In this story there is a Minister named or called Reverend Hooper. He basically is a priest or pastor that always wears a veil to hide his face. None the less of his monstrosity, he reveals his face to the people of his church while relating it to the sermon. They basically made him an outcast, there was allot of logic used, and he talked about hidden secrets. The author crafts this sense of creepiness but in a very understandable way using a noun or adjective.
After he revealed his true self to the people of his church, he felt disappointed. No one really understood him or his lecture because they were caught on the ugly sight of the man. After church was over people started talking about him and starting rumors which caused him to feel even worse not only as a holy man, but as a person. This comes to show you that people are immature and don't care to seek out the real answer or to understand meanings beyond physical belief.
The message revealed in this story is that there are secrets or sins that people have or carry around in there lives and that they shouldn't be looked down upon because of it. Its ironic how he feels as thought he has made a sin so wrong that his face or appearance is ugly. He feels that by being ugly, caused him pain but also grief. He also states that everybody is wearing a veil and that they are hiding secrets that relate to sins. He felt betrayed and lost the trust of his fellow, church members. He thought he could count on them to lift up their veils too and expose there long lived sins, but that wasn't the case.
By relating this to Logos I was able to see that there was some type of door that stood between the ugliness of the Reverend and the sins of others. That came to mind as though this is another message. That to find any understanding, you must look far into logic to find reasoning and answers. Its related to Logos because there really isn't any credibility, or sad situations unless it was related to the revealing of the Reverend.
None the less Nathaniel Hawthorne used a logical way to clean up his horror genre that this story is referred as. This is by far better than The Pit and the Pendulum, but at the same time hold similar characteristics. They are both made by two very different authors that seem to talk about death and evil in the world. Almost like the underbelly of life were everything dies and no one survives. In other words a thriller.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Monday, October 12, 2009
The Fall of the House of Usher
This story seems very weird. It starts off by talking about a house and how it presents its self. This whole story basically talks about the house and the way it looks or presents itself, the friend ship of the two men, and how the narrator felt. This is seems to relate to gothisism and the under belly of life because everything is dark and dreadful.
The way the house is described is very ugly. Its very old and and it looks as if its falling apart. The house is just simply outdated and needs to be fixed completely. By the simple descriptions that the narrator gives, it makes the house seem like its haunted or something. There is definitely something wrong with that because, the house has occupants but no one is willing to try and fix it up. Instead people think that its creepy and weird
The way the narrator felt about the house was indifferent. Because he felt there was a vibe or essence that the house was giving off that made his skin crawl. He thought there was a presence of the house that was very unpleasant and disturbing. Not only that, he thought his friend was creepy as well. Like there was some mystery to the house but two his friend.
The relationship between him and his friend as he explained was very good. But that was when they were younger, now he doesn't really know what to think. He found out that there are secret passages in the house and that his friend seems to be hiding something. Non the less, the house is something else on his mind that he feels very uncomfortable about.
I feel that this story is related to logos. The reason behind that is because there is allot of dark evil kind of theme going on in this story. But at the same time there is so much that you would have to use common knowledge to identify every single thing. This also is like it relates to religion because for this to be strictly dark and evil, that would conflict with everything good and pure.
The way the house is described is very ugly. Its very old and and it looks as if its falling apart. The house is just simply outdated and needs to be fixed completely. By the simple descriptions that the narrator gives, it makes the house seem like its haunted or something. There is definitely something wrong with that because, the house has occupants but no one is willing to try and fix it up. Instead people think that its creepy and weird
The way the narrator felt about the house was indifferent. Because he felt there was a vibe or essence that the house was giving off that made his skin crawl. He thought there was a presence of the house that was very unpleasant and disturbing. Not only that, he thought his friend was creepy as well. Like there was some mystery to the house but two his friend.
The relationship between him and his friend as he explained was very good. But that was when they were younger, now he doesn't really know what to think. He found out that there are secret passages in the house and that his friend seems to be hiding something. Non the less, the house is something else on his mind that he feels very uncomfortable about.
I feel that this story is related to logos. The reason behind that is because there is allot of dark evil kind of theme going on in this story. But at the same time there is so much that you would have to use common knowledge to identify every single thing. This also is like it relates to religion because for this to be strictly dark and evil, that would conflict with everything good and pure.
Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl
This story is about the life of a slave girl and her family growing up in slavery. I feel this is symbolic to racism because here they talk about slaves and how people lived with that being known in there everyday lives. This story talks about the life of the girl and her family after her mother died, when her mistress died, and how she felt with her grandmother still around. Even though there is allot of death going on in this story, there is still allot of information that is told to help explain everything.
The life before her mother died was great. She had people around her who cared about her so, to the point where they would do anything to keep her and her brother alive. When her mother died she told her foster sister to watch over her children as if they were her own. Even though her foster sister was white and they were brought up by the same mom, she said yes and promised that her children would never have to live the life of a true slave.
As the children grew older they soon began to think of their mistress as their mom. Even thought they know that their real mom is dead they think that since the mistress is taking care of them then that's their mom. The mistress made sure that they were properly taken care of. She made sure that they were well fed, healthy, and educated. She took the liberty of educating them even though there weren't many blacks with a decent education. She kept to her word and never forgot it. When she died the kids probably felt stressed out because they were thinking about where they might go, and that the one person they called mom was gone.
With her grandmother around she probably felt that was good because she could always have someone to lean on or to talk to. She was really close to her grandmother because she listened to her tell stories about her going into slavery as a child and how she dealt with certain things. That seemed like a very positive thing because after her mistress died, there was really no one left. Aside from her dad, but he ended up dying too so the children's lives where really devastating.
I think this is related to pathos because these two children ended up loosing very important people in their lives especially if many parents aren't around for many other children's lives. This is related also to romanticism because this seemed all negativity. Nothing good except for the children still having their grandmother, but that doesn't mean the children are happy. This story also used diction to help craft the the words and phrases into a quote that explained what happened in the story.
The life before her mother died was great. She had people around her who cared about her so, to the point where they would do anything to keep her and her brother alive. When her mother died she told her foster sister to watch over her children as if they were her own. Even though her foster sister was white and they were brought up by the same mom, she said yes and promised that her children would never have to live the life of a true slave.
