First thing's first: This project was fantastic and I loved every minute of it!
Now the details...
I have to say that this project truly tested a lot of different as well as similar aspects in thought process to that of a simple essay. For this project, honestly, when we were first assigned it, I was happy about couple of things, the fact that it required no analysis therefore might be easier, and that we had a lot of liberty in the connections we could make. So, that's how it all started for me. After we had selected a theme, I thought the search for the quotes would be really simple. However, I noticed that for this project there was more needed in order to do a good job. For one thing, the analysis was completely embedded within the search. As I was searching for the quotes, I had to sit down and really break down and analyze the theme and the possible connections and meanings that could come from it. Unlike an essay, this analysis wasn't subject to solely the book, Jane Eyre, but its meaning outside of the text, in the real world. On top of that, the choice of our sources would reflect the analysis, a picture is truly worth a thousand words.
Another aspect that required me to come to terms with was organization. This mash up was particular in a way that on the outside there needs to be no sign of organization just a - as it is called - a mash up, but in order to reach that point, you had to have such a specific organization. After we had collected the quotes/pictures/sources, the organization was the most difficult part, something that isn't as true in an essay. In order to organize the mash up, we had to try several methods: We tried organizing on the computer, on a word document, and then finally we ended up printing all our sources and cutting them up and organizing them on the ground. It was a very frustrating process because as we were organizing, we had to choose ourselves which part of the theme we wanted to represent and bring out in a source that said a lot of things. So we had to make a lot of difficult decisions by weighing the individual meanings in one source, and picking the heaviest one. It was almost like pruning of a poem because we might've appreciated all the different aspects that the source brought, but then in the end we had to pick one. At that moment it felt that we lost a part of the source...
I think that overall it was a very good experience, and I think for the future I'd like to work more on the pruning stage, or the organization stage. For me, I thought it was really interesting how the thinking process while writing a poem could be used for creating a mash up!
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Saturday, April 9, 2011
Change of Mind: Jane Eyre
I honestly think that it is more than strange to marry someone a lot older than you, and I mean old enough to be your father/mother. For me, I think I can tolerate up to 10 years age difference, but when that number increases to 30 year difference like that between Jane and Mr.Rochester, well let's just say I'm not a big fan. However, I find that as I read more and more and as Charlotte Bronte reveals more aspects of their love, I'm further convinced that my previous conception of the thought is slightly unjust to the rest of the world and love.
After reading a bit over half of the story, I feel that through the relationship and the conversations that Rochester and Jane share that age really doesn't make a difference. For example, I at first found myself agreeing with Mrs. Fairfax's first impression of the marriage. Complete shock and aversion to the idea that they were getting married. Mrs.Fairfax warns Jane of getting involved with a man old enough to be her father, which I thought was well justified. So, I still wasn't convinced despite the reality that Jane and Rochester felt this intense love for each other. I guess I didn't really appreciate the dialogue that Rochester and Jane were able to share with each other. I was in a way superficial by looking at what the pair looks like on the outside. It was Mrs. Fairfax's change in point of view that really persuaded me as well. After Mrs.Fairfax is finally convince that the marriage will happen despite all her warnings, she finally learns to accept it. Why? Because Jane and Rochester make each other so happy.
This in turn made me think, why did I have the viewpoint of marrying someone old enough to be the father/mother is immoral? For Mrs.Fairfax she carried this viewpoint at first because of her time period, there were a lot of restrictions on marriage and social status. However, in a time like the 21st century, where anything can happen, why was I still thinking this way? This in a way proves the fact that superficiality that we accuse Bronte's time of having, isn't really gone. I found that in a way the characters of Jane Eyre could be a bit more 21st century than I was. Since, my conception about who you "should" marry was based solely on age, but what really should be addressed is love. Realizing this has helped me realize the open-minded nature of love and I find myself being more open to the idea of marriage between two people with such a drastic age difference.
