Heather
Sunday, April 23, 2017
Final Blog post: Still trying to figure out my life
Mrs. Genesky I didn't want to post my reflection for all to see because it is really personal so I am bringing it to you by hand. I hope that's ok and you won't take off points.
Sunday, April 2, 2017
Witty Whitman
Just from looking at the cover of this journal we can see that this was probably Whitman's prized possession. It is all beat up and warn down, meaning it's definitely been used a lot and been exposed to the weather. The caption says that he carried this around with him everywhere he went. When looking at the inside of his journal, we can see that he writes in fast, sloppy cursive. I seems like he was in a rush every time he wrote something, meaning he probably didn't have much time to write during his busy days. It also might mean that he had so many ideas flowing through his head that he needed to rush to get them all down on paper. In many of his entries I noticed that he is having a conversation with someone. One big example is Abraham Lincoln, who inspired many of his Civil War poems. We can see he is against slaves just like Lincoln and this opinion is prevalent in his discussion of Lincoln. In this journal Whitman admits many deep inner thoughts that are very truthful and personal. The pictures he drew are very childlike and simple sketches, but these also probably helped him in relating his poems to certain people.
We can tell through his journal that he cares a lot about people and living his life. Many of his poems were inspired by real life events that took place in his life and documented in this journal. In the first page of his journal the notes tell us that he wrote down many addresses and names of certain people. These must be people who inspired some of his poems. He loved Lincoln so much that he observed his emotions from watching him on the street. He starting writing poems about Lincoln's sad emotions and on some pages of his journal he writes an imaginary conversation with him. This reveals that Lincoln is Whitman's hero, almost and is inspired by Lincoln's beliefs to write poems with themes of freedom, unity and brotherhood.He talks a lot about religion and his stance on it, saying their are 3 religions. He then goes on to discuss how freedom should not only be within the United States, but should be happening around the world and in his inner thoughts he greatly discusses this, which transfers into many of his poems.
We can tell through his journal that he cares a lot about people and living his life. Many of his poems were inspired by real life events that took place in his life and documented in this journal. In the first page of his journal the notes tell us that he wrote down many addresses and names of certain people. These must be people who inspired some of his poems. He loved Lincoln so much that he observed his emotions from watching him on the street. He starting writing poems about Lincoln's sad emotions and on some pages of his journal he writes an imaginary conversation with him. This reveals that Lincoln is Whitman's hero, almost and is inspired by Lincoln's beliefs to write poems with themes of freedom, unity and brotherhood.He talks a lot about religion and his stance on it, saying their are 3 religions. He then goes on to discuss how freedom should not only be within the United States, but should be happening around the world and in his inner thoughts he greatly discusses this, which transfers into many of his poems.
Saturday, March 18, 2017
"Breathing dreams like air..."
1. How would you describe the “American Dream?”
The dictionary definition of the American Dream is "The ideal that every US citizen should have an equal opportunity to achieve success and prosperity through hard work, determination, and initiative." This is a very shallow definition of the American Dream because I think there is more to it than just achieving success. I definitely agree with the definition, but I think the American Dream is whatever someone personally wants it to be. There is no universal "American Dream." It is basically the reason everyone doesn't just go jump off a cliff right now. It is our purpose for living that we work towards for our whole lives and truly never fully reach because they are always just out of reach. I may not have the same wishes and dreams about where I want my future to take me as my friends or peers do. Yes, I obviously want to be successful and hard work is necessary, but my values in life are different from others. I don't really know where I want to be in 5-10 years from now but what I do know is that I want to be happy, healthy, have more confidence in myself than I do now, and just shape into a better person. I hope that being fortunate enough to live in America will present me with opportunities and the ability to achieve these goals. Others may not be worried about these values as much and will hope instead that America allows them to become very wealthy, become a celebrity, create a new invention, etc. Overall, these are all successes, but I feel like you can't assign one definition to the "American Dream."
2./3. What is your definition of wealth?/What are Americans’ attitudes toward wealth and poverty?