As the children grew older they soon began to think of their mistress as their mom. Even thought they know that their real mom is dead they think that since the mistress is taking care of them then that's their mom. The mistress made sure that they were properly taken care of. She made sure that they were well fed, healthy, and educated. She took the liberty of educating them even though there weren't many blacks with a decent education. She kept to her word and never forgot it. When she died the kids probably felt stressed out because they were thinking about where they might go, and that the one person they called mom was gone.
With her grandmother around she probably felt that was good because she could always have someone to lean on or to talk to. She was really close to her grandmother because she listened to her tell stories about her going into slavery as a child and how she dealt with certain things. That seemed like a very positive thing because after her mistress died, there was really no one left. Aside from her dad, but he ended up dying too so the children's lives where really devastating.
I think this is related to pathos because these two children ended up loosing very important people in their lives especially if many parents aren't around for many other children's lives. This is related also to romanticism because this seemed all negativity. Nothing good except for the children still having their grandmother, but that doesn't mean the children are happy. This story also used diction to help craft the the words and phrases into a quote that explained what happened in the story.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Frederick Douglass(Learning to Read and Write)
I feel this story also relates to racism and its message to life in the older days. This talks about how Frederick Douglass learned to read and write, how he was taught, and how he learned the ways of whites at a young age. To me Frederick Douglass is an icon past my wildest dreams because he shows a good sense of well being. He always tried to help and fight for blacks and their rights as human beings. He never stopped trying and brought new ideas to the freedom of blacks.
The beginning of this story talks mainly about Frederick Douglass learning to read and write. As we all should know, it was very hard for blacks to accomplish anything academically. All because the color of their skin. So to me I feel that's very good that he was able to get around racism and education. Not too many blacks could afford a good education or find one that wasn't with whites. It was very hard for them and I congratulate him on that. For him to be young and to get the education that older people wish they could have.
The reason why it was so easy for him to get the good education that many wished they had is because he was taught by his mistress. Unlike others of his kind, many didn't have people that were well educated and could help them be literate and comprehensive. The ones that did have people to teach them things they didn't receive as much as the whites. The whites felt why spend money on these people that are stupid. Even thought that was very arrogant of them to do, they continued to keep doing that to make blacks lives miserable.
I feel that not only did Frederick Douglass learn things academically. I felt he learned more about racism and what whites did to trick and play blacks. When the text said that whites told him to escape, he took that information and applied it to logic. He knew that whites told blacks that and then capture them and turn them in for rewards. That shows that whites were vary cruel and evil and will do anything for money, even if blacks are on the line.
In conclusion- I feel that over all, this story was really good. It relayed a message that I felt was once again to use logic. I also feel that most stories that dealt with racism and slavery involved blacks having to use logic. Frederick Douglass used perfect thinking skills and out smarted the whites when they thought they were out smarting the blacks. He rose to the occasion and lead our people out of slavery. I feel this is related to logos because like i said, you have to have good logic skills to identify the message.
The beginning of this story talks mainly about Frederick Douglass learning to read and write. As we all should know, it was very hard for blacks to accomplish anything academically. All because the color of their skin. So to me I feel that's very good that he was able to get around racism and education. Not too many blacks could afford a good education or find one that wasn't with whites. It was very hard for them and I congratulate him on that. For him to be young and to get the education that older people wish they could have.
The reason why it was so easy for him to get the good education that many wished they had is because he was taught by his mistress. Unlike others of his kind, many didn't have people that were well educated and could help them be literate and comprehensive. The ones that did have people to teach them things they didn't receive as much as the whites. The whites felt why spend money on these people that are stupid. Even thought that was very arrogant of them to do, they continued to keep doing that to make blacks lives miserable.
I feel that not only did Frederick Douglass learn things academically. I felt he learned more about racism and what whites did to trick and play blacks. When the text said that whites told him to escape, he took that information and applied it to logic. He knew that whites told blacks that and then capture them and turn them in for rewards. That shows that whites were vary cruel and evil and will do anything for money, even if blacks are on the line.
In conclusion- I feel that over all, this story was really good. It relayed a message that I felt was once again to use logic. I also feel that most stories that dealt with racism and slavery involved blacks having to use logic. Frederick Douglass used perfect thinking skills and out smarted the whites when they thought they were out smarting the blacks. He rose to the occasion and lead our people out of slavery. I feel this is related to logos because like i said, you have to have good logic skills to identify the message.
Sunday, October 4, 2009
The Story of an Hour
This story relays a message that I feel is recognized in a bad way. What i mean by that is that there is a lot of negativity going on in this story. What this basically talks about is the death of Brently Mallard, how free Mrs. Mallard felt afterwords, and the death of Mrs. Mallard. All of the events that take place in this story are negative because there is no happy ending or nothing good that comes out of it. Thats what I feel is the down fall of the story as a whole. Since there is no positivity, its hard for me as a person to picture everything because I'm a positive person.
The death of Mr. Mallard was kind of a mistery to me. I think that because they never really said what happend or how he died. The only thing that they siad was that he got in an accident that involved a train, but In my mind that could meen anything. They also didn't say a date or anything, so it was hard for me to determin what day and age this is. I noticed that this story was told in the 3rd person, by a narrator.
How Mrs. Mallard delt with the problem was awkward because she started out crying about his death, and then she's telling herself she's free. To me that seems like betreayal because she's basically saying that she's happy and free that he's dead and she can live her life. Maybe she was beatin or something because anytime you are telling yourself that your free with excitment after someone close to you died, that's a problem. Even to have the media publish his death in the news she still is kind of indifferent, as it seems. I think something is wrong or happend in their relationship that caused her to be torn about his death. That's a hidden answer that might not ever be answered.
When she died at the end I felt the story was ended to early because there was a lot left out. From that point I felt that the whole story was incomplete. There is no reason why this story should talk about this little information and end as it started with a question. This really makes me think life and how actual people live on a daily bases. I think that the message was that you shouldn't hurt your self trying to get over an obstical in life or in this case a death.
