4/25/14 - Response 13
I thought that Chocolat was interesting because of the fact that it didn't rely on a plot. I know the email that was sent out before we watched it mentioned this, but I didn't think it would make that much of a difference. But it really did. Because I'm used to American movies that rely heavily on a story line to move the film along and make connections that reveal deeper meanings, I kept thinking "..and now what?" after things would happen. For example, I kept thinking maybe the guy driving France around Africa when she was an adult would be Prote or something because i kept thinking that the plot needed to develop more. That's not what this film relied on though. The powerful uses of specific images really made you think deeper about what they were made to represent, which therefore made you understand the movie. I really had no idea what any of it meant right after we watched it. It wasn't until class Friday, when we hashed out all of the questions that we had that I really began to see the connections of scenes and what everything might have meant. Overall, I think it was a good experience for watching my first foreign film.
4/18/14 - Response 12
Wrapping up Things Fall Apart this weekend was interesting. I was surprised that a couple of groups brought up in class Friday whether or not it was "right" or a good choice for the main character to kill himself. At first when thinking about suicide the immediate answer is of course not. It's widely frowned upon in not only modern day society but also in their tribal society. It was evident by the end of the text that they did not support his decision. However, deciding if suicide was morally right or wrong is very different from deciding if it was the best possible choice for him. As many have pointed out in class, he was a very bold character and often liked to act impulsively. Could there have been a more fitting way for him to die? Probably not. He was so strong in his beliefs that I couldn't see him living on and conforming to the white man's society and what they believed in. Honestly, I think the story would have ended poorly if he were still alive. THis ultimate act of defiance and unconformity was really in character for him. Another interesting point that really struck me in class was that by doing something that was so taboo in his culture (committing suicide) separated him from all of his family/friends for eternity. Now that's for real. It's not like he didn't know that when he was going to do it either. He knew exactly how his culture felt about it. I really don't think that he cared though, because why would he want to surround himself with people who won't stand up for what he and they used to believe in. Let alone for forever.
For the final project, Chris and I are going to pair up again. Credit to Chris, he noticed that there were reoccurring themes of freedom throughout the course and somehow we're going to meld those together. What's interesting to me is that they are sometimes very different types of freedom, yet all still ultimately defined as the same thing. It could be women looking for freedom from society and their husbands, Harriet Jacobs, Douglas, or African tribes looking for freedom from white people, Gregor looking for freedom from his body, or many more but in the end they're all looking for freedom.
Kaitlyn, please see my response to Chris's project proposal.
3/28/14 - Response 10 After watching a bit of Bloom's Yale class lecture on Wednesday, I was prompted to look them up and see what else he had to say. A lot of what Freud talks about deals with sexual desires and how those are mainly the basis of what we repress. In one of his lectures, Bloom discussed how nature and society influence how we think regarding this. Obviously reproduction is natural for animals, and we were born to do it. That, I'm sure almost all can agree is fine. Where people differ is on the topic on non-procreative sex and the morality behind it. Our culture influences us to repress thoughts of this nature because it comes along with a moral code that we (well, mostly) feel obligated to follow. Another great topic he discussed was the idea of exclusive homosexuality and how that fits in with everything. A bit off topic, but it was a VERY interesting lecture!
More along the lines of what we discussed on Friday, I've always thought dreams were fascinating. We have no control over what we see in dreams so we only see the purest forms of our thoughts. Sometimes it's not what you want to see, and sometimes they don't really make a lot of sense, but they all stem from the vast amount of knowledge, wishes, and fears that we store in our brain. Random thing Ive always wondered: What do blind people dream about? Like people who were born blind. If they've never seen anything in real life, their mind doesn't have anything to reference when forming dream, so do they see pictures? colors? shapes? Do they just hear and smell and other stuff instead? This question has literally bothered me for years.
