"Musee des Beaux Arts" and "Before the Mirror"

1. These poems are not merely descriptions of paintings. How do Updike and Auden use the paintings? Why do you think they refer to the paintings instead of writing poems without them?

3. Do you think having the paintings right there to refer to helps you or hinders you as you are reading the poems? Do you rely too much on them, or do they help you to understand the poets' angles of vision? Explain.

2. Discuss the significance of these lines:
They never forgot
That even the dreadful martyrdom must run its course
Anyhow in a corner, some untidy spot
Where the dogs go on with their doggy life and the torturer's horse
Scratches its innocent behind on a tree.

3. What is the "human position" of suffering, according to Auden?

4. "Before the Mirror" is about more than one kind of "reflection." There is the literal reflection in the mirror, but in what other ways is "reflection" important to the poem?

5. Updike uses sexual imagery in "Before the Mirror." Do you think the sexuality is in Picasso's painting as well? And, perhaps more importantly, why is the sexual element in the poem at all?

6. Talk about Updike's poem in terms of the theme of innocence vs. experience.

7. Why does it matter to Auden that it is Icarus in Breughel's painting and not some random swimmer?

8. If Picasso's painting says, "Enter here/and abandon preconception," does Updike's poem say the same thing? Explain.

Weather Emotions

I really like how the mood of each story is told through the weather. I think by creating this setting it definitely gives you a sense of what the characters are feeling. In the story of an hour you knew Mrs. Mallard was at first cloudy, and stormy (sad and angry) about her husbands death then as she relaxed and thought it through, the clouds began to fade and blue skies shined through. She knew everything was going to be ok.
In the storm I felt that as the storm intensified so did the love affair, the thunder the rain the wind you could feel the emotions that were going on. As the storm faded so did the love affair, the storm was over, so was the love affair.

A Storm Was Created

Like Norah, Calixta now has a major secret because she had an affair. At the beginning of the story of A Doll's House everything seems to be picture perfect but it just isn't realistic, Norah's life and relationship with her husband was fake and the realness came out once the secret was revealed. Maybe Calixta won't tell her husband and everthing will "seem" to be happy but it won't be real happiness because she will have to keep something from her husband. I feel that Calixta has created a storm because now she has to have that in the back of her mind until she reveals it and the storm won't end until the affair is revealed to Babinot.

Most like Nora and Having an Affair

I agree with Amber, I think Calixta is most like Nora. Like Amber said Nora and Calixta go behind their husband backs in different ways leading one husband to an affair and the one to saving a life. Having an affair should ever be option in a marrraige. I don't believe that cheating on your spouse can ever be a good thing. If you truely love your spouse, the two of you will find a way to work through it with eachother. And if this seems next to immposible, then maybe the marraige isn't worth saving even though I do not believe in divorce. Going as far as an affair is definately the wrong path to take.

Not Really a Happy Ending

In a way I don't believe the last line of "The Storm" is really true. For the moment everyone is happy at the end of the story. But there are many more storms to come in the future. Sure everyone is happy after this particular storm but who's to say that it would not happen again? I say that if Calixta and Alcee couldn't resist their passion during this storm then they'll most likely do it again during the next "storm." It's kind of funny to me that everybody is happy at the end, but I feel that the happiness is mainly focused on Calixta and Alcee. What about their families? Bobinot and Alcee's wife Clarisse are completely ignorant of Calixta and Alcee's moment of passion. Do you think that they would be happy if they knew about it? I'll answer my own question and say I highly doubt it. So is everyone really better off and happier? No, I don't think so. If you think about it, not every affair is a one-time thing. Calixta and Alcee would most likely find themselves in the same position again. True happiness is not brought in a marriage or any relationship for that matter if one in the relationship is full of lies and deceit. I feel that if the story went on Bobinot and Clarisse would eventually find out about Calixta and Alcee’s affair, and it wouldn’t be a very happy ending.

Nora

In response to Dave. I agree that an affair is only going to end with hurting a relationship most times cause the relationship should be about more then just the sex and if it is not it will come to an end. However, in a broken relationship an affair can sometimes help both or one of the people realize how broken their relationship is quite possibly allowing them a chance to step back and see their problems and find a possitve resolution so I would say on rare occasions it can save a relationship.
In storm though I didn't get the feeling that Calixta's husband was over powering or mean. It seemed that, that was more her role to lead relationship, the way he came in. Having a lie all prepared so that she won't be mad at him or his son for being a mess. Maybe though I misinterperted the end cause it seemed like it was setting up for a repeat performance and them being able to lie to their spouses however if it made Calixta and Alecca(?) appretaite their own spouse more I could see how it may strentghen their relationships. But they would have to be honest with their spouse and communicate.