In conclusion- I feel over all this story talked about a lot of negitivity and bad things that made it not pleasant to read but at the end it really changes my mind. Even thought the text was negative, the message was positive and helped me understand what the author was really trying to say. I feel this is related to logos because you have to really be open minded and have good logic skills to understand this meaning. I also feel this is related to gothisism and the underbelly of life. How everything bad always happens.
The death of Mr. Mallard was kind of a mistery to me. I think that because they never really said what happend or how he died. The only thing that they siad was that he got in an accident that involved a train, but In my mind that could meen anything. They also didn't say a date or anything, so it was hard for me to determin what day and age this is. I noticed that this story was told in the 3rd person, by a narrator.
How Mrs. Mallard delt with the problem was awkward because she started out crying about his death, and then she's telling herself she's free. To me that seems like betreayal because she's basically saying that she's happy and free that he's dead and she can live her life. Maybe she was beatin or something because anytime you are telling yourself that your free with excitment after someone close to you died, that's a problem. Even to have the media publish his death in the news she still is kind of indifferent, as it seems. I think something is wrong or happend in their relationship that caused her to be torn about his death. That's a hidden answer that might not ever be answered.
When she died at the end I felt the story was ended to early because there was a lot left out. From that point I felt that the whole story was incomplete. There is no reason why this story should talk about this little information and end as it started with a question. This really makes me think life and how actual people live on a daily bases. I think that the message was that you shouldn't hurt your self trying to get over an obstical in life or in this case a death.
In conclusion- I feel over all this story talked about a lot of negitivity and bad things that made it not pleasant to read but at the end it really changes my mind. Even thought the text was negative, the message was positive and helped me understand what the author was really trying to say. I feel this is related to logos because you have to really be open minded and have good logic skills to understand this meaning. I also feel this is related to gothisism and the underbelly of life. How everything bad always happens.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Desiree's Baby
In this story it talks about a woman named Desiree and her baby. This story talks mainly about racism and how it is used in this time and setting. The racism brings out the "One drop rule" that Thomas Jefferson created for all those to know and how true blacks can be identified. I feel with that rule, it made it really hard for the blacks who were mixed to live a nice life because it basically put them on the spot. This story points out the sarcasm and signs of the family, her reaction, and how Armand felt after he found out the truth.
To me I feel this story has a secret that isn't explained until the end of the text. It also has alot of sacastic reactions and remarks that the characters made. When Ms. Valmonde saw the baby she was making remarks like, this isn't the baby and what is this. She also called the baby an it, like she didn't know who it was from. I feel she was very wrong because she know's that the baby is from Desiree and that the baby is fine. She was just judging the baby based on its color, which isn't right. She also thought like, where did the baby get the black from. Was it the mom or the dad.
As Valmonde was making her smart remarks or comments, Desiree thought that they were good. In a sense she basically thought like yea the baby is getting big and he looks just like me. I think she was very nieave because she didn't really catch what Valmonde was really trying to say. Valmonde made the whole situation even more worse because she didn't support her duaghter and help her because the baby could possibly be black. I really didn't understand that because Valmonde was her mom, and since she was her mom she should know if she's mixed or not. Thats why I said its a little secrativity going on between the characters.
When Armond finally saw the baby he thought the same as Valmonde and avoided Desiree and the baby. I guess he didn't want to affiliate with them anymore because of the fact that the baby was mixed and Desiree might be as well. I feel that wasn't the brightest thing he could have done because he wasn't there for the baby after that and didn't really care for Desiree any more. Even when Desiree showed her love for him, he still didn't be the true man he could have been. He ran away from the problem instead of talking it out with her. All to find out it was him!
In conclusion- I feel that this story really shows the true meaning of the one drop rule. Before it was kind of blank to me like, when did they ever use it and how was it applied to slaves. This story is a little repetative but was realates to romantisim. I think that because Desiree was all into herself and the baby, nothing else. It was also related to pathos because it was kind of sad that she and the baby died. But she probably felt she had no other choice. She had no support and no help, no body but the baby.
To me I feel this story has a secret that isn't explained until the end of the text. It also has alot of sacastic reactions and remarks that the characters made. When Ms. Valmonde saw the baby she was making remarks like, this isn't the baby and what is this. She also called the baby an it, like she didn't know who it was from. I feel she was very wrong because she know's that the baby is from Desiree and that the baby is fine. She was just judging the baby based on its color, which isn't right. She also thought like, where did the baby get the black from. Was it the mom or the dad.
As Valmonde was making her smart remarks or comments, Desiree thought that they were good. In a sense she basically thought like yea the baby is getting big and he looks just like me. I think she was very nieave because she didn't really catch what Valmonde was really trying to say. Valmonde made the whole situation even more worse because she didn't support her duaghter and help her because the baby could possibly be black. I really didn't understand that because Valmonde was her mom, and since she was her mom she should know if she's mixed or not. Thats why I said its a little secrativity going on between the characters.
When Armond finally saw the baby he thought the same as Valmonde and avoided Desiree and the baby. I guess he didn't want to affiliate with them anymore because of the fact that the baby was mixed and Desiree might be as well. I feel that wasn't the brightest thing he could have done because he wasn't there for the baby after that and didn't really care for Desiree any more. Even when Desiree showed her love for him, he still didn't be the true man he could have been. He ran away from the problem instead of talking it out with her. All to find out it was him!
In conclusion- I feel that this story really shows the true meaning of the one drop rule. Before it was kind of blank to me like, when did they ever use it and how was it applied to slaves. This story is a little repetative but was realates to romantisim. I think that because Desiree was all into herself and the baby, nothing else. It was also related to pathos because it was kind of sad that she and the baby died. But she probably felt she had no other choice. She had no support and no help, no body but the baby.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Sojornor Truth( Ain't I a Woman)
Since there was two letters, I'm going to compare and contrast there different values and dislikes. I noticed just by looking at the title of Aren't I a Woman and it to me comes across like I can be a woman and not because of my color. I noticed that In one passage, it was very proper and correctly written. But in the other, it sounded very southern and nonchalant like "I don't care what people think about me I'm telling you the truth". And that's exactly what Sojourner Truth did.
