My favorite piece of literature was King Lear because I thoroughly enjoy William Shakespeare's writing style. His language flows beautifully, yet he always hides a deeper meaning within the lines. The book also had translations on the sides of the pages which made reading the tragedy rather easy and definitely more interesting. I was very surprised by how much I liked the tragedy; normally, I hate tragedies because they make me slightly upset once I finish reading. However, I thought King Lear ended on a fairly good note. Yes, Cordelia and her father died at the end, but Albany, Kent, and Edgar lived! The kingdom was left to these three men, all of which were good, moral characters throughout the play.
My least favorite piece of literature that we covered in this course was The Tale of Genji. I thought that Genji was a man whore, who traipsed around as he pleased. I think he probably seduced any able female nearby, which was absolutely disgusting. I did not like the way women were portrayed in this piece of literature; the men talked about them as if they were jokes. Marriage was something that was not honored in this culture which also annoyed me. I found Genji to be a rather creepy character. He ends up sleeping with Futitsubo who looks just like his own mother, then he takes in Futitsubo's niece and has relations with her too. Gross. Finally, the most disgusting part of the entire work was when Genji slept with the governor's wife (Lady of the Locust Shell) and then also slept with her 12-year-old brother.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Not a Fan of Tragedies...
Sarah Scheidel
ENGL 2200
I wasn't pleased with the ending of this play. Regan, Goneril, and Edmund all died, which I was completely fine with considering they were bad, terrible characters throughout the entire play. However, I was genuinely upset that Cordelia was not saved and Gloucester passed. Cordelia honestly did nothing wrong to anyone in this entire Shakespearean play. Yet, she is punished for helping her father, who banished her in the beginning. She never stopped loving or supporting him. Gloucester, another character that was extremely apologetic for his poor decisions, also died after discovering that his true son, Edgar, helped him along his journey despite the circumstances. I was unsure how I felt about the death of King Lear; Lear was rude to Cordelia in the beginning of the play and only came around once his two "most beloved' daughters betrayed him. I believe that he got what he deserved in the end, even though he apologized to Cordelia for his mistake. I was, however, pleased that Albany, Edgar, and Kent lived and were reinstated into their former positions. They were loyal and true throughout the play, and I greatly respected them. In the end, I am not a big fan of tragedies. This Shakespearean tragedy made me unhappy. I still cannot get over Cordelia's death; I knew it was going to happen from the beginning, but I still was not prepared for the ending. She was absolutely pure and precious and most certainly did not deserve the treatment she received throughout the entire play.
ENGL 2200
I wasn't pleased with the ending of this play. Regan, Goneril, and Edmund all died, which I was completely fine with considering they were bad, terrible characters throughout the entire play. However, I was genuinely upset that Cordelia was not saved and Gloucester passed. Cordelia honestly did nothing wrong to anyone in this entire Shakespearean play. Yet, she is punished for helping her father, who banished her in the beginning. She never stopped loving or supporting him. Gloucester, another character that was extremely apologetic for his poor decisions, also died after discovering that his true son, Edgar, helped him along his journey despite the circumstances. I was unsure how I felt about the death of King Lear; Lear was rude to Cordelia in the beginning of the play and only came around once his two "most beloved' daughters betrayed him. I believe that he got what he deserved in the end, even though he apologized to Cordelia for his mistake. I was, however, pleased that Albany, Edgar, and Kent lived and were reinstated into their former positions. They were loyal and true throughout the play, and I greatly respected them. In the end, I am not a big fan of tragedies. This Shakespearean tragedy made me unhappy. I still cannot get over Cordelia's death; I knew it was going to happen from the beginning, but I still was not prepared for the ending. She was absolutely pure and precious and most certainly did not deserve the treatment she received throughout the entire play.
