Conversations between characters and/or authorsLeonardo:
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Federico García Lorca Journal 2 (Com)
Compare how writers in your study have explored the themes of judgment and punishment, or disguise and deceit, or love and friendship, and with what effect.On Lorca I will discuss judgment and punishment and on Ibsen I will discuss disguise and deceit:
The Blood Wedding
Lorca explores the theme of judgment and punishment [] Lorca does this to the effect of []
The Wild Duck
Ibsen explores the theme of disguise and deceit [] Sophocles does this to the effect of []
IOP Journal 5
Difficulties:
Determining the significance of things. It was very difficult for me to settle on a topic because it felt like there were so many different directions that I could go. Thinking back on it now, it may be that my mind was just filled with ideas that did not necessarily fit with all of the text. It came to potential conclusions that could be supported by some text, yet shot down by others. I am glad for this process because it helped me to better realize that I should know more context for things. Although I love history and I love stories, remembering context can be strenuous. It had not occurred it me until recently (though it probably should have) that I could actually go online or read books that would give me an insight into Camus' life and his beliefs. I am a student who abhors putting words into other people's mouths, or trying to find meanings out of things that might or might not even have meaning. Upon reading some of his work, I have come to be more comfortable in making assertions on Camus' text. In analyzing a text, as with analyzing artwork, one can better appriciate/understand the authors intentions by understanding the author or artist's context. Their childhood growing up, the lifesyle they lived or other things that happened to them or during their lives. In doing this I have a better appriciation and understanding for why Wecker gives us context before we begin any of our World Lit plays. Although I am sadded by the quality of the context in that I wish there was more time to consolidate and let the information sink in.
Determining the significance of things. It was very difficult for me to settle on a topic because it felt like there were so many different directions that I could go. Thinking back on it now, it may be that my mind was just filled with ideas that did not necessarily fit with all of the text. It came to potential conclusions that could be supported by some text, yet shot down by others. I am glad for this process because it helped me to better realize that I should know more context for things. Although I love history and I love stories, remembering context can be strenuous. It had not occurred it me until recently (though it probably should have) that I could actually go online or read books that would give me an insight into Camus' life and his beliefs. I am a student who abhors putting words into other people's mouths, or trying to find meanings out of things that might or might not even have meaning. Upon reading some of his work, I have come to be more comfortable in making assertions on Camus' text. In analyzing a text, as with analyzing artwork, one can better appriciate/understand the authors intentions by understanding the author or artist's context. Their childhood growing up, the lifesyle they lived or other things that happened to them or during their lives. In doing this I have a better appriciation and understanding for why Wecker gives us context before we begin any of our World Lit plays. Although I am sadded by the quality of the context in that I wish there was more time to consolidate and let the information sink in.
IOP Journal 4
Techniques &&Stuff:
Thesis: Albert Camus’ The Stranger depicts his absurdist view. Through the use of structure and paralleled concepts Camus portrays that “the absurd is not in man nor in the world but in their presence together”Through the text the reader should be able to come to the conclusion that there can still be meaning in life and that one can still achieve happiness by embracing the absurdist view.
Thesis: Albert Camus’ The Stranger depicts his absurdist view. Through the use of structure and paralleled concepts Camus portrays that “the absurd is not in man nor in the world but in their presence together”Through the text the reader should be able to come to the conclusion that there can still be meaning in life and that one can still achieve happiness by embracing the absurdist view.
Why. Is a verrry broad question.
4) Parallels in the his name
Nevermind. I am not looking to this because there are too many potential variations.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Federico García Lorca Journal 1 (Dis)
Stylistic techniques (imagery, figurative language, sensory detail)
Motif -
Imagery -
IOP Journal 3
IOP Date: (Wednesday) May 19
IOP Novel & Topic: The Stranger & Society v. Individual
Thesis: TBA
To better structure myself, during this process of working on my IOP, I shall use this (journal 3) to talk on my presentation, I'll use journal 4 to talk on parallels that I find in the text, and I shall use journal 5 to express my difficulties in the process of my IOP.
Rather then talking in front of the class for 10-15 minutes or having a PP, the techniques that I will use my presentation shall include T charts of parallels. My first point will be on the structure that Camus chooses in making a part one and a part two. The first T chart will be why Camus chose to create two parts and on the parallels in part one and part two. The second T chart will be the parallels between Meursault himself. Essentially, his growth.
