This poem stood out to me for some reason when I was reading through the poems tonight. I wasn’t sure why, then I remembered that we had briefly discussed nightmares in Spanish class. My subconscious must be telling me something.
Anyway, I think this poem is about a person having a nightmare. The whole thing aboviously deals with fear, which is an integral part of any nightmare. What makes me feel as if this is specifically about a nightmare is the last line: ‘before I slept, and met you’, thus implying that the person is asleep and dreaming.
The poem personifies fear as a person carrying a one’s fears in a sack in order to give these fears to the recipient/victim/dreamer. The Fear-man (I have a picture in my head of him looking sort of like the grim reaper) also keeps a list of what scares the person the most, including death. Death was probably mentioned because almost everyone can relate to having a fear of death, since very few of us actually want to die, or are unconcerned about our eventual demise.
The dreamer also wishes for whatever fears are brought to him in this nightmare to be simple and not very scary fears, like bats and crickets. ‘Small’ fears he calls them. These are fears that do not affect someone in a great way and are easily overcome. I, for example, fear bugs. They freak me out. Yet I am not extremely bugophobic and can deal with bugs and smash them when they invade my room. (Ants and cockroaches and silverfish and spiders are horrible things). I’ve found, though, that in dreams even little fears that aren’t serious can turn drastic. If one fears papercuts, for example, but only to the extent that one is usually careful turning a page but isn’t too upset when one actually gets a papercut, one might have a horrible nightmare about papercuts in which one dies from blood loss. In dreams our fears are often exaggerated to the point of ridiculousness and yet, while asleep, are still frightening.
Friday 29 August 2008
Wednesday 27 August 2008
I Stand Here Ironing
Sentence: This is a story about a woman reflecting on her daughter.
Questions:
L1: What is the daughter’s name?
L2: Why does the mother think she didn’t do a good job of raising Emily?
L3: This mother had circumstances which she couldn’t control which caused her to treat Emily as she did. Was she justified in doing so? Are others in a similar position justified as well?
Observations:
I find this story immensely more difficult to comment upon. It didn’t seem to have a straightforward point. The theme (as far as I can tell) was that one must show affection to one’s children, otherwise you will regret it when they have problems. That’s fairly obvious to most people, since our society regards children highly.
The characterization in this piece was much better than in the other one. The way the mother explained why she did what she did was understandable and in character with the personality she showed and the hardships she faced. Emily’s growth was plausible as well and showed her more like a real person than a stock character. The fact that at the end she was never able to show affection to her mother the way her mother wanted her to, but still overcame some of her problems made her seem more real, since nobody ever overcomes all their problems, or never overcomes any. (Although I suppose they might, but it’s not very likely). I did think it was odd the way the mother felt she didn’t show Emily enough affection because she clearly explained that she did love her daughter.
I didn't extremely enjoy the story. It was better character-wise than the other one, fairly interesting and was mostly well written (there was one paragraph that seemed out of place) as well. However, there was nothing that made me actually like it. It wasn't a bad story, but it wasn't attention-getting and fascinating and so forth. Possibly because the story didn't have much depth or complexity- it was obvious. So there was no need to really think about it.
Questions:
L1: What is the daughter’s name?
L2: Why does the mother think she didn’t do a good job of raising Emily?
L3: This mother had circumstances which she couldn’t control which caused her to treat Emily as she did. Was she justified in doing so? Are others in a similar position justified as well?
Observations:
I find this story immensely more difficult to comment upon. It didn’t seem to have a straightforward point. The theme (as far as I can tell) was that one must show affection to one’s children, otherwise you will regret it when they have problems. That’s fairly obvious to most people, since our society regards children highly.
The characterization in this piece was much better than in the other one. The way the mother explained why she did what she did was understandable and in character with the personality she showed and the hardships she faced. Emily’s growth was plausible as well and showed her more like a real person than a stock character. The fact that at the end she was never able to show affection to her mother the way her mother wanted her to, but still overcame some of her problems made her seem more real, since nobody ever overcomes all their problems, or never overcomes any. (Although I suppose they might, but it’s not very likely). I did think it was odd the way the mother felt she didn’t show Emily enough affection because she clearly explained that she did love her daughter.
I didn't extremely enjoy the story. It was better character-wise than the other one, fairly interesting and was mostly well written (there was one paragraph that seemed out of place) as well. However, there was nothing that made me actually like it. It wasn't a bad story, but it wasn't attention-getting and fascinating and so forth. Possibly because the story didn't have much depth or complexity- it was obvious. So there was no need to really think about it.
