Responses to Course Material (12/22)

Hamlet. Hamlet. Hamlet.

The month of December has basically been a whole lot of Hamlet. Is it bad that there's not a single character in this play that I like? I can appreciate Hamlet and Claudius as characters and the complexities behind them, but aside from Horatio (who I'm really just indifferent towards) I actually just dislike every character. The only previous reaction that I've had similar to this that I can recall was after reading The Great Gatsby. Nick has no personality and can hardly be considered a character, Jay is too angsty and desperate, Daisy is an insufferable mental case, Tom is a jerk, Jordan's acts above it all when she's just kind of mean and off putting, George is an oblivious sad sack, and Myrtle is...well, that shouldn't require explanation.

That didn't really have a point, I just connected Hamlet to The Great Gatsby and I just had to go and trash all of the characters. Pardon me.

The films to me were great in showing how not to perform Hamlet (no guyliner, no pelvic thrusting into the air, no throwing fencing sabers across ballrooms like they're spears, etc.). My favorite was definitely the 40s one though. It didn't have anything that I really disliked. I'm not entirely sure myself what expectations I had set for these films but the 40s version hit the most of them. I think the biggest praise I'd give it is that it wasn't too over the top and all of the acting was solid.

The most interesting thing that came out of the Hamlet discussions for me was at the very end of the month when we read the Tragic Hamlet article which revealed possible deeper complexities to the character of Hamlet and injected more religious undertones into our class discussion. It completely altered my understanding of Hamlet's motivations, even if the article failed to make me any more sympathetic towards Hamlet. It's like at the end of an episode of Scooby-Doo, the villain is unmasked and you know who is responsible and how they did all that they did, but the most interest part is when the villain ultimately explains why he/she was a villain. We've all known about Hamlet and his actions but the article gave more insight into what actually motivated Hamlet.

Open Prompt 4

2005 Student Responses

Essay 3A:

I do not understand how the AP readers can decipher the scribbles that some of these kids pen to paper. This individual essay isn't even that bad (I've seen worse) but I'm having to stop every couple of sentences to figure out what certain words are. Poor handwriting aside, the essay is strong, and the only time the handwriting takes away from the content is in a few grammatical errors (though I could just not be seeing the punctuation marks). The AP reader gives this essay an eight, and I'd give the essay that score as well. There's good claims and evidence to support them, but minor problems with the organization and occasionally poor transitions hold the essay back.

Essay 3B:

The handwriting for this essay is much better. I'm rather surprised at the score for this essay, since it's as analytical as the first essay. This essay only received a six, but on first read I probably would have scored it a seven. The AP reader points out that the writing in this essay was not as sophisticated as higher scoring essay would be, but I thought that the essay was well-written and I wasn't distracted by anything (though I did notice that a lot of the author's sentences began with the word "She"). The biggest problem I had with the essay, one that the AP reader also noted, was the unnecessarily long concluding paragraph. A more focused and concise ending would've done this essay good.

Essay 3C:

The pattern with these open prompts tends to be great-good-bad. This holds true here but this essay actually exceeded my expectations for it. As far as last essays go it is not as bad as many of its peers. The biggest problem with this essay is that the analysis doesn't go very deep. Often times, the author will just summarize plot, which is never good. It gets off to a rocky start. The first sentence of the first body paragraph reads: "As a young girl, Janie resided with her grandmother". Okay, not too bad. This statement could ultimately lead to a claim. Maybe the next sentence will lead us somewhe--..."As soon as she was old enough, her grandmother arranged a marriage with a somewhat successful young man." Okay. That's another statement pulled directly from the plot of the book. But maybe..."Jane did not love the man and desperately wanted to find true love, but her grandmother forced her to marry for security". Well what do you know, three in a row! Want to take a guess as to what every other sentence in the first body paragraph (and most of the essay) was like? The AP reader gave this a four, and I suppose that's fair. At the very least it's well written. But I probably would have given it a three, given just the general lack of analysis.

Tomorrow is 10th Anniversary of the N30 WTO Protest in Seattle

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/11/29/808988/-Tomorrow-is-10th-Anniversary-of-the-N30-WTO-Protest-in-Seattle

I don't think anyone other than Ms. Holmes is even going to know what this is but that's not going to stop me from writing about it.

I especially like this article about the event because of the perspective. The author was actually one of the several thousand people that protested in Seattle and experience the protests, police reaction, government reaction, and media reaction himself. This of course adds an ample amount of bias but it also gives the article a strong voice.