After reading a bit over half of the story, I feel that through the relationship and the conversations that Rochester and Jane share that age really doesn't make a difference. For example, I at first found myself agreeing with Mrs. Fairfax's first impression of the marriage. Complete shock and aversion to the idea that they were getting married. Mrs.Fairfax warns Jane of getting involved with a man old enough to be her father, which I thought was well justified. So, I still wasn't convinced despite the reality that Jane and Rochester felt this intense love for each other. I guess I didn't really appreciate the dialogue that Rochester and Jane were able to share with each other. I was in a way superficial by looking at what the pair looks like on the outside. It was Mrs. Fairfax's change in point of view that really persuaded me as well. After Mrs.Fairfax is finally convince that the marriage will happen despite all her warnings, she finally learns to accept it. Why? Because Jane and Rochester make each other so happy.
This in turn made me think, why did I have the viewpoint of marrying someone old enough to be the father/mother is immoral? For Mrs.Fairfax she carried this viewpoint at first because of her time period, there were a lot of restrictions on marriage and social status. However, in a time like the 21st century, where anything can happen, why was I still thinking this way? This in a way proves the fact that superficiality that we accuse Bronte's time of having, isn't really gone. I found that in a way the characters of Jane Eyre could be a bit more 21st century than I was. Since, my conception about who you "should" marry was based solely on age, but what really should be addressed is love. Realizing this has helped me realize the open-minded nature of love and I find myself being more open to the idea of marriage between two people with such a drastic age difference.
Friday, April 8, 2011
360 Degrees: Marrying Someone much older (Jane Eyre)
Marrying someone who is at least 30 years older.
What a strange sentence, but the truth is it exists today as it did during Jane Eyre's era. There's a lot of questions that I'd like to ask Jane and Mr.Rochester about their undying love for each other, even though nearly 32 years separate the two lives. I mean, what allows them to be together? Can love truly overcome all obstacles? How does it work within the brain? Does it seem moral to marry someone who could be your father/mother? What is there to gain from marrying someone much older than you? Disadvantages? (Aside from true love). How does agreeing with this sentence impact us or define us? What makes it hard for us to accept this concept for some people?
This phenomenon that occurs in our society is something that I've been wanting to understand, and Jane Eyre has helped me to understand a bit further. I'd like to think from the relationship between Jane and Rochester that for Jane, especially, the reason why she can come to love Rochester might have something to do with her own past childhood. Jane grew up fatherless for he had passed away, and grew up with her Aunt who was supposed to substitute her mother figure, but that didn't work out either. Therefore, even after losing her parents, she felt no love in her life. So is it possible that she was able to marry a man so much older than her because not only does he play her husband, but a patriarchal role? Perhaps there is influence of one's past and childhood, especially since our childhood forms our perceptions and foundation of love.
In a way, marrying someone much older than you can actually better the relationship in a way that both the husband and wife could overcome these prejudices and viewpoints and actually get married. I think in a different way, it strengthens the relationship. Love truly knows no bounds and feels no aging.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Dialectics: Hypocrisy and Legitimacy
Hypocrisy has the power to destroy everything, especially legitimacy. Many people believe that the two are actually unrelated or at least the correlation hasn't been that obvious, but as both are so interconnected, they reveal the impact of one over the other.
Two ways we can view these two in the same scenario is through Jane Eyre and the two World Wars. Although hypocrisy tends to bring down legitimacy, it also works to build up legitimacy or has the outer skin of legitimacy. As scary as that may sound, we have to look no further than Mr. Brocklehurst for an excellent example. His entire status and the "virtues" he preaches about when he arrives at Lowood is built entirely on hypocrisy. However, he is also a representation of legitimacy and his words were representative of the rules the girls had to follow. Rules that according to Mr. Brocklehurst, Jane had broken among other girls as well. Then his wife and daughter are introduced, and that added hypocrisy simply rips down the wall of legitimacy people had assumed about Mr. Brocklehurst prior to his wife's arrival. It's interesting, because this hypocrisy breaks his legitimacy in the form of Ms. Temple listening to Jane's side of the story and presenting Jane in front of the school as the complete opposite of what Mr. Brocklehurst had claimed.
