This story is about a girl who wants to escape from her horrible life and find happiness elsewhere but can't make the decision to go.
1) What's the girl's name?
2) Why didn't she go with Frank?
3) If you were in that situation, what would you do?
The theme of this story is about fear of change. (Yes, I looked that up in the notes :) ) But really, it is. Eveline is afraid of changing her life, even though it's for the better. She's afraid of leaving what's familiar, even though it's not good for her. People generally don't like the unknown and so prefer even a bad thing that they recognize to a possibly good thing that they're not sure will work out and will take them away from what they know.
I thought the reference to the priest was interesting. We learned in class that every Joyce story (in Dubliners at least) has a reference to a dead/gone priest. I think it would be amazing if we went through the book and found all the priest references. Anyway, I suppose it's more symbolism about how the Catholic church was once good and stable but now (by that I mean James Joyce's now) it caused (in Joyce's opinion) social paralysis and is no longer there for the people, but is just a fond memory.
Showing posts with label short story. Show all posts
Showing posts with label short story. Show all posts
Wednesday, 10 September 2008
Monday, 8 September 2008
Araby
This is a story about a boy who is infatuated with his neighbor and goes to a bazaar to buy something for her and doesn't.
1) What is the name of the bazaar?
2) Why does the boy feel 'anguish and anger' at the end?
3) The description of the section of the book that this story was taken from says that it focuses on the confusion of leaving childhood behind. Does it really show that confusion as it is?
I really have no idea what the theme of this story is.
I didn't think the story was very interesting. It made sense and the characterization and writing and everything was good, but the piece itself didn't seem interesting. A lot of it was description, which has always bored me.
Anyway, the story's ending would have meant something else to me if I hadn't read the descriptions which said that this story had to do with the confusion of leaving childhood or something. I'm not sure exactly what I would have thought it meant, except that the story really didn't seem to have much to do with childhood, except the narrator was obviously young. In the end, his feelings of anger and anguish were what I felt was interesting about the story, since they connected with his failure to find anything for the girl and the obstacles he faces in getting to the bazaar. He feels as if the end isn't worth the effort and so feels that way.
1) What is the name of the bazaar?
2) Why does the boy feel 'anguish and anger' at the end?
3) The description of the section of the book that this story was taken from says that it focuses on the confusion of leaving childhood behind. Does it really show that confusion as it is?
I really have no idea what the theme of this story is.
I didn't think the story was very interesting. It made sense and the characterization and writing and everything was good, but the piece itself didn't seem interesting. A lot of it was description, which has always bored me.
Anyway, the story's ending would have meant something else to me if I hadn't read the descriptions which said that this story had to do with the confusion of leaving childhood or something. I'm not sure exactly what I would have thought it meant, except that the story really didn't seem to have much to do with childhood, except the narrator was obviously young. In the end, his feelings of anger and anguish were what I felt was interesting about the story, since they connected with his failure to find anything for the girl and the obstacles he faces in getting to the bazaar. He feels as if the end isn't worth the effort and so feels that way.
Wednesday, 3 September 2008
A Good Man is Hard to Find
A Good Man is Hard to Find is a story about a family who takes a trip, meets an escaped murderer and dies.
1) Where was the family's destination?
2) Why did the Misfit shoot the grandmother?
3) Are good men hard to find?
I really don't know what to make of this story. I thought all the characters were written well and the story was interesting to read, yet it didn't seem to have a point or a theme or a reason for why it was written the way it was. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, except for the fact that we have to write about such things for this class.
One point about the story that I thought was done particularly well was the part about the shirt. (Bailey wears this yellow shirt with blue parrots, then after he was taken into the woods, the shirt of his that the Misfit puts on is that shirt.) The grandmother's line of how she doesn't remember what the shirt reminds her of shows very clearly the distressed and confused state her mind is in. It adds to the weird quality of the piece.
Oh yeah, and all the religious stuff confused me. I have no idea what exact deeper meaning the author was trying to convey, especially with all the references to Jesus. I mean, I got the obvious- that the Misfit takes pleasure in killing because he thinks the world is messed up and the grandmother thinks he should be saved, etc., but I think I'm missing something important because religion in general confuses me.