Having actually been in Seattle during the protests, more so than others this author can utilize imagery to capture the scope of the event: "We protested in front of the police lines near I-5. "We protested outside the King County Jail that was filled with Americans deprived of their right to petition their government" He also describes an instance where the march of over 45,000 people converged in downtown Seattle and overwhelmed the police force to the point where the police abstained from action simply because there was little they could do. The descriptions of that day relay the enormity of the event and also the strength it had. Imagery is used for purposes outside of describing the event however, he also uses it to describe the reactions, like "that night Seattle Mayor Paul Schell took a big stinky shit on the American Constitution" or that time when "the MSM had focused on a handful of broken windows and some graffiti, attempting to characterize all the W.T.O. protesters as rioters". You can't win 'em all.

Obviously the writer wanted to share his perspective so the article is written with easy to understand diction. The hardest word I can find in the article is "euphoric". The use of colloquial diction helps readers relate to the author. The author of this article is just a normal person, and by keeping the words easy we can fully relate to him and the feeling that drove him to protest. It's normal words from a normal person for normal people.

Due to the strong amount of bias in the article (not that anything less was expected considering the source), the biggest contribution to the voice of the article is definitely the parts of the week that the author chooses to include. He was a protest who is now validating the protests and what they stood for, so duh he's going to focus on events that convey this best. It's be foolish to deny that absolutely none of the protesters in Seattle were non-violent, but it wouldn't help his case very much if he spent a long time focusing on it. He also quotes what's basically an entire essay by an author of a book about the protests which essentially outlines his entire position. (I suppose he just got lazy at the end.) Also, any success that has come about due to the WTO, IMF, and other globalization organizations isn't touched upon. There's an astounding lack of counterpoint mentioned.

I feel like I sort of diminished the article in that last paragraph but I really do agree with the point of the protests and think that the article made several good points. That's completely unrelated to the prompt for this but I wanted to state that opinion anyway.

Responses to Course Material (11/24)

My biggest takeaway over the past month is how as a class we've been able to improve in our discussions. We had another mood and atmosphere discussion, and it went much better than the first time we did one. The first time, we hardly even agreed on a word and I don't think we managed more than one sentence because we were hardly unified in anything we said. But this time we managed to use our class time efficiently and got our paragraph done before the hour ended. We only were held up because some people didn't realize that the person in the boat was entering the cave and not leaving it.

I think our improvement in this area largely stemmed from our Death of a Salesman discussions. I think that that was the point in the year where we as a class became much better at being quicker in our discussions and zeroing in on what we need to accomplish. We took longer than other hours to get our theme set, but on the last day we had to get the theme done we just locked down and did it and I think that was the day where from then on we've been able to be much more efficient with our discussions in class, at least for my hour.

We also had to write an essay on The Century Quilt and it was terrible. I was only on my second body paragraph when the bell rang. But these essays are something I'm going to need to get good at for the AP exam. Doing the discussion on it later really helped increase my understanding of the poem, but unfortunately on the AP exam we won't be able to discuss the poem we're given together for an hour before being forced to write about it. So the "quick" analysis is something that I'll definitely need to improve on.

In conclusion:

Open Prompt 3

2004 Student Responses

Essay N:

This essay begins with a strong opening paragraph, with a well-developed thesis and smart usage of rhetorical questions in order to strengthen the writing. The writer uses a slew of quotes throughout his body paragraphs as evidence to strengthen his claims (even if a third of them are "we must tend our gardens"), and just in general all of his body paragraphs are very well developed and stay focused on supporting the thesis. The only flaws the AP reader found in this essay was lack in sophistication with regards to language and syntax, along with some minor repetition. I hardly noticed the lack of sophistication, and the repetition seems very nitpicky to me. The AP reader only gave this essay an eight but I actually think that I would give in a nine.

Essay J:

The constant scribbling out of various words in this essay is really annoying. That's not important in the context of grading the essay, but I still wanted to say that. The opening paragraph of the essay is rather simple, but the author compensates by having a strong thesis. The writer does a good job at laying out claims that support the thesis, but the evidence doesn't go very far, and the analysis feels pretty simple. So the author ultimately achieves the objective of the essay, but doesn't go as deep as he could. I think the AP reader's scoring, a six, was the correct one.

