Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Plays and Movies
I really enjoyed our discussion last class about whether the scene we watched in class was an appropriation, interpretation, etc. of the play. I always just thought of a play being turned into a movie as something that wasn't able to be changed much because all of the lines were already given. From watching the movie in class and on the blog, I can see how, especially with Othello not having stage directions or detailed scenery, a director or producer can also take the words of the play and the scenes and portray them in the film very differently than another director or producer would.
Also, while watching the movie in class it was especially interesting to see, in comparison to the movie posted on the blog, how these specific directors chose to portray the play since Shakespeare chose not to leave stage directions. Noticing which lines the directors chose to leave out of the play was curious as well. I wasn't aware of how much of a difference it makes until I watched the version in class where Desdemona doesn't have her "not dead yet" moment.
In middle school we read Romeo and Juliet, and we also watched two versions of the movie. We watched the version with Leonardo DiCaprio in which the movie takes a very modern look at the play but keeps all the original dialogue, and we watched an older version in which the original dialogue is the same but a much more traditional view.
A Question to Think On:
Do you think Shakespeare purposefully left his play without stage directions so that it may be left up to interpretation; Did he want people to use their imagination or for the play to be timeless, to fit into any future culture?
Also, while watching the movie in class it was especially interesting to see, in comparison to the movie posted on the blog, how these specific directors chose to portray the play since Shakespeare chose not to leave stage directions. Noticing which lines the directors chose to leave out of the play was curious as well. I wasn't aware of how much of a difference it makes until I watched the version in class where Desdemona doesn't have her "not dead yet" moment.
In middle school we read Romeo and Juliet, and we also watched two versions of the movie. We watched the version with Leonardo DiCaprio in which the movie takes a very modern look at the play but keeps all the original dialogue, and we watched an older version in which the original dialogue is the same but a much more traditional view.
A Question to Think On:
Do you think Shakespeare purposefully left his play without stage directions so that it may be left up to interpretation; Did he want people to use their imagination or for the play to be timeless, to fit into any future culture?
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Drama Drama Drama
While reading this play, Othello, I keep getting very frustrated with Othello and a few other of the characters in the play. They all think Iago is such a great guy, and as the reader who is able to see all the mischief he is creating, this is very irritating. Cassio even says to Iago at one point, "I never knew a Florentine more kind and honest" (95). They don't realize that Iago is manipulating every single one of them and essentially turning them all against each other.
I also become very frustrated with Othello when he believed Iago so easily about Desdemona being unfaithful to him. Instead of confronting Desdemona about it, he takes the false evidence Iago gives him as fact without checking if it is trustworthy evidence.
Was anyone else really irked by Iago and how he so easily pulled the wool over everyone's eyes? Or were you more irritated by the fact that everyone was so ready to believe anything he told them?
I also have some questions about the times. Were a woman's views on a situation seen as irrelevant? Were women inferior to men in that way and that is why Othello never confronted Desdemona? Do you think it would matter if she explained the situation or would Othello have still believed Iago?
I also become very frustrated with Othello when he believed Iago so easily about Desdemona being unfaithful to him. Instead of confronting Desdemona about it, he takes the false evidence Iago gives him as fact without checking if it is trustworthy evidence.
Was anyone else really irked by Iago and how he so easily pulled the wool over everyone's eyes? Or were you more irritated by the fact that everyone was so ready to believe anything he told them?
I also have some questions about the times. Were a woman's views on a situation seen as irrelevant? Were women inferior to men in that way and that is why Othello never confronted Desdemona? Do you think it would matter if she explained the situation or would Othello have still believed Iago?
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
font size
I have no idea how to get my font to go back to normal size. I try highlighting and putting it back to normal...is that not right? I'll keep trying.
Writing Process
I have been brainstorming for this short paper for about a week now. All weekend I came up with some topics I wanted to talk about, managed to form some main points, created an introduction, AND formed a thesis (the last thing I do before I begin to write). So things are going great...UNTIL I go in to class yesterday and we begin discussing counterarguments. I am sitting there and can not come up with a counterargument for the life of me.
Of course, I then think of a counterargument for a totally DiFfErEnT paper topic. I quickly write down some main points for this new topic and the counterargument I had come up with. After class I go in and talk with Professor Ambrose and now the trouble is finding a thesis for my new topic. And that is where I am now. Trying to come up with a thesis for my new paper.
Does anyone else have this problem?? Knowing what you want to write about, having evidence and points and a counterargument...all that JAZZ and then not being able to write a thesis that brings everything together? Guess I'll start writing and just hope it comes to me...
Of course, I then think of a counterargument for a totally DiFfErEnT paper topic. I quickly write down some main points for this new topic and the counterargument I had come up with. After class I go in and talk with Professor Ambrose and now the trouble is finding a thesis for my new topic. And that is where I am now. Trying to come up with a thesis for my new paper.
Does anyone else have this problem?? Knowing what you want to write about, having evidence and points and a counterargument...all that JAZZ and then not being able to write a thesis that brings everything together? Guess I'll start writing and just hope it comes to me...
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Oops!
When I was reading this short story I thought it was Gilman talking, I hadn't realized it was a fictional character's journal which Gilman had created. My thoughts still hold true, but I just wanted to point out that error in my writing!
