables, and their morality issues, are completely subjective. However what is not subjective is the power of the beast fable, when attempting to identify the flaws of humanity.

Beggar's Opera

I think this is a great opera! It is completely different than most opera's of this time. Many of the opera's are about issues not comic like John Gay's. There was a time when opera was somewhat converting going from classical opera to comedy type opera. I think this was close to that time. It seems that he is trying to make fun of classical opera, taking a dramatic and unusual type of story and putting it into opera with familair music for the singing parts. I am trying to find out what the difference between the crooks and the Peachum's mean! The crooks are witty and smart and the Peachum's are very illiterate and rude acting. Maybe he was trying to say that the higher class is actually uncivilized with their actions and ways of life. That the people who have to resort to stealing are smart in a way because they are doing what they have to in order to survive. OR he could be say that the higher class are theives. Since they do say "whawt we win, gentlemen, is our own by the law of arms and the right to conquest", don't many kings of that time go by that? In fact maybe he could be making fun of the war hungry rulers in this era. I know that there was a War of Spanish Succession from 1701-1713 and Spain lost a few territories to Britian in this war too. The enlightenment was also during this period, a new secular view on things first began in 1690, so this could be definatly making fun of the king in a way.

Wife of bath

"No man hath switch that in this world alive is. God woot this noble king, as to wit, The first night haddle many a merye fit with eech of hem, so wel was him on live. Blessed be God that i have wedded five, Of which I have piked the beste, Bothe of hir nether purs and of hir cheste. Diverse practkes in sondry werkes maken the werkman parfit silkerly: Of five housbondes scoleying am I." This story goes against all beliefs and traditions of the times. Woman did not have many rights and were not looked at as equals. In this story a woman justifies her marriage to five husbands through the use of bible parables and characters from the bible. She had mention king Solomon and the hundreds of wives in which he had. This story goes against the usual writings by Chauser because I was led to believe he did not like woman. This goes against all common description of what was acceptable of women. This is a woman that married for money and sex. Her first three husbands she married to get their money through the use of with holding certain wifely duties. This lady was not really a gold digger, a woman who made a valid point, why is it cool for men to play and not so for women. Her fith husband flipped the script on her because it was not about the money but the sex, and from this one she did not get love.

A modest proposal

"FOR PREVENTING THE CHILDREN OF POOR PEOPLE IN IRELAND FROM BEING A BURDEN TO THEIR PARENTS OR COUNTRY, AND FOR MAKING THEM BENEFICIAL TO THE PUBLIC"

" It is is a melancholy object to those who walk through this great town or travel in the country, when they see the streets, the roads, and the cabins doors, crowed with beggars of the female sex, followed by three, four, or six children, all in rags and importuning every passenger for an alms. These mothers, instead of being able to work for their honest livelihood, are forced to employ all their time strolling to beg sustenance for their helpless infants, who, as they grow up, either turn to thieves for want of work, or leave their dear native country." Out of everything I have had the pleasure of reading this one really touched my heart. Some how I see something like this happening through out the world today. The injustice that was happening in Ireland by the English invasion and how through his use of irony he brings the social injustice to the table. He talk about eating these poor children as a delicacy for the rich as a form of getting rid of the problem of having these children on the streets without it being a financial burden, and making money from it. It had a strange way of making sense for those whom this was not directly affecting and how today where many are dying from similar situations people think of ways to make a profit, I think of India and how people are so poor they actually maimed themselves or sell vital organs to make money for their families.

Beggar's opera

"Life is a jest, and all things show it;

I thought so once, but now I know it."

"The underworld rose to the surface, Crime was constant, brutal threat in early 18th century london, and stories about notorious criminal poured from the press. In the corupt legal system, which rewarded racketeers for informing on othersless powerful felons, the line between those who broke the law and those who enforced it was often smudged." This basically says it all about this story, it is how John Gay talked about what was going on by using humor and taking shots at political system. This is about a slickster who new how to work the crowd, he spoke to his gang buddies and female friends one way and common folks another. I like this one because of its use of music to express how they feel.