Essay U:

This essay is so absurdly short it's almost laughable. The paragraphs are lengthy...but there are only two of them. A thesis is present, it's the first sentence, but it's almost forgotten in the context of the essay because of the terrible organization, which is really hard to get past. The author never goes very far in depth and is very meager when it comes to providing evidence. It's just a really bad essay. But the author does provide a slightly suitable thesis and does stay on topic, so I'd say that he does barely manage the three that the AP reader gave him.

Death of a Salesman: Summary and Analysis

Summary:

Death of a Salesman, a play by Arthur Miller, follows Willy Loman and the seemingly drastic, dramatic collapse of his life. Willy's eldest son Biff returning home is the primary catalyst for this. Willy desperately wants Biff fulfill the dream he sets up for him: a popular, well-liked, successful businessman. However, at the time of the play Biff is 34 and has been travelling around working temporary blue collar jobs. In a series of flashbacks we learn that Biff didn't graduate college because he flunked a math class, that Willy has cheated on his wife Linda with another woman, that his older brother Ben had inspired him, and that Willy is not nearly the businessman that he claims he is. Willy's family, but especially his wife Linda, keep reinforcing the idea in Willy's mind that he's a good salesman, perpetuating the false reality that Willy has seemed to create for himself. Linda and Biff also learn that Willy has had thoughts of suicide. Willy is fired from his job, though he can't seem to understand the reasoning behind it, and loans money from his friend Charlie. However, he won't take a job from Charlie. Biff's meeting with his old "friend" falls through, and although Biff's brother Happy tries to convince Willy that it went swimmingly, Biff tells his father otherwise at a restaurant. Willy can't seem to accept this and breaks down, where in more flashbacks we learn that Biff didn't go to a summer school he could have gone to to graduate after he had earlier caught Willy cheating on Linda. Willy completely snaps at this point, and Linda tells Biff to leave because he's going to end up killing Willy. Biff agrees to go, but another argument breaks out between Biff and Willy. Biff thinks that what he's said will keep Willy from killing himself. But Willy, after talking with a hallucination of his now dead brother Ben, convinces himself to commit suicide, and does so by driving his car off of a bridge as a boat passes. Willy's family may have collected life insurance due to his suicide, but regardless they are able to pay off the house shortly after his death. Willy says earlier that he wants to be a good salesman, to be popular, and well-liked. However, only four people are present at his funeral.

Theme:

Arthur Miller's Death of a Salesman comments that America's conformist society inhibits the pursuit of one's dreams, which can lead to tragic outcomes.

Analysis:

Main Characters:

Willy Loman - Willy has a somewhat admirable attitude of self-reliance. He wants to provide for his family and he wants to do it all by himself. He wants to succeed on his own merits, through hard work. The problem is that he wants to do this without actually having any merits or work ethic. He's a terrible businessman, and he seems completely fine with stealing and lying if it benefits him (he even cheats on his wife for the sake of business). He's also created his own world for himself, where he is the successful and well-liked businessman that he wants to be. However, semi-frequent relapses back into reality result in numerous contradictions and lies. Eventually, suicide becomes the best "business venture" he can see, and that plus the toll that reality is putting on his mind ultimately leads to his suicide.

Biff Loman - Biff is a lot like Willy when he's a kid. He holds a similar ideological view of the world and is okay with stealing and lying in the same way that Willy is. However, after Biff catches Willy cheating on Linda his worldview is shattered. It remains partially intact, but this leads to Biff not knowing what to do with his life. He works blue collar jobs after failing to graduate from college, but gets pulled back home and tries to go the business route again. However, it's this failure that finally and completely breaks the facade. While Willy is unable to ever confront reality, Biff is. He may take a rather pessimistic view towards his situation as a result, but he's no longer deluding himself. At the end of the play, Biff seems to have more direction than he began with.

Linda Loman - She is one of the biggest reasons that Willy can never confront and deal with reality. She helps maintain the delusion that Willy has built for himself, largely because she fear what will happen if it ever crumbles. She worries that Willy breaking from his delusion will result in his suicide, which is partially correct. She's fiercely protective of Willy, to the point where she's ready to throw out her two sons to save him. She's rather static as a character, however.

