1 Down, 1 to Go

I cannot believe this semester is over already!! And look how far everyone has come!! From Frankenstein to A Doll's House, we have covered how society affects someone, gender differences, and how external forces can affect the internal conflict. My favorites from this semester are Frankenstein, Grendel, and A Doll's House. Very different yet they all seem to have a similar idea of society affecting the internal conflict. In Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, the creature is rejected from society because of his appearance. Through his rejection he is feeling anger and wants to be loved. However, he at first is not a mean and nasty being--he's curious about people. The external forces that caused him pain made him the killing machine that he is in the end. In Grendel by John Gardner, Grendel starts off the same way as the creature--wanting to be loved and curious. But as soon as Hrothgar throws the ax, he knows that the world he was expecting does not exist. After the humans assume he is an awful thing, he again like the creature, turns into an awful being that the external forces influenced. Lastly, A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen, it's the same idea but in the end there is no murderer. Nora is influenced by society in being that she does what her husband says and that because she is a woman she cannot do anything business like. It's hogwash. But it's how society was. The way she acts is because of the external forces such as Torvald and her dad teacher her to be the puppet while they tell her what to do. It's what we call "learned helplessness" in AP Psych. But she reverses the conditioning by breaking the cycle and leaving Torvald in the end. All three characters in the end are alone. The external factors of society have made them realize that they are not who they officially would be. Creature realizes that no one will ever love him and is alone, Grendel finds out he can be defeated which crushed his spirit BUT HE DOES NOT DIE, and Nora realizes she does not have to be the housewife that cannot do anything related to business. They all are in a way enlightened in the end--another topic that has come up over and over this semester. My favorite thing to relate our books to is Plato's Allegory with the prisoners. One prisoner makes his way out into the world and comes back and tries to tell the others what has happened. It's kind of amazing how the authors seem to have a hidden language that can they can all communicate to each other with. Maybe that's a weird way of looking at it and it's really just a format that is just really common. But I'm going to pretend I'm one of the prisoners still stuck in the cave in my own fantasy believing that all of the authors have their own language.

A Doll's House

A lot was going through my mind after I read A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen.  I wasn't really sure what to expect when we did out class discussion of what a "doll house" could mean. I didn't know if I should expect a child playing with dolls or if the dolls came to life--I never expected a real house being like a doll house with a puppet master. Never ever. First, I pitied Nora because I thought she was in a rough relationship because she had to hide her "macaroons." Technically, we could say she is in a tough relationship because she can't be fully open with Torvald. LIGHTBULB! The macaroons that she has to hide parallels to Nora and Torvald's relationship!! The macaroons have to be kept secret just like how Nora committed forgery and borrowed money without Torvald's consent is a secret!! Wow. How did I not catch that earlier?? Okay getting off the tangent--second, I had trouble deciding whether or not I like Torvald or not. I feel bad for him because Nora did keep this HUGE secret from him that could have ruined him and his career. However, I totally disliked him after he threw himself a little pitty party because he thought his life was over. No. Think about your wife. Think about what she sacrificed to save YOU you selfish-little-stinker. In the end, I sided with Nora--hmmm I wonder if it has to do with gender.... When we read the second ending Ibsen wrote, I hated it. It completely defeated the entire purpose of the entire play!! Nora is not supposed to give into staying with Torvald to fulfill her motherly and wifely duties. No, she is supposed to go and take care of herself! Ibsen didn't write A Doll's House to talk about how women can be manipulative, and lie, and deceitful and then have them exposed and then they come right back to where they started to fulfill the motherly role. No. That is not at ALL what he was trying to say. When Nora leaves, it's because she has discovered her own independence that she never thought she had. As she grew up, either her father or Torvald always had to take care of her or shoulder the burden for anything. Now she has learned that she can handle things. She does not need a man to always take care of her. On a completely different note, what would have happened if Krogstad had gotten the letter back and Torvald never got to read it? Would Nora claim to be happy still? Or would she realize that she might not have ever been happy and tell Torvald herself to break the chains?? There is an endless amount of possibilities for their situation.

I Carry Your Heart With Me

I Carry Your Heart with Me
E.E Cummings

I carry your heart with me( I carry it
in my heart) I am never without it (anywhere
I go, my dear; and whatever is done by only
me is your doing, my darling) I fear
no fate (for you are my fate, my sweet)
I want no world(for beautiful you are my world,
my true) and it's you are whatever a moon has
always meant and whatever a sun will always sing is you
here is the deepest secret nobody knows ( here is
the root of the root and the bud of the bud and
the sky of the sky of a tree called life; which grows
higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide) and
this is the wonder that's keeping the stars apart
i carry your heart(i carry it in my heart)


I don't even know where to start for this. I'm having trouble really figuring out how it's supposed to sound because it doesn't rhyme! I've always had the hardest time reading poems that don't rhyme! How do you figure out the rhythm?? Is it supposed to be echoey? Is it supposed to be a song? Is it supposed to sound like a conversation between two lovers? It can really go anyway. However, I am reading it as a conversation between two lovers. Two departing lovers I guess I should say. After doing research on E.E. Cummings, I found that he lived in two places--meaning he must have had someone he loved in one place and he would have to leave her to go back to the opposite place. Through his departure to his other home or whatever you want to call it, Cummings would have a hard time leaving her. Therefore, he wrote this poem to show his hardship of going back and leaving her each time. He starts off "I carry your heart with me" as if he's saying that he's taking her love with him. He's not going to forget about her while he's gone--aka he's not going to have a girlfriend in one place, and then a different one in the other. And then he says "I carry it in my heart." Everyone knows that a heart symbolizes love, so by saying that he is carrying hers in his shows how he will be faithful to her and he will not forget about her. I think my favorite line is when he says "I fear no fate (for you are my fate, my sweet)." Does that not make you happy?? He's not scared of anything because he knows no matter what, he will be back for her to love her and be with her for the rest of their lives. And then he tells her, "you are whatever a moon has always meant." The moon is a mysterious being, people always see it and it's glowing beauty, but what exactly does the moon mean? We see it commonly in love scenes or in mysterious scenes when it adds another beauty. The moon give off a softened light. It lights up the dark showing people what they haven't been able to see. This means that the moon and the woman are the same to the speaker. The speaker has no light without his love in the dark, he has no love, and he has to mystery. And lastly the speaker ultimately says his love is better than life itself by comparing her to, "tree called life; which grows higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide." She's better than life itself. She means more to him than life. If she wasn't in his heart as he went from place to place lighting the way, he would have no reason to live.