Act 5.1: All Issues Resolved

I've finally reached the end of the play....well that was fast. It felt like most of the play centered around Antonio as the victim of Shylock's cruelty, but other relationships in the novel seem to play an equally important role. Act 5.1 mainly consisted of two parts: Lorenzo's interaction with Jessica and then Portia, Nerissa, Antonio, Bassanio, and Gratiano eventually arrive for the last act of the play. I found an interesting contrast between Lorenzo and Jessica's dialogue with each other compared to Portia and Bassanio's dialogue with each other. Lorenzo seemed particularly harsh towards Jessica when they discussed about the power of music. Jessica felt unmoved by the music which led Lorenzo to basically label her as heartless for not feeling the power of music.

"Their savage eyes turned to a modest gaze/By the sweet power of music" (5.1.85-86)
Lorenzo emphasizes this idea of how music can turn savage creatures into more civilized beings. He seems to indirectly imply that Jessica is the one with savage eyes and that music should be softening her eyes into a softer, more civilized gaze. There is no doubt that "savage eyes" could be referencing her past Jewish heritage because Shylock is often referred to as barbaric and animal-like. Therefore, music could potentially be a metaphor for Christianity because Jessica converting to Christianity turns her into more of a civilized human being in the eyes of Lorenzo. However does that mean that being a Christian is making Jessica unhappy then? I think Jessica didn't for her lack of enjoyment of music to offend Lorenzo but Lorenzo certainly seems to be concerned and offended by Jessica's words.

"The motions of his spirit are dull as night,/And his affections dark as Erebus./No such man can be trusted." (95-97) Furthermore, Lorenzo says that "no such man can be trusted", which literally indicates that he doesn't trust Jessica.

Another highlight of Act 5.1 is Portia's lengthy speech on the symbolic value of a ring. Here she is replying to Gratiano after he admits that he gave away Nerissa's ring to a clerk (which was Nerissa herself in disguise). I noticed that Portia's dialogue is also somewhat indirect like Lorenzo's because her dialogue is really meant for Bassanio, not Gratiano.  

"To part so slightly with your wife's first gift,

A thing stuck on with oaths upon your finger,

And so riveted with faith unto your flesh.

I gave my love a ring and made him swear

Never to part with it, and here he stands.

I dare be sworn for him he would not leave with it

Nor pluck it from his finger for the wealth

That the world masters."

We discussed in class that a marriage ring also symbolizes a woman's virginity because through marriage a woman gives her virginity away to her husband. A woman's virginity is likened to an oath which indicates its significance. I also liked how she said "faith unto your flesh" because it connects an intangible value of faith to something tangible as your flesh (which is the finger which the ring wraps itself around on).  Along with an oath, the act of "swearing" upon the oath shows sacredness of the union but at the same time this sacredness is put upon a materialistic object (the ring). So it does seem a little ironic to put such a high symbolic value on an object with high monetary value, but I think it also signifies this contradictory obsession with Christian faith along with materialistic wealth "that the world masters".

Act 4.1: Mercy VS Justice

Act 4.1 revolved around the court trial in which basically everyone in the court was  begging Shylock to show mercy towards Antonio. However , similar to previous acts, the Christians continued to insult him while asking for his mercy which reveals further hypocrisy in their behavior.
The Duke pleads Shylock to be "touched with humane gentleness and love" by "glancing an eye of pity on [Antonio's] losses" while simultaneously referring to him as barbaric as "stubborn Turks and Tartars never trained". The word "gentleness" connotes Christianity and it's paired with the word "love" because he equates Christianity with love. However, Shylock is not a Christian and he does not pity Antonio because did break his bond and failed to repay three thousand ducats in time. The word "gentle" is also repeated when the Duke tells Shylock "We all expect a gentle answer, Jew".  (4.1.26-35) Once again, he expects Shylock to show Christian behavior while at the same time calling him a Jew.

Even Antonio, who should be the one begging for Shylock's mercy, describes Shylock's "Jewish heart" as unchangeable and as hard as stone: "You may as well do anything most hard/As seek to soften that than which what's harder?--/His Jewish heart" (4.1.49) If his Jewish heart is hard, then Christian hearts must be the same because they never seem to show any compassion whatsoever to evoke empathy from Shylock. 

Gratiano interprets Shylocks determination to uphold justice as a "desire": "for thy desires/Are wolfish, bloody, starved, and ravenous." (4.1.139-140) I think it's true that Shylock's vengeance does make him deserving of being called as a ravenous, bloodthirsty wolf but in this quote it seems like Gratiano is attributing justice as a bloodthirsty desire instead of a rational societal belief. Justice is usually associated with reasoning and upholding equality, but in the Christian's view mercy overcomes justice. 

Portia who is disguised as Balthazar depicts that mercy is not something that is restrained, but rather falling like rain from heaven. "The quality of mercy is not strained/It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven" (4.1.190-191) She describes mercy as being "gentle" which also emphasizes mercy as being a Christian value. The repetition of the word "gentle" undoubtedly conveys the Christian mindset of how mercy is above all things, even justice. Thus not expressing mercy would be considered as a wrongdoing in the Christian view.

What particularly interested me was how Portia undermined justice by saying that justice does not give salvation, only mercy will.. "Therefore, Jew,/Though justice by thy plea, consider this:/That in the course of justice none of us/Should see salvation. We do pray for mercy" (4.1.203-206) Portia used the word "us" which made it seem like it included Shylock in Christian salvation when they clearly point out how Shylock is a Jew. Maybe it served to prepare for Shylock's conversion to Christianity....perhaps that's why there were multiple uses of  the word "gentle".

In the end, Shylock was forced be for mercy himself, indicating that mercy was the only solution to injustice: "Down, therefore, and beg mercy of the Duke.' (4.1.378) At the end of the Act 4.1, it was also interesting how Portia requested for Antonio's ring when Bassanio insisted that he should repay her. Portia referred to the process as begging, which I think draws connection with the act of begging for mercy. In between the Christians, begging involved objects and monetary value whereas in with Shylock's trial it involved begging for mercy. I wonder if this is significant to the Christian hypocrisy or maybe I'm just reading a little too deep  into it.

"I see, sir, you are liberal in offers/You taught me first to beg, and now methinks/You teach me how a beggar should be answered." (4.1.456-458)

MoV: Act 3.3-3.5: Vengeance and Praise

Shylock

Not surprisingly, Shylock is thirsty for revenge and he does not show any mercy when Antonio pleads for a lesser punishment. It's evident that Shylock is turning the Christian merchants' words against them. They insulted and mocked him by calling him a dog, devil and other degrading words and he uses the same words to express his vengeance.

"Thou call'dst me a dog before thou hadst a cause,
But since I'm a dog, beware my fangs."  (3.3.7-8)

Saying "beware my fangs" certainly does not make him a sympathetic character and it further perpetuates the idea of Jewish people being barbaric creatures. However., he strongly abides the law and rightly punishes Antonio for not being able to repay his interest-free bond with Shylock. I also noticed that Shylock's dialogue has been largely repetitive. I'm wondering if it's simply for emphasis on his stubbornness and determination to gain vengeance or is Shakespeare in a way trying to further mock him and dehumanize him.

"I'll have my bond. I will not hear thee speak.
I'll have my bond, and therefore speak no more.
I'll not be made a soft and dull-eyed fool,
To shake the head, relent, and sigh, and yield
To Christian intercessors. Follow not!
I'll have no speaking. I will have my bond." (3.3.13-18)

He is definitely fighting against all of the discrimination he's faced and refuses to become a "dull-eyed fool" and to "yield to Christian intercessors". I think his willingness to stand up for himself does make him a more respected character because there is truth in his words. However the Christian merchants interpret his determination to impose the law as  their common enemy who is inherently evil.

Portia

Literally everyone in the play thinks of Portia as a heavenly saint/angel  with her fair beauty and wealth. It was overwhelming to say the least to have every single person praise her in such an exaggerated manner. I wonder if their praises for her are truly genuine or do they just feel the need to praise her because of her high status, beauty, and wealth? Portia does seem like the heroine of the play. She does not hesitate to "save" Antonio from his ill fate and it was interesting how she feels this deep connection towards Antonio simply because Bassanio is like his "bosom lover". The book annotated "lover" as friend or "well-wisher" or a romantic lover and "bosom" meaning confidential. Does Bassanio feel a closer tie with Portia or are homosocial bonds stronger than heterosexual relationships?