Wednesday, November 9, 2011
King Lear-Regret
Sarah Scheidel
ENGL 2200
I noticed a lot of regret in the assigned reading for this week. The regret Lear experiences over Cordelia and poor decisions due to the cruelty of Goneril and Regan parallels the same feeling harbored by Gloucester. In tonight's reading, I really felt bad for Gloucester. He may have disowned Edgar, but the lies of Edmund are what caused this action. It is not like Gloucester was completely ridiculous and stupid like Lear. Lear simply wanted to be flattered, and didn't hear enough from Cordelia; her actions spoke louder than her words. Edmund and Edgar were both good sons before Edmund began plotting. Once Edmund framed Edgar, Gloucester disowned the rightful heir. At least Gloucester had a "reason" for kicking out his son even if it was fabricated. I was also extremely surprised by the cruelty of Regan and Cornwall's actions. They gouged out Gloucester's eyes for helping Lear, a former king. It was during this occurrence that Gloucester was filled with deep regret for what he did to Edgar. Regan informed Gloucester that Edmund had be the one who ratted him out for helping the French and Lear. It made me extremely sad when Regan and Cornwall kicked Gloucester out into the storm to "smell his way to Dover". I was also upset when Edgar didn't reveal his identity to his father, but I was very thankful that the son was present to help his father along the journey. It was heart-wrenching to imagine Edgar helping his poor, blinded father in the storm. It seems as if every character has fallen rather far since the beginning of the story. I'm not sure if I can handle a tragic ending. It's sad to watch good characters experience hardships.
ENGL 2200
I noticed a lot of regret in the assigned reading for this week. The regret Lear experiences over Cordelia and poor decisions due to the cruelty of Goneril and Regan parallels the same feeling harbored by Gloucester. In tonight's reading, I really felt bad for Gloucester. He may have disowned Edgar, but the lies of Edmund are what caused this action. It is not like Gloucester was completely ridiculous and stupid like Lear. Lear simply wanted to be flattered, and didn't hear enough from Cordelia; her actions spoke louder than her words. Edmund and Edgar were both good sons before Edmund began plotting. Once Edmund framed Edgar, Gloucester disowned the rightful heir. At least Gloucester had a "reason" for kicking out his son even if it was fabricated. I was also extremely surprised by the cruelty of Regan and Cornwall's actions. They gouged out Gloucester's eyes for helping Lear, a former king. It was during this occurrence that Gloucester was filled with deep regret for what he did to Edgar. Regan informed Gloucester that Edmund had be the one who ratted him out for helping the French and Lear. It made me extremely sad when Regan and Cornwall kicked Gloucester out into the storm to "smell his way to Dover". I was also upset when Edgar didn't reveal his identity to his father, but I was very thankful that the son was present to help his father along the journey. It was heart-wrenching to imagine Edgar helping his poor, blinded father in the storm. It seems as if every character has fallen rather far since the beginning of the story. I'm not sure if I can handle a tragic ending. It's sad to watch good characters experience hardships.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Crazy King Lear
Sarah Scheidel
ENGL 2200
Thus far, I have really enjoyed Shakespeare's King Lear. This story is filled with lying, deceit, and fraud, all of which make for a very exciting plot. First, crazy King Lear disowns the only person who is kind, loving and true to him, Cordelia. She is left without a dowry; lucky for her, the King of France still marries her (Not bad!). Needless to say, Goneril and Regan, the sister's of Cordelia, receive parts of Lear's kingdom simply by lying and flattering their father. They shower him with backwards flattery that is not true. Not only does Lear insanely give his kingdom to two unworthy daughters, but he also fires one of his most loyal men, Kent. Kent has served the family and Lear for years and is astonished by the king's actions towards not only himself but also Cordelia, the favorite. Finally, Lear decides to visit each daughter, not including Cordelia, and stay with them. He stays with Goneril first, who of course is not pleased by her father's presence and progressing insanity. I believe that karma is working against Lear in this situation. He disowned his most loyal daughter and gave his kingdom away to two cheap flatterers. Now, these same two daughters are disowning their father, which is very ironic. After being treated poorly at Goneril's palace, Lear heads to Regan's home. The second daughter sides with Goneril and is not happy to have him. She is unaccommodating and rude to not only Lear but also to his servant-in-disguise, Kent. I enjoy this tragedy so far because it is mischievous and complex. I am very interested to see what happens to Cordelia especially since she hasn't been around much in the beginning after she moved to France. I also like the parallels between Lear's family and Gloucester's family. Cordelia is disowned just like Edgar is disowned. I feel like these two separate situations will have similar results or maybe converge.