3/21/14 - Response 9
I never knew that so much happened with the Congo. I really enjoyed how the presentation group this week had us do a simulation of what it was like in the Congo. Although it was as simple as dividing into groups and drawing index cards out of a pile, it actually opened my eyes to things I hadn't thought about regarding this topic. Like someone mentioned in class, I thought that if the africans would have just worked really hard, they could collect all of the resources they needed and the white men wouldn't need to kill their families or chop off their hands. I had never really given consideration to the fact that maybe they went to look for ivory that day and came upon no elephants. Luck of the draw - just like the simulation. As Dr Hartman also mentioned, even if they did find an elephant, they'd have to kill it to retrieve its tusks for ivory. Now I've hunted a lot of animals, but I don't think I'd ever be crazy enough to try and hunt an elephant. I just can't get over how harsh the punishments were though. And impractical. Okay, so King Leo. wants these villagers to go out and hunt down some giant elephants to he can ship ivory back to Europe and score some big bucks - cool. But if they don't collect enough, he'll cut their hands off or kill their family. Well, if you cut their hand off, they're unable to go and get you any more ivory, and if you kill their families, you're depleting the supply of villagers to go and collect resources for you. It really doesn't make much sense to me. For a guy that was smart enough to come up with a tricky system to make sure that the Congo was his own, you would think that he would be more tactful in how he punishes his "workers".
3/7/14 - Response 8
Monday's discussion of "The Yellow Wallpaper" was very interesting, and great job to the group that presented! What I was most intrigued by was how physicians dealt with depression back in those times. I've known a few people who have struggled/are struggling with severe depression and it blows my mind that doctors used to think that the rest cure could be effectively be applied to these types of patients. From today's point of view it is obvious that isolation and restriction from freedom to express yourself are in no way conducive to the curing of depression, but rather catalysts to the worsening of it. Like someone mentioned in class though, the physicians of this day and age did not know any better, and to their knowledge at that point, this was the best solution they could come up with. I'm glad Dr. Hartman informed us that it was not originally meant to handle depression but rather for men who were having trouble after war (maybe PTSD?). Something else that I liked was Blake's interpretation of the wallpaper. If she was wearing a yellow dress and all she had in the room were a few reflective surfaces, it's easy to think that the "yellow wallpaper" she was describing was actually her reflection. This also explains why she saw women in the wallpaper and how she eventually describes herself as a part of it. I think that anyone would go stir crazy in that room after so long, even if they didn't have depression.
2/28/14 - Response 7
I think that one of the most interesting contrasts between A Doll's House and Ivan Ilych is the topic of passion vs pride. It's innate in men to have a sense of pride and to work hard to preserve it. This shows through both Ivan, when he maintains social norms even on his death bed to avoid anyone thinking less of him and through Torvald when he says "no man is willing to sacrifice his honor". On the opposite side, women are more passionate and emotional about issues. We see this in A Doll's House when Nora makes her dramatic exit to "find herself" or whatever it is that she needs to do. She doesn't care that she's breaking social norms and that some may look down upon her in society. She doesn't let pride get in the way of her decisions, but rather lets emotion guide her to do what she does.
Another interesting point that was brought up, that somewhat goes along with pride, is that the men in these stories had a strict moral code and image to uphold. When regarding marriages, people looked to the man to determine status and rank in society - women had little to do with it. These men would go through a lot to uphold what they thought was right and what they thought they had to do according to society. It would be interesting to look at these stories and relationships through today's perspective. With women being very independent now, it would be easy for a woman to walk out on her husband and rely on herself for steady income, high status, and happiness. Back in the times of these stories women would pretty much be nothing if they didn't have a strong man at their side to support them. Personally, I plan to be a successful actuary in the future and make six figures, so it's funny to me to think that I need to marry someone who can provide more than me and that I should stay and raise kids in the home in order to conform to what the societal ideas of marriage were back when these stories were written. Yeah right. 2/21/14 - Response 6
I thought Friday's discussion on "what is the meaning of life" was interesting. I think it's cool that the short list of things that were said ended up being what the author was trying to convey is the meaning of life. A lot of people get caught up in how much things cost, how nice of things they own, and how much their job pays rather than making great relationships with people and traveling around. Someone mentioned that experience tied in to making relationships with people, and I couldn't agree more - especially with travel. I think that more people should travel the world and immerse themselves in a culture that very different from their own. Traveling is not all about just going and seeing beautiful places, it's also about meeting people from different cultures. People who do this open themselves up to a spectrum of cultures and can really broaden their ideas of what is "socially acceptable". Spending time with people different than yourself allows you to open up your mind more to new ideas and not be so quick to judge others because of those differences. People become more accepting when they're more worldly and cultured.