"Which makes me think that this Antonio,
Being the bosom lover of my lord,
Must needs be like my lord. If it be so,
How little is the cost I have bestowed
In purchasing the semblance of my soul
From out the state of hellish cruelty!"  (3.4.16-21)

Portia's use of "purchasing" to describe the act of saving Antonio definitely makes her seem money-oriented and possessive. Describing Antonio as the "semblance" of Bassanio's soul really creeps me out because she sort of regards Antonio and Bassanio as one entity and for the soul to resemble each other must indicate a highly interpersonal relation.

Jessica

Speaking of praises, I also noticed that Jessica felt the need to flood Bassanio with compliments.
"Nay let me praise you while I have a stomach!". Why is this act of praising taken so seriously? Does this tie into how Christians are at times hypocritical on how they emphasize the inner over outer appearances but in reality they take every chance they get to elevate their appearances to seek societal approval??

MoV: 3.1-3.2: Happily Ever After?

The beginning of Act three was action-packed filled with new events and new interactions between characters. I thought the plot moved incredibly fast because three months have passed and Antonio finds out of his shipwrecks and that he is unable to repay Shylock three thousand ducats, Jessica elopes with Lorenzo to Genoa, Bassanio chooses the right casket and is Portia gives him her ring indicating that his is to be the new lord of Belmont. Portia and Bassanio celebrate their happiness and union of love but the terrible news from Antonio casts a shadow upon their newly found happiness. Gratiano, who accompanied Bassanio to Belmont is also engaged to Nerrisa and he says, 

"We are the Jasons, we have won the Fleece" (3.2.250)

This line also draws reference to the previous lines in Act one when Bassanio describes Portia in Act One. "Renowned suitors, and her sunny locks/ Hang on her temples like a golden fleece, /Which makes her seat of Belmont Colchos' strond,/And many Jasons come in quest of her." (1.1.176-179)

Portia and Nerissa are the golden fleece that they have won and this further emphasizes the monetary nature of marriages. Marriages are described as an economic transaction where the women are the idealized trophy to be won by the man who fights for her. Bassanio and Gratiano are the ones who hold victory and they appear almost as the heroes who have been rewarded with beautiful, fair women. This certainly objectifies the two women and it reminded me of Jessica gilding herself for Lorenzo. Come to think of it, the two main women are both rich due to their father's wealth. Does this indicate that they are wealthy because of men and not for their own credit? When they grow up, they become bait for men to catch because of all the wealth they have and they are more than willing to be objectified and to fulfill men's desires. I just find the whole golden fleece reference disturbing and I hate how the women are being objectified even they have many other qualities to offer, for example Portia's wisdom and wittiness and Jessica doesn't seem like such a terrible person but she does betray her father, trades her father's turquoise ring for monkeys and converts to Christianity to leave her Jewish heritage and pursue love (okay maybe she does pale in comparison to Portia, but let's not forget Portia's racist views!)

One particular line that caught my attention was when Portia declares all of herself and all of what she owns to be "converted" to his possession.

"Myself, and what is mine, to you and yours/Is now converted" (3.2.170-171)

This line rang a bell for me because of the use of the word "converted" and once again it mimics the scene where Jessica expresses her desire to convert to Christianity and become Lorenzo's loving wife. Instead of the subject of love, Portia's conversion consisted of economic diction. Portia herself becomes Bassanio's property along with her wealth.

There's definitely parallels in Portia and Jessica's wealth-driven pursuit of marriage but will their romantic endeavors both end in a happily ever after?

Source

MoV: 2.7-2.9

Prince of Morroco and Arragon attempt to choose the casket to win Portia as their new wife and the portrayal of Shylock as the "villain Jew" is further emphasized through the dialogue between Salarino and Salanio. 

"My daughter, O my ducats, O my daughter! Fled with a Christian! O my Christian ducats" (2.8.15)

Salarino and Salanio are recounting Shylock's shocking discovery of Jessica's departure and there is no surprise at their deliberate insult at Shylock. However since it's a second-hand account of the event, there are also issues with the reliability of their statement and they could be exaggerating on how he was more worried about his ducats and jewels than the disappearance of Jessica. Perhaps Shylock is genuinely shocked at how how not only does Jessica elope with Lorenzo, but she also brought along all of his precious ducats. 

The dialogue between Salarino and Salanio in Act 2.8 was similar to the Act 1.1 where the Venetian brotherhood all came to visit Antonio and comfort his worries. They used similar poetic language and intertwined commercial diction with dramatic emotions.  In particular I found these lines regarding Bassanio departing from Antonia very emotional and dramatic.

"And even there, his eye being big with tears,

Turning his face, he put his hand behind him,

And with affection wondrous sensible

He wrung Bassanio's hand-and so they parted." 

When I read the above lines it almost felt like they were Romeo and Juliet forcibly pulled away from each other as they depart with heartbreak and tears running down their face.The words "tears", "face", "hand", "affection", "sensible" also seem more feminine words because they seem to revolve around the theme of love. What was interesting is that the parting between Antonio and Bassanio was more dramatic than Jessica running away with Lorenzo. It makes me question whether love really is genuine. Maybe Antonio and Bassanio have closer Christian brotherly ties with each other.....maybe because Bassanio has been borrowing money on Antonio's credit.....and Antonio's business is now experiencing troubles.....and Antonio soon will be in huge trouble.

The Merchant of Venice (2.1-2.3)

The first three scenes of Act Two were filled with latent assumptions of different characters. I think that there was a great contrast between the portrayal of the Prince of Morocco and the second-hand portrayal of Shylock.

In the first scene, I found that the Prince of Morocco blatantly perceived his race and dark complexion to be a disadvantage among Portia's other suitors. He always felt the need to defend himself by arrogantly emphasizing his valor and accomplishments, which I think would make Portia dislike him even more. It demonstrates the Prince of Morroco's insecurities and indirectly shows how he perceives Portia (probably being judgmental and racist as supported by Act One). Although the Prince doesn't call her a racist and neither does Portia herself, both characters subtly convey their latent assumptions of each other through dialogue an

On the other hand, Shylock is outwardly referred to as a "devil' multiple times in the play. In the second scene, Lancelot Gobbo, Shylock's servant, debates on whether or not to leave his master.
There is the typical argument between the angel and the devil hovering on one's shoulders, trying to distinguish between what is right and what is wrong.

"To be ruled by my conscience I should stay with the Jew my master, who (God bless the mark) is a kind of devil; and to run away from the Jew, I should be ruled by the fiend, who (saving your reverence) is the devil himself. Certainly the Jew is the very devil incarnation..." (2.2.22)

His conscience, representing the metaphorical angel who tells people to choose the "good" path, tells him that he should stay with Shylock but the "devil" is telling him to run away. He then makes a logical fallacy by coming to a conclusion that Shylock must be the devil himself because no matter what option he takes, he's supposedly ruled by the devil. The only given reason for associating Shylock with the devil is because he's Jewish.

"My master's a very Jew. Give him a present! Give him a halter. I am famished in his service. You may tell every finger I have with my ribs.....To him [Bassanio], father, for I am a Jew if I serve the Jew any longer." (2.2.104)

Although Shylock claims to be famished in his service, which could indicate Shylock's brutal treatment towards Lancelot by not feeding him enough, in the end he emphasizes that if he continues to be his servant, he will become a Jew, which seems to be the worst thing a person can become according to the Christian merchants in the previous act. Lancelot perpetuates the prejudiced assumptions expressed by Antonio and Bassanio, revealing that Christians don't only hate Jewish people for their usury but mainly for their Jewish identity.

Even Shylock's daughter appears to despise Shylock and no longer wishes to be be associated with her Jewish father. Jessica acknowledges her guilt for being ashamed of being his daughter, but also justifies her hatred because he is in disagreement with his "manners". She didn't explicitly state as to what "manners" she disagreed with and she may be exaggerating her hatred because she wants to marry Lorenzo and convert to Christianity.