A better example is the legitimacy the world powers (U.S., Britain, and France) had declared for themselves during the 1800s and 1900s. The powers talked of freedom and equality, for example Woodrow Wilson's claim of self-determination, however, realistically the powerful nations still held firmly onto the colonies they had staked out for themselves without backing down. Therefore there was a complete dissonance in their claims, since they were bragging of their "matured, sophisticated" tactics, while denying other people of the same ideals and rights. As a result, such deep hypocrisy led to anger and people like Hitler were born. Making sure at the end, that the fake legitimacy we had built up to come tumbling down. Perhaps if the big powers had not built themselves up on such hypocritical legitimacy, our world could have been spared a lot of bloodshed.
Hypocrisy seems almost inevitable. Therefore, I believe that by studying hypocrisy and legitimacy and the impact of both, we can further understand human nature and perhaps help us to better ourselves.
Two ways we can view these two in the same scenario is through Jane Eyre and the two World Wars. Although hypocrisy tends to bring down legitimacy, it also works to build up legitimacy or has the outer skin of legitimacy. As scary as that may sound, we have to look no further than Mr. Brocklehurst for an excellent example. His entire status and the "virtues" he preaches about when he arrives at Lowood is built entirely on hypocrisy. However, he is also a representation of legitimacy and his words were representative of the rules the girls had to follow. Rules that according to Mr. Brocklehurst, Jane had broken among other girls as well. Then his wife and daughter are introduced, and that added hypocrisy simply rips down the wall of legitimacy people had assumed about Mr. Brocklehurst prior to his wife's arrival. It's interesting, because this hypocrisy breaks his legitimacy in the form of Ms. Temple listening to Jane's side of the story and presenting Jane in front of the school as the complete opposite of what Mr. Brocklehurst had claimed.
A better example is the legitimacy the world powers (U.S., Britain, and France) had declared for themselves during the 1800s and 1900s. The powers talked of freedom and equality, for example Woodrow Wilson's claim of self-determination, however, realistically the powerful nations still held firmly onto the colonies they had staked out for themselves without backing down. Therefore there was a complete dissonance in their claims, since they were bragging of their "matured, sophisticated" tactics, while denying other people of the same ideals and rights. As a result, such deep hypocrisy led to anger and people like Hitler were born. Making sure at the end, that the fake legitimacy we had built up to come tumbling down. Perhaps if the big powers had not built themselves up on such hypocritical legitimacy, our world could have been spared a lot of bloodshed.
Hypocrisy seems almost inevitable. Therefore, I believe that by studying hypocrisy and legitimacy and the impact of both, we can further understand human nature and perhaps help us to better ourselves.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
What if: Women Switched Roles with Males?
What if women had not needed to fight for their equality and their rights because they already had them? What if the males rather had to fight for those rights as we did? I'm sure the world would be an extremely different place today.
What first sparked these thoughts was talking/imagining Jane Eyre's time as well as Charlotte Bronte's time and watching "Titanic." It's really upsetting and incredulous when we think about exactly how unfair it was to be a woman during the earlier times. For example, women were expected to stay at home and if they wanted to educate themselves, they were essentially laughed at and told to drop their dreams. On top of that, women did not have that many rights, as a result they were there just for moral support for the males. In "Titanic" as Rose talks with her mother about their financial situation (huge debts because of their father), Rose needs to marry the rich guy in order to save the family. One of the lines Rose says is, "It's unfair," and her mother responds with, "It's because we are women... we have to make difficult choices." So when we actually collect exactly how much suffering, pain, and loss women have gone through in order to become equal to men, I wonder what the men would've done.