Monday's discussion ended up focusing a lot on the idea of people as property to business. It's interesting, because as americans living in the time that we do now with child labor laws and other legislation that prevents a lot of maltreatment of workers, we talk about these issues as if they were only in the past. For many countries still today, these are very pressing issues. I always think it's absurd when american's appalled by finding out their clothing or other items imported into the US are made my child workers and then start to boycott the products. In their self-righteous attempts to "better" the situation, they're actually making things worse. What do you think happens to all of those children who are now out of a job because you took away your business? More than likely they're out doing far worse things to earn money because, after all, they still need to provide some type of income for their family. I wish more people understood that this is the effect of what they believe is "right".
2/7/14 - Response 5
As we discussed Romanticism, I thought it was interesting that all of the "Romantic Heroes" that we could think of were fictional characters, and also almost all male (excluding Katniss). Is this because there are no real-life romantic heroes today? Were there ever? I'm not sure if the idea of the romantic hero was based on characteristics that men in real life possessed that were compiled together to create the persona of this character type or if it was just wishful thinking. It very well may be that there are no real people of this type and that they're just a compilation of characteristics that Romanticists wished someone would have. Just a thought.
At the very end of class Friday, we looked at the Whitman poem (at least, I'm pretty sure it was Whitman) that had to do with same sex love. Honestly, I didn't think it stood out as any different from the poems about straight people missing each other. If it was never mentioned that he was talking about another male, I'm not sure if I would have assumed that at all. His feelings of longing and desperation were very clear and I enjoyed how well he conveyed that. Unlike many other poetic pieces, I knew exactly what he was trying to say and exactly the emotions he was saying that he felt because it was so clear. 1/31/14 - Response 4
Wednesday we discussed how Gretchen's character was actually based on what happened to a woman in real life. I thought this was interesting, because the events that happen to her almost seem too tragic to have any merit in the real world. I guess I was wrong. Although in today's society it is not uncommon (sadly) to hear a story of a girl getting pregnant and her baby daddy leaving her, I'm sure it would have been very very shocking in that time period. Her story doesn't end there though, because her mother, brother, and child all die too. I'm sure that some part of the reason this plot line takes up so much of the story is to be some kind of social commentary on the fact that men would have received no punishments for the same acts as women. Both of them had to have sex with each other for Gretchen to have a baby, but she's the only one that's called a whore for it.
On a similar note, it was interesting to think about what Faust did to Gretchen, vs. what society does to Gretchen, vs. what Gretchen does to herself. Essentially, who is to blame for how her life ends up?
1. Faust gets her pregnant. He convinces her to give her mother the sleeping potion that eventually kills her. He abandons her. He kills her brother.
2. Society ridicules Gretchen for being pregnant. They also put her in jail.
3. Gretchen has sex with Faust and also kills her baby.
Ultimately, I think Faust is the most at fault here, but not entirely. He has a hand in all of the things that lead to Gretchen's demise, but Gretchen also agrees to some of the things he convinces her to do. She could have said no to giving her mother the sleeping potion, and she could have not had sex with him, which would also leave her baby-less, thus, not giving her the opportunity to kill the child or for here to end up in jail.