Biffy Loman - He's kind of ignored in the grand scheme of things. Willy always focuses on Biff's future instead of Happy's, even though Happy is only a few years younger. Biff does his best to appease everyone at almost all times. Even if this results in massive contradictions and enormous lies, he tries to keep everyone happy and pleased. Him lying to Willy about the result of Biff's meeting with Oliver is the most glaring incident. He also has lots of promiscuous sex with (often married) women with seemingly no intent to ever actually settle down, even though he continuously tells his mother that he'll get married.

Conformity:

Being a businessman is probably not what Willy, deep down, really wants to do. But he sees it as a quick way to success, largely inspired by his brother Ben: "...when I walked into the jungle, I was seventeen. When I walked out I was twenty-one. And, by God, I was rich!" (36-37). Willy pushes himself into this mold because he kind of sees it as the American dream. You go through the system and you come out rich. Only it's not that simple. It's not as simple as Ben makes it seem like it was for him. And Willy doesn't realize that. He fails as a result. He doesn't become the success he imagines, because he thinks by just conforming to the system, things will work out and he'll be happy. He would have been a much better carpenter than a businessman. Biff confronts the issue of conformity though, except he realizes that it's not giving him what he wants, and by the end of the play he's broken the mold and completely resisted the conformity that his father succumbed to. "Why am I trying to become what I don't want to be?" asks Biff in his final argument with his father (105). Willy thinks that by conforming and buying into the system he'll be successful and thus be happy. He gets neither of those things. And when Biff tries to do the same thing, he gets the same result. One of the central points in this play is the contrast there between Willy and Biff. We don't get to find out if Biff ever does become successful or happy after having broken the mold, but I'm led to believe that he's already off to a better start than Willy ever was.

Setting (but really more conformity):

The setting reflects the growing conformity too. The house is, during the flashbacks, in an open area. There's so much left for development, anything could happen in the land surrounding the house. But in the present the house is surrounded by large apartment buildings, locked in place, unwavering and unyielding, they leave no room for change and no room for development. If you travel around you're going to get one thing and one thing only.

China sees the best and worst of America in Boston bombing

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/04/16/china-sees-the-best-and-worst-of-america-in-boston-bombing/

This article doesn't have the strongest voice, I'm sure I could have found articles that had stronger ones. But I wanted to analyze this article's voice mainly because the voice is unique in that it partially represents a voice we don't often see. The author uses colloquial diction, well-used imagery, and focused details to provide a unique outlook on an American tragedy. Unique, because the perspective isn't an American one.

This article is meant to be read by the average person, so it's most fitting that the words used be simpler. "Reverently" is about as challenging as it gets. And when there are words that might be harder to understand (usually Chinese terms), the author goes out of his way to explain them to readers. More educated readers may already know what Weibo is. But to make the article more accessible, since Weibo is mentioned so frequently, the author makes sure to let the readers know that it's "China's massive social media service".

The author uses imagery to enhance the description of China's perspective to the American tragedy. He at one point describes it as "somewhat rosy", adding a color to the dimension. It's just a soft red, but it implies fondness, comfort, admiration. However, the best use of imagery doesn't come from the author of the article, it comes from the Chinese netizens that the author chooses to cite. This ties into detail since it was the author after all that chose to include the quotes, but I'll touch on that later. The Chinese web users use imagery to compare and contrast the response of the US government to that of their own government during similar crises. One user paints a picture of the local police holding a press conference immediately, the public getting involved and helping the runners, and contact information being spread. Through the words, we can see these events play out, only to watch them evaporate when the user compares it to the Chinese reaction to similar events (no reporting until at least six hours after the event, no unity in relief effort).

But what's most probably most important in this article is the use of detail. The voice of this article wouldn't be nearly as compelling and intriguing if the author hadn't picked his details out as well as he did. The author takes an are where not many are too well informed, and does well to present both sides. The Chinese quotes he chooses are all very intellectual and smart comments. There are probably uneducated comments as there are anywhere on the Internet, but that's not the best way to present perspective, so the author does well in his choice of comments. I mentioned a comment earlier where the Chinese web user looks fondly upon the US reaction, but the author contrasts that with an alternative perspective that looks more fondly on China, pointing out how the stricter Chinese security would have prevented such an incident in the first place.

The voice isn't strong in that the author is strongly opinionated one way or another, but I believe it has a strong "smart" voice. The author is presenting unique perspectives that we don't often learn about, and the author does a very good job at delivering that information. And the author effectively uses diction, imagery and detail to do this.