The long and short of it

Daniel poses an interesting question in the prompt, can an affair be a good thing in a relationship? On the one hand, marraige isn't all about sex, but it definitely plays a big part in the success and level of contentment one feels in a relationship. Things are just calmer, less complex. If there was no satisfaction, the marraige could be in jeopardy. So the addition of an outside satisfying element could indeed prove beneficial short term, or so one could argue. However, I believe that what is most important in a healthy relationship is open communication and trust. If these elements are lacking, at some point the relationship will suffer, especially if what is compromised is the fidelity of one half of the whole. Affairs are full of deceit and mistrust, ultimately poisoning what could possibly be a happy situation. In the case of the storm, Calixta and Alcee seem to have satisfied some desires that may have gone unsatisfied, yet they have both betrayed the trust and love of their spouses. The storm may be over for now, but I foresee in the end a falling out of some sort when their secret passion is discovered. So there you have it, the long and the short of it.

Most Like Nora

Between the two stories I think that Calixta is most like Nora from "A Doll's House". Both Calixta and Nora go behind their husbands backs, for very different reasons, Nora's is to save her husbands life and Calixta's is to have an affair. Although it can be argued that Nora did what she did for power, therefore, not entirly just for love.
Also Calixta married Bobinot, when she has had a past with Alcee. That makes me think that she married Bobinot for a certian reason that is not menioned in the story. Nora marries Helmer to help her father, and also herself.

The Story of an Hour

I really enjoyed reading The Story of an Hour. Chopin effectively used the setting to portray Mrs. Mallard's true inner feelings. Death is generally a mournful time for most people. It is associated with dark, dreary, sadness, black, all negative feelings. Not for Mrs. Mallard. The way the scene is described depicts very well how happy she is to know of her husband's death. The description of the outdoors, such as "new spring life",  "delicious breath of rain", and "countless sparrows were twittering in the leaves" all reflect the inner peace Mrs. Mallard feels now that her husband is gone. Spring is symbolic of new life coming forth and for Mrs. Mallard, her life is set anew. She is now free to live her life "free, free, free!" A normal, loving, and mournful wife would be in a winter setting possibly. Throughout the story, there are several little details about the scene that give away Mrs. Mallard's true feelings on the matter.

 She died because she realized her new found freedom had been stripped from her when her husband walked in the door at the end. I find it interesting how in almost all of the stories we have read in the past couple weeks, the one common theme is the suppression these women feel. Their husbands seem to be completely dominant. They all end with these women trying to find themselves, to find who they really are. All with drastic measures. 

Multiple Meanings

When Kate Chopin wrote The Storm, she intended the meaning of the title to be interpreted in different ways. There is the obvious fact that a literal storm is occuring, and then there is the figurative storm that rages inside Calixta and Alcee's passion for each other. One thing that is also known about storms, is the fact that they are never ending. Storms are always raging somewhere, in some form, and weather permitting, will come raging back in the future. So feeding off of Megan's comment about the calm before the storm, it can also be looked at as a storm that occurs (figuratively) that will definitely be around again. Everyone might be happy at this point in time, but the storms are not over.

The Story of an Hour

 In the last line of "The Story of an Hour" my first impression was that she had passed away by joy of her husband dying. Then after reading it again i came to the conclusion i was wrong. Mrs Mallard shows definite emotion upon hearing of her husbands death. She even mentions how she will weep again at his funeral. The time she spends looking out her window is when i feel the last line of the story is brought to life. She feels a sense of freedom, and feels alive with her ability to see everything alone. No one watching over her she was able to be "free". Joy overcomes her body and she  slips away. With your loved one gone and your health failing, with ultimately nothing to live for it wouldn't be hard to let go. I also think some of her joy could be attributed to knowing of her own death to come soon and not being able to be with her husband any more, and upon news of his death she thinks their separation will not be long. Making her passing that much more timely and understandable. 

Nearly a Feast of Freedom--swept from the tounge before the taste

First I'd like to say I love how the author, Chopin, uses the setting to reflect the emotions of the characters. For example, in "The Story of an Hour""the tops of trees that were all aquiver with the new spring life...delicious breath of rain was in the air...countless sparrows were twittering in the eaves". These phrases represent happiness, a sense of being reborn, or a new life. This is how Louise was feeling when she realized she was free. I like this technique. Chopin also used it in "The Storm". I quote, "they did not heed the crashing torrents, and the roar of the elements". That was how Calixta and Alcee felt in their irresponsible moment of passion. Chopin then writes, "the growl of the thunder was distant and passing away...the rain was over." After the affair was over, they were more calm, immitating the whole time the storm.