Moral of the story here? - Women, don't let men tell you what to do! (:
1/24/14 - Response 3
I honestly thought I was going to hate reading Faust. I'm really not into poetry and authors going on and on and elaborating on what they're trying to say. (Like seriously, just say what you mean). That being said, I'm actually enjoying reading this. It takes a little more effort for me to figure out what he's trying to say, but I'm really enjoying the plot so far. I think it's interesting how clever Mephistopheles was when he entered Faust's house and then could not leave. I'm still really confused about the whole deal they made though. In the prologue God made it sound like Faust was a very religious man and wouldn't stray from God even if the devil tempted him. If this is true, why would Faust even make this deal in the first place? I know that he is looking to get earthly experience and the deal can give him that, but he knows that Mephistopheles represents the devil, so why would a God fearing man do such a thing? We also talked about in class how in another version, Faust calls the devil into his home directly to seek out a deal. I'm not sure how Faust is supposed to be characterized when it comes to the matter of his faith.
1/17/14 - Response 2
On Monday when we discussed Jacobs' work, we were asked to just think about whether or not Incidents of a Slave Girl being thought of as a narrative was a good thing or a bad thing. After giving this some though, I kind of see how it would be good and bad. Let's start with bad first. These were real events that happened to Jacobs and in writing them down, she wanted to open people's eyes to the horrors of slavery. If people thought that it was simply a work of fiction since the imagery was too awful to believe, they may not have taken it seriously, thinking it was all some wild story of the imagination. I think it could be a good thing too. Autobiographies tend to be dry, merely factual, and boring. Allowing her story to read like a narrative with dialogue, imagery, and pathos, Jacobs allows the reader to feel connected to her personal accounts in a way that would not have been possible if she simply wrote a dry account of what she went through.
I also thought it was interesting to read a slave story from a female's point of view. Unlike Douglass' writing, this piece was loaded with emotion and really appealed to me as a woman. She goes on and on for at least a few pages about how her Mistress was jealous of her and that something that would have easily been left out if a man had wrote it. Everyone knows that slavery was very brutal and that people were physically beaten and denied all of their rights, but Jacobs really opens the readers mind to other atrocities of slavery that are not always recognized. Girls who were prettier than the others were sexually assaulted and taken advantage of because their master's thought to have some right over them. Although Jacobs was never beaten or mistreated in the typical sense of the word by her master, she was left just as emotionally damaged as any other slave would have been. How awful that a characteristic (beauty) that the white women could be proud of was the cause of sexual corruption and the loss of Jacobs' innocence at such a young age.
1/10/14 - Response 1
Well hi! We didn't really get a chance to talk about much this week, so I'll start with a little introduction. I'm Kaitlyn Miner, and I'm one of the select few who actually enjoys math and problem solving, which is why I'm going to be an actuary some day. Weird, I know. Even though I'm an Actuarial Science major, I was originally a vocal music performance major but realized that would make me close to nothing as a career, so now it's just more of a hobby. I think bulldogs are the cutest animals ever, and if you ever want to watch Grey's Anatomy, Bones, or Criminal Minds, I'm your girl. Despite being from Ft. Wayne, IN, I am a die-hard Packers fan - football is my favorite sport. I like to read, shop, and hunt (mainly deer, I'm not very adventurous) and am a proud member of Kappa Delta sorority. I also work in Woodworth, so if you come in for a sandwich or a salad, look for me!
As far as the reading goes for this week, I enjoyed how the topic of slavery sort of picked up where we left off last semester in 202 (good call, Mr. Hartman!). We were discussing freedom today and I actually wonder of Douglas every thought of himself as a truly free man. It was brought up that even though slaves could escape to a free state, they still ran the risk of being captured back into slavery. So, at what point could these people be considered truly free? It was also clear that a long chain of events happened in order for Douglas to get to where he was at the time he was writing his book. Though many of the things he went through were very hard, if one of them would not have happened, would he have had the same outcome? It's interesting to think about whether or not things are all left up to chance. Some people are the kind to believe that everything happens for a reason, while others believe in an added element of good fortune and happenstance.