Since males were the dominant ones, they also got to make most of the decisions that create our foundation, so they supplied many of their needs. I think with women in charge, the decisions might have been more pacifistic, perhaps less selfish decisions. On the other hand, I think the decisions women might have made could have been worse. In my opinion, I think behavior and decisions depend largely on status. So the women, had they been the dominant ones, could have been extremely domineering as well. I think in terms of the time it would've taken the men to get equality, it would be a lot shorter. For one thing, they have more force than women in some aspects. A lot of literature could have also been saved and brought into society (since women weren't really accepted as writers) that were lost due to the inferiority of the women.
However, with all these benefits I think that there are also losses if we lost the male talent. This, therefore proves that a society where both male and female are equal, the better the society will be. Although, living in a world dominated by women would be extremely interesting.
What first sparked these thoughts was talking/imagining Jane Eyre's time as well as Charlotte Bronte's time and watching "Titanic." It's really upsetting and incredulous when we think about exactly how unfair it was to be a woman during the earlier times. For example, women were expected to stay at home and if they wanted to educate themselves, they were essentially laughed at and told to drop their dreams. On top of that, women did not have that many rights, as a result they were there just for moral support for the males. In "Titanic" as Rose talks with her mother about their financial situation (huge debts because of their father), Rose needs to marry the rich guy in order to save the family. One of the lines Rose says is, "It's unfair," and her mother responds with, "It's because we are women... we have to make difficult choices." So when we actually collect exactly how much suffering, pain, and loss women have gone through in order to become equal to men, I wonder what the men would've done.
Since males were the dominant ones, they also got to make most of the decisions that create our foundation, so they supplied many of their needs. I think with women in charge, the decisions might have been more pacifistic, perhaps less selfish decisions. On the other hand, I think the decisions women might have made could have been worse. In my opinion, I think behavior and decisions depend largely on status. So the women, had they been the dominant ones, could have been extremely domineering as well. I think in terms of the time it would've taken the men to get equality, it would be a lot shorter. For one thing, they have more force than women in some aspects. A lot of literature could have also been saved and brought into society (since women weren't really accepted as writers) that were lost due to the inferiority of the women.
However, with all these benefits I think that there are also losses if we lost the male talent. This, therefore proves that a society where both male and female are equal, the better the society will be. Although, living in a world dominated by women would be extremely interesting.
Friday, February 25, 2011
Best of the Week: Details, Details, details
Because our current unit is on short stories, we took a look at the short story, "Cathedrals." One thing, as Mr. Allen mentioned, is that unlike a lot of the novels, there are different elements that play more important roles in a short story in contrast to an actual novel. One of those elements is details! The power of details in most novels is quite often overlooked, and because there are so many other powerful and bigger elements at play, that's acceptable, but for an author of a short story, details are his or her most powerful color. Neglecting the details will result in missing out on the deeper meaning along with losing the true goal of the author.
In "Cathedrals," the author uses details to portray mood, tone, characteristics of characters, and emotions. Without the details the short story would become nothing, but pointless words. I think it's incredible to be able to see how adding a detail like, "She was still wearing that smile," can give insight on the narrator's feelings and their relationship (Carver 214). Without even mentioning their relationship, the readers can already learn who they are and what kind of couple they are.This makes me think about the ultimate power in the words and how well placed details can do much of the talking for you.
I think through this short story and the realization of the importance of details, they have completely changed my methods of reading and writing. For me, with such a limited time schedule, when we have reading assignments, I tend to (at times) look over or skim over the details. However, seeing the depth of meaning a piece of writing can reach through well placed details, I'm beginning to see the importance of small words. This paying attention to details crosses over in all the fields, academic, artistic, as much as the big picture matters, in places like Math, details are also extremely important. I can see myself using details and paying more attention to them in all my classes, all my assignments, reading, and writing. I want to be able to wield the power of the details.
