Raphael for President!

When reading Sir Thomas More’s, Utopia, searching for religion and nature in the story was a piece of cake. But what really got me was the structure of the government of Utopia and how Raphael describes it. I’m not into religion at all, and when he begins to speak about the Cardinal and the Utopians religion, honestly, I zoned out. It was just like every other religious hub-bub you read about in stories. Who cares? The really interesting thing is the society and government of Utopia.

The one line in Book one that caught my attention and I thoroughly agree with comes near the very end. Raphael states, “But as a matter of fact, my dear More, to tell you what I really think, as long as you have private property, and as long as money is the measure of all things, it is really not possible for a nation to be governed justly or happily” (543). This line really shows the whole story of Utopia, and what a perfect world could be like. It also shows the hopelessness for our world to ever be a Utopia. Our world, and particularly our government, is controlled by money and material assets. Who has the nicest car? Who has the bigger house? Who has the larger income? The people on top are those with the most money, and as Raphael stays, if this is how the world is, nothing can be ruled over justly or happily. I think that this story really relays a message for our generation.

Look at what has happened in our generation: a war in the Middle East, oil spills, rebellion, all caused by greedy people with too much money. The war in the Middle East was started because of Former President Bush’s statement that the terrorists had weapons of mass destruction. This was a ploy by Bush to outdo his father. W. Bush wanted to outdo his father and be the better president and be more liked by everyone so that he could have a longer term as president and make more money to have better cars, houses, and a better life than his father. We all know how that turned out. And BP’s little boo-boo in the gulf was all because the leaders of the company were too selfish to stop the oil drilling in order to save our environment. They didn’t want to lose any money from their pay checks in order to save the American people and government a lot of trouble. And finally, the rebellions in the Middle East are fights against the government having too much power and too much money, and instead of listening to their people, Kaddafi decided to blow his people up instead. He didn’t want to lose his possessions or money in order to rule justly or happily.

Sir Thomas More’s message he gives to the readers through Raphael is especially important today in our time and age. People need to think about others and not just themselves, and let other people worry about them. If everyone focuses on one another and not themselves the world could be a much better place.

(P.S. This is not a solution for world peace, just a step forward in the way of curing the human condition.)

Donne’s writings all vary from poems to sonnets to prose. But the one thing that stood out most the most to me was his poem “Song.” Most of his poems had some sort of structural symmetry, but this one varies greatly compared to his others. Honestly, I really can not figure out what this poem is about. And that’s one reason I wanted to post about it. To see if I could get some opinions on what its about.

Go and catch a falling star,
Get with child a mandrake root,
Tell me where all past years are,
Or who cleft the Devil's foot,
Teach me to hear mermaids singing,
Or to keep off envy's stinging,
And find
What wind
Serves to advance an honest mind.

If thou be'st born to strange sights,
Things invisible to see,
Ride ten thousand days and nights,
Till age snow white hairs on thee;
Thou, when thou return'st, wilt tell me
All strange wonders that befell thee,
And swear
No where
Lives a woman true, and fair.

If thou find'st one, let me know,
Such a pilgrimage were sweet;
Yet do not, I would not go,
Though at next door we might meet:
Though she were true, when you met her,
And last, till you write your letter,
Yet she
Will be
False, ere I come, to two or three.

The structure of this poem give emphasis to the last lines in each stanza. The last three lines in each begin with two lines that are indented and only contain two words a piece. These four words are clearly emphasized for a reason. This reason partially evades me because I’m not really certain of the story behind Donne’s words. Though in the last stanza he is obviously talking about finding a women and being somehow disappointed.

I know Ruminations are supposed to be about what we know, but I was intrigued by this poem and really wanted to understand what was going on.