I thought that Chocolat was interesting because of the fact that it didn't rely on a plot. I know the email that was sent out before we watched it mentioned this, but I didn't think it would make that much of a difference. But it really did. Because I'm used to American movies that rely heavily on a story line to move the film along and make connections that reveal deeper meanings, I kept thinking "..and now what?" after things would happen. For example, I kept thinking maybe the guy driving France around Africa when she was an adult would be Prote or something because i kept thinking that the plot needed to develop more. That's not what this film relied on though. The powerful uses of specific images really made you think deeper about what they were made to represent, which therefore made you understand the movie. I really had no idea what any of it meant right after we watched it. It wasn't until class Friday, when we hashed out all of the questions that we had that I really began to see the connections of scenes and what everything might have meant. Overall, I think it was a good experience for watching my first foreign film.
4/18/14 - Response 12
Wrapping up Things Fall Apart this weekend was interesting. I was surprised that a couple of groups brought up in class Friday whether or not it was "right" or a good choice for the main character to kill himself. At first when thinking about suicide the immediate answer is of course not. It's widely frowned upon in not only modern day society but also in their tribal society. It was evident by the end of the text that they did not support his decision. However, deciding if suicide was morally right or wrong is very different from deciding if it was the best possible choice for him. As many have pointed out in class, he was a very bold character and often liked to act impulsively. Could there have been a more fitting way for him to die? Probably not. He was so strong in his beliefs that I couldn't see him living on and conforming to the white man's society and what they believed in. Honestly, I think the story would have ended poorly if he were still alive. THis ultimate act of defiance and unconformity was really in character for him. Another interesting point that really struck me in class was that by doing something that was so taboo in his culture (committing suicide) separated him from all of his family/friends for eternity. Now that's for real. It's not like he didn't know that when he was going to do it either. He knew exactly how his culture felt about it. I really don't think that he cared though, because why would he want to surround himself with people who won't stand up for what he and they used to believe in. Let alone for forever.
For the final project, Chris and I are going to pair up again. Credit to Chris, he noticed that there were reoccurring themes of freedom throughout the course and somehow we're going to meld those together. What's interesting to me is that they are sometimes very different types of freedom, yet all still ultimately defined as the same thing. It could be women looking for freedom from society and their husbands, Harriet Jacobs, Douglas, or African tribes looking for freedom from white people, Gregor looking for freedom from his body, or many more but in the end they're all looking for freedom.
Kaitlyn, please see my response to Chris's project proposal.
3/28/14 - Response 10
After watching a bit of Bloom's Yale class lecture on Wednesday, I was prompted to look them up and see what else he had to say. A lot of what Freud talks about deals with sexual desires and how those are mainly the basis of what we repress. In one of his lectures, Bloom discussed how nature and society influence how we think regarding this. Obviously reproduction is natural for animals, and we were born to do it. That, I'm sure almost all can agree is fine. Where people differ is on the topic on non-procreative sex and the morality behind it. Our culture influences us to repress thoughts of this nature because it comes along with a moral code that we (well, mostly) feel obligated to follow. Another great topic he discussed was the idea of exclusive homosexuality and how that fits in with everything. A bit off topic, but it was a VERY interesting lecture!
More along the lines of what we discussed on Friday, I've always thought dreams were fascinating. We have no control over what we see in dreams so we only see the purest forms of our thoughts. Sometimes it's not what you want to see, and sometimes they don't really make a lot of sense, but they all stem from the vast amount of knowledge, wishes, and fears that we store in our brain. Random thing Ive always wondered: What do blind people dream about? Like people who were born blind. If they've never seen anything in real life, their mind doesn't have anything to reference when forming dream, so do they see pictures? colors? shapes? Do they just hear and smell and other stuff instead? This question has literally bothered me for years.