The passage in the book started out by saying that I'm a woman not because I'm black and your white but I'm a woman by taking care of all these kids and upholding duties of a man also. She also says that anytime that she can watch the white man take one of her kids away is allot of strength on her part. I think its very different how white girls think there a woman based upon their rules and guidelines but in with a black person its way off track because in their world in that time, there were very little middle class or rich blacks. Since most of the blacks were poor and lived in poverty these were their guidelines from a different point of view, the turned it into a whole entire way with their rules. Most black woman had to take care of allot of kids, work also, and carry on the duties of a man because the father left or was killed or taken.
The difference between these letters is that one is proper and one is not, true. But since they're both written by Sojourner Truth it questioned the whites. They weren't for sure if she wrote it and how and why. They made it seem like blacks or black woman in this case weren't intelligent at any stake. They felt that blacks didn't get a good education, which most didn't but there were still allot of blacks that did. It shouldn't have even been a question. I also noticed that one passage was in a book and the other one wasn't. The passage that wasn't was the one that had allot of southern accent to it and very nonchalant. I feel that the whites probably gave her credit but didn't want the other one published because maybe it told to much about the whites or maybe it would create a bad name for them.
She also attacks religions in the case of a man. She basically said what makes are rights not equal to yours or why not better. She used religion to come across in a different way that makes people really believe what she's talking about but at the same time listen. I feel right when she said that, it caused people to get her attention and people to take notice of whats going on. She asks "What did your Christ come from" as like who is your lord because the one I know and worship must be different from your if you think that my rights are not equal to yours.
In conclusion- over all I think that these passages really helped me get a better understanding of what she was really trying to say a woman. Even thought the true definition of a woman know has changed, it was changed already when she said those words. She crafted and made her own rules and true womanhood guideline. She set the standard for other woman to follow. I feel that with her nonchalant demeanor and southern accent made it very clear for me to understand the meaning not necessarily the words but the power of meaning. I feel this is related to pathos because it shows an emotional side of the older world and how they worked.
The passage in the book started out by saying that I'm a woman not because I'm black and your white but I'm a woman by taking care of all these kids and upholding duties of a man also. She also says that anytime that she can watch the white man take one of her kids away is allot of strength on her part. I think its very different how white girls think there a woman based upon their rules and guidelines but in with a black person its way off track because in their world in that time, there were very little middle class or rich blacks. Since most of the blacks were poor and lived in poverty these were their guidelines from a different point of view, the turned it into a whole entire way with their rules. Most black woman had to take care of allot of kids, work also, and carry on the duties of a man because the father left or was killed or taken.
The difference between these letters is that one is proper and one is not, true. But since they're both written by Sojourner Truth it questioned the whites. They weren't for sure if she wrote it and how and why. They made it seem like blacks or black woman in this case weren't intelligent at any stake. They felt that blacks didn't get a good education, which most didn't but there were still allot of blacks that did. It shouldn't have even been a question. I also noticed that one passage was in a book and the other one wasn't. The passage that wasn't was the one that had allot of southern accent to it and very nonchalant. I feel that the whites probably gave her credit but didn't want the other one published because maybe it told to much about the whites or maybe it would create a bad name for them.
She also attacks religions in the case of a man. She basically said what makes are rights not equal to yours or why not better. She used religion to come across in a different way that makes people really believe what she's talking about but at the same time listen. I feel right when she said that, it caused people to get her attention and people to take notice of whats going on. She asks "What did your Christ come from" as like who is your lord because the one I know and worship must be different from your if you think that my rights are not equal to yours.
In conclusion- over all I think that these passages really helped me get a better understanding of what she was really trying to say a woman. Even thought the true definition of a woman know has changed, it was changed already when she said those words. She crafted and made her own rules and true womanhood guideline. She set the standard for other woman to follow. I feel that with her nonchalant demeanor and southern accent made it very clear for me to understand the meaning not necessarily the words but the power of meaning. I feel this is related to pathos because it shows an emotional side of the older world and how they worked.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
The Wiz
In the beginning she gets into a predicament to were she needs help to get back home. This movie to me seems as if it is relaying a message to the readers about different problems in their lives. In the movie, Dorthy's mom tries to explain to her that she can get a job as a high school teacher instead of working with the same group of people. She also explained that she can get paid allot more than before and get to be apart of the young adults life. She basically triesto convince Dorthy to move into her own place and start a new life on her own. What the movie is about is how Dorthy over comes her problem, how she helps others with their problems, and how she has changed after ever thing is back to normal and the same.
To me i think Dorthy over comes her problem by just simply doing things herself. She listened to what was being said to her and followed directions. After the munchkins and the good witch disappeared, i think that gave Dorthy enough strength to move on and find the yellow brick road. In other words i guess you could say it was a test because they left her to figure things out on her own which is kind of what her mother wanted her to do. It all ties in together.
After she starts following down the yellow brick road she See's these other characters in the story. The scare crow, tin man, and the lion. Together they go on an epic journey to see the Wiz. The wizard that grants wishes or fulfilment's. The scare crow wanted a Brian, the tin man wanted a heart, and the lion wanted courage. each of them had problems that needed to be solved. I thought the solution came in a sequel because once someone overcame their problems, they helped the next person which helped their problems and so on. I would compare this to string of beads pattern.
She changes allot in the movie from beginning to end. In the beginning she is stuck on one thing and that's being a elementary teacher and living at her parents house. IN the middle of the movie it shows how her maturity level has changed also. she used to be closed minded and didn't want to expand out and try new things. At the end I think she will take her moms advice and take the job to teach high school students and get a higher salary. So she can afford to buy her own place and start a life of her own.
In conclusion- if a was to relate this to the rhetoric triangle it would be ethos. I say that because all along the characters were asking question a they already had the answer too. They already had the necessary tools and what not to have a Brain, heart, and courage. Or in this case to get back home. They didn't need a sheet of paper to tell them that they already had something that already has its own acknowledgement. I give them credibility because they were unique in every way and brought out a good side in each character and in the movie.
To me i think Dorthy over comes her problem by just simply doing things herself. She listened to what was being said to her and followed directions. After the munchkins and the good witch disappeared, i think that gave Dorthy enough strength to move on and find the yellow brick road. In other words i guess you could say it was a test because they left her to figure things out on her own which is kind of what her mother wanted her to do. It all ties in together.
