Response 12
Now that the white man has arrived in Okonkwo’s life everything is changing. The most disappointing thing for him is that his son, Nwoye, is converting to their beliefs. This is not the only book that portrays the white man coming to a “primitive” village and “bettering” it. There can be a debate about if their task is noble or not, but something that I don’t think gets written about a lot is when the opposite of Nwoye’s experience happens. What if a white priest that was sent to Africa to convert the people and bring them to the church begins to celebrate the African customs and won’t take the money to build churches and have Mass or anything. This story is briefly told in the play I am a part of this semester. We have a character named Jack who spent about 20 years in Africa, specifically Ryanga, and was later forced to go back home. His sisters thought he was sent home for his health, but they soon realize he has changed away from his Catholic beliefs and he speaks of sacrifices and ceremonies often. The sisters are appalled at his words, but he is excited and you can tell he truly loves the Ryangan people and their ways. I have read stories of how Africans feel about white men both good and bad, how white men feel about Africans both good and bad, and Africans converting to the white man’s ways. I have not read anything about the white man converting to the African ways. I think this new perspective on a common story of a white man going to Africa or another location they believe need their help is one that should be told more. A person can be converted to any believe, but we as westerns don’t usually think of converting happening in this regard.
For my final project I was thinking of making a video of mock interviews with characters from the story. I would interview Okonkwo, Nora, and Gregor in the style of a sit down interview like they would do when a new book or movie were created. I would grab some friends to be the other people, film it, and edit it together to play for the class on the finals day.
Jessica, I like this idea. Would you be writing a script for your friends to read? Would the video have a common theme? - MH
Response 10
From Wednesday’s reading the part about Freud learning about hypnotism really interested me. It discussed a girl whom was suffering mental and physical pain. The only way the girl would be able to describe what was wrong with her was under hypnosis, and from there the healing process began. Thanks to hypnosis this girl improved greatly, but I have always been skeptical about the process. I have seen many shows in which a group of audience members are brought up on stage and told to do crazy this once they are hypnotized. I had hoped that on one of these occasions I would have gotten chosen to experience it first hand, but no such luck for me.
Upon hearing Tanner’s testimony on being chosen and it not working on him, it makes me think the idea is very subjective. If you are willing to be hypnotized, then you most likely will be. There are those who can’t allow themselves to be put under, therefore hypnotism doesn’t work on them. This isn’t surprising because most medicines are subjective and don’t always work on everyone. As Freud dropped that method, I would also drop it as a method of healing. I may be lacking research, but it doesn’t seem very consistent with its success and just generally how it works boggles my mind.
One other last point I want to touch on is Freud’s idea of the Id, Ego, and Super Ego. I first heard about these in a play (The Complete Works of William Shakespeare Abridged) I was in in high school. On the section regarding Hamlet we split the audience into each part and had them shout something relating to Ophelia. My favorite line – I believe it was Ophelia’s Id talking – was: “Cut the crap Hamlet, my biological clock is ticking and I want babies now”.
Response 9
I wanted to reflect on the activity we did in class for the group whom presented about. It was a very creative and well thought out idea to represent how the white people had an affect on the African people. We can’t begin to imagine how awful it would have been to easily be killed because you didn’t bring in enough supplies, but we try to get some sense of it from this activity. I started out as a regular African and when the colonists came I upgraded to the leader of my new group. This wasn’t so bad, but then after the first round of goods gathering I didn’t really want to be the leader. Over half of my group died right then and there for not getting enough resources. After that one I didn’t even get enough resources so I died. The uncertainty of how easily you can be killed really opened my eyes to how awful the African people must have had it when the white man came over.
Moving specifically to the novel, Heart of Darkness, I found it interesting how terrifying the African wilderness. There doesn’t seem to be any wonder about this new land. We talked about how this is also a symbolic meaning for the overall savagery of Africa. Another interesting part of the novel that stood out to me were all the cannibals on the boat. Why did it seem a good idea to get cannibals to be on the same boat as you? Marlow never seems to be concerned with this though. Even when the helmsman dies he throws him overboard so the cannibals won’t eat him, yet there is still no concern they might eat someone else. I personally would not be comfortable being in a boat in a river with cannibals, so I don’t really understand Marlow’s comfort with them.