The dictionary definition of wealth is, "An abundance of valuable possessions or money." Once again, if you are just looking on the surface, this is a great definition, but when you really take into account society and what it values, the meaning can be taken much deeper. When you do this, wealth can be described as security, power, safety, happiness, dignity, respect, and pride. Our society in America and throughout the world, places great importance on wealth and money, maybe even the highest importance. You are in the high class in America with a lot of money and are taken more seriously/looked up upon by lower classes. People yearn to be in your position. For example celebrities have a boat load of money and everyone loves them, they are almost treated as better than human. When looking at the Great Gatsby and the 20s era, wealth was becoming a very important part of America, because it comes up a great deal in the book. Gatsby is the man everyone yearns to be, representing the unattainable "American Dream." Everyone else in the story admires him and wants his life, but in reality Gatsby is alone with all of his wealth and that is not a way to live life.
4. What is your attitude toward wealth and poverty?
I feel like wealth is definitely of great importance to me, but it is not everything like so many people think it is. It is sad how we place so much importance on wealth because there is more to life then being rich. Yes having money is important in living a happy life but love, friendship, and success are way more important. I do not understand women who marry older men just for the money and do not actually love them. I would much rather be with a person who I really love and does not have much money then be with somebody just for the money. Love trumps wealth to me. Now I think people in poverty definitely have a different take on this because they have such little amount of money that they are on the brink of dying, so to them, wealth is everything. However, once you get past having your basic needs, wealth becomes less and less important. Honestly I think the sweet spot is the middle class. You are not living pay check to pay check, but you also cannot just go around buying whatever you want. That is like my family and I am really happy with our situation. Having too much money can make a person unhappy because you can start to become materialistic just like Americans in the 20s after WW1.
Sunday, March 5, 2017
Nothing Really Mattress?: Kafka, Camus, and the Importance of Translation
Quote 1:
Diction: The words that stood out the most for me were "awoke," "uneasy," "gigantic," and "insect." All of these words are more elegant then every day speak. So I would consider this translation to have fancy diction and is not only trying to get a point across about what has happened, but the translator is also trying to portray the time period it took place in where people spoke more elegantly (published in 1915).
Syntax/Structure: I think structure and syntax go hand in had in this sentence. For the most part, the sentence feels smooth to read, but the ending seems a little confusing when it says "found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect." I feel like the way this part of the sentence is structured seems is out of order. I think it would make more sense to say "he found himself transformed into a gigantic insect in his his bed." It flows better and is more easily comprehendible. But once again the translator probably structured the sentence in this way to stay with the convention of how people talked or were used to reading novels.
Imagery/details: The use of "As Gregor Samsa awoke" instead of "when" or "one day" it makes the audience feel more like it is occurring right then instead of in the past. It makes the audience feel more like they are there when he is waking up instead of getting a retelling of the event. The use of gigantic insect instead of just "big" or no adjective at all creates a picture in the audiences mind of what Gregor might look like because "gigantic" is a stronger more meaningful word. Also transformed creates more imagery instead of using "changed" because it gives that sense that he is something completely new instead of just looking different in some way but not totally different.
Quote 2:
This quote is the most simple one, using more elementary words like "woke" instead of "awoke," "changed" instead of "transformed," "giant" instead of "gigantic," and "bug" instead of "insect." The purpose of using simple words is to make it easier to comprehend, appealing to more audiences. In terms of imagery, I really did not picture too much with this quote compared to others because of how simple, short, and to the point this sentence was. The syntax was smooth and the sentence was structured in a way that made perfect sense unlike the previous quote. I like this translation for the fact that it is easy to understand, but I do not like how it does not show the true language technique abilities of the original author. I also wonder why this translation is the only one that does not have "in his bed" included and the name Gregory is used instead of Gregor. The translator's main goal here seems to be to just tell the story and is not as focussed on keeping to Franz Kafka use of different language devices. The audience feels somewhat detached from this translation because of the way the translator words the part that says, "to find himself" instead of how the last version worded it as "he found himself." This translation makes it seem like this event has already occurred and we are listening to someone retell the event instead of us as the audience witnessing the event for ourselves. Overall, there is not as much emotion in this version as I would like to have in a text of this subject matter
Quote 3:
This translation is similar to the first one in its descriptive diction choices except for the use of "troubled," "enormous" and "bug." This one is a mix between the first and second, with the diction being not as simple as the second but not as fancy as the first. I find the structure of this sentence to be understandable and more descriptive but definitely choppy. The use of the word "troubled" instead of "uneasy" makes the dream seem more serious. The use of the word "when to start out the sentence conveys the meaning that this event happened in the past and he noticed the difference in his body right away. The same imagery occurs as in the first quote.