"Alack, what heinous sin is it in me To be ashamed to be my father's child? But though I am a daughter to his blood, I am not to his manners....I shall end this strife, Become a Christian and thy loving wife." (2.3.17)

I noticed how being a Christian is also tied in with being a "loving wife". I wonder if Jessica also shares the same perception of how being Jewish automatically makes you more hostile and somehow unloving.

A devilish image of Shylock

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/81/Shylock_film.jpg

The Merchant of Venice Act 1.3: Shylock

Act 1.3 was very entertaining to read because Shylock was introduced and it also portrayed the interaction between a Jewish usurer and a Christian merchant. I think there were clear tensions between both groups of men and Shakespeare highlighted their differences. Shylock's dialogue was filled with money diction and he was portrayed as being calculative, cautious, but also disciplined and fair. The amount of three thousand ducats that Basannio is planning to borrow on behalf of Antonio's credit was emphasized multiple times. There were many words of measurement such as "a pound of flesh" and he describes Antonio as "sufficient". As Meghan pointed out in her blogpost, line 15-17:"My meaning in saying he is a good man is to have you understand me that he is sufficient"  shows that Shylock is focused on a person's financial condition. In contrast, Antonio called Shylock a "goodly apple rotten at heart" (line 10) which indicates that he judges people by their heart.

What I find ironic is that Antonio clearly does not treat Shylock with kindness even though he says at the end of the scene "The Hebrew will turn Christian: he grows kind." (line 191), meaning that he equates kindness with being a Christian. However earlier in the scene, Antonio displays his hatred for Shylock and insists that he will not treat Shylock with respect even if he should lend Basannio money with no interest: "I am as like to call thee so again, to spet on thee again, to spur thee, too." (line 152-153). Although Shylock is portrayed as a greedy, money-motivated villain, the only literal display of hate is how Christians will spit upon Jewish people and mock them with degrading names. Antonio does not show and kindness or compassion towards Shylock which I think exposes the hypocrisy of Christian values and sheds light upon Shylock's integrity.

The Merchant of Venice 1.1 -1.2

Having finished background reading before starting the play, I had a grasp on the context and possible themes in the play which made it easier for me to understand Act 1.1-1.2.  Scene one was filled with commercial diction as Antonio engages in conversations with his friends and kinsman on his sadness. I think that the abundance of commercial diction emphasizes the role of trade in Venetian society. Words such as argosies, venture, ports, piers, the wealthy Andrew, vessels, fortune, merchandise, and business were used in scene one as Antonio and his friends discuss commerce matters. However, I noticed that the men in the scene actually try to avoid appearing overly concerned with their business matters because Antonio denies that he is worried about his business. His friends also bring up the discussion of commerce mostly in an indirect manner because they intermix Antonio's state of mind with his trading matters as seen in lines 8-9: "Your mind is tossing on the ocean, There where your argosies with portly sail".

 I remember in the background essay we read for The Merchant of Venice that in Christianity, mercy and compassion was emphasized over literal matters such as wealth and appearances. So I think Shakespeare portrayed the men seemingly not having their business matters as a priority because they Christian men wouldn't want to appear as too focused on their wealth or being portrayed as greedy. However when Bassanio enters scene one, he certainly does seem concerned with wealth because he needs money in order to become a potential suitor for Portia. He talks to great lengths on his debts and his desperate need to borrow money. Antonio, displaying his generosity and understanding of his situation, agrees that he will help Bassanio as best as he can. Antonio's willingness to help Bassanio despite his own business troubles reflects Christian values of always helping people who ask for your help. However Bassanio's desire to marry Portia is also closely tied with economic concerns, which parallels with Antonio's sadness and the troubles he faces with his trading business. Personal matters are inevitably related to economic matters. 

The Merchant of Venice Background Reading

After reading multiple background readings on social class and gender along with an essay analysis on the The Merchant of Venice, I find this text to be a complex drama revolving around social issues. What stood out for me the most when annotating the essay was how it began with the emphasis of antisemitism and thought provoking questions on the controversy surrounding the play. Juliana in her blogpost discussed how the exclusion of Jews was central to the formation of a group and its identity. In the psychological social identity theory, the concept of "us" versus "them" is what allows for stronger group bonds and identity.  The video definitely highlighted violence surrounding the discrimination of Jews but I thought the essay focused more on the differences between Jews and Christians which build the plot.

I think another important concept in the play is the presence of hypocrisy in the society. In the essay, Jews are described as following the law but also highly motivated by money and usurpation. Shylock, a Jewish man, is mentioned in the essay as prioritizing sentimental value rather than monetary value when his daughter traded an object for monkeys that was dear to his wife. It demonstrated that although Jews are viewed as greedy and wealth-centered, Shylock's sentimental value overrides the loss of his wealth. Christians on the other hand emphasize divinity and Christ as the savior who calls upon his people to be kind to their enemies. However, Christians look down upon Jews because they perceive them as non-human and they also owned slaves, thus placing monetary value on human beings. Furthermore, Christian marriages were usually interconnected with economic interests and was usually sought for due to financial security.

On the topic of marriages, I think the role of women will also play a significant role in the play. When reading the background passages on the role of women in society, I think that women will somehow bridge all the different sociocultural factors together because women most probably play subordinate roles in both Jewish and Christian households. Overall, The Merchant of Venice definitely seems to involve many different social issues. 

I stepped from Plank to Plank: Mini Analysis

I stepped from Plank to Plank is a poem which seeks to convey an overarching message on life and experiences. In the first stanza, the speaker steps plank to plank "A slow and cautious way", emphasizing the lack of speed and great concentration to her steps. This movement is precise and the cautiousness implies that the speaker is trying to avoid something. Since this is an abstract poem, what the speaker is trying to avoid maybe something as large and vague as fear itself or something personal to the speaker. The next line "The Stars about my Head I felt/About my Feet the sea -" portrays two opposites of nature; the stars are above while the sea is below.  I think this line serves to illuminate the setting of the poem.  In our small class discussions, my group interpreted the speaker to be walking across a bridge or a dock with unstable planks. The stars also imply that the poem takes place during nighttime, therefore the speaker is more aware of her movements. We thought that the sea could be the destination or signifying how the speaker is paying attention the sea around her feet so as not to drown in the sea.

Image Source

In the second stanza, I think diction plays an important role to convey the central purpose of the poem. The first two lines "I knew not but the next/Would be my final inch -" shows uncertainty of death or the final destination. It signifies that the speaker is inferior in her knowledge of the future, the only thing she is certain of is that death would be the final step. The "final inch" emphasizes the calculation  and length of her steps; each step brings you closer to the final step. The word "final" also indicates the end of something, in this case the end of your life.  The last two lines communicate the central purpose of the poem of how life consists of many uncertainties and the only certainty is that your final step will lead you to death. The  phrase "precarious Gait" is related to the word "Experience". "Precarious" indicates dependence on uncertain conditions while "Gait" is the manner of walking. The word "Experience" usually has positive connotations because it is something valuable you gain in life which I thought contrasts the doubt in "precarious Gait".

Much Madness is divinest Sense: Analysis

"Much Madness is divinest Sense" is definitely one of my favorite poems by Emily Dickinson because of the use of paradox  to describe madness. At first I perceived the poem to be extremely vague because madness and insanity is such an abstract concept.  However, as we looked more in depth into the poem during our Socratic Seminar discussion, the structure of the poem is actually more of a mathematical equation with symmetrical properties. In the first line, Much Madness = divinest sense, while in the third line, Much Sense = the starkest Madness. Equating madness with sense and vice versa is considered as a paradox in our social norms. Madness is usually frowned down upon by society as someone who is unable to reason logically.