After she starts following down the yellow brick road she See's these other characters in the story. The scare crow, tin man, and the lion. Together they go on an epic journey to see the Wiz. The wizard that grants wishes or fulfilment's. The scare crow wanted a Brian, the tin man wanted a heart, and the lion wanted courage. each of them had problems that needed to be solved. I thought the solution came in a sequel because once someone overcame their problems, they helped the next person which helped their problems and so on. I would compare this to string of beads pattern.
She changes allot in the movie from beginning to end. In the beginning she is stuck on one thing and that's being a elementary teacher and living at her parents house. IN the middle of the movie it shows how her maturity level has changed also. she used to be closed minded and didn't want to expand out and try new things. At the end I think she will take her moms advice and take the job to teach high school students and get a higher salary. So she can afford to buy her own place and start a life of her own.
In conclusion- if a was to relate this to the rhetoric triangle it would be ethos. I say that because all along the characters were asking question a they already had the answer too. They already had the necessary tools and what not to have a Brain, heart, and courage. Or in this case to get back home. They didn't need a sheet of paper to tell them that they already had something that already has its own acknowledgement. I give them credibility because they were unique in every way and brought out a good side in each character and in the movie.
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Spontaneous Me
In the poem the author tries to emphasize and tell the readers about nature and its true value to life. The poem talks about how close romantisism and the actual individual interacts with nature, how nature compares to an actual person, and how romantisism is expressed in the text. I think the poem is a very sensual and sexual poem, that relates to the emotion of the poem.
The author talks about how the characters actions and personal feelings. I think what he did was relate the actual people to nature life. He uses alot of sexual diction to get the audiences attention but most importantly to give the poem a more adult feeling. I personally feel that with all of the sexual texts and statements that it was a little over done because it made it a little uninteresting and hard to find enough good info in the poem.
I also noticed that he was trying to tell the audience a message. The message that I feel he was trying to tell was that everything we do is involved with love and emotion. Even from work, to school, to buying a gift for someone. It all coinsides with love and emotion. Which is all in the group of romantisism. If the author tryed to make the message more clearer than it would save the audience or readers alot of time, instead of looking for every single thing in a sexually dominant poem.
At the very end of the poem, it says something that is kind of confusing. I think it talkes about the characters having a baby. If related to romantisism and nature it would kind of be like new life. The same way the two characters brought in new life, I feel thats exactly how nature and all living things were brought up. With that being said, I feel I can relate this to spontaneous generation. The time were plants and living things supposedly popped up from nowhere and started the world we call Earth.
In conclusion- I feel that this is reated to not only romantisism but logic.I feel that way because the author not only realized that he put in the poem a more adult feeling. He knew exactly what to write to direct this to young adults and adults. He was very aware of the audience and the poem was very repetative. The way that it was repetative was strange because normally the words are repeated. In this case he used different words to relay the same message over. Thats what I feel made this poem special, he was very creative and made this poem unique.
The author talks about how the characters actions and personal feelings. I think what he did was relate the actual people to nature life. He uses alot of sexual diction to get the audiences attention but most importantly to give the poem a more adult feeling. I personally feel that with all of the sexual texts and statements that it was a little over done because it made it a little uninteresting and hard to find enough good info in the poem.
I also noticed that he was trying to tell the audience a message. The message that I feel he was trying to tell was that everything we do is involved with love and emotion. Even from work, to school, to buying a gift for someone. It all coinsides with love and emotion. Which is all in the group of romantisism. If the author tryed to make the message more clearer than it would save the audience or readers alot of time, instead of looking for every single thing in a sexually dominant poem.
At the very end of the poem, it says something that is kind of confusing. I think it talkes about the characters having a baby. If related to romantisism and nature it would kind of be like new life. The same way the two characters brought in new life, I feel thats exactly how nature and all living things were brought up. With that being said, I feel I can relate this to spontaneous generation. The time were plants and living things supposedly popped up from nowhere and started the world we call Earth.
In conclusion- I feel that this is reated to not only romantisism but logic.I feel that way because the author not only realized that he put in the poem a more adult feeling. He knew exactly what to write to direct this to young adults and adults. He was very aware of the audience and the poem was very repetative. The way that it was repetative was strange because normally the words are repeated. In this case he used different words to relay the same message over. Thats what I feel made this poem special, he was very creative and made this poem unique.
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Phillis Wheatley
In the passage it talks about the life and history of Phillis Wheatley. Personally I've never heard of her and her marvelous work. The passage to me seems like it is trying to give a message to the audience or readers as a word of wisdom. The author talks about the rise of Phillis Wheatley, what she went through, and a couple of her poems. To me like all new people i learn about in English, it gives me some type of wisdom in life.
Like many others, Phyllis was a slave and went through hard times in life. I think she had a hard time to really express her literary talents. I think that the message that was trying to be brought across was that talent can come from anywhere and that at that time especially. That talent can come from any race. I think back then allot of whit people thought blacks were not bright and smart. I feel that personally is not the right way to think even though back then many people had a different mind set.
When Phyllis Wheatley got discovered by her English and literary talents. I think that the whites gave her a hard time to get her reputation started. Then to find out that after she died, her files were lost. I think someone tried to loose the files of her work on purpose because she was black and they felt that black people don't need to go farther than whites and do something that whites do. In this case there weren't many blacks that were poets and good writers. That's because whites obstructed the blacks ways of prospering or having good success.
I think that Phyllis Wheatley was back then in that time considered a real true woman Because she held up her duties as a woman. She also stayed faithful to he husband until death do they part. That also shows her determination, because she didn't have to stay faithful. From her poems and from what she's been through as a slave, i feel that she was religious because of the way her poems are written. She makes me think that she's a strong individual because no matter what she always fought the racism, and evilness that she dealt with to make her life good.
In conclusion- i think that over all the story of life of Phyllis Wheatley was ver inspirational and good to read. The passage had the poem to help give me as a reader create a mind imager about the life of her. Reading this passage makes me think back agian were Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. fought for are rights as African Americans. This passage also gave alot of wisdom to me because it tells me that no matter what don't give up and fight for your dreams.