ENGL 2200
Thus far, I have really enjoyed Shakespeare's King Lear. This story is filled with lying, deceit, and fraud, all of which make for a very exciting plot. First, crazy King Lear disowns the only person who is kind, loving and true to him, Cordelia. She is left without a dowry; lucky for her, the King of France still marries her (Not bad!). Needless to say, Goneril and Regan, the sister's of Cordelia, receive parts of Lear's kingdom simply by lying and flattering their father. They shower him with backwards flattery that is not true. Not only does Lear insanely give his kingdom to two unworthy daughters, but he also fires one of his most loyal men, Kent. Kent has served the family and Lear for years and is astonished by the king's actions towards not only himself but also Cordelia, the favorite. Finally, Lear decides to visit each daughter, not including Cordelia, and stay with them. He stays with Goneril first, who of course is not pleased by her father's presence and progressing insanity. I believe that karma is working against Lear in this situation. He disowned his most loyal daughter and gave his kingdom away to two cheap flatterers. Now, these same two daughters are disowning their father, which is very ironic. After being treated poorly at Goneril's palace, Lear heads to Regan's home. The second daughter sides with Goneril and is not happy to have him. She is unaccommodating and rude to not only Lear but also to his servant-in-disguise, Kent. I enjoy this tragedy so far because it is mischievous and complex. I am very interested to see what happens to Cordelia especially since she hasn't been around much in the beginning after she moved to France. I also like the parallels between Lear's family and Gloucester's family. Cordelia is disowned just like Edgar is disowned. I feel like these two separate situations will have similar results or maybe converge.
Monday, October 24, 2011
Sunjata and The Lion King
Sarah Scheidel
ENGL 2200
First and foremost, I would like to address how interesting the dialect of the epic is and actually how difficult it is to follow. I realize that this story was originally intended to be passed down through generations by oral tradition, and it was long ago, but now it is very confusing. There are numerous names that are all very long. I noticed this epic relied heavily on family lineage and names to tell the story. For instance, the portion of the epic where Sunjata cuts off a piece of his own leg to feed his fellow traveling companion was gross, yet it explained why it is so terrible for a Keita to betray a Kuyate today. "Things will go badly for him." I also found that loyalty seemed to be very important: Sunjata was extremely loyal to his mother and sister and would not leave them. Yet, I do not understand the animosity between Sunjata and his brothers. They tried to kill each other just to be king...and they are brothers. I also enjoyed reading Mrs. Fowler's blog. I did not even put two and two together about this epic and The Lion King. I should have known! That was my favorite movie as a kid, and now that she has mentioned it, I definitely see how they are related. It made the reading of this story more enjoyable! Simba is Sunjata, and he is expelled because another family member takes over. Rafiki predicts that he is supposed to be the reigning king just like Sunjata's mother and his obstacles predicted his future. Finally, a female ends up helping Simba back to the pride land, similar to Sunjata.
ENGL 2200
First and foremost, I would like to address how interesting the dialect of the epic is and actually how difficult it is to follow. I realize that this story was originally intended to be passed down through generations by oral tradition, and it was long ago, but now it is very confusing. There are numerous names that are all very long. I noticed this epic relied heavily on family lineage and names to tell the story. For instance, the portion of the epic where Sunjata cuts off a piece of his own leg to feed his fellow traveling companion was gross, yet it explained why it is so terrible for a Keita to betray a Kuyate today. "Things will go badly for him." I also found that loyalty seemed to be very important: Sunjata was extremely loyal to his mother and sister and would not leave them. Yet, I do not understand the animosity between Sunjata and his brothers. They tried to kill each other just to be king...and they are brothers. I also enjoyed reading Mrs. Fowler's blog. I did not even put two and two together about this epic and The Lion King. I should have known! That was my favorite movie as a kid, and now that she has mentioned it, I definitely see how they are related. It made the reading of this story more enjoyable! Simba is Sunjata, and he is expelled because another family member takes over. Rafiki predicts that he is supposed to be the reigning king just like Sunjata's mother and his obstacles predicted his future. Finally, a female ends up helping Simba back to the pride land, similar to Sunjata.