In "Cathedrals," the author uses details to portray mood, tone, characteristics of characters, and emotions. Without the details the short story would become nothing, but pointless words. I think it's incredible to be able to see how adding a detail like, "She was still wearing that smile," can give insight on the narrator's feelings and their relationship (Carver 214). Without even mentioning their relationship, the readers can already learn who they are and what kind of couple they are.This makes me think about the ultimate power in the words and how well placed details can do much of the talking for you.
I think through this short story and the realization of the importance of details, they have completely changed my methods of reading and writing. For me, with such a limited time schedule, when we have reading assignments, I tend to (at times) look over or skim over the details. However, seeing the depth of meaning a piece of writing can reach through well placed details, I'm beginning to see the importance of small words. This paying attention to details crosses over in all the fields, academic, artistic, as much as the big picture matters, in places like Math, details are also extremely important. I can see myself using details and paying more attention to them in all my classes, all my assignments, reading, and writing. I want to be able to wield the power of the details.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Inconvenient Truth: Paying Separate Fees for Emergency Services
A house burned down in Tennessee and the firefighters came, but instead of taking out their hoses to stop the overwhelming flames, they watched the blaze as it engulfed the house.
Ray Bradbury must have been picturing a scene like this in Fahrenheit 451. But this isn’t fiction, it’s real and this is America. A house with life, with four household animals, burned to the ground. Impossible, was my reaction. I thought that living in the land of the free meant that it came with some privileges or some rights that would make me safe.
The house had burned because the owners had not paid $75 for such emergency services. Having forgotten the fee, they were forgotten by the firefighters. Even though the owners had offered any sum of money in exchange for the service of dousing the blaze, the firefighters refused. They stood there and watched. The family learned that day that the country does not allow room for mistakes.
Growing up, whenever I heard the loud sirens outside, I would always sigh a sigh of relief, because I knew, without knowing it, that another life or another family was saved. That was one of the best things about being an American, I thought. The idea that 911 is always there for you, no matter what, they’re there to save lives. Isn’t that what it all comes down to? As special as 911 is and as exclusive as it is, it is also a meaning of hope as well as optimism. The powerful words, “Thank you, you saved my life” are words that can’t be transformed into dollars or euros or yens. The emergency services are icons of hope in times of great desperation. Even as a young girl, reading picture books and looking outside the window, the ambulance and its colorful siren was a sign of help. The siren was a song singing, “Don’t worry, I’m here to help.” That very siren that never dies has always been a distinct part of our lives whether we realize it or not. We live our daily lives knowing that help is only a phone call away. In turn we not only live more hopeful lives, but optimistic and productive. After all, we are optimistic in the sight of danger or threats. We are also far more confident about our country because we know that we have services that assure our citizens’ safety.
Another implication could be (as gruesome as it may sound), violent criminals getting a hold of a list of the homes that did not pay and burning them all, and nobody would be able to do a thing about it. Are we ready to let this happen?
Understandably, due to the current state of the economy more politicians are pushing for this option of turning people into customers. Breathing on the people of the United States to pay separately for the insurance of their safety and their lives. Maybe it’s the most logical option for us to surrender to this idea, but a philosopher once said that our decisions are not results of our reason, but of our emotions. Have you ever given money to charity out of reason? Frankly, isn’t it unreasonable to give money away? So, maybe we ought to look into our emotions and really figure out what is our priority and what we are willing to lose. Because, that little girl who is looking through the window for the red truck to appear is slowly moving away from the window.
Payments for emergency should not be an option. We need to speak up and make sure that it stays implanted within our taxes or not at all.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Metacognition: First Semester
Helpful? Creative? New? Different? Exciting? Challenging? How else would I describe first semester English? Now that I reflect upon the impact of English so far this semester, it seems as if the whole process was natural... Sure, it's been tough in class at times, but in terms of the kind of thinking that I've done and literature and ideas I've experienced, it doesn't seem to have been forced. Making the whole process of thinking critically a more natural process.