" Oh Polly, you might have toyed and kissed. By keeping men off, you keep them on. But he so pleased me, And he so pleased me, What I did, you must have done" and " I, like a ship in storms, was tossed, yet afraid to put to land; For seized in the port the vessel's lost; Whose treasure is contraband. The waves are laid, my duties paid. O joy beyond expression! Thus, safe ashore, I ask no more, My all is in my possession." if you have ever been lonely and finally find the one, just like me you can appreciate this one. Any way this slickster's name is Macheath and he captures the heart of Polly who is the daughter of Peechum, an informer. Worrying about their social status they plan to kill Mcheath because he secretly marries Polly. Mcheath the smooth gangster gets tricked by his female friend, jenny, which is funny because his was tricked by the one he himself though had fooled, just a reminder that there is always one slicker than the next. I enjoy this one more when we read it as a class. I would love to go see a play like this one.

Absalom and Achitophel

" To make their kings; for kings are made for them. All empire is no more than power in trust, Which, when assumed, can be longer just. Succession, for general good designed, In its own wrong a nation cannot bind; If altering that the people can relieve, Better one suffer than a nation grieve. The Jews well know their power: ere Saul they chose, God was their king, and God they durst depose. Urge now your piety, your filial name, A father's right and fear of future fame; The public good, that universal call, To which even heaven submitted, answers all." This poem is about King Charles II being compared to king David in the bible. There was alot of injustice taken place during this time, you had religious fraud, taxation and political instability. Titus Oates starts a rumor that the King's life was in danger and that protestant were to be killed and London to be burned to start an uproar, because of this rumor many Jews were killed. Absolom, an illegitimate son of the King. What is amazing in a sense for me was how like mention in this statement above is that even then people in power had someone to clean things up. This was a way of protecting the king from the mistakes committed just like those in our past administrations. The public good was the main focus was their reasoning just like it is today.

THe General Prologue 2

He talks about "soundry folk" it says means various sorts of people. I wonder if he's showing the difference between everyone that tells a story. Like the knight is brave, and a "parfit, gentil knight" and the Squire "cuteys he was, lowly and sevisable" , the Yeoman had an elegant daggar and seemed perfect, the Pioress "frensh she pak ful faire and fetisly" had good manners and was very "plesaunt, and amiable of port" but the Parson of Town is poor , the Miller stole corn... It seems like all the people with out money are bad. Either they are ugly or they are a buffun? All the people who have money are elegant and charming, almost perfect, except the Wife of bath, who is not very lovely from the discription.

Beggar's opera act 2

"But present time is ours, and nobody alive hath more. Why are the laws levelled at us? Are we more dishonest than the rest of mankind? What we win gentlemen is our own by the law of arms and the right of conquest."

Doesn't this line have a fairytale feel to it or what? That's how I look at act 2 of the Beggars opera. It just seems to be getting more and more surreal. In act 2 we go to the "club house" of the high dollar criminal Macheath and his crew. All I could think of when I was reading was about Enron. It may be a far off comparison to catch but in some way Macheath is like a modern day executives for a dirty cooperation. Can a modern thief be compared to a knight at the round table? Macheath seems to think so but I don't. What worries me is what society says makes a gentleman a gentleman? I don't think that the men in Macheath circle were gentleman. Just because they talked proper and had good manners and were form a higher social class they did trashy things. They were thieves and liars is that what knight is? This is still true today. There are still crooks in every social class. The first rule to breaking the law is, "What ever you do don't get caught." you can be a really stupid criminal as long as you don't get caught. Then your smarter then the brightest criminal who does get caught. Have you ever seen one of those movies where the popular kid at school is a total jerk but none of the teachers sees all the bad thing he dose because they can't see past his image? That is kinda how i feel about Macheath. only in act 2 he gets betrayed by his own kind. i think Macheath's weakness is going to be his ruin. we'll see what happens in act 3....

beggar's opera act 1

The first act of Beggar's opera left me feeling confused about the play. I think it starts off in an awkward place because the writer wants the reader to draw his or her own conclusions about all the characters ,who ,at this point are undeveloped. I kinda felt like I was coming in on the middle of the play. I had some questions like, why are her parents calling Polly a slut and a hussy all the time? Compared to today's standard she hadn't acted like a slut at all. why were her parents mad at her for getting married? What was wrong with the guy she'd picked? The first act left me feeling bad for Polly, hating her parents, and thinking that Macheath was a good guy.

