This month we finished Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. I enjoyed this play, but I couldn't really tell you why. I just enjoyed it. It was unlike anything else I had read before. From the breaking of the fourth wall, to the expansion on a play I knew and love, and the humor in the play, I loved every word of it.
We had some more practice writing essays as well. I need a lot of help, although I do not feel like I'm wallowing in a sea of incompetence anymore. Only a pond. I think that my best writing was done in my Open Prompt Part 2: 2004, although that is not for me to decide.
Lastly, we finished Frankenstein. I love this book, and it is definitely one of my favorite books. It reveals some unsettling conclusions about the nature of man. I would be lying if I said that I have never judged anyone by their looks. I probably would have judged the monster for what he looked like, not for who he was.
All in all, it was a good month. I can't wait to do more.
Sunday, March 22, 2015
Sunday, March 15, 2015
Open Prompt Part 2: 2004
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein asks "Is it better to be alive and damned, or never to have lived at all?" Shelley offers an answer to this: no. She shows her answer through Frankenstein's Monster. The monster lives a life ostracized by society, eventually choosing to end his own life rather than suffer in a society that hates and fears him.
Frankenstein's Monster lives his life with people fearing him just by his looks. For instance, the blind old man accepts him, but then he is chased out when people who are not blind see him. Why live in a society that cannot move past your looks? Shelley makes a point about his intelligence as well. The Monster read classics such as Paradise Lost and is articulate, forming mature thoughts and ideas about the world.
The Monster also loves the world that he lives in, but the world will not love him back. He has a childlike curiosity about the world around him. He explores and learns by trial and error, like when he learns about fire. He has nothing but love to give. But then, he realizes that he has been abandoned by his creator and that the world is too closed minded for him to be accepted. His own creator would not even give him a companion to live with to lessen his pain.
The Monster eventually chooses to commit suicide by self-immolation so that no trace of his existence will plague the world. He lived a damned life that was so terrible, he saw no other way to stop the pain other than his own suicide. The Monster's life was nothing but pain. His damned life was horrendous in every way possible with constant suffering. Shelley says no to the aforementioned question, it is better to have never lived.
Shelley's Frankenstein displays a frightening image of the nature of man. The Monster's suffering was so much so that he took his own life to make the suffering stop. The Monster would have been better of if he had never been alive in the first place.
Frankenstein's Monster lives his life with people fearing him just by his looks. For instance, the blind old man accepts him, but then he is chased out when people who are not blind see him. Why live in a society that cannot move past your looks? Shelley makes a point about his intelligence as well. The Monster read classics such as Paradise Lost and is articulate, forming mature thoughts and ideas about the world.
The Monster also loves the world that he lives in, but the world will not love him back. He has a childlike curiosity about the world around him. He explores and learns by trial and error, like when he learns about fire. He has nothing but love to give. But then, he realizes that he has been abandoned by his creator and that the world is too closed minded for him to be accepted. His own creator would not even give him a companion to live with to lessen his pain.
The Monster eventually chooses to commit suicide by self-immolation so that no trace of his existence will plague the world. He lived a damned life that was so terrible, he saw no other way to stop the pain other than his own suicide. The Monster's life was nothing but pain. His damned life was horrendous in every way possible with constant suffering. Shelley says no to the aforementioned question, it is better to have never lived.
Shelley's Frankenstein displays a frightening image of the nature of man. The Monster's suffering was so much so that he took his own life to make the suffering stop. The Monster would have been better of if he had never been alive in the first place.
Sunday, March 8, 2015
Open Prompt 2: 2004
Student N
This student's intro is a little longer than I would have liked. However, it works well because Student N is thorough throughout. The writer lays out exactly what they are writing a they hope to answer in their thesis paragraph. I personally think that this writer had a fully developed argument, and that this essay was sufficient to get a 9, but I'm no AP grader.
Student J
The AP graders said that Student J's writing was too reliant on the plot, and I would agree. The entire essay built off of its own plot summary. The essay was more of a summary than anything else. I have not read Huckleberry Finn, but I did not need to to fully understand this essay. All summary aside, the writer made some valid points.