Responses to Course Material (10/27)

The main thing I've been able to take away from this past month of learning is how to take something large and deconstruct it, in order to have a better idea of what it means as a whole. To fully understand a building for instance, you need to be able to recognize all of its pieces, all of the materials that were used to construct it, how those pieces were used in the construction, how it was built, who built it, for what purpose was it built, how it's currently being used...The same can be said about literature. We used this to tackle poetry and to help us construct our theme for The American Dream and are currently deconstructing Death of a Salesman for a similar purpose.

With poetry, we used STIFS to quickly point out the main parts of a poem and to help us tackle multiple choice questions that we will face on future tests (and ultimately the AP). With The American Dream, to construct our theme, we were forced to incorporate every motif in order to be successful. This tested our understanding of the work and really pushed our thinking abilities to the limit. It's similar to the poetry analysis in that in order to have a full idea of the work, we need to be able to find and appreciate all of its pieces. We'll ultimately have to construct another theme for Death of a Salesman and I hope that the building metaphor will keep me focused and on the right track when we have to do another theme and analysis blog. It's a frustrating process, but a necessary one in order to best grasp a work of literature.

Open Prompt 2

2003 Student Responses


Essay LLLL:
The student gets off to a great start with a nice, concise opening paragraph. Close reading is used to convey the students ideas, starting right away in the first body paragraph when the student describes the first image we see of Gatsby to explain an effect the book has. The student keeps from summarizing, and does a terrific job at using quotes to illustrate his points. The use of quotes is especially remarkable considering that this is all drawn strictly from memory. His handwriting could be neater, but that's just a minor quibble of mine. The student keeps the essay well organized, and all of the main points are nicely wrapped up at the end. The student fully deserves his high marking.

Essay C:
Firstly, I really don't like that he restates the quote from the prompt in his own opening paragraph. That doesn't seem to bother the graders, but I didn't like it. And the essay in general is written rather simply. "This happened. This is why this affects that. Here's another point I have. That means this because reasons." The grader describes it as "workmanlike", and it's a pretty apt description in my opinion. The first body paragraph reads more like a summary than an analysis. It does connect back to the main points in the thesis in a few ways, but it's harder to find those moments than it should be. I almost want to say that this should be a 5, but the discussion of meaning holds up well enough that I'd probably give it a 6. A 7 seems pretty generous.

Essay FF:
The opening paragraph is concise, but it's too narrow and is pretty boring to read. The first body paragraph is also practically a summary, with the student only managing to barely connect it back to the thesis at the very end. There's just too much summarizing in general throughout the essay. But the first body paragraph provides the most glaring example along with the paragraph where the author simply describes the climax of the work, offering no analysis of it until later. The actual analysis is severely lacking because the student spends way too much time describing events in the book. I know way more about the plot of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest then I should. On top of that, the organization is lackluster. The student probably should have been awarded a 4. The grader must have been feeling nice the day he/she read this essay.

The American Dream: Summary and Analysis

Summary:

The American Dream, a play by Edward Albee, briefly follows an upper-middle class "family" in the living room of their apartment. Mommy and Daddy are the power couple, with Mommy having near total control over Daddy and dictating most of his decisions. Grandma, Mommy's mother, is nearly voiceless in the house. though can occasionally hold sway with Daddy. Grandma keeps up an act of foolishness and naivete, when in reality she is very aware of her situation. She is constantly under threat of being taken away by the "van man". Mommy and Daddy call Mrs. Barker to demand satisfaction, although it takes them awhile to figure out why exactly she's there.  The child that Mommy and Daddy bought from Mrs. Barker was too full of content, and despite mutilating the child to fit their wants, the child was unpleasing to them and eventually died. However, when the Young Man arrives, Grandma sets it up so that Mrs. Barker can present the Young Man as the replacement child: pretty on the outside but devoid of content, depth, and emotion. Grandma leaves and Mommy gets over it quickly, happy that she got satisfaction in the end.

Theme:

Albee's American Dream warns that the current generation of upper class Americans have gutted the heart and soul of what it means to be American and replaced our collective dream with a superficial, immature, materialism driving us to acquire power and wealth, but there is hope of change.

(The elements of this theme are supported below in the Analysis section)

Analysis:

Since there's no format by which to abide, I think I'm just going to separate this into chunks and address certain things separately.