3/21/14 - Response 9
I never knew that so much happened with the Congo. I really enjoyed how the presentation group this week had us do a simulation of what it was like in the Congo. Although it was as simple as dividing into groups and drawing index cards out of a pile, it actually opened my eyes to things I hadn't thought about regarding this topic. Like someone mentioned in class, I thought that if the africans would have just worked really hard, they could collect all of the resources they needed and the white men wouldn't need to kill their families or chop off their hands. I had never really given consideration to the fact that maybe they went to look for ivory that day and came upon no elephants. Luck of the draw - just like the simulation. As Dr Hartman also mentioned, even if they did find an elephant, they'd have to kill it to retrieve its tusks for ivory. Now I've hunted a lot of animals, but I don't think I'd ever be crazy enough to try and hunt an elephant. I just can't get over how harsh the punishments were though. And impractical. Okay, so King Leo. wants these villagers to go out and hunt down some giant elephants to he can ship ivory back to Europe and score some big bucks - cool. But if they don't collect enough, he'll cut their hands off or kill their family. Well, if you cut their hand off, they're unable to go and get you any more ivory, and if you kill their families, you're depleting the supply of villagers to go and collect resources for you. It really doesn't make much sense to me. For a guy that was smart enough to come up with a tricky system to make sure that the Congo was his own, you would think that he would be more tactful in how he punishes his "workers".
3/7/14 - Response 8
Monday's discussion of "The Yellow Wallpaper" was very interesting, and great job to the group that presented! What I was most intrigued by was how physicians dealt with depression back in those times. I've known a few people who have struggled/are struggling with severe depression and it blows my mind that doctors used to think that the rest cure could be effectively be applied to these types of patients. From today's point of view it is obvious that isolation and restriction from freedom to express yourself are in no way conducive to the curing of depression, but rather catalysts to the worsening of it. Like someone mentioned in class though, the physicians of this day and age did not know any better, and to their knowledge at that point, this was the best solution they could come up with. I'm glad Dr. Hartman informed us that it was not originally meant to handle depression but rather for men who were having trouble after war (maybe PTSD?). Something else that I liked was Blake's interpretation of the wallpaper. If she was wearing a yellow dress and all she had in the room were a few reflective surfaces, it's easy to think that the "yellow wallpaper" she was describing was actually her reflection. This also explains why she saw women in the wallpaper and how she eventually describes herself as a part of it. I think that anyone would go stir crazy in that room after so long, even if they didn't have depression.
2/28/14 - Response 7
I think that one of the most interesting contrasts between A Doll's House and Ivan Ilych is the topic of passion vs pride. It's innate in men to have a sense of pride and to work hard to preserve it. This shows through both Ivan, when he maintains social norms even on his death bed to avoid anyone thinking less of him and through Torvald when he says "no man is willing to sacrifice his honor". On the opposite side, women are more passionate and emotional about issues. We see this in A Doll's House when Nora makes her dramatic exit to "find herself" or whatever it is that she needs to do. She doesn't care that she's breaking social norms and that some may look down upon her in society. She doesn't let pride get in the way of her decisions, but rather lets emotion guide her to do what she does.
Another interesting point that was brought up, that somewhat goes along with pride, is that the men in these stories had a strict moral code and image to uphold. When regarding marriages, people looked to the man to determine status and rank in society - women had little to do with it. These men would go through a lot to uphold what they thought was right and what they thought they had to do according to society. It would be interesting to look at these stories and relationships through today's perspective. With women being very independent now, it would be easy for a woman to walk out on her husband and rely on herself for steady income, high status, and happiness. Back in the times of these stories women would pretty much be nothing if they didn't have a strong man at their side to support them. Personally, I plan to be a successful actuary in the future and make six figures, so it's funny to me to think that I need to marry someone who can provide more than me and that I should stay and raise kids in the home in order to conform to what the societal ideas of marriage were back when these stories were written. Yeah right.