Monday 25 August 2008
The Lesson
Sentence: The Lesson is a story literally about a woman taking some kids out to a toy store, but with the theme of (un)equal opportunity.
Questions:
Level One: Where do the kids and Miss Moore go?
Level Two: Do the kids appreciate what Miss Moore is trying to tell them?
Level Three: Does it matter if America is a land of equal opportunity or not?
Observations:
First of all, we did all the ‘Is America really the land of equal opportunity?’ and whatnot last year, so I feel like I’ve already said all there is to say on this subject. (I.e., that no it’s not and that’s really bad and we can’t really do much about it.) However, there are other aspects of the story I can address.
I didn’t particularly like the piece. First of all, I didn’t like the main character. ‘Sylvia’ did not seem like a nice or sympathetic person. Her telling of how she locked ‘Sugar’ in the shower, among other things, was not particularly conducive to my ability to sympathize with her. Also, she seemed sort of a blatant plot device- her only purpose to allow the author a way to explain how America wasn’t the land of equal chances and opportunity and dreams. The addition of her ‘tough’ personality seemed like a bad attempt at giving her more dimension and disguising her plot device function. (The same thing applies to Miss Moore and the rest of the kids in a lesser degree; the only exist in order for the author to use them to talk about equality; any original qualities they own seem contrived and artificial.)
Second, if the author was subtly and artistically trying to make a point about poverty and unfairness, she (or is it a he?) failed. Not at making the point- that was glaringly obvious- but at artistic quality and subtlety. Sugar’s questioning speech about democracy and equal chance ruined any subtlety the piece possessed, which wasn’t much to begin with. The characters seemed to be there in order to explain that ‘all these wasteful toys cost a lot of money which could go to better things but they don’t so that’s not quite ‘American’ is it?’ The whole thing seemed contrived and was annoying. I tried to enjoy it, because I agree with the message completely, but this short story was not the way to explain the point literarily. The author would have done better with an essay.
As for my Level Three question, yes, I do think it matters. I thought that that might apply to this story because some of the kids in the story did not seem impressed with the message Miss Moore and Sugar were trying to convey. To them, does it matter if America really is the land of the equal and fair? They probably don’t think about questions such as these, so consciously, it doesn’t seem to matter to them, as in they don’t care. But the answer to questions like that does affect them. America is not a land of equal chance, which definitely affects their lives even though they don’t think about it.
Questions:
Level One: Where do the kids and Miss Moore go?
Level Two: Do the kids appreciate what Miss Moore is trying to tell them?
Level Three: Does it matter if America is a land of equal opportunity or not?
Observations:
First of all, we did all the ‘Is America really the land of equal opportunity?’ and whatnot last year, so I feel like I’ve already said all there is to say on this subject. (I.e., that no it’s not and that’s really bad and we can’t really do much about it.) However, there are other aspects of the story I can address.
I didn’t particularly like the piece. First of all, I didn’t like the main character. ‘Sylvia’ did not seem like a nice or sympathetic person. Her telling of how she locked ‘Sugar’ in the shower, among other things, was not particularly conducive to my ability to sympathize with her. Also, she seemed sort of a blatant plot device- her only purpose to allow the author a way to explain how America wasn’t the land of equal chances and opportunity and dreams. The addition of her ‘tough’ personality seemed like a bad attempt at giving her more dimension and disguising her plot device function. (The same thing applies to Miss Moore and the rest of the kids in a lesser degree; the only exist in order for the author to use them to talk about equality; any original qualities they own seem contrived and artificial.)
Second, if the author was subtly and artistically trying to make a point about poverty and unfairness, she (or is it a he?) failed. Not at making the point- that was glaringly obvious- but at artistic quality and subtlety. Sugar’s questioning speech about democracy and equal chance ruined any subtlety the piece possessed, which wasn’t much to begin with. The characters seemed to be there in order to explain that ‘all these wasteful toys cost a lot of money which could go to better things but they don’t so that’s not quite ‘American’ is it?’ The whole thing seemed contrived and was annoying. I tried to enjoy it, because I agree with the message completely, but this short story was not the way to explain the point literarily. The author would have done better with an essay.
As for my Level Three question, yes, I do think it matters. I thought that that might apply to this story because some of the kids in the story did not seem impressed with the message Miss Moore and Sugar were trying to convey. To them, does it matter if America really is the land of the equal and fair? They probably don’t think about questions such as these, so consciously, it doesn’t seem to matter to them, as in they don’t care. But the answer to questions like that does affect them. America is not a land of equal chance, which definitely affects their lives even though they don’t think about it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
