Paper 1 Commentary Outline

I. Intro
Thesis - Thomas Hardy, in his poem "The Voice" uses diction and alliteration to convey the speaker's feelings of loss and weakness due to the death of a loved woman.

II. Body 1 - Diction
Topic Sentence - Hardy uses empty diction to show the speaker's feelings of loss as well as the reality of the death of the speaker's loved one.
~Examples: "the voice" "were" "air" "dissolved"

III. Body 2 - Alliteration
Topic Sentence - The use of alliteration in each stanza was made to convey insight to the speaker's feelings on the death of a loved one. In looking at the alliterations, a sense of loss and felt absence are seen at first. The speaker then moves on to reminiscing, want and sadness, weakness, and finally ends the poem in the feeling of pain from his/her loss.

IV. Conclusion
Restated Thesis

As I Lay Dying - Whitfield

Whitfield is one of the character that was only mentioned a few times in the book, however he plays a huge part in the Bundren family. In piecing together both Addie's and Whitfield's narratives, we find that Addie had an affair with Whitfield. There is also speculation that Jewel may be Whitfield's son (as we know that he is not Anse's son) however this was never directly stated, and it may be possible that Jewel is the product of another man; Addie may have had multiple affairs.
Because Whitfield does not have many parts in the book, it is hard to get a full reading on his character. It is quite apparent that he is a very religious man; he is a reverend and his entire narrative is full of references to God and Satan. He is wracked with guilt over his affair with Addie, and when he hears that she is dying decides to confess to Anse about what he did. Though a noble gesture, when coupling this with more details, as well as the fact that he did not confess in the end, Whitfield seems to actually be somewhat of a weak willed and cowardly character. First, the fact that he waited so long to confess shows that he must not have a strong desire to do so in the first place (he had to "wrestle with Satan" to do so). Also, he waited until Addie was on her death bed to confess, which may show that he is scared of her; she did not want him to say anything and for him to confess now, when she is too weak to do anything, and that there is no chance of her getting better to get back at him, shows that he is weak and that if she were healthy he would not think of confessing. Whitfield is constantly also looking for the "easy way out." First, he was going to try to make Addie confess and tell the "story" instead of him, and when he found out that she died, he did not say anything to Anse about it. Also, it seems that Whitfield was more looking for forgiveness in God, and not from Anse - Whitfield constantly makes interpretations about God's will and means, and in simply thinking about confessing he says "It was already as though it were done. My soul felt freer, quieter than it had in years." Whitfield does not want to confess and confront Anse, he just wants to feel as if he had, and get the guilt off his chest. He is quite selfish in that he is not looking to do the "right thing" (confessing at this point would only bring up bad feelings and would cause Addie to die in anger, and with anger toward her from Anse and the famly), he just wants to make himself feel better.

Siren Song

Atwood, in her poem "Siren Song," establishes both the speaker and the audience as well as comments on why the siren song works and the sirens themselves. She does this through her use of diction and tone, as well as the actual content of the poem.
One of the first things that Atwood does is she establishes who is speaking, as well as who the audience is. She does this through both the title and content of the poem, identifying that she is talking about sirens, then identifying that the speaker herself is one of the sirens in the passage

"I don't enjoy it here
squatting on this island
looking picturesque and mythical
with these two feathery maniacs."

As Atwood describes the speaker as squatting on the island with to feathery maniacs, the reader is fairly safe to assume that the speaker is a siren as well. Doing this, it is possible to say who she is talking to, or singing to. Simply knowing the facts about sirens, that they sing to sailors and travelers, we can then assume that these sailors and travelers are the intended audience.
In identifying the speaker and audience, it is possible to make the connection that this poem is actually a song - the same song that the sirens sing to lure men to their deaths. Looking at the poem in this sense, it is more possible to see why sailors and men are lured to their death. One of the main qualities of the poem that gives insight to both the sirens and why men are lured are the various changing tones. The poem starts off as a warning, saying what will happen to those who hear the sirens' song, and gives off a dangerous, warning tone through its strong diction such as "irresistable" and "forces." The tone of the piece then takes a drastic turn, and it conveys a "damsel in distress" message. The speaker talks about how horrible her life is and how she wants to escape and how "only you" can help. This both boasts the listener's ego, and creates the idea for them to become the knight in shining armor, causing them to do just what the speaker said they would do in the first two stanzas. Finally, the last stanza takes on a tone which really gives insight to how the siren feels about what she does. She says

"at last. Alas
it is a boring song
but it works every time."