Response 8 I found the Women’s Bible a very interesting read. I am all for women’s rights and agree that there is a problem of women being treated equally to men. A segment of the Women’s Bible that intrigued me was the third chapter and the authors comments on it. There is a line when God is cursing Eve and future women in which He says “and thy desire shall be to thy husband and he shall rule over thee.” After the exert, the author argues against many things. There is the thought that this may be more of an allegory because apples would not have grown in that area. There is also mention of Darwinism to argue for her point. She even takes the blame away from women by saying how clever the serpent. Eve had a thirst for knowledge, not because she wants material things, which makes her more of a hero. All these points that are made make sense, but what about that line I pointed out? The author doesn’t touch on the fact at all that God right out says that men shall rule over women. I think that is a very important point to make. She comments on all the times God made woman equal and is so in God’s thinking, yet the line that blatantly says men will rule women she doesn't say anything about. I would like to hear her comments on that line and her argument. She makes a lot of compelling arguments before that section, but that is one point I think she misses a key point there.
Both this and the Declaration of Sentiments use old texts to prove a new point about women’s rights. In class we talked about if it would have been better if we made a new case completely from scratch about women’s rights. I thought the most compelling argument that was said was the idea of bringing something we automatically accept and true and pointing it at a new subject. So for the Declaration of Sentiments, freedom from the British is just as wanted and needed as women being free from the “rule” of men.
Response 7 When I read A Doll’s House for the first time, I didn’t make a connection to The Death of Ivan Ilych. The thought was placed in my head not until the group brought up that there are many similarities between the two. Both stories have the idea of the main character being trapped or stuck in the house with their family. The main difference then becomes how each character deals with their predicament. In the end, Ivan stayed with his family and Nora left hers. This difference also then becomes a similarity because their choice to leave/stay is an important part of both stories. Nora leaving is the huge, big, shocking part of A Doll's House and is a main part of Ivan’s suffering. Ibsen wanted to push the boundaries and show that women should have equal rights and be treated as equals, so her leaving is a sign of her becoming an independent woman. If Nora had stayed at the end of the play, it would have taken away the entire point Ibsen was trying to get across. In Ivan's story, him staying with his wife and kids only adds to the sadness his life has become. It may not have been looked upon as a good thing, but it was one more thing Ivan just didn't do and didn't give his life any meaning. It was interesting to me to draw similarities between these two stories when it wasn’t obvious right away, like comparing Harriet Jacobs’ and Fredrick Douglas’ stories. Once the idea was placed in my head it was almost easy to make comparisons between the two.
I also want to briefly talk about the ending of A Doll’s House. Several people in class today thought that Nora should have stayed, but I thought the ending was how it should be. The whole point of writing the play was to show woman’s independence and if Nora would have stayed that idea would be lost.
Response 6 The Death of Ivan Ilych is a very intriguing story for me to read. While reading the preface about the author and about what the story would be about, I formed a very different story in my head. I imagined the story beginning with Ivan on his death bed and he would lament to someone or to himself how awful his life has been and how he regrets not living it to it fullest. Then flashbacks would happen that show specific moments Ivan wishes didn’t happen or wishes he could change or considers the biggest mistakes of his life. The actual story was very different than the outline I created in my head. Right in the beginning Ivan has already died and we don’t even get his point of view on anything in the first chapter. The first chapter focuses on what Peter experiences and thinks about Ivan dying. I can’t say which way to tell the story I would enjoy more, mine or Tolstoy’s, but Tolstoy has a very creative way to tell the story.
Starting the story out with Ivan dead and the funeral to take place soon shows truly how no one really misses him. It is almost a brutal way to show people not caring about his death with having his coworkers concerned more with who will take Ivan’s position and them feeling only obligated to go to the funeral. This continues throughout the first chapter as even his wife does not seem broken up about her husband’s passing. A focus on Peter as he attends these events and talks to different people at the funeral gives a glimpse of hope that maybe Peter did care for the old man a bit. He seems to be the one most affected emotionally by Ivan’s death, but sadly even he isn’t terribly upset. The choice to show Peter’s experiences after Ivan’s death really gives the reader an outside perspective of how there wasn’t really anyone to mourn Ivan after his death, thus his life wasn’t a good one and wasn’t lived properly.