First day of English, I will admit I was curious, anxious, scared, and excited for another year of "upgraded" English, no more freshman material. I soon realized that as enriching the experience was going to be, my mind also had a lot of catching up to do. It was no longer just reading to get good grades on a test or writing with a false voice that would appease the teacher. It was all about developing your identity, in a way. Writing, is in fact just that. Writing to express your voice, your character, your ideas, and your mind. The first English writing assignment, I thought, was definitely something new and quite unexpected. A letter to the teacher, about an inspiration? What? However, as the days passed on and we began to dive deeper and deeper into the world of Husseini and Shakespeare, it was evident that digging for gold that deep was hard even though we were pretty much standing on the gold the whole time. It just took someone else to point it out, to open our eyes. That's what I think English class has done for me and my thinking so far. It has helped my thinking mature a little more and deepen the amount of thinking that I'll do while I'm reading or writing. For example, sometimes as I'm reading, I can't help, but to let my mind use some of the critique methods taught in English class, and it's often when I am able to use ideas (memes) and vocabulary outside of English. For me all my classes have begun to flow into one. It's no longer just English or just German. It's English and German. Seeing these continuations in ideas and thoughts just boggle my mind and keep me interested throughout the entire day. And when I find myself making that connection it's like reading Shakespeare and saying, "I totally know what Shakespeare's intentions were with that rhyming couplet there in relation to the characters."
Reading critically and in depth has opened up new doors in my understanding as well as learning the methodology on how to open those doors. However, what I thought was like the explosion of a door was the kind of writing we got to do this semester. Writing in English class has always been extremely stressful for me, but I found that given the opportunity to let my voice shine through in my essays was probably the best thing that's happened to me in English (aside from the awesome theatre we did with King Lear). By writing with my voice, I'm able to look at things at completely different angles, angles I would have never thought to have experimented with. As much as this freedom enriches my thinking it also reveals my weak spots in my thinking, spots where the critical thinking simply stops... So, that's my goal for second semester, develop my voice into a full-fledged one.
Vive l'anglais!
First day of English, I will admit I was curious, anxious, scared, and excited for another year of "upgraded" English, no more freshman material. I soon realized that as enriching the experience was going to be, my mind also had a lot of catching up to do. It was no longer just reading to get good grades on a test or writing with a false voice that would appease the teacher. It was all about developing your identity, in a way. Writing, is in fact just that. Writing to express your voice, your character, your ideas, and your mind. The first English writing assignment, I thought, was definitely something new and quite unexpected. A letter to the teacher, about an inspiration? What? However, as the days passed on and we began to dive deeper and deeper into the world of Husseini and Shakespeare, it was evident that digging for gold that deep was hard even though we were pretty much standing on the gold the whole time. It just took someone else to point it out, to open our eyes. That's what I think English class has done for me and my thinking so far. It has helped my thinking mature a little more and deepen the amount of thinking that I'll do while I'm reading or writing. For example, sometimes as I'm reading, I can't help, but to let my mind use some of the critique methods taught in English class, and it's often when I am able to use ideas (memes) and vocabulary outside of English. For me all my classes have begun to flow into one. It's no longer just English or just German. It's English and German. Seeing these continuations in ideas and thoughts just boggle my mind and keep me interested throughout the entire day. And when I find myself making that connection it's like reading Shakespeare and saying, "I totally know what Shakespeare's intentions were with that rhyming couplet there in relation to the characters."
Reading critically and in depth has opened up new doors in my understanding as well as learning the methodology on how to open those doors. However, what I thought was like the explosion of a door was the kind of writing we got to do this semester. Writing in English class has always been extremely stressful for me, but I found that given the opportunity to let my voice shine through in my essays was probably the best thing that's happened to me in English (aside from the awesome theatre we did with King Lear). By writing with my voice, I'm able to look at things at completely different angles, angles I would have never thought to have experimented with. As much as this freedom enriches my thinking it also reveals my weak spots in my thinking, spots where the critical thinking simply stops... So, that's my goal for second semester, develop my voice into a full-fledged one.
Vive l'anglais!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)