Student U
The first sentence made me not want to read the essay. It was bad. I may not be the best writer, but even I know not to write a lead like that. The thesis paragraph never ends too. If the reader cannot be grabbed by an intro, the writer has ultimately failed. Plot summary is prevalent as well, but not too much, only because there is not much to this essay. This essay seems half formed.
This student's intro is a little longer than I would have liked. However, it works well because Student N is thorough throughout. The writer lays out exactly what they are writing a they hope to answer in their thesis paragraph. I personally think that this writer had a fully developed argument, and that this essay was sufficient to get a 9, but I'm no AP grader.
Student J
The AP graders said that Student J's writing was too reliant on the plot, and I would agree. The entire essay built off of its own plot summary. The essay was more of a summary than anything else. I have not read Huckleberry Finn, but I did not need to to fully understand this essay. All summary aside, the writer made some valid points.
Student U
The first sentence made me not want to read the essay. It was bad. I may not be the best writer, but even I know not to write a lead like that. The thesis paragraph never ends too. If the reader cannot be grabbed by an intro, the writer has ultimately failed. Plot summary is prevalent as well, but not too much, only because there is not much to this essay. This essay seems half formed.
Tuesday, March 3, 2015
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead
The play begins with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern flipping coins. The coins continue to land heads. Rosencrantz wins everywhere it lands heads. They run into the actors from Hamlet on their way to Elsinore. They find out that the actors have become prostitutes. The actors and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have a bet. There, the actors pack up and leave. The coin is revealed to be tails. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are suddenly thrown into a scene in Hamlet where Hamlet is chasing Ophelia, who abruptly. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern meet with Claudius and my main squeeze Gertrude. They are tasked with figuring out what ails Hamlet. They then pretend to be Hamlet to find a good approach to find out what is bothering him. They meet with Hamlet, but discern nothing of value. The players return, and perform the play Hamlet wanted them to perform. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern try to trap Hamlet when they find out that he killed Polonius. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern then tell Hamlet that they have to escort Hamlet to England. It then cuts to them on a boat. They see Hamlet sleeping by them. They open up their orders from the king and find out that Hamlet will be executed in England. Then, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern fall asleep Hamlet switches out the letter with a letter ordering the king of England to execute Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The tragedians from earlier pop out of some barrels on deck just as the pirates attack the ship. Everyone jumps into a barrel and the tragedians and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern pop out afterwards, without Hamlet or the pirates. When they realize that Hamlet is no longer with them the Guildenstern says, "We've travelled too far, and our momentum has taken over; we move idly towards eternity, without possibility of reprieve or hope of explanation." (121). To this, Rosencrantz responds, "Be happy - if you're not even happy about surviving? We'll be alright. I suppose we just go on." (121). Here, the pair realize they have no point without Hamlet. The tragedians then talk about different forms of death, and they all perform them. The disappear, leaving Rosencrantz and Guildenstern to contemplate their fate. Then, there is a cut revealing the end of Hamlet where everyone has died.
Sixth hour's theme statement was, the way we perceive our circumstances affects the way we perceive our free will. This plagues Rosencrantz and Guildenstern throughout the play. They are constantly trying to push the boundaries of their free will, like trying to climb out of the set, and by breaking the fourth wall. They never succeed because they are not fully aware of their entrapment. Also, when Rosencrantz giving his box monologue. He believes that living in a box would be worse than living at all. He believes that he is not living in a box, even though he is. We as the audience see that he is enclosed in a box, the stage. He is just not aware of this. He believes that he has complete free will, while we know he does not.
Sixth hour's theme statement was, the way we perceive our circumstances affects the way we perceive our free will. This plagues Rosencrantz and Guildenstern throughout the play. They are constantly trying to push the boundaries of their free will, like trying to climb out of the set, and by breaking the fourth wall. They never succeed because they are not fully aware of their entrapment. Also, when Rosencrantz giving his box monologue. He believes that living in a box would be worse than living at all. He believes that he is not living in a box, even though he is. We as the audience see that he is enclosed in a box, the stage. He is just not aware of this. He believes that he has complete free will, while we know he does not.