Jonathn Swifts' poems no.2

the lady's dressing room

I thought this poem was really gross. The description of her dirty dressing room made me sick. I know that everybody poops but did Swift really have to take it that far? Celia was a nasty lady. line 40 really put it over the top. It's also reflected in lines 119-124 which say," But vengeance, goddess never sleeping, Soon punished Strephon for his peeping. His foul imagination links Each dame he sees with all her stinks, And, if unsavory Oder's fly, conceives a lady standing by." The guy was traumatized for life. Celia ruined it for all lady's. but what was he doing in her dressing room anyway and how come he had to look in her toilet? What an idiot. I think he had some screws loose to begin with but seeing and smelling Celia's poop didn't make it any better. I really feel bad for the guy.

The reason That induces Swift to write a lady's dressing room

I thought that her rebuttal to The lady's dressing room was pretty good. Although i don't think her motives were pure. She took a low blow at swift in describing him going to see a prostitute and he's a priest. This lady must have really hated swift. Although I agree with her when she says," That all is right but his head is wrong." I think swift was pretty messed up for writing all these poems about disgusting topics. The Author of the poem was very effective in making Swift look like a pig.

Bondage of "War" in Oroonoko

The third form of bondage that Oroonoko faced in the text was the bondage of war. This form of bondage was a form, like being physically enslaved, was one that was not the free will choice of Oroonoko. Because of his royal status, he was required by his family to engage in war. Orookono was not the type of person who would normally, or formally engage in such a barbaric act. This idea is almost contradictory in the fact that people of royaly are supposed to be the most most civilized of all the people. They are the standard example of excellence in their cultures. However, there is nothing civilized about war. Oroonoko knew that this was wrong and he did not want to engage in the act of war. He wanted love, not war. He was a hippy in some sense. This example can be found on page 2186 in the text. "Her had sacrce arrived at his seventeenth year, when fighting at his side, the general was killed with an arrow in his eye, which the prince Oroonoko very narrowly avoided, nor had he, if the general, who saw the arrow shot, and percieveing it aimed at the prince, had not bowed his head between, on purpose to recieve it in his own body rather than it should touch that of the Prince, and so saved him". I believe that Oroonoko was struggling and had hard times coming to grips with the fact that the arrow that killed the general was intended for him. The general sacrificed his life to save Oroonoko's life. Oroonoko was under alot of pressure because of this. He was bound by the actions taken by the General. This may lead to Oroonoko's love for the general's daughter Imodia. He may subconciously feel that he is now reponsible for taking care of the general's daughter.

Bondage of "Royalty" in Oroonoko

The other form of bondage that Oroonoko faces in the text is the concept of bondage of royalty. This is the concept that eventhough and especially that he is a famous Prince to his people, he is in fact not free because of this. He longs to be a common man without the responsibilities of being a Prince. He loves the privlleges of being royal, but he does not feel true freedom that other people his age feel. An example of this mental bondage can be found on page 2209 in the text. "He had spirit all rough and fierce, and could not be tamed to lazy rest; and though all endevours were used to exercise himself in such actions and sports and this world afforded, as running, wrestling, pitching the bar, hunting and fishing, chasing and killing tigers of a monsterous size, which this continent affords in abundance, and wonderful snakes, such as Alexander is reported to have encountered at the river of Amazons, and which Caesar took great delight to overcome, yet these were not actions large enough for his large soul, which was still panting after more renowned action." What these few lines are telling of Oroonoko's bondage to royalty is that while being a prince is nice, he can hunt tigers, and do many things that the common man cannot do, his heart was still missing something. Whatever it was he yearned for, it gave him a sense of being incomplete. This concept reminds me what it must be like to be a celebrity. Everyone wants to be a celebrity. That is everyone except the celebrity themselves. The may have endless money, fame, fortune, and great connections, but they are not free. Many celebrities would trade their spots with a common person for a day, a week, or even all together. This menatl constaint and bondage is what Oroonoko faces. The fact that Oroonoko was enslaved and his title of being royal was stripped from him. This may have in fact freed his mental bondage, but he was no longer free physically.