The siren shows a sort of accomplishment at what she just did, as well as a twisted pleasure that even though she had warned these sailors in the begining, she was still able to make them drown.

"Follower"

Seamus Heaney, in his poem "Follower," is able to depict the relationship between a father and child, and how each is perceived as time goes on, through his use of diction and imagery. This poem deals with two time periods; five out of the six stanzas talk about when the speaker was a child, and the last talks about when the speaker is grown up. Overall, this poem is about the speaker's father, and in these first five stanzas, Heaney conveys a sense of wonder and awe that come from the speaker as a child. He believed his father to be perfect, flawless. He was "an expert" and could "map the furrow exactly." His father could make no mistakes, and was not only strong but was even a greater man for being able to put up with the speaker as a child, constantly tripping and stumbling behind him, constantly talking. As a child, the speaker looked to his father in a superhero sense, that he was not a real man, but a wonder set to always be as he was. This perception changes however, as the speaker grows up. The speaker's view of his father as a child is broken, and a sense of reality and the switching of roles is seen in the last stanza. The speaker has taken his fathers place, and the father, who used to be untouchable, has been reduced to a child, a nuisance. The relationship between the two is there, however earlier in the poem, the where the father allowed the speaker to follow him, the readers were lead to believe that it was not from annoyance, but from love, or at least indifference. Now in the last stanza, the speaker's annoyance at his father is clear, however we find that he may allow his father to keep following more out of a sense of duty, or repayment than actual want.

Midterm Break

At first glance of "Mid-Term Break," it seems as if the speaker is very indifferent and emotionless over the death of his younger brother, however, after looking deeper into the poem, it becomes apparent that Seamus Heaney uses time and age to express the speaker's feelings of grief.
First, Heaney uses time to express both the speaker's impatience and his feelings of fear and regret. The first stanza is...

"I sat all morning in the college sick bay
Counting bells knelling classes to a close.
At two o'clock our neighbors drove me home."

This stanza gives a few examples of time expressing the impatience felt by the speaker. First, he says that he "sat all morning....counting bells..." This phrase can be counted as either boredom, in a regular setting, however in the context of the poem, it shows how the speaker is waiting to go home - the morning seems to strech out longer, as his impatience causes time to slow. Just as when one counts sheep as they wait to go to sleep, the speaker counting bells can be seen as his way to pass the time, and makes the time seem much longer. The second way Heaney uses time to express impatience is with his use of "two o'clock" and later in the poem, "ten o'clock." These two times are very important, and are the key times when the wait which the speaker experiences ends. At two o'clock, he was able to go home. At ten o'clock, the abulance arrives with his brother's body. By using specific times, Heaney really expresses that the whole day is centered around those two events, and that the time inbetween is just a waiting game.
Heaney also uses time to show the speaker's feelings of fear and regret. Even though the corpse had arrived at 10 o'clock that night, the speaker waited until the next morning to go up into the room to see his brother. This wait can be interpretted that the speaker could not go up to see his brother the night before, it was too painful, and it would destroy the denial that he was feeling over his brother's death (stages of grief). Heaney then uses the speaker saying that he "saw him for the first time in six weeks" to express a feeling of regret and guilt, as the speaker realizes that squandered that time that he could have spent with his brother.
Finally, Heaney uses age to show the overwhelming feelings of sadness felt by the speaker. The fourth stanza shows a contradiction between the age of the actual speaker-

"And tell me they were "sorry for my trouble,"
Whispers informed strangers I was the eldest,
Away at school, as my mother held my hand"

As seen, he is said to be the eldest and is away at school, so it is assumed that he is an adult, or young adult. However, it is shown in the line following that the speaker is holding his mother's hand. This reduces the speaker back into the role of a small child, taking comfort in his mother. There is also the use of "old men" and the "baby." This could result in a number of different interpretations. Heaney could be hitting upon how a full life is the progression from a baby to an old man, and it furthurs the tragedy of the young boy's death that he was not able to experience that. It could also be that all the "old men" were not all old men at all, however to the speaker's reduced age, or in comparison to the boy's short life, all other ages simply seem old.