Sunday, February 22, 2015
Response to Course Materials
Thanks to breaks, snow days and finals wrapping up, this month was pretty short. We read Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead by Tom Stoppard. I enjoyed this piece, although I couldn't tell you why. Maybe it had to do with its self-aware humor. Maybe it was its like-able, relatable leads. Or maybe the layers of control present. Whatever it was, I loved it.
Our class began working on our theme statement. We knew we had to include control, split personalities between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and the cyclical nature of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.
This month has been a little low on events. Hopefully next month we won't have a ton of breaks and snow days to stop us.
Our class began working on our theme statement. We knew we had to include control, split personalities between Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and the cyclical nature of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.
This month has been a little low on events. Hopefully next month we won't have a ton of breaks and snow days to stop us.
Sunday, February 15, 2015
Open Prompt 2: 1970a
In Edward Albee's The American Dream, a parallel society is present in our society's stead. In this society, desire for power, materialism and selfishness are emphasized. This causes Grandma to leave and kill the problem.
Power is emphasized by characters like Mommy. She is the dominant figure in the household, compared to the stereotypical male-lead American household. This is because she forces Daddy to get a sex change so she can assert her dominance. She wants more and more power causing Grandma, who represents the old world ideals of pulling oneself up by their own bootstraps, to leave hire the Young Man to kill Mommy and Daddy. Mommy tries to control Grandma, but this causes Grandma to hide her belongings and eventually leave.
Materialism forces Grandma to leave and kill Mommy and Daddy. Mommy and her desire for more goods is present from birth. Grandma talks about how Mommy only cared about the outside of the way Grandma packed her lunches. She would not even open her lunch because it would ruin its shape. She did not look deeper. This is why she cannot find Grandma's stuff when she hides it. Grandma leaves because of this materialism.
Lastly, selfishness causes Grandma to leave. No one in the family cares for each other. Daddy is a puppet of Mommy, and Mommy takes everything that she can. She taunts the characters like Daddy, and cannot even be bothered to remember Ms. Barker's name. Grandma does not jive well with this and gets the Young Man to kill Mommy and Daddy so she does not have to deal with it anymore.
Desire for power, materialism and selfishness cause Grandma to leave the society created by the likes of Mommy and Daddy. The American Dream's society is so unlike the old one, that Grandma leaves, and purges the household.
Power is emphasized by characters like Mommy. She is the dominant figure in the household, compared to the stereotypical male-lead American household. This is because she forces Daddy to get a sex change so she can assert her dominance. She wants more and more power causing Grandma, who represents the old world ideals of pulling oneself up by their own bootstraps, to leave hire the Young Man to kill Mommy and Daddy. Mommy tries to control Grandma, but this causes Grandma to hide her belongings and eventually leave.
Materialism forces Grandma to leave and kill Mommy and Daddy. Mommy and her desire for more goods is present from birth. Grandma talks about how Mommy only cared about the outside of the way Grandma packed her lunches. She would not even open her lunch because it would ruin its shape. She did not look deeper. This is why she cannot find Grandma's stuff when she hides it. Grandma leaves because of this materialism.
Lastly, selfishness causes Grandma to leave. No one in the family cares for each other. Daddy is a puppet of Mommy, and Mommy takes everything that she can. She taunts the characters like Daddy, and cannot even be bothered to remember Ms. Barker's name. Grandma does not jive well with this and gets the Young Man to kill Mommy and Daddy so she does not have to deal with it anymore.
Desire for power, materialism and selfishness cause Grandma to leave the society created by the likes of Mommy and Daddy. The American Dream's society is so unlike the old one, that Grandma leaves, and purges the household.