-The Young Man clearly represents the modern "American dream". He lacks depth and content. ("Yup. Boy, you know what you are, don't you? You're the American dream, that's what you are" (108)). This can be related to several other parts of the play. It doesn't matter what's inside Grandma's boxes, it only matters that they look nice. The quality of the hat that Mommy buys isn't important, the name of the color is. Mrs. Barker as a person doesn't matter to Mommy, only the various titles and positions she holds do. Furthermore, Grandma is representative of the old "American dream". She's smart, hard-working, resourceful, and isn't a victim of consumerism. Unlike Mommy, it's what's inside the boxes that's important to her, and she even says that making the boxes is pretty is tiresome and makes her fingers hurt. Mommy is constantly at conflict with the old American dream: she's always arguing with Grandma and she, along with Daddy, mutilates their first child, who is similar to Grandma in that he has content. The Young Man is a result of the mutilation. He is what Mommy and Daddy want. He's the American dream, dead on the inside but beautiful on the outside.

-Gender roles play a very important role in understanding the characters of the play. As the play progresses, it becomes increasingly clear that Mommy wears the pants in the relationship between her and Daddy. She takes on a more masculine role, and as a result of this, Daddy is more feminine. We can see that he's been reduced to a more feminine role by Mommy, he's fickle and indecisive and needs her constant reassurance in order to make choices and decisions. And yet, Daddy wants to believe that he's masculine, even trying to prove it at times. This culminates when Daddy alludes to a sex change. He mentions having a surgery where he was given tubes. He tries to fight it, it seems. He mentions feeling pains in his stitches and gets a huge confidence boost when he ultimately does make the decision to open the door (this wasn't without Mommy's prodding however). But he ultimately seems to be fighting a losing battle. Grandma comes across as sexually androgynous. She mentions that given her age and her looks she could pass as either male or female, and even does pass for male when she wins the baking contest. To me, the gender roles show that women can easily have and take power, but it still takes actually male anatomy to get things done. Grandma had all the means to win that baking contest, yet she did so as a male. Mommy is the one basically dictating what happens in the apartment, yet it's Daddy who has to go through with most of the decisions. She leaves it up to him to open the door for Mrs. Barker and to call the van man. However, Mrs. Barker is able to dictate and execute as a woman, and she doesn't hesitate to remind people that she's a professional woman. This could perhaps signal a transition to female dominance, where no male is necessary for things to either be dictated or executed. Gender roles are part of the struggle for power.

-Consumerism is a motif that pops up often in the play. A lot of this ties in with the first chunk, so this will be briefer. Consumerism plays into the appearance part of the new American dream. Appearance, perception, and status are what's most important for the new American dream, and money is one of the biggest tellers of status and can greatly affect how others perceive you. It gives you power. Because of this, money, and therefore consumerism, becomes one of the most important things in society. Hell, Mommy basically says that she married Daddy for his money, and that she feels entitled to it. Mrs. Barker is the biggest symbol for consumerism. Her entire being revolves around business and she takes advantage of opportunities to improve her business. Even though Grandma is the one who arranges for the Young Man to give Mommy and Daddy satisfaction, Mrs. Barker is quick to announce that she will send them a bill in the mail. Also, despite being devoid of most other emotions, the Young Man still has a drive to make money, it's the reason he visits the apartment. The characters, save for Grandma, are often driven by their quest for power, which is through money and consumerism. ("They wanted satisfaction; they wanted their money back. That's what they wanted" (101)).

-The matter of age comes up several times as well. Mainly, in that it doesn't matter, and that it can even be better. Grandma is definitely the most "rootable" character in this bunch, despite being the oldest. And despite saying a bunch of self-deprecating things about old people, she proves a lot of those things to be incorrect through her actions. It's also Grandma's day-old cake that ends up winning the baking contest, and the old American dream that proves to be the better one (at least, that's the message we get).

-Albee incorporates Absurdist elements into his play. Although the play can't be fully classified as part of the Theater of the Absurd due to the amount of symbolism and actual meaning, the Absurdist elements are important in making the play what it is. Repetition is used to provide characterization, usually in a negative way (Ex: Daddy constantly forgets Mrs. Barker's name, belittling his intelligence). But primarily, other elements such as the illogical conversation flow, strange conclusions, and confusing dialogue are used to provide humor. I actually think the humor is used to show the seriousness of the issue Albee is having us focus on. It's all quite humorous, but then we reach the scene where Grandma describes how Mommy and Daddy brutally mutilated and ultimately murdered a child. It all seemed funny, but now everything has a much darker feel to it. And that scene forces you to go back and notice exactly what you were laughing at before. If the humor weren't there, that juxtaposition wouldn't exist, and that metaphor probably wouldn't be as powerful as it is.