Relationship with John
In my opinion, not only is the rest cure not helping her, but the narrator's relationship with her husband John is not helping her one bit either. Though she claims he loves her, he speaks down to her and makes her feel guilty about her condition. Despite the "my dears," he treats her as any other patient. She describes her feelings, "He takes all care from me, and so I feel basely ungrateful not to value it more." (369). She goes on later to confess, "It is so hard to talk with John about my case, because he is so wise, and because he loves me so." (374). Even when she is talking about the care and love John gives her, we get a sense by the way she says she feels "basely ungrateful" and how she confesses "it is so hard to talk with John," that she feels trapped and guilty for not agreeing with him about the rest cure.
John even talks to her as though she is a child, and Gilman seems to look right past that. He refers to her as little several times throughout the reading: "called me a blessed little goose," (370), "What is it, little girl?" (374), and "Bless her little heart!" (375). He also, "gathered me up in his arms, and just carried me upstairs and laid me on the bed, and sat by me and read to me till it tired my head," (373), as though she was a child going up for bedtime. The final reason he is not helping her and most likely making her worse by being condescending, is by telling her, "There is nothing so dangerous, so fascinating, to a temperament like yours. It is a false and foolish fancy." (375).
It is so obvious to me that he is doing her no good. How could she see past that? Was she really that ill? Was it just the time? How could be think locking someone up by themselves without being able to do something would make them better? Would she have been better off with a different husband? Someone who wasn't a physician?
John even talks to her as though she is a child, and Gilman seems to look right past that. He refers to her as little several times throughout the reading: "called me a blessed little goose," (370), "What is it, little girl?" (374), and "Bless her little heart!" (375). He also, "gathered me up in his arms, and just carried me upstairs and laid me on the bed, and sat by me and read to me till it tired my head," (373), as though she was a child going up for bedtime. The final reason he is not helping her and most likely making her worse by being condescending, is by telling her, "There is nothing so dangerous, so fascinating, to a temperament like yours. It is a false and foolish fancy." (375).
It is so obvious to me that he is doing her no good. How could she see past that? Was she really that ill? Was it just the time? How could be think locking someone up by themselves without being able to do something would make them better? Would she have been better off with a different husband? Someone who wasn't a physician?
Mistreated Illness
I am so glad times have changed and now we are able to correctly evaluate and help those with mental anxiety. It is so sad to read this story of the narrator's dealings with mental illness. After being prescribed the "rest cure", in which the patient is not allowed to do anything at all, she knows it is not making her well again and expresses this from page one, claiming, "Personally, I disagree with their ideas. Personally, I believe that congenial work, with excitement and change, would do me good." (368).
We can also see that the narrator realizes writing is one thing she is able to do in secret and also a way to relax her mind when she says, "I would not say it to a living soul, of course, but this is dead paper and a great relief to my mind." (368). She later claims that writing is tiring, but after rereading this section, I saw that it is not the act of writing which is tiresome, but the constant need to hide what she is doing. She obviously knows that the rest cure is not helping her condition, but she trusts her husband, John, to do the right thing for her.
I was also thinking as I was reading that maybe it is not a nervous disorder that she is suffering, but perhaps it could be Postpartum Depression. It mentioned how she had a child and was not even allowed to see the baby, which made her sad. I'm not sure if they knew what this was then, but do you think this has potential as her actual problem?
We can also see that the narrator realizes writing is one thing she is able to do in secret and also a way to relax her mind when she says, "I would not say it to a living soul, of course, but this is dead paper and a great relief to my mind." (368). She later claims that writing is tiring, but after rereading this section, I saw that it is not the act of writing which is tiresome, but the constant need to hide what she is doing. She obviously knows that the rest cure is not helping her condition, but she trusts her husband, John, to do the right thing for her.
I was also thinking as I was reading that maybe it is not a nervous disorder that she is suffering, but perhaps it could be Postpartum Depression. It mentioned how she had a child and was not even allowed to see the baby, which made her sad. I'm not sure if they knew what this was then, but do you think this has potential as her actual problem?
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Class Questions from Friday 1-30
In class on Friday we were discussing 3 questions: What is Woolf's "take away" point or conclusion? Is her point still relevant today? and, Does it need to be adapted in any way? I didn't share my opinions in class, but I would like to share my thoughts now.
I think Woolf's "take away" point is that the women she is speaking to have no excuse not to succeed, to not be ground-breaking. Women before them were denied the means needed for success and now these women are given those means and must take advantage of what they have been given. Woolf wants these women to succeed for all the women before them. She explains, "but she lives; for great poets do not die; they are continuing presences; they need only the opportunity to walk among us in the flesh." (p.113).
This point is still relevant in today's world because there are many people who have been given all they need to succeed and do not use it. For example, some people have the ability to go to college, get an education, and later a job, but choose not to go. Then there are those who do not use their God-given talents and waste their gifts.
Woolf's point does need to be adapted slightly in that we don't need to focus on using our gifts for those before us, but rather that we should just take advantage of all the opportunities we have been given and use them to our full potential
I think Woolf's "take away" point is that the women she is speaking to have no excuse not to succeed, to not be ground-breaking. Women before them were denied the means needed for success and now these women are given those means and must take advantage of what they have been given. Woolf wants these women to succeed for all the women before them. She explains, "but she lives; for great poets do not die; they are continuing presences; they need only the opportunity to walk among us in the flesh." (p.113).
This point is still relevant in today's world because there are many people who have been given all they need to succeed and do not use it. For example, some people have the ability to go to college, get an education, and later a job, but choose not to go. Then there are those who do not use their God-given talents and waste their gifts.
Woolf's point does need to be adapted slightly in that we don't need to focus on using our gifts for those before us, but rather that we should just take advantage of all the opportunities we have been given and use them to our full potential
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)