Shakespeare VS Time

Shakespeare’s sonnets that we have read all have a similar theme of love and time passing, introduced by metaphors that he creates by personifying the feeling of love and the perception of time. In some sonnets, Shakespeare even goes as far as to capitalize the word “Time” to give it an importance over the rest of the words. The language he uses when speaking of time also shows his attitude towards time, even more so than his metaphors.
Beginning with Sonnet 12 and looking at time, the poem is an entire metaphor for the passing of time with Shakespeare mentioning the seasons passing and people turning old, while at the end of the poem he writes, “And nothing ‘gainst Time’s scythe can make defense” (13). This use of language shows time as death, carrying his scythe and the fact that no one can stop it. The capitalization of time personifies it in the poem as a person or death, which causes a tonal change near the end of the poem. In Sonnet 19, time turns from death to something the Shakespeare is trying to defeat. He wants his love to last forever and therefore has time killed and mauled by animals. “Devouring Time, blunt thou the lion’s paws.” (1). And although Time may take away his love wrongfully, “My love shall in my verse ever live young.” (14). Shakespeare is trying to defeat time; therefore he personifies it as a person so that it is something physical he can overcome. In Sonnet 60, another reference to time as death is made, as he capitalizes time as well as mentioning the scythe:
And Time that gave doth now his gift confound.
Time doth transfix the flourish set on youth
And delves the parallels in beauty’s brow,
Feeds on the rarities of nature’s truth,
And nothing stand but for his scythe to mow.
And yet to times in hope my verse shall stand,
Praising thy worth, despite his cruel hand. (8-14)
Shakespeare’s use of the capitalization of the word time demonstrates that he feels as though time is not something you can escape physically, but it is something his poems and feelings can surpass. As in the final two lines, he states that time can take beauty and life but not his verses, which his transcripts show as a true testament. This statement is shown again in Sonnet 65:
When rocks impregnable are not so stout,
Nor gates of steel so strong, but Time decays?
. . . Shall Time’s best jewel from Time’s chest lie hid?
. . . O none, unless this miracle have might,
That in black ink my love may still shine bright. (8-14)
Without the capitalization and personification of time, Shakespeare’s hatred and fear of it may have been lost in his sonnets.

David Bowie's "Let's Dance"

The album I chose is by one of my favorite men of all time, David Bowie. Bowie's career was an incredible journey, and although he was at times thought to be insane, his fans will always stick by his side. The album that I have chosen isn't all in first person, but all of the songs are about the feeling of love or about a person he is in love with. The songs tones and lyrics are almost melancholy, he has a sense of calm feelings of love, or of a lost love. In "Without You," Bowie is singing about how he wouldn't be able to live without them, and they give him a purpose. The musical tone gives the song a melancholy feelings. The song "Ricochet," if analysed in a certain light, can be seen as what the world is like without love, and how love is sometimes not enough to shield someone from the cruelties of the world. "Criminal World," is written in the third person, but it is a great example of betrayed love. The narrator finds out that he doesn't really know who the person he is in love with is. He one line that "the girls are like baby-faced boys" shows that women can be just as cruel as men, and just as deceiving.

This album represents different types of love and how love can be cruel or doesn't always give you what you want.

A Lover's Quarell: Comparing Wyatt and Surrey

Thomas Wyatt and Henry Howard (referred to in the reading and in the blog as Surrey) were two very similar writers. They were close friends and lived working under the infamous Henry VIII. Both were imprisoned multiple times by Henry and in some cases got each other out. When looking at their writing, there is a similar style, maybe because they wrote in the same climate and in the same time period. But if your focus is put on one specific poem by each, you can see that there must be something more going on than just writing in the same time and place.

When looking at Wyatt’s poem “The long love that in my thought doth harbor,” and comparing it to Surrey’s “Love, that doth reign and live within my thought,” you notice right away the similarities in the titles. If the poems are taken line by line, only a few differences remain to be seen. Beginning with Wyatt’s and Surrey’s first four lines, line one begins by speaking of the love that lies within each narrators thoughts. In line two both narrators are speaking of the simple thought of love, which is personified into “he,” and moving from a thought to a feeling in the narrators heart. Where, in the third and fourth line in both poems, “he” is clad in armor and is holding a banner. At this point the love as been symbolized to knight or warrior, and the “banner” is representing of the now thoughts of constant love the narrator’s heart is showing him.

Moving on to lines five to eight in both poems, Wyatt and Surrey both speak of how “she” teaches the narrator how to both love and suffer. “She that learneth me to love and suffer” (Wyatt, 5). Compared to Surreys, “But she that taught me love and suffer pain” (5). Line six in both speaks of the narrator’s carless and doubtful love and lust, moving onto line seven, speaking of modest looks towards “her.” Here, there is the slightest difference in lines, as Surrey’s poem takes a turn for the brighter in line eight: “Her smiling grace convereteth straight to ire.” While in Wyatt’s poem his line eight speaks “his hardiness taketh displeasure.” These difference in lines shows that these two narrators and beginning to have different views on the situation, Wyatt’s poem taking a darker side.

The poems sync up again beginning in line nine, where the narrators are speaking of fleeing cowardly to the heart, followed by line ten which continues the running and hiding, but a slight variance changes the mood yet again. Wyatt’s poem speaks of “pain and cry,” when fleeing to hide, while Surrey’s narrator merely “plain(s)” or complains. Yet both narrators end up losing their way by line eleven. In the last few lines, the narrators of both poems speak of leaving their “lord” and “master.” Wyatt uses master while Surrey uses the word lord, both speaking in lines twelve to fourteen of leaving this person. Surrey’s use of lord may be a religious reference, being backed by the fact that his poem is the lighter of the two, and Wyatt’s poem seems to be coming from a darker side.