Forbidding Mourning

John Donne's poem, "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" is a poem of one lover speaking to the other about death. To explain the lover's ideas and beliefs of death, Donne using altering stanzas dealing with the ideas, actions, and beliefs of the general public, and the ideas, actions, and beliefs of the lovers. The first stanza is posed to be speaking about people in general, and how as someone passes away, they may be at peace with themselves, however their friends, and those that care about him/her, can either be at peace with the death as well and accept it, or can be in denial, and mad or depressed. Donne uses this to introduce the situation of the lovers, as one lover tells the other that in their death situation, they should accept the situation, and be at peace with the death of the other. The next two stanzas are once again in general. The first stanza in this is:

"Moving of th' earth brings harms and fears ;
Men reckon what it did, and meant ;
But trepidation of the spheres,
Though greater far, is innocent. "

I took this to be taken as the general view of death. Donne relates how men fear the unknown, and make up meaning and explanations for it, however the unknown is not necessarily bad or evil. This is just like death, many view it to be bad, and a tragedy, however simply because it is unknown does not make it a bad thing.
The second stanza in this series of general is used to describe the difference between normal lover's love, and their love. The speaker compares how regular lovers can't admit the death of their lover, or the "death" of their love, because they need it. The speaker however, says that their love is above that of regular love, and it is not the physical sense that is important, but that they are connected in their very being and mind. The speaker further goes on to explain (in the rest of the stanzas) that very difference. About how unlike other lover's, the separation that their souls endure because of the death is a new adventure, it strengthens their love, and their souls.

“The Good-Morrow” Commentary

“The Good-Morrow” by John Donne is yet another poem about love by Donne, in which he expresses the feelings and effect of love through metaphors and imagery. The metaphors and imagery are split into three different phases; before love, as seen in the first stanza, during love, as seen in the second stanza, and finally, what love is, or the total accumulation of what love is, as seen in the third stanza.
In the first stanza, Donne expresses how pointless life was without love. The main metaphor used to express this was with the line “But sucked on country pleasures, childishly?” Donne compares how his life before love was simple, or meaningless, through using country pleasures. “Country pleasures” is meant to mean lust based relationships, meaningless relationships.
The second stanza is used to talk about how love makes one feel. Donne says that love “makes one little room an everywhere.” The little room refers to how love, physically, is a small thing between two people, however mentally, love is unconfined to “a little room,” it is boundless, it is anything and everything.
Finally, in the last stanza, Donne tries to express what love is through the metaphor “Where can we find two better hemispheres, without sharp north, without declining west.” In using hemispheres, Donne makes a comment how there are two parts to the one whole, two hemispheres to the one world, two people to make up one world. However, Donne further comments upon the overall unity of love by stating how though though the two hemispheres are separate, they are “without sharp north, without declining west,” meaning that they do not have bounds or limits. So Donne is saying that though physically two people in love are separate, they make up one whole, and are not bound to stay separate.
Throughout the poem, Donne uses imagery and metaphors to communicate the ideas and feelings he has about love, to help everyone understand and relate to his ideas of love.

Act of Resistance

For my act of resistance, i decided to use chalk drawing to get my point across. i used this method because i've seen it before (on the college campus, cause i live real close by) and i know that a lot of people will see it simply because they will walk over it, and since a lot of people look at the ground, they will at least get a glimpse that will spark their interest to take time to read it. now sadly, i made it, and then it started snowing, so i don't actually think a lot of people saw it since 1) not many people probably went out, 2) the snow melted and made the ground wet, 3) then the snow stayed and everything is covered in snow so you can't see it.

but anyways, my act of resistance was one against consumerism. Consumerism has taken over our country and, i believe, it is a big cause for the lack of empathy and humanity in people. With people's whole focus on goods and the next big thing, they become selfish and forget the true morals and thoughts that we should live by. Consumerism causes selfishness and disinterest in the well being of anyone other than yourself or someone you care about. it also prevents us from taking steps that can improve our economy and quality of life. So i hope to raise awareness about the effects of consumerism on this country and people, and though i don't expect consumerism to stop (obviously) i want people to realize the harm that consumerism can cause, and i want them to be more aware of it and change to make the effects of consumerism not as damaging.

The Boycott

ok, so my actual real last post on lysistrata is tied in with the boycott. i just wanted to compare the two and how the boycott was supposed to be like, the modern day lysistrata, but in reality really wasn't at all except for the character's name (Lysistrata / Lyssa Stratan), the manner of achieveing the goal (sex strike) and one scene (Myrrhine & Kinesis / President & Ismenia). other than that there really was no connection between the two. 

I think that there easily could be more of a connection, the plot of lysistrata (just looking at the actions) is one that could easily be repeated, and in fact, has been many times.