My presentation will be broken into 3 parts.
1) Establishing context for the structure of the novel. What is the significance of part one? What is the significance of part two? Determine the parallels that create that significance.
2) Establish context for Meursault's growth. Determine the parallels that demonstrate his growth.
3) Ask why should any of this matter. What significance does the creation of the two parts have on me as an individual? What should I get from the text? Anyone who knows me knows that I have difficulty putting opinions on anything or making assertions. I realize that part of the reason why I don't feel that I have the qualifications to have certain opinions or make certain assertions is because I know that there are things that I do not know. So I am beginning to think of the context that Camus was in when he wrote his novel. Having gone through World War 2, (in his biography) Camus writes that many people had the believe that life was merely just existing and that it really had no rational or redeeming meaning. People had to believe in this in order for them to accept all of the deaths that were happening around them. I guess in a way Meursault is like a soldier. In killing the Arab and to have no emotion or thought involved, Meursault was perfect in that he treated life as merely just exisiting. I see that I have gone off a little from my tracks. Basically my 3rd point would be to express my difficultly in trying to make an accurate analysis without context.
I may choose to ask the class to express their beliefs on the meaing of life. Or an individual's purpose in life. If the class thinks that there is meaning to it. And take their answer and put it into comparison with Camus' context. Through the use of Meursault Camus can express to us the mindset of an individal who lived in the war times of WWII. I will make the connection that it almost makes it difficult for many of "us" (people in present day America) to feel empathy toward a character like Meursault because we don't the mindset of those in wartimes. We don't understand as well the need to cope with death because we do not feel it all around us as obvious as people living in WWII. This will transition me into my last point which is that
4) I will go back to how Camus structures his novel into two parts. I will say that he establishes the 1st to give the reader an insight into Meursault's character (an invdivual level) and he established a 2nd to give the reader an insight into the judgement of society on Meursault's character (a societal levlel ). Through Meursault we can see an indivudal with absurdist views who (at the beginning; part 1) does not yet understand his views. He just understands why he does not have other views (his loss of ambition). Then at the end, for a brief moment (beginning of part 2) has in inkling of humanity -is able to be like the rest of his community by looking to the past and future and potentially seeing value, creating one's one meaning- but after that brief moment, goes back to his orginal train of thought -which was the there was no value to things, that life is just existing- and is able to embrace his death in the end (end of part 2). Basically Camus creates these parallels to contrast the absurtist idea to what one might call a (for lack of better wording) "moral" idea (what the society believes as right and good, that there is reason/purpose).
IOP Novel & Topic: The Stranger & Society v. Individual
Thesis: TBA
To better structure myself, during this process of working on my IOP, I shall use this (journal 3) to talk on my presentation, I'll use journal 4 to talk on parallels that I find in the text, and I shall use journal 5 to express my difficulties in the process of my IOP.
Rather then talking in front of the class for 10-15 minutes or having a PP, the techniques that I will use my presentation shall include T charts of parallels. My first point will be on the structure that Camus chooses in making a part one and a part two. The first T chart will be why Camus chose to create two parts and on the parallels in part one and part two. The second T chart will be the parallels between Meursault himself. Essentially, his growth.
My presentation will be broken into 3 parts.
1) Establishing context for the structure of the novel. What is the significance of part one? What is the significance of part two? Determine the parallels that create that significance.
2) Establish context for Meursault's growth. Determine the parallels that demonstrate his growth.
3) Ask why should any of this matter. What significance does the creation of the two parts have on me as an individual? What should I get from the text? Anyone who knows me knows that I have difficulty putting opinions on anything or making assertions. I realize that part of the reason why I don't feel that I have the qualifications to have certain opinions or make certain assertions is because I know that there are things that I do not know. So I am beginning to think of the context that Camus was in when he wrote his novel. Having gone through World War 2, (in his biography) Camus writes that many people had the believe that life was merely just existing and that it really had no rational or redeeming meaning. People had to believe in this in order for them to accept all of the deaths that were happening around them. I guess in a way Meursault is like a soldier. In killing the Arab and to have no emotion or thought involved, Meursault was perfect in that he treated life as merely just exisiting. I see that I have gone off a little from my tracks. Basically my 3rd point would be to express my difficultly in trying to make an accurate analysis without context.
