Friday, September 20, 2013
Web Presentations.
Hi Everyone: Once again, let me say that the work you did on your webs is really thoughtful and provoking. In the comment box below, respond to one of your classmate's ideas as they were presented in class. You can extend the idea, gently disagree, use the idea as a bridge to another idea, or simply appreciate it. Please try to have the response in by the end of the day on Monday as there is another response to come soon on your amazing discussions of Jane Eyre.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I really liked HannahEllis' assertion about the duality of characters. Not only did it apply well to Wide Sargasso Sea but also to other books and real life. Our past experiences and initial impressions of people allow us to form opinions about them without knowing fully if they are true or not. In life, our actions are justified because we know the whole story, but we unfairly judge others without knowing all they are thinking. I don't think it'll ever be possible for us to judge others fairly because it is impossible to read their minds.
ReplyDeleteI found Arly's idea that the Invisible Man is invisible because of racial inequality. I had also done my project on this novel and focused more on people living through the invisible man, and stereotypes taking away his identity. Before hearing Arly's presentation, I had not thought of the novel in a way concerning race. She brought up some good points about his grandfather's words getting clearer as the novel progressed. Also, she mentioned something that I had also noticed in the novel. She said that the Invisible Man is given an identity by the Brotherhood, but even though he is given an identity, he is actually being stripped of his true identity and is becoming less of a person. I had also noted that in my responses to this novel. Hearing Arly's opinions and thoughts on this novel was eye-opening and introduced me to some things that I had before thought about.
ReplyDeleteI was very intrigued how Josh explained that the central point of Invisible Cities was to show the importance of reality versus imaginary. He put out the huge question that can never really be answered, where is the line between reality and imagination? Every real thing created has to be thought of first, and isn't it then imaginary? Without imagining something first, it can not be created and become reality. So is all imagination an impending reality? And is all reality an old imagination? So essentially, looking at Calvino's cities, whether or not they are made up, they are still as important as any reality could be. Josh also brought up the great point that imagination can change perspective. It didn't even really matter if the cities Marco Polo were speaking of were fake, because either way, it was still changing Khan's perspective. In a way, the question of imagination versus reality could be put aside because they both had the same affect. All of these points Josh made were very thought-provoking questions that kept my mind returning to Polo and Khan's conversations.
ReplyDeleteEthan's thesis statement really made me think about Invisible Cities and it's meaning. He said that Polo wrote the book to make up for what he did not achieve. All the "cities" he wrote about were really just part of his imagination. The quote he pointed out about the fact that you can either accept or deny reality caught my attention as well. I thought he made a good argument that made me rethink the whole book.
ReplyDeleteSince I did not get to present, I want to explain what my poster was all about, referring to my big idea. I chose Wide Sargasso Sea, and my big idea was that external conflicts influence and affect personal struggles, rather than the individual person himself. I focused on how Antoinette and her mother are thought of as "crazy". I honestly don't believe they are crazy, I just think that they are made to look it. First off, if you look at Antoinette's mothers life you soon realize it was tough. Her first husband is gone, her son has mental issues, society hates her because of her family past, her horse was killed, and her house was burnt down, resulting in her son dying. Anyone who has been through this much will most likely suffer from some type of depression. As her emotions shut her body down, her husband had no idea how to deal with her, so he just pushed her away and basically locked her up. When times are tough and everyone gives up on you things become even harder to deal with. Eventually she passed away, and when that happened Antoinette was of course sad, but when she prayed the words meant nothing. Growing up Antoinette was always being pushed away and never really got to be super close with anyone. When her mother was locked away she tried to visit, but again was pushed away. So what was she supposed to say when she died, it was like she lost something she never really had. Since Antoinette had no idea how to react to the situation and what connected to it, she never talked about it. Antoinette bottled up her feelings and thoughts until the day her husband confronted her. He never really knew the truth, because Antoinette barely talked, so one day he found out. When Antoinette finally let out was was held back for so long, made her look and sound indeed crazy. The truth was she was sort of mentally unstable, due to the fact she never learned how to express herself, and grew up thinking it was wrong to do so. Her husband became scared and jumped to conclusion, locking her up and practically forgetting about her. Sitting there alone, Antoinette finally asked herself who she was and what she was doing there. The influence made by the world around her (her mother, family, supposed friends, and her husband) made her think she had to keep to herself, and when asked for her feelings was again shit down. Antoinette's mother was pushed down her whole life, and no one wanted to accept her love for her son. These two women were made into puppets, and once people got sick of them they were thrown out. As you can see it really is not Antoinette and her mother's fault they are "crazy", it is everyone else.