- One group holds all the power (G1)

-G1 ignores Group 2 (G2)

-G2 gathers and makes a plan to solve the problem at hand

-G2 demands attention from G1 (rebellion)

-Ongoing conflict between G1 & G2 (stalemate)

-Both groups try to win over the other group

-G1 gives in

Last Thoughts of Lysistrata

Overall, i didn't really like this play. it was a nice change in pace, but i kinda thought that there wasn't really much to it. i thought the plot was creative, very original, but at the same time its something that doesn't spark my interest or hold my attention. also, there were a lot of things that i didn't really get ( like the chorus and other lines that weren't explained). maybe if we had gone over this more carefully, and i actually got more of the information and understood it, i might have liked it better, but at the moment, it definitely isn't my favorite.

The Commissioner

I think that the commisioner is a stuck up traditional old fool. He gets really upset about how the women took over the Akropolis, and constantly leads attempts to try to get them out and get rid of them, and refuses to even try to look at things in a different light. He is also a scared hypocrite, sending soldiers out to capture the women and scorning and insulting them when they don’t, while he hides safely away from them. Also, he doesn’t even try to listen to lysistrata, dismissing her idea as womanly nonsense, judging that she doesn’t know anything that’s going on simply because she is a woman. His sexist frame gets a shock when the women dress him up as a woman, and sputters in aggravation saying how he was going to report the “monstrous maltreatment of a public official”, showing further how he has a very large ego and thinks that he is better than the rest. He even gets drunk when he realizes that things aren’t going his way, acting like a child and a stuck-up brat.

Love

In the intro, the play was said to be not just about sex, but about love, and the bond between the husband and the wife. I don’t really know about this, I’m trying to see the love in the story, and yes, I get the obvious love between husband and wife, but at the same time I don’t actually see it as love - not as I’ve seen love in the past plays. I don’t see the love between lysistrata and her husband (how he treats her), I don’t see the love between myrrhine and kinesis (he’s saying those things just to get her to bed) and especially when Peace is brought in and holds the attention of all the men. 

Now, the love I’m talking about is the husband-wife love. Other love I see a lot of, there is the love for their country and fellow man, the love for the safely of those they care about, and ect. But even though I know that the desire for their husbands to come home from the war stems from love, I don’t see it as the same love that I though should be there. But of course, I may simply have strange views on love, or what love is.

Kleonike

On page 24 I notice that when lysistrata asked for the other women’s support to end the war (before telling them that the way was to abstain from sex) Kleonike responds with 

“you can count on me! If you need money, I’ll pawn the shift off my back ---Aside and drink up the cash before the sun goes down.”

I never really got this, Kleonike throughout the play seems to be a close friend of lysistrata and one of the main women holding the strike in place, yet here she is pledging her support, only to then seem to be very shady and not supportive at all. I mean, she says, I’ll do everything I can to give you money, but then use it all right away instead. I just want to know everyone’s thoughts on this, so hopefully I can understand it better.

Husband and Wife relationships

I wanted to explore the relationship between the athenian husband and wife that led to the women taking power. From listening to Lysistrata tell about how she always asked her husband how the war was going and if they were getting closer to peace, and how he replied with “What’s that to you? Shut up!” and if they persued the matter she was threatened with a clout on the head (56), its fairly easy to see that the women were not treated with much respect or given much power. However, this slightly contradicts as the women were the head of the household in the sense that they took care of everything at home, from children to cooking to managing the budget. Also, then factoring in how easily the women were able to make them men bow to their wants, I wonder who held the true power in the relationship. The husband, who portrayed having complete control and power (through possible physical and mental abuse?), and seemingly to manipulate others to get their wants (kinesis using his son to get to myrrhine); or the wife, who actually manages the household and succumbs to the husbands wants, but is easily able to take power and control as soon as they want to?

24-Hours

One thing I have to keep reminding myself is that this play happens in 24-hours. Now, I always thing that it takes a much longer time than that, as I truely don’t think that the men would give in that easily. I also wonder over what time it really must have been. I mean, the play starts off with lysistrata having a meeting in the morning. Then during the part of the play where a lot of the women were trying to get out, Kleonike says “and those goddamned holy owls; all night long, tu-wit, tu-wit - they’re hooting me out into my grave!” (73) Finally, when the whole group is going to make peace, they stop at the commissioner’s house. He is drunk and carrying a torch - two things that signifiy that it is later towards evening. Now, I know I’m being very literal with all this, but I just wanted to try to figure out exactly what the time frame was, as I never was really explained. Also, by figuring this out, I can see that Lysistrata follows the morning to evening storyline. Meaning that it starts in the morning, a time of new beginings and starts (lysistrata bringing up her idea, all the women going against their roles) and it ends in the evening, signifying closure and and end (to the war).