In the poem, the speaker also uses a commanding and absolute tone which indicates that there is no middle ground. When you're mad, you possess the highest form of sense but if you're full of sense, you possess madness. This absolute tone is also further illustrated in the sixth and seventh line: "Assent- and you are sane- Demur- you're straightaway dangerous." Therefore assenting equal to staying sane, while agreeing equals danger in becoming insane.  What makes this poem thought-provoking is the strong use of paradox since agreeing with the majority is usually attribute to normality whereas disagreeing makes the odd one out, therefore less normal. However, since the first two lines paradoxically define madness and sense, the whole poem follows the logic of how those who are mad are those with the most sense.

In the last line of the poem, those who demur and are "handled with a Chain" portrays people who demur as being punished for going against the majority. Chains indicate a sense of the lack of freedom which poses a barrier to your own imagination and self-expression. I think the speaker is trying to convey that although those who are mad have the divinest sense, the majority who are in the "Much Sense" category will inevitably dictate the social norms. Being handled with a chain doesn't necessarily mean a direct control how someone else's freedom, but it can also indicate that madness is always handled with chains therefore it cannot exist in its truest form of madness.

Because I could not stop for Death: Analysis

In The Book Thief "Death" is also portrayed in a civilized manner which I thought was very similar to to Death in this poem. Source

Summary/What is the tone of the poem?

I was really surprised at the optimistic tone of the poem despite the poem revolving around the theme of death. Usually death is described as morbid, horrifying, and comes to you when you least expect it. However in the poem, the speaker personifies death into a kind gentlemen with who courteously waits for her to prepare herself for the journey towards death. The two last lines of the poem, "I felt surmised the Horses' Heads Were toward Eternity" supports the optimistic tone of the poem with the feeling of hope for eternity. The word "eternity" is also often associated with religion and the hereafter as opposed to the temporary nature of life on earth.

Who is the speaker? What kind of person is the speaker?

As in most of Emily Dickinson's poems, the speaker is ambiguous but more of her personality is revealed in this poem compared to other poems. The speaker seems to be female because she mentions "For only Gossamer, my Gown--My Tippet--only Tulle--" which describes her delicacy.

State the central idea or theme of the poem in a sentence.

The central theme of the poem is that when death approaches you and takes you away, life goes by without you and death essentially makes you immortal.

Discuss the diction of the poem.

In the poem, the words associated with death all have civil connotations, in both manners and societal matters, that give "Death" respect and authority.  "He kindly stopped for me" shows civil manners and portraying death as thoughtful and respectful. The words "carriage", "labor", and "leisure" in the first and second stanza all relate to overall daily life indicating transportation, work, and entertainment. In the third stanza "school", "Children", and "Recess" describe childhood while the "Fields of Gazing Grain" reflect adulthood and labor. Therefore there is a contrast between childhood and adulthood which indicate the impact of the passage of time as Death and the speaker "passed the Setting Sun".

Imagery

We passed before a House that seemed
A Swelling of the Ground--
The Roof was scarcely visible--
The Cornice--in the Ground--

The fifth stanza of the poem is a great example of Dickinson's use of imagery in her poems. "a House that seemed A Swelling of the Ground" is referring to a grave that is submerged into the ground. It is called a "House" because that's where dead bodies are sheltered in when they're buried. "Roof" and "Cornice" are both architectural properties of the house and in the poem both of these structures can barely be identified because it reveal destruction and lack of structure. Like death, the destruction of the roof and cornice shows the collapse of life and how death gives you a new home. The use of imagery in this stanza emphasizes the contrast between the house of death and the house of life.

I had been hungry, all the Years (Mini) Analysis

I find this poem interesting to do a mini analysis on because of the use of hunger and abundance of food food as the conceit of the poem.  Hunger symbolizes unfulfilled desires or cravings and abundance of food thus represents over-fulfillment and the loss of appeal to certain desires. What I particularly liked about this poem is its simplicity and how it uses the feeling of hunger and the guilt of gluttony to describe human behavior.

The dining room inside windows vs "nature's dining room"

Image 1/Image 2

Paraphrase the poem

The speaker in the poem reflect upon on how she used to feel relentless hunger and looked for "Wealth" in windows which in turn inflicts pain upon her because she realizes all that "wealth" will never belong to her. She was used to having crumbs while the rich had "ample Bread". Not only do the poor only have crumbs, but the poor share among the poor thus emphasizing how little they have and presents a stark contrast to those who possess not only more, but an abundance of it: "The Birds and I, had often shared In Nature's--Dining Room--". The references to nature and animals portray hunger as a primitive emotion and I found that "sharing in nature's dining room" is ironic because dining rooms usually have tables served with food but nature in essence only serves you what you need and not necessarily what you want. The two lines that come after about a berry bush transplanted to a road I think draws reference to the artificial dining room which serves your desires as opposed to nature serving strictly enough to feed you. The poem then ends in the last stanza about how she was no longer hungry, therefore there was no longer any desire to go outside windows and hunt for fulfillment because "The Entering--takes away" (entering windows and finally receiving what you've wanted all along depletes all the desire you've had in the first place and now you're stuck inside the window with nothing to hunt for.)

What is the setting in time?

The poem begins with "I had been hungry, all the years" but does not specify how many years or how long ago she was looking through windows and hurt by all the wealth she saw. As usual, time in Dickinson's poems are very ambiguous and either defined as "long ago" or a change in "day/noon" and "night''. Perhaps because time is always passing but you never actually consciously register time in accordance to your emotions.

One need not to be a Chamber - to be Haunted: Analysis

The skeleton represents the inner fears within you that you cannot escape.

Source

Surprisingly, I felt that this poem was actually relevant to our lives and something that I could actually relate to compared to other poems by Emily Dickinson. I admired Dickinson's use of metaphors and her careful use of diction which all serve a purpose to convey the message of how you can never escape from your own mind but you can always run away from other people. Through this poem, she made the message more tangible by describing chambers and houses as something with solid walls that you cannot penetrate through and there are no doors available to exit out of the confinements of your own mind and fears. To further analyze this poem, I will answer the following questions.

Outline the poem to show its structure and development/Point out examples and explain any metaphors

The first stanza of the poem describes physical structures such as chambers, houses, and corridors. The speaker states that "One need not be a Chamber-- to be Haunted--One need not be a House--". The word "haunted" gives a feeling of horror along with the word "chamber".  However, the line claims that there are other forms of horror and it is not always confined by physical walls. Furthermore, "The Brain has Corridors--surpassing Material Place--", so it is essentially the opposite of a chamber and a house because there are multiple corridors which extend beyond material walls and confinements. The brain is a metaphor for all of the intangible fears and abstract thoughts in your mind that you cannot run away from.

In the second stanza, the poem then mentions how it's safer to confront and "External Ghost" during midnight than confronting "That cooler Host". The external ghost is something physical or someone who you fear and you're able to escape from. However, the "cooler Host" is the person inside of you. I feel like the word "cooler" gives a darker sense of horror because it's inside of you that you can't confront. The fourth stanza is very similar to the second stanza because it compares inner horrors/fears to an external fear: "Ourself behind ourself, concealed--Should startle most--Assassin hid in our Apartment Be Horror's least--". Our inner fears are hidden within ourselves compared to external fears which are assassins planning to kill us while we're in our apartments. The poem then transitions to the last stanza which is "He bolts the Door-- O'erlooking a superior spectre--Or More." The "He" represents the body who bolts the door trying to escape an external fear but then overlooks a superior ghost or a superior fear which is the fear/horror inside of him.  Therefore, although we can always run away from external fears, our inner fears will always remain with us no matter what door we choose to exit through.

What is the tone of the poem?

I feel that the tone of the poem is dark and haunted especially through the use of ghosts as metaphor for our fears. Even chambers gives a sense of being haunted and the use of assassins and a revolver implies murder and killing.

Discuss the form or pattern of the poem.

There is a pattern of using confined infrastructures as something that can seemingly be haunted when you assume that ghosts or assassins  are all around you, similar to how children are scared of monsters under their bed. However, Dickinson always contrasts those external fears to inner fears which emphasizes the greater darkness and horror of what lies within you.

Criticize and evaluate the poem.

For the most part, this poem is fairly straight-forward and I think Emily Dickson could make the central purpose more convincing by adding a different dimension to fear other than simply contrasting internal and external fears. The poem currently demonstrates fear as two opposite ends of a spectrum, but doesn't explain the grey areas in between the "black and white".