-The ending seems to suggest that things won't stay the same, or that they at least might not. Grandma says that the play is ending because it's best to stop when everyone has what they think they want. ("...I don't think we'd better go any further. No, definitely not. So, let's leave things as they are right now...while everybody's happy...while everybody's got what he wants...or everybody's got what he thinks he wants" (127)) This implies that they might realize what they have isn't really what they want. So there does seem to be potential for the characters to realize that they're unhappy with their new American Dream. Also, Grandma, the old American dream, doesn't completely leave the play when she exits the apartment. She's still on stage, observing, almost as if she's waiting for the right time to come back. Why else stick around?

The House GOP has nothing to show for its government shutdown

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-10-07/opinions/42792517_1_government-shutdown-house-gop-obamacare

The Editorial Board of the Washington Post takes its position on the government shutdown, and puts most of the blame squarely on Republican shoulders, while also pointing out the ineffectiveness of the strategy used by the GOP. Diction, syntax, and details are all used to effectively relay the message of the writers to the readers of the column.

The main goal of any editorial is to send a message to its readers. The readers of the Washington Post probably have an average intelligence that's above normal, so it only makes sense that the diction in the article is slightly elevated. Bigger words such as "ostensible" are used, as well as politic terms that normal readers may not know, such as "caucus". The reader is also expected to know of various programs and political figures pertaining to the government shutdown. But so as not to lose too many people, the diction as a whole is fairly colloquial, so even readers who get lost on a few words and don't know what the various programs are can still grasp the intent of the article and come away with an understanding of what the Editorial Board is trying to convey.

Syntax is used to focus attention on the consequences of the Republican Party's actions. Questions, followed by short one word sentence answers are used to slow down the reading and make you focus on each individual consequence. All of the three opening paragraphs contain such format: "Damage the livelihood of millions of Americans? Check....Waste billions of taxpayer dollars? Check....Interfere with key government operations? Check." The syntax theme established here is used later to make a different point about how the GOP came away with nothing: "Derail the hated Obamacare? Ch . . . — oh, no, wait a minute." When presenting details and facts about the shutdown, the sentences are longer and read more quickly. But when opinions are stated, the sentences become short and succinct, acting as conclusions that should be drawn from the details presented. If you got lost in the long lines of details, there are short and sweet sentences that tell you what conclusions you should draw. Because you're more likely to remember and retain all of the short sentence as opposed to the longer ones, and the article wants you to come away with their conclusions, not with the information they used to reach those conclusions.

Finally, the details the article presents are naturally going to be the ones that help their case the most. A counterargument is never really addressed, and the only information that is presented is information that supports the overall conclusion of the editorial: the Republican strategy has failed and they've severely hurt the country through their stubbornness. Personally, I agree with most of the conclusions made in the editorial, but it's rather one-sided with the information it presents. But of course, readers are much less likely to disagree with the argument if they're given information they can use to disagree, and with a tricky subject like politics it'd probably be hard to fully refute a counterargument to the point where no reader could come away completely disagreeing with the article. It's just safer to leave that information out. But still, this manipulation is important in creating an effect on readers, and leaving them with the conclusions that the editorial wants them to leave with.

So if you took away the smart use of diction, syntax, and details, what would happen? The shutdown would still be because the Republican strategy failed (and because the House GOP leaders like Boehner suck, but that's just my opinion), but the Washington Post might not as easily convince its readers of that.

Responses to Course Material

So far, our classroom discussions have revolved mainly around two things: close reading and Theater of the Absurd (with some existentialism thrown in for good measure). I think that mainly what both of these things have helped strengthen us in is analysis. DIDLS (diction, imagery, details, language, syntax) gives us guidelines on how we can analyze things, and starting with the Theater of the Absurd presents with an immediate analytic challenge, given the strangeness of the works. Close reading can be used to find connections and meanings in works and TOTA works like American Dream make it hard to find connections and meanings with all of the random parts and moments that are so profound due to their lack of meaning. Personally, I quite like the challenge that American Dream has presented and have found Albee's works (I ended up reading The Zoo Story too) very interesting and thought-provoking. I think after getting through TOTA, other stories we read won't be nearly as hard to analyze.