Test Post!

I've had this blog set up for a while so I hope no one is in shock by all of my other posts. My teachers have been using this site a lot. Hope to talk to you all soon!

Plays

Today in class, I think I was very surprised. Everyone had very different and unique plays. I was thinking that everyone was gonna have a similar play style or topic. I was also pleasantly surprised how funny a lot of them were. I was thinking that everyone was going to do something serious. It was also cool how everyone sort of picked a certain type of play and used it to make their own. Some of the topics were pretty random, but still really funny. Like, Jen’s play. I was NOT expecting to hear a play about mammoths. Or as Dexter was saying mam-moths. It was an awesome change up. I also thought Michaels play was cool. It reminded me of Law and Order (bum bum).

Performing the plays was also a lot of fun. I think that Michaels was the coolest to perform. I got to be an attorney, which was pretty sweet. I also thought it was strange how funny everyone, well at least Dexter, thought mine was. Cuz it was supposed to be serious. But I think we had fun performing stuff anyway so it doesn’t really matter. It was also cool how everyones play had little twists in them, it seemed like we all used some sort of twist to make our story different from others.

Lastly, I would like to say this was my favorite writing assignment. Everyone got to write about whatever they wanted and make stuff up. Which is pretty easy to do. Also, my little brother, who is 9, loved helping me with this. He picked out the names for me, and also, while I was writing my play, it inspired him to write his own story. Which was amazing, because he hates reading. But I thought it was cute how he felt inspired to write a story like I was. I really enjoyed this class, because I love theatre, and getting a chance to write and share my play was awesome. And I loved listening to others plays, it lets you get an idea of what everyone is really like. Although I hope everyone doesn’t think I do drugs and sleep with lots of women because of my play. Cuz I don’t.

Pygmalion

First off, I have to say, the entire time I was reading this play, all I could imagine and hear in my head was the movie/musical My Fair Lady. If you haven’t seen it, it’s pretty much the Pygmalion story in a musical form, with a slightly different story line, and I highly recommend it if you had problems with Eliza’s accent. At any rate, I had all of the songs from My Fair Lady stuck in my head for the past 3 days. But, as annoying as it was, knowing the storyline in advance did help me to understand what was happening in the play, especially with Eliza’s accent. The vocal link Mrs. Pierce gave us to listen too was also helpful in understanding some of the strong dialect.

Before class today I didn’t realize how the play Pygmalion was connected to the ancient Greek and Roman myth. The likeness of the two stories is not as strong as in other adaption’s, but it is still there. Most modern adaptions would probably keep Galatea as a statue and Pygmalion as a sculptor; with maybe some name variation and change of venue and language. But the way Shaw uses the ancient story to adapt it to modern day is amazing. Thinking that Higgins was just using Eliza to sculpt a perfect member of society by his standards was pretty twisted. When comparing the play to My Fair Lady it’s interesting to see the difference in characters but the almost complete similarity in storyline. When watching My Fair Lady, you do not really get a sense of Higgins being a creepy old guy out to use Eliza for his own entertainment. While in the play, Pygmalion that is how I read his character.

Over the past few classes when we’ve focused on comparing the play with its film adaption, I’ve become more in tune with spotting the small differences between the two. So when I read Shaw’s play, I saw able to quickly compare our modern day musical adaption in my head and see how the directors of both may have changed some things around to use to their advantage. The moral story that each of the adaption’s tell, I think, is still similar. In each, once Higgins turns Eliza into a “sophisticated lady,” there is nowhere for her to go, physically and socially. She’s stuck between two classes that are both not going to easily except her.