Like many others, Phyllis was a slave and went through hard times in life. I think she had a hard time to really express her literary talents. I think that the message that was trying to be brought across was that talent can come from anywhere and that at that time especially. That talent can come from any race. I think back then allot of whit people thought blacks were not bright and smart. I feel that personally is not the right way to think even though back then many people had a different mind set.
When Phyllis Wheatley got discovered by her English and literary talents. I think that the whites gave her a hard time to get her reputation started. Then to find out that after she died, her files were lost. I think someone tried to loose the files of her work on purpose because she was black and they felt that black people don't need to go farther than whites and do something that whites do. In this case there weren't many blacks that were poets and good writers. That's because whites obstructed the blacks ways of prospering or having good success.
I think that Phyllis Wheatley was back then in that time considered a real true woman Because she held up her duties as a woman. She also stayed faithful to he husband until death do they part. That also shows her determination, because she didn't have to stay faithful. From her poems and from what she's been through as a slave, i feel that she was religious because of the way her poems are written. She makes me think that she's a strong individual because no matter what she always fought the racism, and evilness that she dealt with to make her life good.
In conclusion- i think that over all the story of life of Phyllis Wheatley was ver inspirational and good to read. The passage had the poem to help give me as a reader create a mind imager about the life of her. Reading this passage makes me think back agian were Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. fought for are rights as African Americans. This passage also gave alot of wisdom to me because it tells me that no matter what don't give up and fight for your dreams.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
The Decleration of Independence(Thomas Jefferson)
In this passage it first talks about the Declaration of Independence and what is was used for. In the beginning they try to portray Jefferson as a good leader and such, but in reality he wasn't. To me it seems as if he was with an alliance with other tyrants in the U.S. at that time and he went along with what they proposed they should do about the "colored problem". This passage mentions about what they took from over seas, what they used them for, and they did to them.
Since most of the Indians were dying, they needed a new source of people to help them keep there country going by force. The same thing that they did to the Indians is the same thing they did to the new group of people. So Jefferson and his people went to get African Americans from Africa since they thought that the way that the Africans live now resembles the way a poor person would live they could just take them.
After the Africans were taken they were forced to do work and hard labor for any rich or high class person that wanted a "slave". Of course Jefferson and his people didn't want to hand over slaves for free they had something set up called "the warfare of The Christian king of Great Britain. That was basically to help keep an open market were Africans can be bought or sold. They treated Africans bad, and to think of Jefferson of even being apart of that and having a slave plantation. That makes me wonder about him, and how did he even come up with the conclusion of making or help making The Declaration of Independence.
He also used the Africans as examples to show his power and authority. He deprived them of their hope, happiness, and strength. He killed Africans who despised him and rebelled and like i said used them as examples. He helped put things in the way so that Africans could never have their way and would always be slaves and nothing more. Jefferson was a tyrant which is a mad leader or ruler. He helped those who dislikes blacks always uphold the racist structure, and he payed off crimes committed by white people. Since they are a whole.
In conclusion I think that Jefferson is a person that can easily be put into a category with others like Columbus because they are portrayed as if they are very good people but in reality they aren't. They are not true to their word, and he helped corrupt the U.S. with slavery and racism. This is more like pathos because it it emotional and could be kind of an offence to people of color to just hear this is what he did. There was little diction that helped me create an image of what this was really like back them and to picture Jefferson being the new person i now know.
Since most of the Indians were dying, they needed a new source of people to help them keep there country going by force. The same thing that they did to the Indians is the same thing they did to the new group of people. So Jefferson and his people went to get African Americans from Africa since they thought that the way that the Africans live now resembles the way a poor person would live they could just take them.
After the Africans were taken they were forced to do work and hard labor for any rich or high class person that wanted a "slave". Of course Jefferson and his people didn't want to hand over slaves for free they had something set up called "the warfare of The Christian king of Great Britain. That was basically to help keep an open market were Africans can be bought or sold. They treated Africans bad, and to think of Jefferson of even being apart of that and having a slave plantation. That makes me wonder about him, and how did he even come up with the conclusion of making or help making The Declaration of Independence.
He also used the Africans as examples to show his power and authority. He deprived them of their hope, happiness, and strength. He killed Africans who despised him and rebelled and like i said used them as examples. He helped put things in the way so that Africans could never have their way and would always be slaves and nothing more. Jefferson was a tyrant which is a mad leader or ruler. He helped those who dislikes blacks always uphold the racist structure, and he payed off crimes committed by white people. Since they are a whole.
In conclusion I think that Jefferson is a person that can easily be put into a category with others like Columbus because they are portrayed as if they are very good people but in reality they aren't. They are not true to their word, and he helped corrupt the U.S. with slavery and racism. This is more like pathos because it it emotional and could be kind of an offence to people of color to just hear this is what he did. There was little diction that helped me create an image of what this was really like back them and to picture Jefferson being the new person i now know.
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Hus Wifery
In the poem Edward Taylor tries to use certain items to help describe the character but at the same time to keep that old English language. The character wants to be given the supplies he needs so he can become more spiritually in tune. He wants god to mold or make him into a better more heavenly way using the materials listed. He also wants basically he whole mind set changed into a way were he can spiritually glorify the Lord.
I think this is related to the puritans because just as the puritans wanted brand new, if feel the character wants the same. The way he says he wants to be changed that is exactly what the puritans concept was. New Change. Also the different words that he uses are also plain and simple. I think the author was trying to use common or simple house hold items in the poem to symbolize the ways of the puritans and how they were.
I also feel that this poem is related to the covenant of grace. I say that because the covenant of grace basically means 100% faithful and I feel that that's what the character is. I feel that any person that wants to be more spiritually in tune with god then they are committed and faithful. I also think that the author was trying to say that people can get closer to god as long as they try hard to go as far as god wants them to go. They have to want it, and that's what the character shows.
In the poem the author uses allot of diction to help create an image of what the character really wants. In the poem it says "I am cloathd in Holy Robes for Glory". I think that that means that he basically wants to be a spiritual or godly icon because he just wants to be this new person and to just be new and fresh. With that being said he also says that with this robe I'm purified of all my sins, weaknesses, illnesses and everything else because he feels he been made strong by the lord. Not just physically but mentally as well.