Why no Yes in the Rock Hall

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/12/why_no_yes_in_the_rock_hall.html

I'm already biased in the case argued by the author. As a fan of Yes, I most definitely believe that they should be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. But I think that even if I weren't a huge fan of Yes and the genre they represent, that I would support them being inducted after reading this article. The author uses diction, detail and syntax to great affect in order to get his point across.

The article is very accessible because the diction is very casual, colloquial. But the diction is also used to highlight Yes and progressive rock as a whole in a positive light. "Yes and other prog bands of the 1970s had enormous success and substantial influence" is one of the many quotes that emphasizes the high level of fame the band achieved. The diction conjures up feelings of grandness and importance when it comes to Yes, which supports the author's original position.

The detail provided by the author is also critical in how the point of the article comes across. "It's not only Yes who has been consistently passed over by the Rock Hall: Jethro Tull; Emerson, Lake & Palmer; King Crimson; The Moody Blues; and Procol Harum are all still outside looking in". Is it necessary for the author to list all of these other progressive rock bands? No, it isn't. But it enforces the idea that it's not just one fanboy upset that his favorite band has been snubbed. It shows that the problem is large and scale, with Yes just being one of the most notable examples. The author uses a wide array of details to show all of the credentials Yes has: popularity, artistry, musicianship, and influence. The author also leaves out any and all details that might strengthen the case of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. In fact, when the Hall itself is brought up, detail is used to discredit it's decisions, noting that its decision to shut out most of progressive rock "fatally undercuts the credibility of the institution".

Finally, syntax in the article is put to great use in areas where the author wants emphasis. Questions are used to make you think about the case yourself, but usually with the author's slant in mind. For instance one of the questions makes you ask yourself if "the fact that it's not only Yes that is passed over, but also most of the other '70s prog bands, point to a pervading prejudice that undercuts the credibility of the entire Rock Hall enterprise?" Most people aren't going to read that question and say no, they'll think of various reasons why the answer is yes (the author makes use of the rest of that paragraph to give you more reasons). The author also keeps key information until the end of the sentence so that it really sinks in. In this instance: "It's almost as if these folks think they can dictate history with no explanation or supporting argument: rock history by fiat." the last four words have the most impact because they're at the end of the sentence, and it works well because that's the main point the author is getting at in the sentence.

Poetry Problems

I already knew what my biggest problems were with poetry going into the poetry multiple choice section of the book, and my thoughts have only been reinforced. There are two things in poetry that spell doom for me. The more a poem fulfills one of these two categories the more trouble I'll have with it. Firstly, is old English. The older the poem the harder the English is for me to understand. The Keats poem wasn't old enough where this was too much of an issue, but whenever there's a word that's asterisked, I typically have to look and see the definition provided. Different prepositions also make things harder. But having read plenty of Shakespeare in my schooling, old English isn't as difficult as it used to be. Now my biggest problem with poetry is digging through all of the figurative language to dissect the plot and meaning of the poems. Unlike book, poems don't just tell you what's happening. Books tell you what's happening and then provide description and detail. Poems tend to be very heavy on detail and leave you on your own to use that detail to figure out what's happening, and I don't like having to piece those things together myself. The less clear a poem is in its plot and meaning, the more trouble I'll have with it.

Peterson's AP English Diagnostic Test - Reflection

Going into the test, I thought I would do pretty well on it. Literature tests are typically the kind of tests that I excel at. But I didn't do as well in some areas and I think the biggest thing I need to expand on is my knowledge of lit terminology. Most of the questions that asked about what type of poem or story the passage was I didn't know what a few of the choices meant. For example, I got question nine wrong because I didn't know what a Lyric was. Questions regarding knowing what happened in the passages is easy for me, and since those type of what-does-this-line-mean, what-is-the-author's-point and what-does-this-person-want questions came up a lot in the Pride and Prejudice passage and in the last passage (historical, I love history), I did well in those sections of the test. And since poems aren't as literal and often use language that mires and obscures what the work is about, I have more trouble on those. The poem about the white mares at the break of dawn was followed by several questions where I had to figure out what the heck was being talked about. Having to pick apart poems one word at a time to try to interpret what an author is saying is not something I enjoy doing, largely in part because I find difficulty doing that. I ended up doing moderately well on that section of the test but it ended up taking a lot more time than all of the other sections. That's something that I'll most likely need to improve this year.