Response 5
I really liked the recording of Gretchen’s song she sings at the spinning wheel. What I love most is that even without knowing what the woman is saying or anything about the song, the listener can still get a sense of what emotion is trying to be conveyed. I have a very basic knowledge of German to pick up a few words here and there, but not enough to actually interpret an idea from the song without a translation. The song definitely has an emphasis on the speaker’s emotion, which is a trait for it to be romantic. Then you add the text to it and you know what is actually happening. Gretchen has a desire for what she can’t have. She sings a song about that idea because it pertains to her life and what is happening in it right now. I also found it interesting that the piano was played to seem like the spinning wheel in the background.
The idea of a song relaying a feeling even without understanding of the words can easily be transferred to modern music. Now we have songs that are our go to workout songs, break up songs, pump up songs, etc., that convey an emotion even without understanding the words. It reminds me of a YouTube video I just recently watched that has a little boy crying while listening to “Say Something” by A Great Big World and Christina Aguilera. The little boy is listening to the song in the car and is moved to tears. I doubt he understands what the song actually means. He may be at an age in which he can speak, but can he understand a meaning behind a song? I personally don’t believe that is the case, so I think the feel of the song is what made his cry. The boy even agrees that the song is a sad song when his dad asks him.
Response 4
A question that stood out in class and also came to mind while reading the end of Faust was why is the second half based more around Gretchen than Faust. At the beginning you know Faust is the main character and thus I expected everything to revolve around him. When Gretchen came into the picture, I saw it as a loved interest for Faust so the plot still is around him. It wasn’t until the downward spiral began for Gretchen than I think the focal point kind of shifted. Faust was still a large part of what was happening but we were concerned more about Gretchen, who all these events were affecting. Then at the very end, yes Faust is taken away to Hell, but we still see more of an end with Gretchen. She refuses to be rescued and knows that Faust loves her no more. That seems to me the ending of a story focused around Gretchen, not Faust. So why did the author end it this way? I believe it’s because he wanted to show how big of an influence you can be onto another person. Making a deal with a devil is about you and you make the decisions on if the deal goes bad or not, however, what about those around you? Gretchen may never had come into contact with Faust besides in passing if he were not currently with Mephistopheles, who used trickery to get them to meet again. Faust, at the hand of Mephistopheles, was also the one to kill Gretchen’s brother to trigger the chain of horrible event to drive Gretchen insane. Would anything bad have happened to Gretchen if Faust had not used his deal with the devil to meet with her? I think having Gretchen as the focal point in the later half of the play shows that one must still consider others when making decisions to benefit themselves.
Response 3
I really enjoy reading Faust, which surprises me a great deal. As a theatre major I think people just expect I love to read plays, but just like everyone has their taste of novels everyone has their taste of plays. A lot of the plays I’ve read for honors classes have not been my favorite. I read Tartuffe last semester and loved the humor in it. I knew Faust wasn’t a comedy, so I just expected to feel “eh” about it. I was wrong though. The poetry of it makes it easy and enjoyable to read and the story line is very intriguing to me. As I read I want to know what is going to happen next as apposed to how many more pages do I have to suffer through. I can’t wait to read more of the story and find out how far Mephistopheles will go to win his bet with The Lord.
Another thing I wanted to write about was the activity we did in class on Wednesday. As a theater major, visualizing how my group would put on the show in an actual production was super awesome. In the plays I have read in previous honors classes we’ve discussed story lines and maybe acted out a few scenes to understand what’s happening, but I can’t recall when we were asked to cast the show and imagine the set and then be shown pictures of some of the productions that are being performed now. I wish more professors would add this element to their lesson plans. It is a play after all. Plays are supposed to be thought of in that regard. Sure its about the story and how the story connects with the life of the people in that time period, but it is still a play at its heart and plays are meant to have sets and costumes and actors. Why read a play in class if you’re not going to treat it like a play?
Response 2
When was Harriet truly free? This was the most intriguing question that was brought up during our discussion. Freedom in general, is a relative term, in my opinion. It can mean so many different things to every different person. Speaking about Harriet specifically I would argue that she wasn’t free until her freedom was truly bought by her friend. But wasn’t she free when she escaped from her master in the first place? Well no because she lived in fear of being discovered. Then would she be free once she moved to New York, which was a free state? Again, no, because there was still a threat of her being recaptured and brought back to into slavery. It think it was hard for Harriet to even feel free once her freedom was bought. After all she’d been through would there ever be a time she would feel completely free? I think this is almost a completely different point to make. I stated when I thought Harriet was free, but what about when Harriet felt free? There can only be speculation about this of course, but I would find it interesting to see if she ever felt truly free or did the shadow of slavery continue to hang over her?