Jonathan Swifts' poems (the 1st two)

A Description of a City Shower

lines 55 -57 are my favorite in this poem. Swift seems to be telling it like it is. and I love that he doesn't try to sugar coat anything. I think it's safe to say that all the poems that we've read up until now are sugar coated poop because swifts poems discuss the side of things that know one talked about that's still true today. People don't just go around talking about their poop like it's a normal thing to do and they especially don't write poetry about it. In a description of a city shower we get a taste of what it was really like to live in England back then. Yes, Swift is describing England in this poem not Ireland Like his subject in a modest proposal.

A Modest Proposal

I love Swift's proposal. It's brilliant that he can be so sarcastically great even tot eh point where he thought out every way you can eat a baby. That makes me think, was he really being sarcastic in some sick region of my mind I want to think that Swift is some kind of in the closet cannibal. You know what they say about sarcastic people.... If he's not an in the closet cannibal then he must really have big balls to just go out there and tell people to eat their babies. I think Swift is really passionate about his country. Or really upset with the way things are being handled. You know what I think, I 'm gonna tell you, I think that the government in Ireland was pretending like the famine didn't exits and that people weren't dying of starvation and that's what upset Swift. So in retaliation he wrote a modest proposal to make people think. However, I don't think I really solved the crisis of the famine. It may have made hungry people even madder. They may have even really eaten their babies. The first time i read a modest proposal the teacher didn't tell u anything about Swift and the fact that he was being sarcastic and I thought he was serious. He makes his argument so clear that it's hard to see him as being anything other than serious. He did that on purpose making him really good at what he does.

So far Swift is my favorite author that we've studied

Modest Proposal

In a modest proposal Jonathan Swift is using and extreme suggestion to wake people up. To bring to the government's attention that people are living in filth and famine. There was a major population problem in Ireland during the 1700's. The population grew from "3 to 8.5 million between 1700 and 1845". Famine in Ireland was common in the 18th and 19th centuries. The Great Famine was actually in 1845 after Swift. but it was still a problem then because of the growing population. I think that Swift was showing how serious the problem was by this odd peice. To actually suggest eating children, showed how this was a major issue and needed some attention and solutions. The government needed to do something, or the people needed to stop having children. I also believe that he is pointing out the social classes with in this peice also. By stating that the poor families will sell thier children to the rich landlords and the "money will circulate among ourselves". I think this is also referring to the fact that many people in ireland were purchasing goods from other countries at this time, and he is saying that thye should be buying things from their own country.

Also he says "let no man talk to me of these and the like sxpedients, til he hathat least some glimpse of hope that there will ever be some hearty and sincere attempt to put them in practice" Talking of the population that needs to be reduced, that they need to tax the people on items that they are not buying from their own country's manufacture, that landlords need to have compassion and quite evicting people so they don't have to pay taxes on them.