Dr. Faustus

Dr. Faustus was another hard read. This Medieval stuff is really hard for me to read, and I’m not sure why. I love Shakespeare and it is not far from it in some of its style and conventions. Though I must say that this story was more interesting than some of our previous stories, so it was a lot easier to get through. I thought that Dr. Faustus was an interesting man. He gives up his soul to the devil as to gain magical powers, and uses these magical powers to impress people. You would think if you got magical powers you would use it to make yourself invincible, or make it so that you can fly, or that you’re the richest person in the world. But it seemed to me like Dr. Faustus just wanted everyone to find him interesting and to be liked by his colleagues and the upper class. I found this pretty different. Nowadays if someone received magical powers, they would most certainly use them more destructively; whether it is self destructive or dangerous to others. A modern day tale would more likely be Dr. Faustus wishing to be the richest person in the world, or to have superpowers. Another thing about Dr. Faustus that I found interesting, and I didn’t necessarily like, was his indecisiveness. He kept changing his mind about whether he should be doing what he was doing. I mean, his indecisiveness before selling his soul makes sense, but afterwards, there’s really nothing you can do. He keeps thinking that he should pray to God and hope that he can be saved, when instead he should be enjoying his powers. You’ve already sold your soul Faustus, stop whining! Although I do feel sorry for him because Mephistopheles does push him towards selling his soul, and he didn’t really get a good chance to make a decision on his own.

Also, I found the play that Mrs. Pierce had us watch pretty amazing. The fact that when the director read this play, he imagined that in his head, that’s pretty incredible, especially seeing the his final image come to life on stage. When most people think of plays they don’t imagine things like that. I certainly didn’t and neither did anyone else in the class. Seeing this play, in any form and produced by anyone, seems as though it would be much easier to follow that when simply reading it.

Everyman

Everyman was a great moral tale, and had a wonderful underlying theme. But the story itself was very repetitive and boring. I didn’t want to upset anyone in class by saying this, but I’m not a very religious person at all. I may be one of the least religious people in the class, so the story was hard for me to read because of the way it was being told. I was bothered by Everyman having to appease god for doing all his wrongs before he could move on, and how he was no followed by his friends because of the fact he betrayed god. Don’t get me wrong, it was a great story and I do believe you must take responsibility for your “sins” so that you can pass on happily, but the fact that it was based on God and Jesus made it hard for me to read.

I do love allegorical stories, and the allegory used to tell this story was one of the best I’ve read, but again, I didn’t agree with the basis of the story. Also, I didn’t agree necessarily with the order that everyone left Everyman. To me, it would probably be Fellowship, Cousins, Kindred, Goods, Five-wits, Strength, Beauty, Knowledge and Discretion. Of course, because I am not religious I’m sure that this changes the way I look at myself and the world, as well as death.

One thing I do not understand about the story was the point of the Doctor at the end. I understand that he was there to sort of give a summary of the stories events, but I believe that the Angel could have just as well given us a summary. Everyman could have also given us a summary of his feelings and realizations.

The other thing that bothered me about this was the language. I’ve read Dante’s Inferno, Paradise Lost, and almost all of Shakespeare’s plays, but this play really gave me trouble. I had to read all of the foot notes at least twice and then read the lines very slowly so that I could comprehend what was happened. But I still ended up pretty confused as to what was going one near the end. The language in The York Crucifixion was much more complicated but I liked that story better. It was light hearted and the tone helped me to follow what was going on.

Atsumori

This story was pretty interesting, and it wasn’t hard to follow for me. The part that made the reading difficult was the fact that there were so many stage directions I was trying to keep track of and all the characters switching back on forth between lines. This style of writing made sense for the culture and time period, but isn’t very effective now.

When we learned about the Noh theatre traditions, the play’s unique style and structure made much more sense. And when we watched the video and I was actually able to see the effect all of the stage directions had on the actual performance. Performing in the Noh theatre looked like it might be very difficult. Having to remember all of the specifics of the movements as well as your lines seem like a lot to have to remember. The audience had to be well informed as well, and also very intelligent to be able to follow along with the story and use the actor’s body movements to tell what was going on.

When we were in class and Ms. Pierce started explaining what was happening at the end of the play I got really lost. I had no idea what was happening at the end because of the multitude of stage directions and the fact that the Shite was changing between characters. When she explained what was actually going on with the Shite’s line it made so much more sense to the story.

Another thing I found interesting about the theatre of the Noh area is the similarities between the Japanese theatre and the Chinese theatre. The singing element of the plays seems like a very asian feature. We in America would think of these as musicals, but they use the singing as a dramatic effect to add emotion to the play as well as to tell the story.

Snow in Midsummer - Chinese Theatre

The structure of this poem was what really caught my interest at first. The way there are stanzas’s and then paragraphs, it made the play flow very strangely, until I knew that it was mostly to be sung. Then the structure made more sense to me. The repetition of every detail of the story in every characters line’s was very frustrating because I felt like the author was just doing it to fill in space. It was helpful at some points in the play because it did get confusing when characters began threatening each other and gold was being exchanged and everyone was strangling each other.