In comparing Harriet and Douglas’ work, I’m more of a fan of Harriet’s. The obvious reason is that she appeals more to a female audience. She pretty much outright says what she went through can only truly be understood by women. I would agree that that is most likely the biggest reason I found more interest in her story than Douglas’. Even as a woman I can’t imagine going though some of the horrors she went through. It boggles my mind that one woman can go through so much and still be the strong woman she turned out to be.
Response 1
One thing that stood out to me in our discussion regarding Fredrick Douglas was the idea that slaves had a complete lack of identity and were very dehumanized. At the beginning of Douglas’ narrative he states how he does not even know for sure of his age. The “white boys” of his time and nowadays always keep track and celebrated their birthday. I cannot even imagine not knowing your birthday. Age is so important in modern times with the restrictions some activities have depending on when you were born. In Douglas’ time there wasn’t as harsh or as many age restrictions on events, but it is still unfortunate that the slaves were not even sure when they were born. Douglas later mentions how many times he changed his name before settling on Douglas. I say settle instead of chose because they way he wrote his reasoning behind it, settle seems the appropriate adjective to use. He says he was called Fredrick Douglas. He doesn’t say him name was Fredrick Douglas, he was called Fredrick Douglas. When deciding what name he chose Fredrick Douglas to be his name because that is what most people called him. There was no mention about if he liked the name nor was there a mention of him feeling as if that was his real name. All the times he talks about his name there is no ownership to it. A name, to him, is simply something he is called, but has no attachment to who he is. The combination of the certainty of age and certified name makes for a serious lack of identity. As one of my classmates noted, the first questions you would ask someone who had a head injury to make sure they were okay would be what’s your name and how old are you. Those two facts are questions we should all know about ourselves and if we don’t then we are lead to believe there is brain damage. For slaves of Douglas’ time not to know their age or have a designated name really shows the lack of identity the slaves had.
Now that the white man has arrived in Okonkwo’s life everything is changing. The most disappointing thing for him is that his son, Nwoye, is converting to their beliefs. This is not the only book that portrays the white man coming to a “primitive” village and “bettering” it. There can be a debate about if their task is noble or not, but something that I don’t think gets written about a lot is when the opposite of Nwoye’s experience happens. What if a white priest that was sent to Africa to convert the people and bring them to the church begins to celebrate the African customs and won’t take the money to build churches and have Mass or anything. This story is briefly told in the play I am a part of this semester. We have a character named Jack who spent about 20 years in Africa, specifically Ryanga, and was later forced to go back home. His sisters thought he was sent home for his health, but they soon realize he has changed away from his Catholic beliefs and he speaks of sacrifices and ceremonies often. The sisters are appalled at his words, but he is excited and you can tell he truly loves the Ryangan people and their ways. I have read stories of how Africans feel about white men both good and bad, how white men feel about Africans both good and bad, and Africans converting to the white man’s ways. I have not read anything about the white man converting to the African ways. I think this new perspective on a common story of a white man going to Africa or another location they believe need their help is one that should be told more. A person can be converted to any believe, but we as westerns don’t usually think of converting happening in this regard.
For my final project I was thinking of making a video of mock interviews with characters from the story. I would interview Okonkwo, Nora, and Gregor in the style of a sit down interview like they would do when a new book or movie were created. I would grab some friends to be the other people, film it, and edit it together to play for the class on the finals day.
Jessica, I like this idea. Would you be writing a script for your friends to read? Would the video have a common theme? - MH
Response 10
From Wednesday’s reading the part about Freud learning about hypnotism really interested me. It discussed a girl whom was suffering mental and physical pain. The only way the girl would be able to describe what was wrong with her was under hypnosis, and from there the healing process began. Thanks to hypnosis this girl improved greatly, but I have always been skeptical about the process. I have seen many shows in which a group of audience members are brought up on stage and told to do crazy this once they are hypnotized. I had hoped that on one of these occasions I would have gotten chosen to experience it first hand, but no such luck for me.