Dare you see a Soul at the "White Heat"? : Analysis

At a first read, I found this poem very hard to understand because I wasn't familiar with ironwork and its tools. I realized that imagery plays a significant role in Emily Dickinson's, or poems in general because they help convey the central purpose and the overarching theme. The main components of the poem is the fire/heat within the forgery, the blacksmith and his/her tools, and the ore which goes through refinement through the hammering and the fire (the blaze). The first line of the the poem, "Dare you see a soul at the "White Heat", I feel sums up the entire poem because it expresses the process through which an ore (which I interpreted as symbolizing the soul" goes through a fire so hot that the fire turns into "white heat".  At the end of the whole ironwork process, the ore is refined to its highest value, therefore the soul is purified through the "white heat".

http://smithery.co/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/blacksmith.jpg

Here are some questions that helped me gain a further insight into the poem:

Is there an identifiable audience for the speaker?

I don't think there's an identifiable audience for the speaker in the poem because I interpreted the poem is written used as a means to express the speaker's journey and the hardships of her soul. Poetry is sometimes used as a form of therapy or trying to understand one's own life and all of the feelings they've dealt with. However, Dickinson could be writing the poem for others who relate to her own experience.

 What is the setting in place?

The setting of the poem primarily takes place inside a blacksmith's workshop to explain the process through which an ore is refined "until the designated light repudiate the forge".

Summarize the events of the poem.

The poem starts off with asking the reader whether or not you dare to see a soul at the "White Heat" and then transitions to the ironwork setting where the "vivid ore" will proceed to vanquish the heat of the flame and it will quiver from the forge. Once the ore has gone through the heat, it is refined with a hammer and once again with more heat until it has enough light in it to "repudiate" or fight against the forge.

Discuss the diction of the poem/ Point out and explain any symbols .

The use of the colors white and red contrast each other to represent the fire into different heat levels. Through religious interpretations, white could symbolize purity and red could symbolize bloodshed and hell-fire, or the forgery itself. The fire is described in many different components: heat, flame, and blaze. Heat indicates the actual temperature which refines the actual material of the metal. Flame, in my opinion, describes the physical appearance of the fire while the use of the word "blaze" indicates the violent movement of fire. Therefore, the heat, physical appearance and the movement of the fire in the forge all could describe the hell-fire which one's soul has to go through in order to reach the white heat and able fight against/repudiate the hell-fire.

I felt a Funeral, in my Brain,: Analysis

Deviant Art: http://cleanup.deviantart.com/art/i-felt-a-funeral-in-my-brain-33650461

I chose to blog about this poem because I think it's reflective of most of Dickinson's poems. Her poems are almost always related to death and self-deterioration. What I find most interesting about her poems is her use of rich imagery in both visuals and sounds which contribute to the  meaning of the poem. Her use of imagery to describe the numbness in her mind is also emphasized through the use of a funeral procession and other objects connected to funerals and death.

Here are some poetry guidelines I used to further deepen my understanding of the poem:

Who is the speaker? What kind of person is the speaker?

I think the speaker in the poem is very ambiguous due to the many different pronouns used in ambiguous contexts. I feel that Emily Dickinson herself is the speaker because the poem could possibly be a way for her to express the "funeral" she experienced inside her mind in a very delusional way.

What is the occasion?

The occasion of the poem takes mostly inside the speaker's head but the funeral itself is a separate occasion and the mind is described with a funeral setting. There is no absolute location because the poem emphasizes on emotion regarding her brain, soul, isolation, and internal depression.

What is the central purpose of the theme?

I interpreted the central purpose of the theme to convey the presence of death inside her mind. More specifically, the poem references "That Sense was breaking through" and the "Plank in Reason, broke". The death taking place inside her mind causes her mind to go numb "And [she] dropped down, and down".


Discuss imagery of the poem.

The imagery of the poem surrounds the theme of death and funeral processions. Mourners are described to be walking "to and fro" and there's a "A Service, like a Drum". Furthermore, in the third stanza: "And then I heard them lift a Box" could make reference to a coffin or uncovering something that was hidden or ambiguous to reveal something clearer, perhaps relating to death.

What is the tone of the poem? How is it achieved?

I felt the tone of the poem was very pessimistic and morbid. There was a lot of descending motion and the idea of falling and dropping down. Overall, the language revolves around depression and death and there's a tone of indescribable suffering and pain.

Emily Dickinson Background

After reading a one page biography of Emily Dickinson, I've noticed that she lived most of her life in isolation and wrote poetry probably in her private time. It was noted that she was very close with her intellectual family and was also heavily influenced by Reverend Charles Wadsworth and English Metaphysical poets of the 17th century. I think her Puritan upbringing along with her interest in metaphysical poetry is what will mostly shape Emily Dickinson's poetry.

I found the concept behind metaphysical poetry slightly confusing because it seems like such an abstract, philosophical concept. It shouldn't be considered a genre of poetry, but metaphysical poetry do share common characteristics of wit and religious philosophy. I found the description of metaphysical poetry really interesting because transcends the boundaries of strict and usually one dimensional religious literature. Speaking of strictness, Puritanism is usually associated with discipline and strict moral grounds. However I learned that Puritans were the first to establish a formal education system in America and they also encouraged write poetry with religious content. However, I was wondering whether or not metaphysical poetry would be deemed as too "dreamy" or delusional for strict Puritan beliefs. I think that there are probably different levels and extremes of metaphysical poetry because it's open to wide philosophical questions.

The Book of Revelations were also really confusing to me because there were so many interpretations of what they called prophecies or holy visions which John experienced. There is a common theme of sins, sacrifice, saviors, and overall the revelations are to strengthen your belief in Christ. Perhaps the wide variety of revelations could further inspire Emily Dickinson and metaphysical poets to question reality but not to the extent of existentialism. Metaphysical poetry seems to be focusing more on nature in a religious perspective and what is around you rather than who you are and what your purpose in life is.

Source

Sula: Final Thoughts

Although our socratic seminar wasn't packed in with as much energy as previous seminars,  I gained  insight on many different things that I hadn't realized before. Cindy's interpretation of the Sula's birthmark as looking like a tadpole after all of the rose petals have been peeled off is really insightful. A rose to me symbolizes beauty and romance (or perhaps in her case simply promiscuity) and the tadpole underneath all of the petals could either symbolize innocence or prematurity. 

I don't think I've ever thought of Sula as under-developed or necessarily psychopathic in any way. I felt like her emotions and thoughts are somewhat justified by her upbringing and her past experiences. What I noticed throughout the novel was that most of the descriptions on Sula was from other people's point of view including Nel and Shadrack. 

Shadrack's role in the novel still confuses me a little because it isn't clear of the connection between Shadrack and Nel and Sula's friendship. Speaking of Nel and Sula's friendship, in our Socratic seminar we also discussed whether their friendship resembled more of a platonic love or romantic love. I feel like there was no such this romantic love in this novel because all of the "relationships" weren't really based on mutual love but more of a possession. Despite Sula and Nel going separate ways, their relationship was far stronger and supportive than any of the relationships in the novel. Perhaps the novel is meant to portray that platonic love outweighs romantic love?

Sula: The End!

I have mixed thoughts on the novel and I'm just generally overwhelmed by all of the overlapping themes and motifs. A clear overarching theme in the novel is the exploration of social norms in an African-American community and the ever-presence of suffering in their day to day lives. I feel like the whole novel emphasized the adversities of living in the "Bottom" and how evil plagued their lives in every way possible. However, evil in the novel is referred to as something that needs to be overcome and not something that you aim to destroy. Evil seems more common than good, in fact all of the "good" mentioned in the novel is constantly overshadowed by suffering. I've also noticed that there are always natural disasters occurring in the Bottom and it emphasizes how natural disasters are simply an extension to all the suffering they are already experiencing. Just their mere existence is already a sign of suffering due to their dehumanization and lack of freedom. Colored women especially lack freedom inevitably find themselves dependent on men. I think this is why Sula is significant in this novel and is named after her; Sula embodies the pariah, the outlaw woman who chooses not to follow societal expectations of her as a colored woman. She ignores the society's criticism of her promiscuous ways which do not follow the Medallion moral code but instead is appalled at how women gave in so easily to the controlling strings of society. Sula separates herself away from the society and in a sense does hold pride over her rebellious ways. However Sula doesn't go around preaching feminism to the community, her actions, her clothing, and her gestures are enough to unify the Medallion community against her, viewing her as the ultimate evil of society. I find it interesting how people view her as a curse and how her birthmark is always referred to as a symbol of evil. However, people's interpretations of Sula's birthmark reflect THEM more than they reflect Sula's identity. I wish the novel contained a passage on how Sula viewed her own birthmark, but I don't think she would really think much about it because Sula didn't have a sense of her own individuality, she had no core and no set of rules. 