This play seemed a very different form then the Greek drama’s we’ve been reading. This was not completely centered around mythology or religion, but was in fact focused and driven by one factor which was the Chinese belief of the 7 virtues. Dou E. had to follow the virtues so that her family name and honor would be upheld; the same is true for the Greek drama’s, the people had to uphold their family name and honor but instead of following virtues they had to follow and appease the rules of the gods. The presence of a tragic hero isn’t so much present in the Chinese drama but there is a sense of a flaw in the characters. The characters in these drama’s also are not royal members, but instead merely peasants or common people.

When it comes to the visual sense of the Chinese dramas, they are very similar to the Greek dramas. The presence of masks does exist in both cultures and the Skene doors are replaced by a simple indented wall for the exit and entrances of the actors. Both forms of theatre are preformed outside for the most part, and involve similar use of props such as masks and scenery. Both the Greek and Chinese theatre use masks to represent the characters, as well as using little to no scenery, instead they both use props and body movement to represent what is going on in the play in place of the scenery. These plays types are very similar in nature and it makes you wonder if they either have influences from each other or from a similar outside source. Certainly they are not very similar to today’s plays and dramas, which are pretty much the same all over the world.

Medea - The Witch of Corinth

In this Greek play written by Euripedes, Jason, a prince by blood, is married to a witch of sorts named Medea. Medea helped Jason to milk the fire breathing ox, defeat the undead army which sprang from the ground and to slip past the dragon to reach the Golden Fleece. After this Medea fled with Jason, being disowned by her family and married him. The play begins, en medius res, we see Medea is mourning because Jason has decided to marry Creon’s young daughter Creusa, so that he may gain power over the land of Corinth. Jason claims that his purpose in this is to make sure that his sons, whom he has with Medea, will have a chance to become royalty when they grow older.

When reading the play, you get a sense of simplicity to the set and characters. There isn’t much of a set that would be needed because the stage directions simply call for people entering and exiting. Plays nowadays are so complex, with multiple levels and machines, moving buildings and things to make people fly, it would be amazing to see where theatre would be now if there weren’t all of these inventions to make theatre more entertaining. When reading the play, there are only a few characters that are the main speakers: Medea, Jason and the Chorus. In modern plays we have much more complex character systems. But when we compare Euripedes play to that of Sophocles, we see a much larger character base. The chorus in this play seems to be a force that pushes Medea’s character development, not a huge character in itself like it was in Oedipus. Medea gets more hateful towards people as the chorus tells her to calm down, and that they love her and only want to help her.

One thing that I believe both the play and the film were missing was the character of Creusa. She is the entire reason that Medea has lost Jason and does all of these terrible sins. It is understandable to not have her in the play as written originally, but in the film adaption it would have made more sense. It would have been nice to see some sort of action between Medea and Creusa. This would have been very useful in the fall of Medea into madness, to see her anger towards Creusa, although she continually says that her true hate is towards Jason, she ends up killing Creusa which means she must really hate her just as much.

Oedipus the King-Sophocles

This story was pretty interesting. Being part of a trilogy, just reading this one part didn’t give me much of a sense of what the characters were like. I could tell that Jocasta really loved Oedipus and him the same to her, but that was the only character elements I could really grasp. Oedipus is definitely one of the most interesting drama characters, and the story of Oedipus and the Sphinx is one of my all time favorites. The one thing that I got out of this story about Oedipus’ character was his tragic flaw. It seemed to me like he was very proud of where he came from, but also very scared. He was proud that he solved the riddle of the Sphinx and came to power as the king but he ignored all of the signs that pointed to his demise. His cowardliness was also a big flaw. He ran from all of these situations that a prophet predicted would come true, instead of facing all of them head on. It also seems like he was focusing on one event to hold him in power, the riddle of the Sphinx. He mentions it so much in this short time span that it made me think that maybe he was insecure about being the king so suddenly that he had to make it known that he deserved the title because he saved the people from the Sphinx.

This was the first drama I have read where there was a chorus. It seems like we have replaced the role the chorus played with extras in our modern shows. The extras will say little side comments to help the audience catch on or let them know what their reactions should be. The chorus seems like a strange concept; in this drama they acted all as the town’s people and also almost as an audience. To think of them singing all of these lines together also makes the concept even stranger. I was actually trying to sing the lines in my head at one point to see how it would sound and it was kind of weird.

Lastly, the structure of this piece is very simplistic. There are only a few characters, and mainly one person does all the talking. I felt like the whole drama was just one long monologue from Oedipus and the Chorus. To think of one person playing multiple characters would also make this an interesting show to see, or even perform. I continued to think throughout the reading how difficult it must have been for these actors to memorize all these lines along with changing characters. I definitely wouldn’t have been able to do that.