In conclusion- the author made this poem surprising because he uses alot of new material that is new to me because of the way he writes and pronounces words. I feel that this is related to Logos because you have to have a clear concept of what you just read because it can be tricky in the mind. There are a lot of phrases that are a little unclear but over all the character in the poem was determind to be very religios and according to him, he did it.
I think this is related to the puritans because just as the puritans wanted brand new, if feel the character wants the same. The way he says he wants to be changed that is exactly what the puritans concept was. New Change. Also the different words that he uses are also plain and simple. I think the author was trying to use common or simple house hold items in the poem to symbolize the ways of the puritans and how they were.
I also feel that this poem is related to the covenant of grace. I say that because the covenant of grace basically means 100% faithful and I feel that that's what the character is. I feel that any person that wants to be more spiritually in tune with god then they are committed and faithful. I also think that the author was trying to say that people can get closer to god as long as they try hard to go as far as god wants them to go. They have to want it, and that's what the character shows.
In the poem the author uses allot of diction to help create an image of what the character really wants. In the poem it says "I am cloathd in Holy Robes for Glory". I think that that means that he basically wants to be a spiritual or godly icon because he just wants to be this new person and to just be new and fresh. With that being said he also says that with this robe I'm purified of all my sins, weaknesses, illnesses and everything else because he feels he been made strong by the lord. Not just physically but mentally as well.
In conclusion- the author made this poem surprising because he uses alot of new material that is new to me because of the way he writes and pronounces words. I feel that this is related to Logos because you have to have a clear concept of what you just read because it can be tricky in the mind. There are a lot of phrases that are a little unclear but over all the character in the poem was determind to be very religios and according to him, he did it.
Friday, September 4, 2009
The Author to Her Book
In the poem the author talks mainly about the way she lives. To me it seems she doesn't like the way she lives and the way she looks. She gets shy or embarrassed when she is in public and has a very low self esteem. Then at the end she runs away, that's not a good way to live life or to solve any of your problems.
The author implies that she doesn't like the way she looks. She said that she tries things to fix herself in the image that she wants herself to be in. I feel that she just needs to cope with life because the people that do say stuff to you or about you about the way you Look isn't important. If you don't like the way you look change it, within reason. That's unhealthy to stretch joints in your feet or any where period. Now if something happened to her from trying to do all of these personal changes to herself, she wouldn't like herself any more than what she does now.
As implied by the text. She states that she thinks she's and ill formed child that basically is ugly. I feel that she is making a little deal into a big deal with her self esteem issues. It is not healthy to not like your self to the point were you want to make changes to your self that can hurt you. I think that this female is a teenage girl because if she was older she probably would have had plastic surgery already.
At first i kind of looked over it but she also said that her mother either kicked her out the house or caused her to run away. I she was kicked out the house i feel that's the worst that you can do now especially if your daughter is feeling like she's ugly and wants to do almost any thing to correct herself. She needs the support and wisdom from her mom. They need to have good communication skills. Now if she ran away she's not doing anything to help herself because all she's doing is running away from the problem. Not looking for help, or for advice or nothing, I thing she really needs help before she hurts herself.
In conclusion- if i had to relate this to the rhetoric triangle it would be pathos because the girl is tossing her life away basically and she needs a reality check. People are going to say stuff about you all the time and its up to you to overcome what think about you because your doing what you need to do. Let them keep talking and if it gets out of hand then take it to the authorities. Its not worth it. I feel she used phrases that helped a little to piece everything together but in the end i was still left with a question unanswered.
The author implies that she doesn't like the way she looks. She said that she tries things to fix herself in the image that she wants herself to be in. I feel that she just needs to cope with life because the people that do say stuff to you or about you about the way you Look isn't important. If you don't like the way you look change it, within reason. That's unhealthy to stretch joints in your feet or any where period. Now if something happened to her from trying to do all of these personal changes to herself, she wouldn't like herself any more than what she does now.
As implied by the text. She states that she thinks she's and ill formed child that basically is ugly. I feel that she is making a little deal into a big deal with her self esteem issues. It is not healthy to not like your self to the point were you want to make changes to your self that can hurt you. I think that this female is a teenage girl because if she was older she probably would have had plastic surgery already.
At first i kind of looked over it but she also said that her mother either kicked her out the house or caused her to run away. I she was kicked out the house i feel that's the worst that you can do now especially if your daughter is feeling like she's ugly and wants to do almost any thing to correct herself. She needs the support and wisdom from her mom. They need to have good communication skills. Now if she ran away she's not doing anything to help herself because all she's doing is running away from the problem. Not looking for help, or for advice or nothing, I thing she really needs help before she hurts herself.
In conclusion- if i had to relate this to the rhetoric triangle it would be pathos because the girl is tossing her life away basically and she needs a reality check. People are going to say stuff about you all the time and its up to you to overcome what think about you because your doing what you need to do. Let them keep talking and if it gets out of hand then take it to the authorities. Its not worth it. I feel she used phrases that helped a little to piece everything together but in the end i was still left with a question unanswered.
Wednesday, September 2, 2009
Sinners In The Hands Of An Angry God
In the passage the author talks about the unbelieving Israelites and how they cause destruction in the world of religion. He adds in information about the power of the Israelites, destruction and fall, and the path of them. I feel he was really trying to relay the message by repeating things over and over in the passage. That made it confusing in the beginning but after reading every thing else I saw the purpose of doing that.
He talked about how the Israelites are going to fall and they're going to be punished. He said that once they slipped and fell, God wouldn't help them up. I feel in a sense that is reasonable to agree with but I still feel unsure about it. Depending on what they did, that's when I feel they should be punished. God always forgives us of are sins, so if God does that then why did he say that God is or can send them to hell.
In the passage it said that the Israelites were basically born into a life of failure and destruction. I feel that the Israelites are just put in a bad category and are miss understood. In the passage he doesn't tell the audience what exactly they did or what they are going to do in the text. Maybe the Israelites should move away from all of the negativity and anger or hatred against them. That would satisfy them and any one who hates them.