Sula 138-162

The novel is drawing to an end but I don't think there has been much change between Sula and Nel. In the beginning they seemed inseparable and were like the dynamic duo but there were sharp differences in their upbringing and their goals in life. Although Sula embodies the pariah in the Medallion community, it doesn't necessarily equate to freedom or independence. It seemed to me that Sula is still caged by her past and her lack of emotion fuels her apathy and disdain for the world. On the other hand, Nel seems to be the only one who understood Sula but at the same time never understood why Sula thought the way she did.

"Lonely ain't it?"
"Yes, but my lonely is mine. Now your lonely is somebody else's. Made by somebody else and handed to you. Ain't that something? A secondhand lonely." (143)

I think the quote above accurately points out the difference between Nel and Sula. As colored women in Medallion, they both experience loneliness. However their loneliness is different in that Nel was constantly searching for something to be attached to, while Sula was lonely in her own decision of separating herself away from the others. No matter how "independent" Sula was from the rest of the Medallion community, she couldn't escape from the shared loneliness that the others experience. Through Sula's perspective, women were lonely because their existence depended on marriage and children and men were lonely because they were always seeking for another women to fulfill their needs. However, Sula cultivated her own loneliness inside of her and with her arrogance she holds her loneliness with pride. Perhaps there's no such thing as true independence or freedom for the colored women in Medallion.

Sula 112-137

"I did not hold my head stiff enough when I met him and so I lost it just like the dolls." (136)

Source

Finally in Chapter 1939 the readers are exposed to a more intimate insight into Sula's mind. What I liked most about this chapter was understanding how Sula thought of Nel instead of strictly Nel's views on Sula. I wasn't surprised at Sula's indifference or her selfishness because of the women who shaped her to become the woman she is now. It becomes clear that the turning point for Sula's apathy was when Hannah claimed she never liked her thus she Sula found no reason to ever please others if her own mom didn't like her. So I think that explains why she Sula had no issue sleeping with Jude. In fact, Sula seemed confused with Nel's anger because she always felt that Nel had always "seen through" the women who only seek the sexual approval of men:

"But she and Nel had always seen through them. They both knew that those women were not jealous of other women; that they were only afraid of losing their jobs. Afraid their husbands would discover than no uniqueness lay between their legs." (119)


The main difference between Nel and Sula was the concept of possessiveness and their idea of love, but Sula's relationship with Ajax made me think that Sula was really no different than Nel. Sula just happened to crave a different type of man than Nel, she wanted someone who could see her eye to eye instead of looking down at her as an inferior. Ajax eventually embodied the very thing that Sula craved for, and there she finally understood Nel's possessiveness towards Jude: "Sula began to discover what possession was. Not love, perhaps, but possession or at least the desire for it". (131)

I felt like Ajax was essentially the male version of Sula, he wanted a woman who was independent and indifferent to societal expectations. I feel like both Sula and Ajax shared the same dislike for commitment and everything that marriage required. They both wanted an intimate relationship but was afraid of having their hearts chained to each other until death do them apart. I was surprised that Sula began to develop a feeling of possessiveness for him but it didn't surprise me that Ajax left her.

"In her words, in her voice, was a sound he knew well. For the first time he saw the green ribbon. He looked around and saw the gleaming kitchen and the table set for two and detective the scent of the nest. Every hackle on his body rose...His eyes dimmed with a mild and momentary regret." (133)

This quote portrays that Sula fell in love with him because of the "nest" she built around him, indicating that she was already too attached and never wanted him to leave. The "nest" is basically identical to how a married woman would care for her husband, like how Nel took care of Jude. There was definitely a contrast in the way Ajax left Sula compared to Jude leaving Nel.  Sula "could find nothing, for he had left nothing but his stunning absence" while Jude's yellow tie was left behind for Nel as a reminder of his absence. (134)

Sula 86-111

The dark stemmed rose

In Part One, I felt an air of mystery surrounding Sula because I felt like she was only portrayed through the eyes of her family and Nel but there was no personal insight from Sula herself. I was at unease reading about Sula accidentally swinging Chicken Little into the river, dismember her finger, and watching her mother burn to death with interest. Jackie mentioned that it demonstrates her more or less her apathetic demeanor and seemingly indifference to pain.

 As the novel transitions to Part Two, the content becomes more abstract along with dialogue conversations. Birds all of a sudden pollute the sky and defecate the ground, signifying the unwanted return of Sula. What remains the same is the attention she receives from people, both men and women alike, but mostly with disapproval. I interpreted the community's cautious attitudes because Morrison shapes her as the "outlaw woman" who everyone dislikes simply because she doesn't succumb to gender expectations in order to appease social norms. Women dislike her because she doesn't permanently settle for marriage and children but instead takes her own course by running away and attending college. Just the mere existence of Sula reminds women of how they're chained to conventional norms and lack the freedom she owns. However men feel threatened by her independence and how she doesn't desire approval from men. 

These two quotes from Jude's viewpoint clearly illustrate how he's alarmed at her confidence when speaking about men because she did not speak to them to please them but actually chooses to express her unfiltered thoughts.

"she looked like a woman roaming the country trying to find some man to burden down" (103)

"she stirred a man's mind maybe, but not his body" (104)

Nel was an exception to those who were horrified by her return, but in the end Sula's intimate encounter with Jude eventually made her think twice. Nel only saw the good parts of Sula and although she noticed the darkening of her rose birthmark, she viewed it as a strong selfless identity. In a way, Nel seemed to to be the only one who knew Sula best  even though through rose-colored glasses.

"The rose mark over Sula's eye gave her glace a suggestion of startled pleasure. It was darker than Nel remembered" (96)

"Sula never competed; she simply helped others to define themselves". (95)

On the topic of Sula's birthmark, Meghan brought about the epigraph of the novel which I think is an accurate description of Sula. Her stemmed rose birthmark grows darker which symbolizes the strengthening of identity as she grows up and learns of certain dark truths. Despite her apathy and lack of judgment, Sula contains this inner glory and confidence that threaten others around her ....except Nel (until she was found naked with Jude).

"Nobody knew my rose of the world but me....I had too much glory. They don't want glory like that in nobody's heart."
-The Rose Tattoo

Sula 67-85

Omens: Wind, Fire, and Death

Hannah's whole body is on fire as Sula watches with interest, Eva jumps through the window with her one leg to save her first-born, Eva is smothered with blood while she watches Hannah inevitably burn to death.

I found Hannah's death really unexpected because what are the chances that two characters in one novel would spend their last moments with fire devouring their flesh completely? In retrospect, I feel like I should have expected her death because of all the ominous signs especially her dream of wearing a red gown in her wedding. Taking a few steps back, Eva was recounting the number of "strange" things occurring recently starting off the wind that took the dampness out of the air instead of welcoming rain. Sula was acting up and the strangest events were Hannah's dream of a wedding in red bridal gown and when Hannah bends down to light the yard fire.

The "strange" events were presented almost in a chronological manner leading up to Hannah's clothes getting caught on fire and Eva attempting to rescue Hannah and her precious beauty. All of these events represent ominous signs of Hannah's death. I noticed how the wind/breeze in the previous chapters symbolized freedom and empowerment in relation to Nel and Sula but the symbol of wind took a dark turn embodying the destruction of Hannah's precious beauty.