Monday, October 17, 2011
Genji's Weird Life
Sarah Scheidel
ENGL 2200
To start off, I found it extremely odd that Genji slept with a twelve-year-old boy, who happened to be the brother of the governor's wife whom he also slept with. In my opinion, Genji "got around". He was married to Aoi, however, he was completely not phased by this reality. I understand that the time period's cultural stance on marriage was very different than it is today, but Genji's numerous pursuits almost seemed ridiculous and too carnal for me. This handsome, royal man basically could skip to whichever woman he pleased; he became attached easily as well. First, he became attached to the governor's wife simply because she was playing hard to get. He played along with these games, which made him seem very childish. These men picked apart women's flaws as if they were on display. No woman was ever "perfect"enough for any of them. All of the men in this tale were shallow; it was disgusting. Every time a relationship (if you could even call it that) ended, it was ALWAYS the female's fault; the males in this story could do no wrong. They also passed around women amongst their group, which was gross. Tu-no-Chujo first stayed with Yugao ("Evening Faces") and Genji knew that, however, it did not stop him from sleeping with her. He admired her gentility and easily fell for her. The reading ended on a very odd note: Yugao died in bed with Genji, Genji mourned for a short time, and then he went back to his old ways and old lovers. Typical.
ENGL 2200
To start off, I found it extremely odd that Genji slept with a twelve-year-old boy, who happened to be the brother of the governor's wife whom he also slept with. In my opinion, Genji "got around". He was married to Aoi, however, he was completely not phased by this reality. I understand that the time period's cultural stance on marriage was very different than it is today, but Genji's numerous pursuits almost seemed ridiculous and too carnal for me. This handsome, royal man basically could skip to whichever woman he pleased; he became attached easily as well. First, he became attached to the governor's wife simply because she was playing hard to get. He played along with these games, which made him seem very childish. These men picked apart women's flaws as if they were on display. No woman was ever "perfect"enough for any of them. All of the men in this tale were shallow; it was disgusting. Every time a relationship (if you could even call it that) ended, it was ALWAYS the female's fault; the males in this story could do no wrong. They also passed around women amongst their group, which was gross. Tu-no-Chujo first stayed with Yugao ("Evening Faces") and Genji knew that, however, it did not stop him from sleeping with her. He admired her gentility and easily fell for her. The reading ended on a very odd note: Yugao died in bed with Genji, Genji mourned for a short time, and then he went back to his old ways and old lovers. Typical.
Monday, October 10, 2011
Courtly Love: Is Chivalry Dead?
Courtly love is described as a medieval European conception of nobly and chivalrously expressing love and admiration. It seems as if courtly love had no bounds. Marriage was not even an excuse for not loving. Married people could love others. Love rarely endured the hardships of the public eye, therefore, most courtly relationships were kept a secret. Courtly love also consisted of all the "bells and whistles". This type of love entailed the butterflies, rapid heart pounding, and poems of passion and jealousy. A true lover was constantly and without intermission possessed by the thought of his beloved. So the questions are: Does this kind of love still exist? Is chivalry dead? I'm young, and therefore, haven't had very much experience with "true love". I would like to entertain the thought that this kind of deep, true, passionate love really exits, but I doubt it. In today's society, things are always complicated. As a female, I feel like I am generally stuck in limbo. Guys don't really share their feelings; they'd probably get teased terribly if they did. Females would also consider the male to be a "creep" and slightly obsessive. However, every now and then, a girl comes across a guy who will open car doors, hold doors open and let her walk in first, compliment her on her appearance, and seem interested without scaring the girl. These occurrences are sparkling glimpses and reflections of the ancient conception of courtly love. Some men may surprise you still; they definitely keep you on your toes.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)