PEACE

Peace is an important motif in this play. Throughout the dialog (especially in the beginning and end), Peace is the goal that the women want, as well as the men (by the end). After reading how Peace was also a person, it got me thinking; whenever I write peace, I usually write it lower-case, however throughout the play it was always uppercase. Now, I don’t know if I’m just crazy and don’t know that peace should have an uppercase, but I was thinking that maybe it could be a little bit more. After re-reading the play with the knowledge that Peace was also a woman, quite a few of the lines in the beginning of Lysistrata could easily apply to peace as the concept, as Peace as in the woman. So it makes me wonder whether Lysistrata was planning to use Peace (the woman) in the first place. For example, on page 24, Lysistrata says “we can force our husbands to negotiate Peace…” where at first, I thought that the mesage was fairly obvious - she wants the athenian men to get together with the spartan men and stop fighting. But after reading this, and remembering how, in the end, the husbands really DID negotiate Peace (the woman) I wonder whether this was just another part of her plan. 

The Spartans

In Lysistrata, we only see/hear two Spartans, and oly one of them is actually characterized. Lampito is the spartan woman that is to hold and lead the same idea to abstain from sex in Sparta, and though she holds an important role, she is only present in the beginning. The other spartan, who is only present at the end for peace negotiations, isn’t even given a name. Actually (after looking through the text), it says that a whole delegation of spartans come, but because Aristophanes only refers to the speaker as “Spartan” it’s hard to tell whether the one speaking is the same person or different people. The spartans also have a very distinct dialect or speech. In the Notes (115) it said that the spartans dialect was based off of an american mountain dialect - to me, at least, it sounds like the speech of a southern redneck or countryman. 

I think Aristophanes uses these two things, the lack of distinction and characterization of the delegation of Spartans, as well as their spech to highlight the differences between the Athenians and the Spartans and to show how the Athenians thought of the spartans. The lack of distinction gives the feeling that each spartan had no real value or personal value, and they were just all grouped together as if they had no individual thoughts, as if they weren’t important enough to be separate. The spartan dialect also gives a feeling like the spartans weren’t smart and didn’t have good ideas or thought processes - which isn’t true as both Lampito and the delegation of spartans brought good ideas and new perspectives to the table.

Beginning Thoughts of Lysistrata

Unlike the past two plays, which were fairly dark and tragic, i'm glad to see that Lysistrata will be a good change in pace. Its a play that is more comical and i think will be more enjoyable to read. One thing that all three plays share is the theme of women taking control and power, though this has a different twist than the other two. Unlike in the house of bernarda alba and hedda gabler, no power or control started in the hands of the women, it was all given to the men. The women fulfilled their duty as the "traditional wife", staying at home and not interferring with the men and their decisions. This changes though when the women get fed up with the war and take power into their own hands. By doing this, it becomes kind of apparent that the men never had true power, they only had the illusion of power from the women letting them do what they want. the women had the real power, as seen with how easily they were able to take it and render the men helpless.

Light and Dark

There is another contrast between the beginning and end of the play, and this is of the setting. In the beginning, the setting was very lively and optimistic. The rooms were awash in natural light and a lot of detail was seen. It was also very colorful, the room being covered in flowers and the autumn colors seen through the door and windows. In the beginning, the setting was also during the morning. As the play continues, time does too. In the ending, the setting takes place in the evening. And though the physical setting is the same, its described completely differently. At the ending of the play, the setting is covered in darkness, with only one source of light available. There is almost no detail, and the tone is very depressing and suspenseful.
The beginning started off with such promise, there was hope and light. But it ended with such sadness and depression. This change could be caused by hedda. The hopeful beginning existed with the absence of Hedda, and the end existed centered around her.

Thea's Growth

Thea is a very dynamic character, completely changing from the start of the play to the end. In the beginning, Thea was very meek and timid, and had no self-esteem or power. However as the play continues, this changes. First, we find that Thea does have power - over Lovborg. Also, as she develops a relationship with lovborg, she becomes more confident in herself. Finally we see a complete change in Thea by the end, especially in consideration of her research and work. When she and lovborg fight over the book and his alleged actions, she becomes a strong powerful woman, someone in complete contrast of herself in the beginning. Also, when she and Tesman join together to try to sort out the notes to re-write the manuscript, she once again transforms into a strong confident driven woman, someone who finally takes control of her own life.