I really liked "The Story of an Hour". I thought it was both interesting and engaging in a short amount of time. It was sad that her husband "died" at the beginning of the story. I felt terrible for her. Here is this woman with a heart condition and no children--at least no children are mentioned--she was bound to be all alone now that her husband was "killed". This story somewhat reminded me of Romeo and Juliet. Now let me explain what I mean by that. Not the unquestioning love those two had for each other, but for all of the devious or remote plots happening at the same time which no one was aware of throughout the play. Most of the characters in that play had a certain plan for their personal success, or a hidden agenda, if you will. Only the audience knows the entire outside story as they read, the characters are oblivious. In "The Story of an Hour", we know exactly what Louise just crucially realized or comprehended in a matter of minutes(I'm guessing it was minutes since the whole story takes place in an hour). Her emotions ranged from the deepest sadness imaginable(debatable) to perhaps the most superfluous happiness she sought after without knowing--her freedom. I guess the connection I make between these two texts is that both Louise and Romeo died from what they didn't know. Kind of. Also, the doctors, Louise's sister and brother-in-law all thought she died from happiness or shock of finding out that her husband had actually not been killed. Not communicated to them that it was in fact the opposite, under confusion without knowing. We as the audience know or interpret her death to be from her realizing she was not free after all. Especially after her terrific realization, a fantasy, which freedom she merely, nearly tasted.

A Calm Before the Storm

The last line of "The Storm" I believe is a false statement.  I think a better ending would be a calm before the big storm.  With the passion that was described between Calixta and Alcee I don't see how they couldn't stay away from each other if you know what I mean.  And if they keep it up then I think that it would be a really big storm.  

They might be happy now but somewhere, sometime something is going to sleep and they are either going to be caught or someone is going to say something and all hell will break lose. 

"The Storm" and "Story of an Hour"

Choose one of the following five prompts and respond to it on the blog. Remember that we are not turning in reading responses on Thursday. Instead, we are discussing Chopin’s stories here.

1. Point to examples in both “The Storm” and “Story of an Hour” where Chopin uses the setting to reflect the emotions of the characters. Do you like this technique? How is it different than being told what the characters think and feel?

2. Interpret the last line of “The Storm”: “So the storm passed and everyone was happy.” Do you believe this? Has the storm passed? Is everyone better off and happier because of what has happened? I’m not looking for a specific answer. Respond to the story’s last line any way you wish.

3. This question is related to the last one. Can an affair actually be a good thing for a relationship in some cases?

4. The last line of “Story of an Hour” is, “When the doctors came they said she died of heart disease--of joy that kills.” Argue that the doctors were right about what Mrs. Mallard died of.

5. Who is more like Nora in A Doll’s House, Calixta or Mrs. Mallard? Point to specific examples when making your claim.

Thank you. Blog away!

Yellow Wallpaper

I have a proposal to make and I would like to know your opinions.

Is John really her husband? Or is he just her doctor, and she imagined the whole thing? When he is in the room with he at night could he not have been making observations?  He always has other patients that he have to be tend to over night so couldn't she be just a patient too? If she truly was in a mental institution wouldn't this make sense?

-Megan

What the

What the crap Dan are you sexist against men or something cause I would say these last few peices have been pretty sexist. But any ways that isn't what I got on here to blog about. I thing Torvald is a terrible character he is shallow and self center, also he's arrogant. I just think in all reality though he isnt the antagonist or hero in thie play although he is important he is just a round character. The true antagonist of this play is Nora, she has all her little secrets that cause the action of this play and Krogstad is the hero doing what must be done when no one else would and revealing the true of what happened. But really the only person in this play with any courage is Mrs. Linde cause she see's everyone for what they are and instead of saving poor stupid Nora form her secrets, she instead lets the truth come out allowing a kind of resulotion. Kristine gives everyone the opportunity to show their true colors even Krogstad so maybe Kristine is the Hero mmm... now that is an idea. The women lead though whole play and the men are just there reacting to what the women do. So is that the moral of this story that Women lead the world no matter what men think? I like that. I'm going to have to think on that some more.

A Doll's House

Please choose one of the following prompts and write a one-page, double-spaced response. Remember what we have discussed about analysis vs. summary, and as always, please point to specific examples from the text to help you make your points.

1. Do any of the characters in A Doll’s House remind you of other characters we’ve read about this semester? If so, explain which characters you are reminded of and why they come to mind.