1) Where was the family's destination?
2) Why did the Misfit shoot the grandmother?
3) Are good men hard to find?
I really don't know what to make of this story. I thought all the characters were written well and the story was interesting to read, yet it didn't seem to have a point or a theme or a reason for why it was written the way it was. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, except for the fact that we have to write about such things for this class.
One point about the story that I thought was done particularly well was the part about the shirt. (Bailey wears this yellow shirt with blue parrots, then after he was taken into the woods, the shirt of his that the Misfit puts on is that shirt.) The grandmother's line of how she doesn't remember what the shirt reminds her of shows very clearly the distressed and confused state her mind is in. It adds to the weird quality of the piece.
Oh yeah, and all the religious stuff confused me. I have no idea what exact deeper meaning the author was trying to convey, especially with all the references to Jesus. I mean, I got the obvious- that the Misfit takes pleasure in killing because he thinks the world is messed up and the grandmother thinks he should be saved, etc., but I think I'm missing something important because religion in general confuses me.
Monday, 1 September 2008
The Rocking Horse Winner
The Rocking Horse Winner is a story about a boy who wants to make money on racehorses and then dies.
1) What is the boy's name?
2) Why does he want money?
3) Is the story right? Can money not replace happiness?
This story's theme was that money cannot bring happiness and that luck doesn't concern itself only with bringing money.
This story was good because it (like the one we read in class the other day) utilized the element of suspense very well. In addition, it made the characters slightly disturbing, which added to the sense of intrigue. The added supernatural-ish parts (the way he got his answers from the rocking horse, the whispering house) added to the interest of the story and made it much more fascinating to read than if the author had simply let the point of his story be known through the description of a boy who tried to make money because his family was in debt through their own desire for money. The story goes deeper than that, the characterization is much more interesting and the point is not painfully obvious. The parts about the house whispering were particularly interesting because they added the atmosphere of suspense and the sense of something unusual happening. I got the impression somehow that the boy, Paul, did not actually try to win money to please his mother, though he didn't mind doing so. That was a minor motivation. I felt that he was actually taking his child's idea of 'luck solves everything' to the extreme because of the house- he felt its message and tried to get money because of that. He had luck of both kinds: good and bad, although maybe they're the same thing. What he thought was good luck brought bad things more than good, after all.
I'm not sure what exactly to say about the actual theme and idea of the story. The mechanics were all great and I enjoyed reading the piece. However, the idea of 'money does not bring happiness' is so cliché and well-worn that I seriously cannot find anything new and original to say about it.
1) What is the boy's name?
2) Why does he want money?
3) Is the story right? Can money not replace happiness?
This story's theme was that money cannot bring happiness and that luck doesn't concern itself only with bringing money.
This story was good because it (like the one we read in class the other day) utilized the element of suspense very well. In addition, it made the characters slightly disturbing, which added to the sense of intrigue. The added supernatural-ish parts (the way he got his answers from the rocking horse, the whispering house) added to the interest of the story and made it much more fascinating to read than if the author had simply let the point of his story be known through the description of a boy who tried to make money because his family was in debt through their own desire for money. The story goes deeper than that, the characterization is much more interesting and the point is not painfully obvious. The parts about the house whispering were particularly interesting because they added the atmosphere of suspense and the sense of something unusual happening. I got the impression somehow that the boy, Paul, did not actually try to win money to please his mother, though he didn't mind doing so. That was a minor motivation. I felt that he was actually taking his child's idea of 'luck solves everything' to the extreme because of the house- he felt its message and tried to get money because of that. He had luck of both kinds: good and bad, although maybe they're the same thing. What he thought was good luck brought bad things more than good, after all.
I'm not sure what exactly to say about the actual theme and idea of the story. The mechanics were all great and I enjoyed reading the piece. However, the idea of 'money does not bring happiness' is so cliché and well-worn that I seriously cannot find anything new and original to say about it.
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)