ReplyDeleteI liked Diana's web presentation about Wide Sargasso Sea. Her bold assertion was about the conflict between controlling and belonging. She dove even deeper and explained that in this story, belonging was not so much fitting in as it was being owned. She also pointed out that there are sub conflicts in the story such as inheritance/influence. She backed up her argument using details about the era, and how Rochester controls Antoinette's identity. She said that Rochester and Antoinette represent two places (Rochester, England and Antoinette, Jamaica). Either way, Diana says that Antoinette doesn't belong. I agree strongly with her statement as that was part of my argument as well. I like how she said that ownership is veiled as a sense of belonging in this story. I didn't pick up on this detail until she brought it up. Her last assertion was that corruption of belonging ultimately leads to disaster. Because Antoinette was owned instead of accepted, it lead to her destruction. My argument about the Wide Sargasso sea agrees well with Diana's. We both argued that the controlling of Antoinette lead to a negative outcome.
ReplyDeleteI thought Jordan's presentation on "Invisible Cities", written by Italo Calvino, provided a thoughtful insight as to what the author was trying to establish within the book. Jordan thought that the structure of the book is what made it great and how the two characters communicated through their dialogue, even though there was such a language barrier. Her main point was that without the structure of the book, all the cities would be the same. This struck me as interesting because there are so many different details used to describe each and individual city, that without any of the structure the book provides, each city would be the same. The way she explained it made much more sense than I'll ever be able to make of it.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed Zach’s presentation on his view of Wide Sargasso Sea. Having paid little attention to the social structure used in the book, his explanation was enlightening. Not only that but the internal and external conflicts that were rampant in the books were also displayed eloquently. I wish he had gone a bit more into detail about the fine details in the books had resulted in conflict, such as the difference between white people and white people. Although, it seems a good comparison would be how “white trash” correlates with “preppy people” between the poor whites and the rich, powerful whites. Not just in wealth comparisons either. But also how they view each other. The poorer whites of Wide Sargasso Sea such as Antoinette and her mother have a certain pride in who they are and where they come from, just like some “white trash” people are.
ReplyDeleteI thought Sam's interest in the conflict between groups in "Invisible Man" was an interesting way to look at the book. While reading, I am sure that we all noticed that the main character seemed to continually fall into and out of groups and organizations, but, I know for me at least, it never stuck out. Now that Sam has brought it to our attention, I start to notice many patterns with the main character's choice to join groups and the results. Every time he gets involved in a new organization, his membership seems to be terminated in a rather tragic and brutal way. After so many incidences, why does the narrator keep trying? As Sam pointed out, most humans have the internal conflict of both wanting to belong to a group for a sense of comfort and security, but also wanting to stand out and earn a sense of individuality. After hearing Sam's presentation, I believe that this conflict is a much more central idea to the story than I had originally thought. Thanks to Sam's presentation, I now have a new way of looking at "Invisible Man."
ReplyDeleteI was very interested in Ethan’s presentation of Invisible Cities. I had a challenge reading and comprehending the novel. I had my own personal interpretation of what the possible meaning of the novel was. Although, after listening to Ethan’s presentation I had not interpreted the novel in the same form. His presentation strengthened my understanding of the novel. He made it clear that Marco Polo created all those cities in recompense for the expeditions he was unable to accomplish. Now it all makes complete sense in my mind considering my interpretation of the novel was very shaky. No wonder Marco Polo created all those cities since Kublai Khan also admired the vivid descriptions of each city. Without Ethan’s presentation I probably would have still been in a state of confusion. Thanks Ethan!