I may choose to ask the class to express their beliefs on the meaing of life. Or an individual's purpose in life. If the class thinks that there is meaning to it. And take their answer and put it into comparison with Camus' context. Through the use of Meursault Camus can express to us the mindset of an individal who lived in the war times of WWII. I will make the connection that it almost makes it difficult for many of "us" (people in present day America) to feel empathy toward a character like Meursault because we don't the mindset of those in wartimes. We don't understand as well the need to cope with death because we do not feel it all around us as obvious as people living in WWII. This will transition me into my last point which is that
4) I will go back to how Camus structures his novel into two parts. I will say that he establishes the 1st to give the reader an insight into Meursault's character (an invdivual level) and he established a 2nd to give the reader an insight into the judgement of society on Meursault's character (a societal levlel ). Through Meursault we can see an indivudal with absurdist views who (at the beginning; part 1) does not yet understand his views. He just understands why he does not have other views (his loss of ambition). Then at the end, for a brief moment (beginning of part 2) has in inkling of humanity -is able to be like the rest of his community by looking to the past and future and potentially seeing value, creating one's one meaning- but after that brief moment, goes back to his orginal train of thought -which was the there was no value to things, that life is just existing- and is able to embrace his death in the end (end of part 2). Basically Camus creates these parallels to contrast the absurtist idea to what one might call a (for lack of better wording) "moral" idea (what the society believes as right and good, that there is reason/purpose).
Sunday, May 16, 2010
IOP Journal 2
IOP Date: (Wednesday) May 19 [3 days away. Also when point recovery for commentary is due]
IOP Novel & Topic: The Stranger & Society v. Individual
Thesis: TBA
*People are often afraid of what they don't understand. Things are out of one's comfort zone are (duh) not comforting. The establishment of one's comfort zone stems from society & its rules/guidelines. It then branches out to how one interacts with actual individuals in a society (though it must be noted that those other individuals have also felt society & its rules/guideline to as much of an extent as one has, therefore those who are not at least majorly like society & its rules/guidelines are deemed to be not of the comfort zone, and essentially: strangers)
IOP Novel & Topic: The Stranger & Society v. Individual
Thesis: TBA
- I found my copy of The Stranger by Albert Camus
- Presentation points to cover:
- Introduce thesis concept
- Introduce different characters who help to emphasis thesis: Meursault, Maman, Salamando, Marie, Raymond.. (Perhaps may only do Meursault, Salamando & Marie/Raymond. Maybe even just Meursault & Salamando)
- Explain the significance of the particular character to the text
- Analysis of significance to real life
- Connections of society rules from text to real life
- Real life application to how individuals lives their lives: How do we determine our morals? What makes them so significant that we should follow them? Essentially, why do we do what we do?
- Leads to bigger question: Should it matter? ("it" being reasons behind our decisions; this question only rising if one believes that what society wants is more powerful then what the individual wants)
- In regards to: passages that would support my main points, I need to first settle on which characters I want to focus on. I'm thinking (due to time) I may just do Meursault (how he is effected by his society, how he reacts to those in his society, how he deals with the loss of this mother) & Salamando (how he is effected by his society, how he reacts to those in his society, how he deals with the loss of his dog)
- On how I want to present my topic: I want something visual (but PPs can get redundant), I don't want to just stand there with notecards and talk (or even without notecards, I don't want to just talk), interation with the audience would be nice. So here's what I think I'll do:
- A T-Chart transparancy of Meursault and Salamando
- I will read specific passages pertaining to the text
- When I am done with explaining Meursault/Salamando, done developing the impact of socety rules in the text, then I will move onto the application to real life
- To do this I will attempt a discussion by asking simple questions (like the ones in italics above), eventually this will lead to questioning how much our society impacts who we are, and how questioning this can impact how we treat ourselves as well as others in our society (ambition, Meursault's boss, Paris, relationships)
*People are often afraid of what they don't understand. Things are out of one's comfort zone are (duh) not comforting. The establishment of one's comfort zone stems from society & its rules/guidelines. It then branches out to how one interacts with actual individuals in a society (though it must be noted that those other individuals have also felt society & its rules/guideline to as much of an extent as one has, therefore those who are not at least majorly like society & its rules/guidelines are deemed to be not of the comfort zone, and essentially: strangers)
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