Upon hearing Tanner’s testimony on being chosen and it not working on him, it makes me think the idea is very subjective. If you are willing to be hypnotized, then you most likely will be. There are those who can’t allow themselves to be put under, therefore hypnotism doesn’t work on them. This isn’t surprising because most medicines are subjective and don’t always work on everyone. As Freud dropped that method, I would also drop it as a method of healing. I may be lacking research, but it doesn’t seem very consistent with its success and just generally how it works boggles my mind.
One other last point I want to touch on is Freud’s idea of the Id, Ego, and Super Ego. I first heard about these in a play (The Complete Works of William Shakespeare Abridged) I was in in high school. On the section regarding Hamlet we split the audience into each part and had them shout something relating to Ophelia. My favorite line – I believe it was Ophelia’s Id talking – was: “Cut the crap Hamlet, my biological clock is ticking and I want babies now”.
Response 9
I wanted to reflect on the activity we did in class for the group whom presented about. It was a very creative and well thought out idea to represent how the white people had an affect on the African people. We can’t begin to imagine how awful it would have been to easily be killed because you didn’t bring in enough supplies, but we try to get some sense of it from this activity. I started out as a regular African and when the colonists came I upgraded to the leader of my new group. This wasn’t so bad, but then after the first round of goods gathering I didn’t really want to be the leader. Over half of my group died right then and there for not getting enough resources. After that one I didn’t even get enough resources so I died. The uncertainty of how easily you can be killed really opened my eyes to how awful the African people must have had it when the white man came over.
Moving specifically to the novel, Heart of Darkness, I found it interesting how terrifying the African wilderness. There doesn’t seem to be any wonder about this new land. We talked about how this is also a symbolic meaning for the overall savagery of Africa. Another interesting part of the novel that stood out to me were all the cannibals on the boat. Why did it seem a good idea to get cannibals to be on the same boat as you? Marlow never seems to be concerned with this though. Even when the helmsman dies he throws him overboard so the cannibals won’t eat him, yet there is still no concern they might eat someone else. I personally would not be comfortable being in a boat in a river with cannibals, so I don’t really understand Marlow’s comfort with them.
Response 8
I found the Women’s Bible a very interesting read. I am all for women’s rights and agree that there is a problem of women being treated equally to men. A segment of the Women’s Bible that intrigued me was the third chapter and the authors comments on it. There is a line when God is cursing Eve and future women in which He says “and thy desire shall be to thy husband and he shall rule over thee.” After the exert, the author argues against many things. There is the thought that this may be more of an allegory because apples would not have grown in that area. There is also mention of Darwinism to argue for her point. She even takes the blame away from women by saying how clever the serpent. Eve had a thirst for knowledge, not because she wants material things, which makes her more of a hero. All these points that are made make sense, but what about that line I pointed out? The author doesn’t touch on the fact at all that God right out says that men shall rule over women. I think that is a very important point to make. She comments on all the times God made woman equal and is so in God’s thinking, yet the line that blatantly says men will rule women she doesn't say anything about. I would like to hear her comments on that line and her argument. She makes a lot of compelling arguments before that section, but that is one point I think she misses a key point there.
Both this and the Declaration of Sentiments use old texts to prove a new point about women’s rights. In class we talked about if it would have been better if we made a new case completely from scratch about women’s rights. I thought the most compelling argument that was said was the idea of bringing something we automatically accept and true and pointing it at a new subject. So for the Declaration of Sentiments, freedom from the British is just as wanted and needed as women being free from the “rule” of men.
Response 7
When I read A Doll’s House for the first time, I didn’t make a connection to The Death of Ivan Ilych. The thought was placed in my head not until the group brought up that there are many similarities between the two. Both stories have the idea of the main character being trapped or stuck in the house with their family. The main difference then becomes how each character deals with their predicament. In the end, Ivan stayed with his family and Nora left hers. This difference also then becomes a similarity because their choice to leave/stay is an important part of both stories. Nora leaving is the huge, big, shocking part of A Doll's House and is a main part of Ivan’s suffering. Ibsen wanted to push the boundaries and show that women should have equal rights and be treated as equals, so her leaving is a sign of her becoming an independent woman. If Nora had stayed at the end of the play, it would have taken away the entire point Ibsen was trying to get across. In Ivan's story, him staying with his wife and kids only adds to the sadness his life has become. It may not have been looked upon as a good thing, but it was one more thing Ivan just didn't do and didn't give his life any meaning. It was interesting to me to draw similarities between these two stories when it wasn’t obvious right away, like comparing Harriet Jacobs’ and Fredrick Douglas’ stories. Once the idea was placed in my head it was almost easy to make comparisons between the two.