ReplyDeleteI think that Liz's presentation on "Invisible Man" was insightful into the deepest pieces of the novel. I agree that the narrator loses his identity and regains it by the end. I feel that she truly understood the effect that the Brotherhood had on his life, forming him a new identity that he never fully fit into and subsequently allowed him to adopt his true persona. I enjoyed Liz's strong presentation and her accurate thought process of the novel.
ReplyDeleteI likes Hannah’s assertion that the characters of “Wide Sargasso Sea” each had a duel nature to them, depending on who was narrating. This idea of identity changing based on whose perspective we were seeing them through reflects our own thought processes and understanding of situations. The two narrators present us with a more fleshed out story, one that does not leave either side out. As Hannah said, this duality of the characters is an example of the differences between Rochester and Antoinette. While I did somewhat notice the duality of the characters in the book, I did realize its importance to the conflict between Antoinette and Rochester. Hannah did a great job at picking up on this writing tool and had a good understanding of its meaning.
ReplyDeleteEveryone's poster was artful and a certain cara's in particular gave the impression that the creator wanted to make up in flamboyant gaudiness where her words were lacking. Afterwards I learned her thesis was about insanity and I agree the extravagant floral symmetry did indeed complement the psychedelic aspect of the book, WSS. From a "casie'" (by pronounciation) and her speech I was able to add to my list of literacy terms 'deconstructive lens' which is a practice where the reader (critic) intentionally misreads what the author is trying to get across. In Invisible Cities, the narrator talks a lot about nothing. The "casie" suggests the book in fact has no meaning to it and is designed to give the reader a midlife crisis, which "casie" funnily fell victim to. Cool story
ReplyDeletei just noticed my name is illegible
DeleteMy words were lacking? your face is lacking seiken. and yes i didn't capitalized your name cause you didn't capitalize mine.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI think Morgans Invisible Man web was very insightful and planned out well. She pointed out that the book wasn't just about the battle between race and society, Morgan showed that it went further to natural identity vs. society. She pointed out that race, gender, and cultural class all played a roll in this book against society. Her poster was made to symbolize main points of the book as well. It contained the Invisble Man's brief case, the chain link, and Clifton's blood. Overall Morgan made a very clear argument to support her assertion.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed Jordan’s presentation because of how closely it related to mine. It was interesting to see how someone who had a very similar thesis managed to approach the presentation in there own unique way. She hit upon a lot the topics that I found key to the structure and had some that I had not considered. While she presented admirably I feel she was limited by the fact that she had to present off of her Phone but all in all she did a good job.
ReplyDeleteIn Ethan's presentation he said that Marco Polo had created all the cities from one city that he knew of. This description helped me understand how the book explained how one's perception changes the whole environment of a city. He showed how the cities connected with his quotes and made it so you could easily understand what his idea is and where it was coming from. He also took an approach that was different than most, because he looked at Kahn and Polo's interactions rather than look at the cities themselves.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed what Anna had to say about Wide Sargasso Sea. It was easy to relate too because we both had about the same bold assertion and central idea as far as insanity and control. She made me think about the effect the outside world had on someone like Antoinette and she brought to light certain situations. She spoke about how her outside environment made Antoinette appear to be insane, but that deep down it wasn't necessarily true. That relates to what I had to say about how the outside controlling environment can contribute to one's mental sanity. I thought Anna did a great job getting her point across, and I was very impressed with her presentation.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDiana's presentation was extremely poignant for me. Her thoughts about the conflict between desire to belong and desire to control was a theme that, although prevalent in Wide Sargasso Sea, I had not noticed at first. Diana had a lot of good points and made me think more about the novel. These two desires could be summed up very neatly with Antoinette and Rochester. Antoinette wanted to belong somewhere. Even when in her hometown, she does not belong, due to racial and social issues. Rochester's desire to directs back to his family and his lack of control with him. This is something that exists in Jane Eyre as well. He constantly seems to fear being inadequate and losing control over people. Overall, Diana's presentation gave me new insight to both Wide Sargasso Sea as well as Jane Eyre.
ReplyDelete