2. On page 821, Nora says, “Torvald is a man with a good deal of pride—it would be terribly embarrassing and humiliating for him if he thought he owed anything to me. It would spoil everything between us; this happy home of ours would never be the same again.” In your opinion, what is this “happy home” built on? What hangs in the balance here? Why is Nora trying to protect her “big secret”?

3. Why do you think Nora confesses to forging her father’s signature when Krogstad confronts her about the date?

4. To Europeans in the 19th century, the ending of A Doll’s House was scandalous. Although the play was popular, it was not socially accepted; much like Torvald, the European audience cared very much about appearances, and they did not want to endorse Ibsen’s ideas. The play was banned in Britain for many years. At the time, the marriage covenant was considered sacrosanct, beyond reproach, and Ibsen caused an outrage by portraying a dysfunctional relationship. Nora’s leaving at the end of the play was particularly scandalous. People rioted. In the German theater, the actors refused to perform the play as written, and the ending was altered. In the alternate version, Nora does not leave. She is forced to stay with Torvald and the children. Ibsen defended his original ending, writing in a letter, “I may almost say it was for the sake of the last scene that the whole play was written.” Why is this so? Why is the ending so important to the play? Why must Nora leave Torvald at the end in order for the play to be “true”? How would it be different if she stayed?

5. Why is Nora so upset when Rank declares his love for her? Why doesn’t she want to hear it? Use this example to discuss the theme of dream vs. reality.

6. On page 841, Nora tells Rank, “Well, you see, there are those people you love and those people you’d almost rather be with.” Interpret this statement. What does Nora mean? Do you think she still feels this way at the end of the play?

7. Do you think Mrs. Linde is justified in her actions on page 850? Krogstad offers to take the letter back, yet Kristine decides that “this unhappy secret must come out.” Is this her place to decide? Why is she interfering? Would you have done the same in her place? Why or why not?

8. Explain how the tarantella (a traditional Italian dance) and everything that surrounds its preparation, practice, and eventual performance can be viewed as a symbol for the change that is taking place in Nora.

9. At the end of the play, Nora speaks of the “miracle of miracles,” defining it as a “real marriage” rather than a relationship with a “stranger.” Do you think this “miracle” is possible for the Helmers? Do you think there is any chance for them in the future? Explain why or why not.

"Imagination is a killer."

During our discussion about the line -"Imagination is a killer" in "The Things they Carried." We spoke about how not facing the reality, or fantasizing that it's not as bad as it seems, or putting ourselves somewhere else could be not only fatal to our sanity but to our survival . And although I agreed with all this in the context of this story, I couldn't help feeling hypocritical or torn. The reason why I couldn't help feeling this way was because of one of my favorite movies- Life is Beautiful. For those of you who have not seen the film here is a synopsis(don't worry I won't spoil anything for you). In the case of the film imagination is a savior. It keeps Guido and his darling son not only sane but, alive long enough to see the U.S. troops come to the rescue. I hate to argue, because I have not personally experienced either of these situations, that these two stories circumstances are similar. And if that is the case, then why is imagination a killer in one and a savior in the other?
I have thought long and hard about this and cannot come up with anything, I would love to hear some one elses thoughts.
Cheers-Sarah
(Disclaimer, I apologize in advance if something is spelled incorrectly or the grammar is off, I struggle a bit.... but I am working on it.)

Prompts for The Yellow Wallpaper and Trifles

1. “The Yellow Wallpaper” was written in 1892 and Trifles in 1916. Is there anything in these works that seems contemporary? That is, do these pieces remain relevant in 2009? Be specific.

2. “You think you have mastered it, but just as you get well under way in following, it turns a back-somersault and there you are. It slaps you in the face, knocks you down, and tramples upon you. It is like a bad dream” (771). On a very surface level, these lines are about wallpaper, but what are they really describing?

3. How is the narrator of “The Yellow Wallpaper” similar to Minnie Wright in Trifles? How is she different?

4. A literary symbol is something, usually an object, that stands for something else. For example, the pebble that Jimmy Cross carries with him is symbolic of Martha, his fantasies, his innocence, etc. Write about three symbols in Trifles and/or The Yellow Wallpaper and discuss what they are symbolic of.

5. Talk about John in both stories. How are the Johns similar? How are they different?

6. Does either of these women escape her situation? Explain.

Cathedral

I was really interested in why the story spent so much time explaining the background of mostly the wife, and some of Robert. The story would have been completely different if it hadn't given such information. I think that I could connect with the characters in the story more effectively knowing their background. I had compassion of what his wife had been through and why she might hold onto friendship that was so dear to her. She hadn't had much stability in her life and Robert had always been the one constant. It was important to know this info because it gave you all points of view. You could gather opions about the characters, even though it was the husbands narration. It gave you insight to how the husband might view Robert in the situation of meeting him and had you anxious to meet him. Knowing this info made me want to care about them and continually read. I personally think the background was intrumental to the characters and that the author did well to put it in there. It is always good to read a story that gives full understanding of the characters and their niches.