 

"Eva mused over the perfection of judgment against her. She remembered the wedding dream and recalled that weddings always meant death. And the red gown, we that was the fire, as she should have known." (78)

What intrigues me even more is how Eva felt that her intuition and judgment went against her and that she should have been more conscientious of her daughter's dream. The statement "weddings always meant death" once again reflects her bitter experience with marriage and perhaps her marriage destroyed her once bright future. When Hannah mentioned that she was wearing a red bridal gown it striked me as odd because red was a bold color usually referencing blood and death. However in Hannah's dream, the red color represented her body being lit on fire.


Image : Katniss, the girl on fire, represented here as courageous. However Hannah's fire red gown symbolized the destruction of her beauty.

Sula Pages 49-66

Nel Wright and Sula Peace: Soul-mates Forever?

In this section of the novel, we gain a deeper insight into the friendship between two very different 12 year-old girls, Nel and Sula. Nel is described as bold and independent whereas Sula is more dependent on Nel and not as emotionally stable. Nel takes the position of the leader while Sula eagerly follows her. I think the contrast in their personalities is really interesting because they become close friends to the extent of  soul-mates. They do share a similar attraction for adventure and "[t]he new theme they were now discovering was men." (Morrison, 55)

As they're both approaching adolescence, it's not surprising that they begin to crave attention from men. From the previous chapters we've learned that their mothers and grandmothers have had bitter experiences with marriage but gain attention from men through their physical appearances. I've noticed that Morrison always emphasizes women's clothing; the color, the way it accentuates the figure, and the way their dresses are blown by the wind to reveal their bodies. Even the 12 year old girls' dresses are described with a sexual connotation, catering to the male gaze: "It pushed their dresses  into the creases of their behinds, then lifted the hems to peek at their cotton underwear." (Morrison, 49)

Speaking of the male gaze, the way women dress are often connected to the male gaze. It could be that women dress to satisfy the eyes of men or that the male gaze is conceptualized due to the way women choose to dress for themselves. However, when Nel and Sula go Edna Finch's Mellow House for ice cream, the male gaze ultimately held power over their appearances: "Nel and Sula walked through this valley of eyes chilled by the wind and heated by the embarrassment of appraising stares." (50) They felt embarrassed and the male gaze was described as a valley of eyes, almost seemingly hovering over them as they walked together.

Another component of the male gaze is the verbal communication between a man and woman. A young man apparently "compliments" the girls by referring to their body as "pig meat", which I found degrading because  it objectified them: "Pig meat. The words were in all their minds." (50) There's definitely tension in the process of the male gaze when their eyes feed on their lust for the girls' skin and flesh.

I feel like this famous statue of Marilyn Monroe demonstrates what men seek in the male gaze. 

Credit

Sula pages 16-48: Overview

Sula is a novel exploring the theme of power in society through both gender and racial lens. The author, Toni Morrison, claimed in the novel's foreword that she did not want to address African-American culture as a "problem" but rather pursue it strictly in literary terms. I found that she somewhat contradicts this statement because there is a clear indication of white versus black race through the mention of skin colors and even behavior. However, I do find that the novel does not focus entirely race and the main purpose is not to depict political power struggles between two different races.

Another major theme in Sula is feminism or a form of female empowerment centralizing around outlawed women. In the foreword, Morrison seeks to discuss the consequences of being an outlaw woman in a woman-prejudiced society. Many female characters have been introduced (Cecila, Helene, Nel, Eva, Hanna, Sula) and I've noticed a pattern  of complexity in personality and responses to trials of being a women. There's a similarity in their experiences due to socio-political issues and family conflicts.

I'm really intrigued on how the novel will progress and also for the character development of Sula, since her name is the title of the novel. Personally, I anticipate how Sula will defy society norms and prove to be somewhat different from how she will respond to socio-economic problems.

Image Credit:

http://dramatica.com/resources/onesheets/sula-one-sheet.jpg

Poem Analysis: Winter Sleep

Thomas' Winter Sleep is a compelling poem exploring the awakening and rebirth of sleep during winter. What immediately draws my attention in the poem is the use of repetition in each stanza. The first two lines of each stanza contain "I know it must be" which indicates a high degree of certainty. It made me wonder whether the speaker does so in order to reassure herself or maybe just for the sake of emphasis for the poem's message.  The poem is divided into four different stanzas discussing sleep, age, fatigue, and death. All of these four ideas are certainly interconnected and organized together in a way where one idea leads to the other.

The central purpose of the poem was to explain the process of the winter sleep leading to the ultimate desire of destruction in order for rebirth to take place. The spring-like nature references of the running stream, flowers, grass transitioning to autumn fields, rain and falling sheaves. After the first two stanzas, the poem reaches the period of destruction with storms and leading to a frosty year which could be interpreted as death. The use of fluctuating seasonal weather is used as a vehicle to outline the transition from sleep to death. The speaker's feeling of herself growing old and tired are the catalysts for her desire of destruction--through the winter sleep.

The poem could also be interpreted as a process of hibernation; the speaker is isolated in her winter sleep and goes through different stages leading to the end of the sleep (where "death draws near"). However, the line "I know I must be dying, for I crave Life--life, strong life" indicates that her intention of destruction is to experience an awakening and an ultimate rebirth.

Image Source

Chronicle of a Death Foretold: Chapter 5

The Pursuit of Love is Like Falconry (Epigraph)

Source: https://24.media.tumblr.com/f92a55775502ce5dd0e396a7c8bae087/tumblr_n3o168UTVb1s25gpco1_500.jpg

I have to admit, I did not foresee the events in Chapter Five....it was all simply unexpected. I think the narrator purposefully  starts at the surface of the murder and then gradually reveals the deeper and haunting details of Nasar's death. I used to think that the narrator was being redundant and simply restating whatever had happened, but really, he's always shedding the events of the murder in a different light. This reminds me of the kaleidoscope-like technique used in The House of Spirits because of the different perspectives that are revealed to us throughout the novel. I never expected that Santiago would be lost in confusion during the last moments of his death; the controversial honor killing just labeled him as the town's most wanted man. Keeping in mind of the huge plot twist during the last moments of Nasar's murder, I want to retrace and analyze the chapter through the quote in the epigraph.

The pursuit of falconry seems dangerous and it's generally the process of taming a wild creature. In order to fit the metaphor of falconry to the context of the novel, I feel like love is the creature that one attempts to tame. This brings me back to the idea of l'amor fou or mad love, personifying love as mad and untamed. Angela's short marriage to Bayardo San Roman demonstrates how although Bayardo San Roman went to great lengths to please Angela, her lost virginity stood in the way of his ideal perception of love. The remains of their short-lasting marriage led to Angela's punishment from her mother but an even bigger punishment for Santiago Nasar. Her brothers felt that it was their duty to kill Nasar in order to reclaim Angela's virginity. The root of this murder is really the wild creature of love. Furthermore, as revealed in this chapter, there were so many coincidences which determined Nasar's ultimate murder by the Vicario twins.

"The investigating magistrate looked for a single person who'd seen him...but it was impossible to find one. In folio 382 of the brief, he wrote another marginal pronouncement in red ink: Fatality makes us invisible." (113) This quote certainly applies to Nasar's case as Cristo Bedoya was searching endlessly for Nasar but failed to locate him. He was on the way to Flora Miguel's house, his fiance, but no one would have expected him to visit her at such early hours. People were confused as to why he was not at home or in the town square walking with Bedoya. Another reference to the danger of falconry as related to the pursuit of love is Flora Miguel's irrational jealousy towards Angela and Nasar. When Flora heard the news that Santiago was responsible for Angela's lost honor, she assumed that Angela would be forced to marry Santiago. No one had told her otherwise. She was so angry to the point that she told him, "And I hope they kill you" (113). When I was reading this, I was shocked at how cruel she treated him during the last moments of Nasar's life. It's terrible because soon enough, she gets her wish and he does get killed. It's tragic how misunderstandings and lack of communication can result in a bizarre ending. It reminds me of the verbatim, be careful what you wish for.

Chronicle of a Death Foretold: Chapter 4

How credible is Nasar's murder investigation?