Oroonoko, or The Royal Slave

I am not really sure I feel about this story. So, first you have a black prince with European features (except for his skin color obviously) who is in love with this beautiful woman named Imoinda. But, Oroonoko's (black prince) grandfather also wants Imoinda. Now let me stop for a second because if I read it right, the King only wanted Imoinda because she was the most beautfiul girl in his kingdom, he didn't have any feelings for her nor did he even know she existed until he found out that Oroonoko liked this woman. What kind of grandfather does that to his child? Actually, it's kind of sick because they are both lusting after the same woman yet there age difference is significant. Anyway...Imoinda ends up getting sold into slavery and her and Oroonoko are seperated. Then a captain of an English ship invites Oroonoko onto his ship to eat and drink and talk, in which Oroonoko accepts. Now how foolish can you be? Why would you go on a ship with all these white men, when you are black and you know that black people are treated differently (back in these times). I mean I know he was a prince but seriously, you shouldn't trust anybody!! So then guess what happens?? The captain takes advantage of Oroonoko...go figure!! And he captures Oroonoko and his men and takes them as prisoners. So they sell Oroonoko as a slave to this guy names Trefry who ends up loving Oroonoko and renames him Caesar. He then finds that his long lost love, Imoinda now called Clemene, is on the same plantation. They find each other and end up having sex and Imoinda becomes pregnant. Oronooko doesn't want his child to be born into slavery so he kills Imoinda along with the unborn child. The fact that he kills his wife was really weird. I mean I understand the reasoning behind it but still, I wouldn't be able to kill my family like that. Then he tries to get revenge on the people who captured him and ends up getting caught and is killed in the most inhumane way. The details they described of how they killed him was unbelievable. This story was very interesting, but very odd. Overall I enjoyed it, but I don't think I would ever sit down and read "Oroonoko, or The Royal Slave" again.

Bondage of "Slavery" in Oroonoko

There is a variety of concepts of bondage in the short story "Oroonoko". Sure there was the literal form of slavery, but there were also four other forms that help create the power of this story. These forms are as followed in later blogs from the story of "Oroonoko". The first form of bondage comes when he was a slave. This is the literal form of bondage where Oroonoko was not a free man with free will-power. There is substansial evidence from the text the clearly states his position as a slave which can be found on page 2201 in the text. "The prince having drunk hard of punch and several sorts of wine, was very merry , and in great admiration of the ship, for he had never been in one before; so that he was curious of beholding every place where he decently might descend. The rest, no less curious, who were not quite overcome with drinking, rambled at their pleasure fore and aft, as their facies guided 'em. So that the captain , who had well laid his design before, gave the word, and seized on all of his guests; they clapping great irons suddenly on the Prince, when he was leaped down in the hold to view that part of the vessel, and locking him fast down, secured him." In this passage, Prince Oroonoko was tricked because of his innocence. He is not an experienced person in the world of the white man. He is naieve, and stands as a perfect target for slavery. This idea reminds me of how an American may become a target if one decides to travel to foreign countries such as the Middle East or the Phillpeans. They stand out, and their stature back home does not matter to the kidnappers or slavemasters. He is not free and he suffers the perils and trials of being in physical bondage.

A Description of a City Shower

This is an odd poem. It starts off all dirty and nasty, with the stinky cat. It talks of "aches throb" which happen sometimes when it rains, mainly to people who do intensive labor, real work. The woman whipping her linen's from the line is middle class i believe. It seems like she is not low class but middle, like a woman who stays home while the husband works but must clean and cook. This woman "linen from the rope", "whirls her mop" many higher class people don't do either of these. But then the second half of the poem talks of women shopping, and using their "oiled umbrellas" calling a coach and worring about getting wet. But what is the association of Troy's horse? Like the people in the horse and buggy are like the horse of troy, except they are hiding from the rain? "Filth of all hues and odors seem to tell what street they sailed from, by thier sight and smell." I guess concidering the fact that this poem might be about the social classes in England, it seems to be saying that you can tell where someone comes from by thier looks. Like the trash can be.

Cantebury Prologue

I love the first line, "When that April with his showres soote, The drought of March hath perced to the root." It sounds so natural, i guess. It seems the writer is trying to describe the season so vividly. Chaucer talks of Zephyrus the greek wind god, who fell in love with a young man named Hyacinthus. He was jealous one day and blew a discus and it struck Hyacinthus in the head, killing him. Insane story. Maybe this is realting to the reason the people are on the pilgramage. But it is odd how the begining is somewhat like a fairy tale, like the story of Zephyrus.