2/21/14 - Response 6
I thought Friday's discussion on "what is the meaning of life" was interesting. I think it's cool that the short list of things that were said ended up being what the author was trying to convey is the meaning of life. A lot of people get caught up in how much things cost, how nice of things they own, and how much their job pays rather than making great relationships with people and traveling around. Someone mentioned that experience tied in to making relationships with people, and I couldn't agree more - especially with travel. I think that more people should travel the world and immerse themselves in a culture that very different from their own. Traveling is not all about just going and seeing beautiful places, it's also about meeting people from different cultures. People who do this open themselves up to a spectrum of cultures and can really broaden their ideas of what is "socially acceptable". Spending time with people different than yourself allows you to open up your mind more to new ideas and not be so quick to judge others because of those differences. People become more accepting when they're more worldly and cultured.
Monday's discussion ended up focusing a lot on the idea of people as property to business. It's interesting, because as americans living in the time that we do now with child labor laws and other legislation that prevents a lot of maltreatment of workers, we talk about these issues as if they were only in the past. For many countries still today, these are very pressing issues. I always think it's absurd when american's appalled by finding out their clothing or other items imported into the US are made my child workers and then start to boycott the products. In their self-righteous attempts to "better" the situation, they're actually making things worse. What do you think happens to all of those children who are now out of a job because you took away your business? More than likely they're out doing far worse things to earn money because, after all, they still need to provide some type of income for their family. I wish more people understood that this is the effect of what they believe is "right".
2/7/14 - Response 5
As we discussed Romanticism, I thought it was interesting that all of the "Romantic Heroes" that we could think of were fictional characters, and also almost all male (excluding Katniss). Is this because there are no real-life romantic heroes today? Were there ever? I'm not sure if the idea of the romantic hero was based on characteristics that men in real life possessed that were compiled together to create the persona of this character type or if it was just wishful thinking. It very well may be that there are no real people of this type and that they're just a compilation of characteristics that Romanticists wished someone would have. Just a thought.
At the very end of class Friday, we looked at the Whitman poem (at least, I'm pretty sure it was Whitman) that had to do with same sex love. Honestly, I didn't think it stood out as any different from the poems about straight people missing each other. If it was never mentioned that he was talking about another male, I'm not sure if I would have assumed that at all. His feelings of longing and desperation were very clear and I enjoyed how well he conveyed that. Unlike many other poetic pieces, I knew exactly what he was trying to say and exactly the emotions he was saying that he felt because it was so clear.
1/31/14 - Response 4
Wednesday we discussed how Gretchen's character was actually based on what happened to a woman in real life. I thought this was interesting, because the events that happen to her almost seem too tragic to have any merit in the real world. I guess I was wrong. Although in today's society it is not uncommon (sadly) to hear a story of a girl getting pregnant and her baby daddy leaving her, I'm sure it would have been very very shocking in that time period. Her story doesn't end there though, because her mother, brother, and child all die too. I'm sure that some part of the reason this plot line takes up so much of the story is to be some kind of social commentary on the fact that men would have received no punishments for the same acts as women. Both of them had to have sex with each other for Gretchen to have a baby, but she's the only one that's called a whore for it.
On a similar note, it was interesting to think about what Faust did to Gretchen, vs. what society does to Gretchen, vs. what Gretchen does to herself. Essentially, who is to blame for how her life ends up?
1. Faust gets her pregnant. He convinces her to give her mother the sleeping potion that eventually kills her. He abandons her. He kills her brother.
2. Society ridicules Gretchen for being pregnant. They also put her in jail.
3. Gretchen has sex with Faust and also kills her baby.
Ultimately, I think Faust is the most at fault here, but not entirely. He has a hand in all of the things that lead to Gretchen's demise, but Gretchen also agrees to some of the things he convinces her to do. She could have said no to giving her mother the sleeping potion, and she could have not had sex with him, which would also leave her baby-less, thus, not giving her the opportunity to kill the child or for here to end up in jail.