I also want to briefly talk about the ending of A Doll’s House. Several people in class today thought that Nora should have stayed, but I thought the ending was how it should be. The whole point of writing the play was to show woman’s independence and if Nora would have stayed that idea would be lost.
Response 6
The Death of Ivan Ilych is a very intriguing story for me to read. While reading the preface about the author and about what the story would be about, I formed a very different story in my head. I imagined the story beginning with Ivan on his death bed and he would lament to someone or to himself how awful his life has been and how he regrets not living it to it fullest. Then flashbacks would happen that show specific moments Ivan wishes didn’t happen or wishes he could change or considers the biggest mistakes of his life. The actual story was very different than the outline I created in my head. Right in the beginning Ivan has already died and we don’t even get his point of view on anything in the first chapter. The first chapter focuses on what Peter experiences and thinks about Ivan dying. I can’t say which way to tell the story I would enjoy more, mine or Tolstoy’s, but Tolstoy has a very creative way to tell the story.
Starting the story out with Ivan dead and the funeral to take place soon shows truly how no one really misses him. It is almost a brutal way to show people not caring about his death with having his coworkers concerned more with who will take Ivan’s position and them feeling only obligated to go to the funeral. This continues throughout the first chapter as even his wife does not seem broken up about her husband’s passing. A focus on Peter as he attends these events and talks to different people at the funeral gives a glimpse of hope that maybe Peter did care for the old man a bit. He seems to be the one most affected emotionally by Ivan’s death, but sadly even he isn’t terribly upset. The choice to show Peter’s experiences after Ivan’s death really gives the reader an outside perspective of how there wasn’t really anyone to mourn Ivan after his death, thus his life wasn’t a good one and wasn’t lived properly.
Response 5
I really liked the recording of Gretchen’s song she sings at the spinning wheel. What I love most is that even without knowing what the woman is saying or anything about the song, the listener can still get a sense of what emotion is trying to be conveyed. I have a very basic knowledge of German to pick up a few words here and there, but not enough to actually interpret an idea from the song without a translation. The song definitely has an emphasis on the speaker’s emotion, which is a trait for it to be romantic. Then you add the text to it and you know what is actually happening. Gretchen has a desire for what she can’t have. She sings a song about that idea because it pertains to her life and what is happening in it right now. I also found it interesting that the piano was played to seem like the spinning wheel in the background.
The idea of a song relaying a feeling even without understanding of the words can easily be transferred to modern music. Now we have songs that are our go to workout songs, break up songs, pump up songs, etc., that convey an emotion even without understanding the words. It reminds me of a YouTube video I just recently watched that has a little boy crying while listening to “Say Something” by A Great Big World and Christina Aguilera. The little boy is listening to the song in the car and is moved to tears. I doubt he understands what the song actually means. He may be at an age in which he can speak, but can he understand a meaning behind a song? I personally don’t believe that is the case, so I think the feel of the song is what made his cry. The boy even agrees that the song is a sad song when his dad asks him.
Response 4
A question that stood out in class and also came to mind while reading the end of Faust was why is the second half based more around Gretchen than Faust. At the beginning you know Faust is the main character and thus I expected everything to revolve around him. When Gretchen came into the picture, I saw it as a loved interest for Faust so the plot still is around him. It wasn’t until the downward spiral began for Gretchen than I think the focal point kind of shifted. Faust was still a large part of what was happening but we were concerned more about Gretchen, who all these events were affecting. Then at the very end, yes Faust is taken away to Hell, but we still see more of an end with Gretchen. She refuses to be rescued and knows that Faust loves her no more. That seems to me the ending of a story focused around Gretchen, not Faust. So why did the author end it this way? I believe it’s because he wanted to show how big of an influence you can be onto another person. Making a deal with a devil is about you and you make the decisions on if the deal goes bad or not, however, what about those around you? Gretchen may never had come into contact with Faust besides in passing if he were not currently with Mephistopheles, who used trickery to get them to meet again. Faust, at the hand of Mephistopheles, was also the one to kill Gretchen’s brother to trigger the chain of horrible event to drive Gretchen insane. Would anything bad have happened to Gretchen if Faust had not used his deal with the devil to meet with her? I think having Gretchen as the focal point in the later half of the play shows that one must still consider others when making decisions to benefit themselves.