The Things They Carried

Blackboard is acting up right now, so I am going to post the prompts on the blog until further notice. See you on Tuesday.

Prompt #2 – “The Things They Carried”

Please choose one of the following questions and write a one-page response. Please come prepared to discuss all of the questions and all of the prompts, even the ones you do not choose to write about. This will ensure quality class discussions and will also prepare you for future writing assignments.

1. At one point, O’Brien writes that “Imagination was a killer.” What do you think this means?

2. Talk about repetition in the story. What kind of things get repeated? How does repetition figure into the story itself and to the way O’Brien tells it? Why is this significant?

3. Why do you think O’Brien spend so much time detailing all of the things that the men carried with them? Is this really important to the story? Use examples in your response.

4. Why do the soldiers do things like kick corpses, cut off thumbs, and make jokes about people dying? Isn’t this offensive? Does it make you think less of them?

5. Why do you think Jimmy Cross burns Martha’s letters? Is this a symbolic act of some kind? An act of anger? Explain.

6. In the final scene, as Jimmy Cross sees Martha in the rain, O’Brien writes a two-word paragraph: “He understood.” What does Jimmy Cross understand?

7. How is this story different than other things you have read or seen about Vietnam? Or, if you have not read or seen anything about Vietnam, what is your impression of that war/conflict after reading this story?

8. Is this story about war? If you think so, what does it say about war? Is there a moral? If you decide it’s not about war, then what is it about?

There was one statement that really stuck out me as the narrator was telling about his wife’s past with Robert. It reads, “… the blind man asked if he could touch her face, … she never forgot it.” An experience like this is something you would never want to forget. Yes, it might be hard to hear your wife or husband talk about an old friend and how great of a time you had together, but it should hopefully show that you can trust one another and not let the past get in the way. I admire the narrator for being able to become friends with Robert when he came for a visit. I know this couldn’t have been easy, but he was able to start putting the past behind him and move on with the future. I think their friendship will improve because it seems like the narrator realized that his wife is happy with him and not Robert.

Okay, for the record, the narrator from the cathedral was EXTREMELY biased toward the blind in general. But what was the number one contributing factor? The wife was rather cold and uncaring as to whether he was okay with the relationship. She never actually asked him what he thought about the situation. He also had some habits that are less than healthy (such as drug use) that may have given him a calloused attitude towards those who are different. But what really made him refer to the death of Robert's dear wife and what happened after as "pathetic"? I believe that the number one contributing factor had to be his wife, and maybe some jealousy that he had there, or possibly just frustration that he didn't have that same open relationship. That's my opinion, and I imagine that since this is the first comment on here that I won't get much feedback, but if you agree or disagree with me, let me know about, and tell me why.

Writing Prompt 1 - "Cathedral"

Normally I will be posting writing prompts on Blackboard only, but because some of us have had trouble logging on to Blackboard this week, I am posting this first prompt here as well.

Please write a one-page response to “Cathedral” based on one of the following six prompts. When you respond to a prompt, you don’t have to answer it exactly. It is meant to spur your thought process, not dictate your response. You certainly don’t need to quote the prompt or use its exact language. However, please do use specific examples from the story when responding.

1. Before Robert arrives, there is quite a long section of back story, where the narrator (we are never told his name) describes his wife’s relationship with Robert along with other details from her past. Why are these important to the story? How would the story be different if Carver began it when Robert is arriving?

2. How does the narrator feel about his wife’s past relationship with Robert? Is he jealous of Robert? Angry? Bitter? More importantly, why do you think he feels this way? What clues does Carver give us?

3. How does the narrator change in the story? Is he different at the end than he is at the beginning? If so, how? When does the change begin to occur? What causes it? Do you think it will last? Why or why not?

4. Interpret the story’s title. Does Carver choose it simply because there is a show about cathedrals on TV and because of the drawing? Or does Carver intend for it to mean more? Explain.

5. Why do you think Robert wants to draw a cathedral with the narrator? Does he really want to know what it looks like, or does he have other motivations?

6. How would you describe the narrator’s experience at the end of the story. Is it a spiritual experience? Is it a pot and alcohol-induced good time? Does it have anything to do with his wife? I’m not looking for any specific answer. I would genuinely like to hear your interpretation of the ending.

Thank you. I am looking forward to your responses.

-D