Sunday, February 8, 2015
Open Prompt Part 1: 2003
Essay #1
Student LLLL did wrote a fine essay. LLLL used a myriad of quotes to back up his points, more than I would have remembered for the AP exam. The quotes were not just there to be quotes. They added depth to LLLL' analysis. Each paragraph had one to help LLLL's points. LLLL summarized the plot but only to get his points across. It brought some out some less-thought off analysis of The Great Gatsby. LLLL went off the beaten path. The thesis paragraph is concise and well-written, however, I would have rather have more sentences instead of one short and one long, almost run on, sentence. LLLL lays out his supporting points very clearly, just by listing the three. I like this. It makes it easier to know exactly what the writer is trying to say. Lastly, LLLL brings in evidence that supports the points not only from the text, but also from the time period.
Essay #2
The thesis paragraph has valid points, but it drags on for too long. A thesis paragraph should be concise and get to the point. The title of the play, King Lear, is not even used, except to describe the King Lear as a person. William Shakespeare is not named either. However, the thesis statement at the end is good. I have no problems with the way it was written, other than maybe it is a little wordy. The conclusion shares some of the same problems of the thesis paragraph, it is too lengthy. It should just say what it needs to say, and then stop. Also, the first paragraph has a little too much summarization in it. For someone who has not read King Lear, this is appreciated, except that I should not even be reading this analysis unless I have read King Lear. AP graders may not want as much summarization of the plot.
Essay #3
Student FF does a lot of Student C did. They both summarized the plot a little too much. The thesis paragraph is the opposite of Student C's however. It shoves the reader into a plot summarization without very much about how McMurphy is a tragic hero. It just defines tragic hero. The paragraphs do not have much semblance of arguments for the plot, it just summarizes. A majority of the paragraphs just summarize the plot and then say very little about how McMurphy is a tragic hero. The essay is saying that McMurphy is a tragic hero because others got hurt along the way, but does go beyond that. That is also the only argument. With only one support, an essay like this could have many holes. Student FF has one point tacked on the end, the part with the narrator, haphazardly. It's like the writer forgot to add on a point, but only had five minutes to add it.
Student LLLL did wrote a fine essay. LLLL used a myriad of quotes to back up his points, more than I would have remembered for the AP exam. The quotes were not just there to be quotes. They added depth to LLLL' analysis. Each paragraph had one to help LLLL's points. LLLL summarized the plot but only to get his points across. It brought some out some less-thought off analysis of The Great Gatsby. LLLL went off the beaten path. The thesis paragraph is concise and well-written, however, I would have rather have more sentences instead of one short and one long, almost run on, sentence. LLLL lays out his supporting points very clearly, just by listing the three. I like this. It makes it easier to know exactly what the writer is trying to say. Lastly, LLLL brings in evidence that supports the points not only from the text, but also from the time period.
Essay #2
The thesis paragraph has valid points, but it drags on for too long. A thesis paragraph should be concise and get to the point. The title of the play, King Lear, is not even used, except to describe the King Lear as a person. William Shakespeare is not named either. However, the thesis statement at the end is good. I have no problems with the way it was written, other than maybe it is a little wordy. The conclusion shares some of the same problems of the thesis paragraph, it is too lengthy. It should just say what it needs to say, and then stop. Also, the first paragraph has a little too much summarization in it. For someone who has not read King Lear, this is appreciated, except that I should not even be reading this analysis unless I have read King Lear. AP graders may not want as much summarization of the plot.
Essay #3
Student FF does a lot of Student C did. They both summarized the plot a little too much. The thesis paragraph is the opposite of Student C's however. It shoves the reader into a plot summarization without very much about how McMurphy is a tragic hero. It just defines tragic hero. The paragraphs do not have much semblance of arguments for the plot, it just summarizes. A majority of the paragraphs just summarize the plot and then say very little about how McMurphy is a tragic hero. The essay is saying that McMurphy is a tragic hero because others got hurt along the way, but does go beyond that. That is also the only argument. With only one support, an essay like this could have many holes. Student FF has one point tacked on the end, the part with the narrator, haphazardly. It's like the writer forgot to add on a point, but only had five minutes to add it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)