The one thing that i found in the text that the author might be talking about is power. What i mean by that is how can people take the life of something instantly and not even realize that your challenging Gods power. Just as you can make decisions, God can make them quicker to take a life or send someone to hell. I felt it was ironic that people do that to just cause havoc and at the same time God could do the same.
In conclusion- the author uses a lot of diction to help us visualize as an audience of the clear message. This passage is like pathos because its emotional in a way that's still religious. I think that the Israelites aren't really given a chance to redeem themselves that they aren't just failures and destructive people. Many of the phrases that he used helped complete the meaning behind this passage.
He talked about how the Israelites are going to fall and they're going to be punished. He said that once they slipped and fell, God wouldn't help them up. I feel in a sense that is reasonable to agree with but I still feel unsure about it. Depending on what they did, that's when I feel they should be punished. God always forgives us of are sins, so if God does that then why did he say that God is or can send them to hell.
In the passage it said that the Israelites were basically born into a life of failure and destruction. I feel that the Israelites are just put in a bad category and are miss understood. In the passage he doesn't tell the audience what exactly they did or what they are going to do in the text. Maybe the Israelites should move away from all of the negativity and anger or hatred against them. That would satisfy them and any one who hates them.
The one thing that i found in the text that the author might be talking about is power. What i mean by that is how can people take the life of something instantly and not even realize that your challenging Gods power. Just as you can make decisions, God can make them quicker to take a life or send someone to hell. I felt it was ironic that people do that to just cause havoc and at the same time God could do the same.
In conclusion- the author uses a lot of diction to help us visualize as an audience of the clear message. This passage is like pathos because its emotional in a way that's still religious. I think that the Israelites aren't really given a chance to redeem themselves that they aren't just failures and destructive people. Many of the phrases that he used helped complete the meaning behind this passage.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Christopher Columbus- Lit. Response
In the essay Columbus goes through alot that wasn't stated before but was brought to light. Now people can really read what happend in those days when columbus came over to what they now call America. Alot of things that a heard before about Columbus was shugger coated. In the essay it talks about Columbus's begining and what was his purpose, what happened when he was over in America and what was the result.
In the begining Columbus's purpose for coming to America was accidental. What he was really trying to do was find a commercially viable Atlantic route to Asia. So instead of finding Asia or even a better route to Asia he ended out coming to America. When he got there he studied the nature and indinas and left some of his people there. When he returned all of his people were dead.
When he brought his people over he brought disease's and illnesses over also. His people to me also abused the purpose for their journey becuase they used the indians as sex partners and demanded gold. I feel thats not a good way to do things at all especially if this is a foriegn land thats new to you. That explains why the indians killed Columbus's people in the first place. His people were ignorant people that thought that this area of people could easily be pushed off the land without a care.
He was forced to return to Spain to clear his name of charges made by Europeans in the West Indies. After he cleared his name and left he was charged with more alligations and was sent away in chains. This makes me think alot differently about him because he was always in trouble. I don't think people were just picking on him and accusing him of things for no reason. I think he was doing something really bad that wasn't stated in the text.
In conclusion- overall Columbus did do good by finding America but didn't do right to the people that inhabited it. Columbus to me is shady becuase he did do something good but then he does something wrong and it makes me wonder. What did he do that was so bad for him to go to jail. Even after Columbus made slaves of the indian people, they still tried there best to stay free as long as they could to live a peaceful life.
In the begining Columbus's purpose for coming to America was accidental. What he was really trying to do was find a commercially viable Atlantic route to Asia. So instead of finding Asia or even a better route to Asia he ended out coming to America. When he got there he studied the nature and indinas and left some of his people there. When he returned all of his people were dead.
When he brought his people over he brought disease's and illnesses over also. His people to me also abused the purpose for their journey becuase they used the indians as sex partners and demanded gold. I feel thats not a good way to do things at all especially if this is a foriegn land thats new to you. That explains why the indians killed Columbus's people in the first place. His people were ignorant people that thought that this area of people could easily be pushed off the land without a care.
He was forced to return to Spain to clear his name of charges made by Europeans in the West Indies. After he cleared his name and left he was charged with more alligations and was sent away in chains. This makes me think alot differently about him because he was always in trouble. I don't think people were just picking on him and accusing him of things for no reason. I think he was doing something really bad that wasn't stated in the text.
In conclusion- overall Columbus did do good by finding America but didn't do right to the people that inhabited it. Columbus to me is shady becuase he did do something good but then he does something wrong and it makes me wonder. What did he do that was so bad for him to go to jail. Even after Columbus made slaves of the indian people, they still tried there best to stay free as long as they could to live a peaceful life.
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Assignment 4
In each text they talked about the death of Princess Diana. This is more pathos becuase if you really think about it, its very emotional to think of a death that could have been avoided. The point that the texts are trying to give is to give descriptive details about the death of Princess Diana. In the texts the speaker uses phrases to emphasize on certain words and meaning. I feel that the texts probably made the audience uncomfortable because its hard for me as a person to hear that a royal mother left her 2 sons to face the obligations and life of living a royal.
Assignment 2
In the essay she talks about child support and how it works in different countries and places in the U.S. In some countries as stated in the essay, after the father pays at least 3 months of child support, he can leave. I think that the audience including me probably feels that the father can do alot better than just giving a little then leaving the mother to struggle. Children ar expensive and if you can't afford to pay for everthing they need without it interfering with your personal finances then you don't need to have them. There are many single parents in the world that are living off of 1 income and need help to support their children. By relating this to ethos i feel its an emotional thing becuase there are children that can't get the minimum of things that they want, not even for Christmas.
Assignment 1
In the letter Einstein uses words and writes as if he's writing a letter to a college student. I feel there was a lack of logic when he was writing the letter. The letter was not the easiest to understand fully, even at age 16. I feel he didn't think logically when writing the letter because he wrote it to a sixth grader. The letter was way too advanced for a child that young to understand what he was talking about. When you writing a letter or even giving a speach, you are always supposed to know who your writing it to or who is the listener. You have to know your audience so you can better use your thinking skills so you can pin point your meaning across.
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