Moral of the story here? - Women, don't let men tell you what to do! (:
1/24/14 - Response 3
I honestly thought I was going to hate reading Faust. I'm really not into poetry and authors going on and on and elaborating on what they're trying to say. (Like seriously, just say what you mean). That being said, I'm actually enjoying reading this. It takes a little more effort for me to figure out what he's trying to say, but I'm really enjoying the plot so far. I think it's interesting how clever Mephistopheles was when he entered Faust's house and then could not leave. I'm still really confused about the whole deal they made though. In the prologue God made it sound like Faust was a very religious man and wouldn't stray from God even if the devil tempted him. If this is true, why would Faust even make this deal in the first place? I know that he is looking to get earthly experience and the deal can give him that, but he knows that Mephistopheles represents the devil, so why would a God fearing man do such a thing? We also talked about in class how in another version, Faust calls the devil into his home directly to seek out a deal. I'm not sure how Faust is supposed to be characterized when it comes to the matter of his faith.
1/17/14 - Response 2
On Monday when we discussed Jacobs' work, we were asked to just think about whether or not Incidents of a Slave Girl being thought of as a narrative was a good thing or a bad thing. After giving this some though, I kind of see how it would be good and bad. Let's start with bad first. These were real events that happened to Jacobs and in writing them down, she wanted to open people's eyes to the horrors of slavery. If people thought that it was simply a work of fiction since the imagery was too awful to believe, they may not have taken it seriously, thinking it was all some wild story of the imagination. I think it could be a good thing too. Autobiographies tend to be dry, merely factual, and boring. Allowing her story to read like a narrative with dialogue, imagery, and pathos, Jacobs allows the reader to feel connected to her personal accounts in a way that would not have been possible if she simply wrote a dry account of what she went through.
I also thought it was interesting to read a slave story from a female's point of view. Unlike Douglass' writing, this piece was loaded with emotion and really appealed to me as a woman. She goes on and on for at least a few pages about how her Mistress was jealous of her and that something that would have easily been left out if a man had wrote it. Everyone knows that slavery was very brutal and that people were physically beaten and denied all of their rights, but Jacobs really opens the readers mind to other atrocities of slavery that are not always recognized. Girls who were prettier than the others were sexually assaulted and taken advantage of because their master's thought to have some right over them. Although Jacobs was never beaten or mistreated in the typical sense of the word by her master, she was left just as emotionally damaged as any other slave would have been. How awful that a characteristic (beauty) that the white women could be proud of was the cause of sexual corruption and the loss of Jacobs' innocence at such a young age.
1/10/14 - Response 1
Well hi! We didn't really get a chance to talk about much this week, so I'll start with a little introduction. I'm Kaitlyn Miner, and I'm one of the select few who actually enjoys math and problem solving, which is why I'm going to be an actuary some day. Weird, I know. Even though I'm an Actuarial Science major, I was originally a vocal music performance major but realized that would make me close to nothing as a career, so now it's just more of a hobby. I think bulldogs are the cutest animals ever, and if you ever want to watch Grey's Anatomy, Bones, or Criminal Minds, I'm your girl. Despite being from Ft. Wayne, IN, I am a die-hard Packers fan - football is my favorite sport. I like to read, shop, and hunt (mainly deer, I'm not very adventurous) and am a proud member of Kappa Delta sorority. I also work in Woodworth, so if you come in for a sandwich or a salad, look for me!
As far as the reading goes for this week, I enjoyed how the topic of slavery sort of picked up where we left off last semester in 202 (good call, Mr. Hartman!). We were discussing freedom today and I actually wonder of Douglas every thought of himself as a truly free man. It was brought up that even though slaves could escape to a free state, they still ran the risk of being captured back into slavery. So, at what point could these people be considered truly free? It was also clear that a long chain of events happened in order for Douglas to get to where he was at the time he was writing his book. Though many of the things he went through were very hard, if one of them would not have happened, would he have had the same outcome? It's interesting to think about whether or not things are all left up to chance. Some people are the kind to believe that everything happens for a reason, while others believe in an added element of good fortune and happenstance.
202 Responses (Fall 2013)