Response 3
I really enjoy reading Faust, which surprises me a great deal. As a theatre major I think people just expect I love to read plays, but just like everyone has their taste of novels everyone has their taste of plays. A lot of the plays I’ve read for honors classes have not been my favorite. I read Tartuffe last semester and loved the humor in it. I knew Faust wasn’t a comedy, so I just expected to feel “eh” about it. I was wrong though. The poetry of it makes it easy and enjoyable to read and the story line is very intriguing to me. As I read I want to know what is going to happen next as apposed to how many more pages do I have to suffer through. I can’t wait to read more of the story and find out how far Mephistopheles will go to win his bet with The Lord.
Another thing I wanted to write about was the activity we did in class on Wednesday. As a theater major, visualizing how my group would put on the show in an actual production was super awesome. In the plays I have read in previous honors classes we’ve discussed story lines and maybe acted out a few scenes to understand what’s happening, but I can’t recall when we were asked to cast the show and imagine the set and then be shown pictures of some of the productions that are being performed now. I wish more professors would add this element to their lesson plans. It is a play after all. Plays are supposed to be thought of in that regard. Sure its about the story and how the story connects with the life of the people in that time period, but it is still a play at its heart and plays are meant to have sets and costumes and actors. Why read a play in class if you’re not going to treat it like a play?
Response 2
When was Harriet truly free? This was the most intriguing question that was brought up during our discussion. Freedom in general, is a relative term, in my opinion. It can mean so many different things to every different person. Speaking about Harriet specifically I would argue that she wasn’t free until her freedom was truly bought by her friend. But wasn’t she free when she escaped from her master in the first place? Well no because she lived in fear of being discovered. Then would she be free once she moved to New York, which was a free state? Again, no, because there was still a threat of her being recaptured and brought back to into slavery. It think it was hard for Harriet to even feel free once her freedom was bought. After all she’d been through would there ever be a time she would feel completely free? I think this is almost a completely different point to make. I stated when I thought Harriet was free, but what about when Harriet felt free? There can only be speculation about this of course, but I would find it interesting to see if she ever felt truly free or did the shadow of slavery continue to hang over her?
In comparing Harriet and Douglas’ work, I’m more of a fan of Harriet’s. The obvious reason is that she appeals more to a female audience. She pretty much outright says what she went through can only truly be understood by women. I would agree that that is most likely the biggest reason I found more interest in her story than Douglas’. Even as a woman I can’t imagine going though some of the horrors she went through. It boggles my mind that one woman can go through so much and still be the strong woman she turned out to be.
Response 1
One thing that stood out to me in our discussion regarding Fredrick Douglas was the idea that slaves had a complete lack of identity and were very dehumanized. At the beginning of Douglas’ narrative he states how he does not even know for sure of his age. The “white boys” of his time and nowadays always keep track and celebrated their birthday. I cannot even imagine not knowing your birthday. Age is so important in modern times with the restrictions some activities have depending on when you were born. In Douglas’ time there wasn’t as harsh or as many age restrictions on events, but it is still unfortunate that the slaves were not even sure when they were born. Douglas later mentions how many times he changed his name before settling on Douglas. I say settle instead of chose because they way he wrote his reasoning behind it, settle seems the appropriate adjective to use. He says he was called Fredrick Douglas. He doesn’t say him name was Fredrick Douglas, he was called Fredrick Douglas. When deciding what name he chose Fredrick Douglas to be his name because that is what most people called him. There was no mention about if he liked the name nor was there a mention of him feeling as if that was his real name. All the times he talks about his name there is no ownership to it. A name, to him, is simply something he is called, but has no attachment to who he is. The combination of the certainty of age and certified name makes for a serious lack of identity. As one of my classmates noted, the first questions you would ask someone who had a head injury to make sure they were okay would be what’s your name and how old are you. Those two facts are questions we should all know about ourselves and if we don’t then we are lead to believe there is brain damage. For slaves of Douglas’ time not to know their age or have a designated name really shows the lack of identity the slaves had.