As the novel progresses, I'm certainly bombarded with more questions on what seemed to be a "murder mystery". The narrator took the role of pseudo-investigator by trying to put the broken pieces together of the mystery. In this chapter, I noticed numerous flaws in this-so-called investigation and it makes me think of how low the credibility of the conducted investigation on Nasar's murder.

First of all, the narrator has mentioned several times in the previous chapter that the appointed investigator of Nasar's murder failed to give a comprehensive report and lacked evidence and contained flaws in his autopsy and other relevant aspects of the murder. Then in chapter four the narrator introduces that Father Carmen Amador, a priest, was forced to perform the autopsy in the absence of Dr. Dionsio Iguaran. Why in the world would you assign such a task on a priest with no prior medical experience? Apparently it was the mayor who assigned the obligation to him and the mayor himself "was a former troop commander with no experience in matters of law" and on top of that, "he was too conceited to ask anyone where he should begin". (73)

This really frustrates me because this is not the first time in the novel where someone simply doesn't know how he/she should take action because they're just not experienced in such situations or they don't have the courage to go out of their way and contribute a difference (referencing to Father Amador in the previous chapter).  The narrator even goes on to note that "the mayor knew that his autopsy would have no legal standing" (74) but suspiciously enough "Father Amador's report seemed in order and the investigator incorporated it in the brief as a useful piece of evidence." (75) That doesn't only make me angry at the mayor and the priest, but also questioning once again the credibility of the investigator. If he decided to use the "massacre" autopsy as evidence for Nasar's case, then just imagine how flawed all other pieces of "evidence" are to the investigation.

Source: https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQXjjV386wCFdDYB7m9TKrDx1VAw7enn6dVdCnsTynSD0NcCy_y

All of these flaws in the investigation of course would also question the credibility of the real cause of the murder, reclaiming Angela Vicario's honor. As Juliana had brought up in our last Socratic seminar, it hasn't been proven that Santiago Nasar was the one who stole her virginity. In fact, the narrator even states that Angela "on the contrary, she would recount it in all its detailed to anyone who wanted to hear it, except for one item that would never be cleared up: who was the real cause of her damage, and how and why, because no one believed that it had really been Santiago Nasar." (89) Furthermore, there's an explanation of how "they belonged to two completely different worlds", therefore it was highly unlikely for Nasar to be the culprit.

WHY DIDN'T THE NARRATOR MENTION THIS EARLIER? Well, it might have been that he recounts the chronicle of Nasar's death the same way as everyone else had experienced this compelling mystery. People never considered that thought in the first place, but only thought of Santiago Nasar as a dirty rich man and the Vicario twins proving their status as men by reclaiming the honor of their sister. However, after everything has settled down, people begin to take a rational perspective on this whole "mystery".

Chronicle of a Death Foretold: Chapter 3

Defending Honor

Chapter three begins with the quote, "The lawyer stood by the thesis of homicide in legitimate defense of honor, which was upheld by the court in good faith, and the twins declared at the end of the trial that they would have done it again a thousand times over for the same reason." (48) I noticed that in this chapter there was a great amount of repetition of events and themes from the previous two chapters but only projected in different perspectives and additional clarity on the occurrence of events leading up to Santiago Nasar's death. Many of the evidence offered in this chapter seemed redundant and made me come to a conclusion that this novel isn't as mysterious as what I've preconceived in the beginning. It was perhaps only a mystery in the first chapter, but soon enough the narrator throws pieces of the mystery here and there.  The focus of this chapter shifts from Bayardo San Roman to the Vicario twins after their sister found the strength to name Santiago Nasar as the man who stole her honor.

Source: www.tumblr.com

In Colombian culture, but certainly not limited to that region, honor is a monumental symbol of a one's dignity and status, especially female virginity and innocence. The Vicario twins have justified their committed murder as defending the honor of their family and the dignity of their sister's loss virginity. I included a gif of flowers dying to represent the frequently referenced metaphor of flowers representing a female's innocence and purity, when Bayardo San Roman found out she was no longer a virgin, her honor died just as how flowers lose their bloom and start to wilt into dead flowers.

The narrator also gives further insight into the Vicario twins' personalities, perhaps for us to understand them a little more and their intentions? Pedro was the twin who declared the decision to kill but did not want to continue once the mayor had taken away their knives but Pablo insisted to continue with the murder.

"Pedro Vicario, according to his own declaration, was the one who made the decision to kill Santiago Nasar, and at first his brother only followed along. But he was also the one who considered his duty fulfilled when the mayor disarmed them, and then it was Pablo Vicario who assumed command." (60)

I also noticed how their sister's lost honor and innocence has been personified and Santiago Nasar became the symbol of the disgrace and dishonor. Since honor has taken a literal form, it explains why Pablo is determined to continue with the murder. The last part of the quote, "it's as if it had already happen" definitely  draws allusions to the title of the novel and how in their minds, Santiago Nasar's death was certainly foretold.

"So he put the knife in his hand and dragged him off almost by force in search of their sister's lost honor. "There's no way out of this", he told him. "It's as if it had already happened." (61)

Another interesting passage in chapter three was the introduction of Maria Alejandrina Cervantes. I found that there was an obvious double standard in the matters of honor because a man's virginity was not as prized or as protected as a female's virginity and honor. Both the narrator and Santiago Nasar seem infatuated by her charm and attraction which sort of reminds me of Bayardo San Roman. There was certainly no one planning to murder her!

Maria Alejandrina Cervantes
"It was she who did away with my generation's virginity. She taught us much more than we should have learned, but she taught us about all that there's no place in life sadder than an empty bed." (65)

Chronicle of a Death Foretold: Chapter 2

Bayardo San Roman, Charming or Dangerous?

Chapter one basically sets up the whole case of the murder mystery of Santiago Nasar, but it's surprising how in chapter two, Marquez delves into as much or even more depth into the character of Bayardo San Roman, indicating his key role in the novel. I was relieved that more time was spent explaining his looks, personality, and his past through the dialogue and perspectives of numerous characters because I was getting tired of having to keep up with the constant shift of characters and their roles. I found a similar pattern between the narrator's portrayal of Nasar and Bayardo San Roman, at first he gives a positive and attractive first impression but then reveals the darker side of the character proving that you can never trust your first impression of anyone. Here are the two prominent examples of how a flowery and charming first impression eventually turns into the realization of something darker:

Magdalena Oliver
"He looked like a fairy," she told me. "And it was a pity, because I could have buttered him and eaten him alive." She wasn't the only one who thought so, nor was she the last to realize that Bayardo San Roman was not a man to be known at first sight." (26)

Narrator's Mother
"Only a long time after the unfortunate wedding did she confess to me that she actually knew him when it was already too late to correct the October letter, and that his golden eyes had caused the shudder of a fear in her." (28)

DISNEY EXAMPLE OF "CHARMING"

Source: http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20131219154141/the-mystery-case-files/images/7/77/Shrek_Prince_Charming.jpg

Besides charming first impressions taking a darker turn, I've also noticed how the narrator often compared the act of playing a game of cards as dealing the cards which destiny gives you in life. The Colombian culture of superstitions and divine prophecies which reflect the title itself, Chronicle of a Death Foretold does reflect the nature of playing a game of cards and how you rely on your fate and destiny, some even argue luck also plays an important role in determining your prophecy.

Life as a game of cards (41):

Source: https://24.media.tumblr.com/989a185048f61ff2ac4075abab16e6e0/tumblr_mf1aeohw401qdunk8o1_500.gif

"My mother was the only one who appreciated as an act of courage the fact that she had played out her marked cards to the final consequences."

"But no one knew what cards Bayardo San Roman was playing."

"Nor was it known what cards Santiago Nasar was playing."

What other cards will be dealt later on in the novel and who else will be joining the game?
I'm actually looking forward to the next chapter and inspecting other clues that the narrator will reveal to us in order to piece this shattered mystery back together. It's clear that Bayardo San Roman is no man to be fooled with but does he have another role in this mystery besides just being the wealthy man who can buy anything to get what he wants including a wife (whom he returned upon knowing she was no longer a virgin)? Is Santiago Nasar also somehow tangled in this dark mystery?