Quote 4:
This translation is the most different one in all aspects. To start off, the diction that stood out was "awakening" "agitated" "monstrous" and "vermin." I thought this one was the most interesting translation because it created the most imagery through the words "monstrous" and "vermin." You can really picture how awful he must look. The syntax and structure was much different as well. The sentence contained many commas, making it very choppy and longwinded.
Through analyzing these 4 versions of the same beginning sentence, I have realized that by changing a few words and the structure, it can greatly change the way an action is perceived, even if it the exact same event. Some of the translations used more elegant diction, creating a more proper tone and some used very simple diction creating a more straightforward result. By the use of differing words some sentences made the action seem in the present and some in the past. In one of the sentences the author just wanted to get the action across but not show any emotion because he wanted to stay simple and appeal to broader audiences. However others used more literary techniques to seem more emotional and meaningful.
I think the most effective translation is the 3rd one because it is not to complex but it contains a good amount of imagery and emotion. I like the use of "troubled dreams" instead of "uneasy" because it seems more severe. I don;t like the second one because it is too simple and barely has any literary devices or emotion.
Diction: The words that stood out the most for me were "awoke," "uneasy," "gigantic," and "insect." All of these words are more elegant then every day speak. So I would consider this translation to have fancy diction and is not only trying to get a point across about what has happened, but the translator is also trying to portray the time period it took place in where people spoke more elegantly (published in 1915).
Syntax/Structure: I think structure and syntax go hand in had in this sentence. For the most part, the sentence feels smooth to read, but the ending seems a little confusing when it says "found himself transformed in his bed into a gigantic insect." I feel like the way this part of the sentence is structured seems is out of order. I think it would make more sense to say "he found himself transformed into a gigantic insect in his his bed." It flows better and is more easily comprehendible. But once again the translator probably structured the sentence in this way to stay with the convention of how people talked or were used to reading novels.
Imagery/details: The use of "As Gregor Samsa awoke" instead of "when" or "one day" it makes the audience feel more like it is occurring right then instead of in the past. It makes the audience feel more like they are there when he is waking up instead of getting a retelling of the event. The use of gigantic insect instead of just "big" or no adjective at all creates a picture in the audiences mind of what Gregor might look like because "gigantic" is a stronger more meaningful word. Also transformed creates more imagery instead of using "changed" because it gives that sense that he is something completely new instead of just looking different in some way but not totally different.
Quote 2:
This quote is the most simple one, using more elementary words like "woke" instead of "awoke," "changed" instead of "transformed," "giant" instead of "gigantic," and "bug" instead of "insect." The purpose of using simple words is to make it easier to comprehend, appealing to more audiences. In terms of imagery, I really did not picture too much with this quote compared to others because of how simple, short, and to the point this sentence was. The syntax was smooth and the sentence was structured in a way that made perfect sense unlike the previous quote. I like this translation for the fact that it is easy to understand, but I do not like how it does not show the true language technique abilities of the original author. I also wonder why this translation is the only one that does not have "in his bed" included and the name Gregory is used instead of Gregor. The translator's main goal here seems to be to just tell the story and is not as focussed on keeping to Franz Kafka use of different language devices. The audience feels somewhat detached from this translation because of the way the translator words the part that says, "to find himself" instead of how the last version worded it as "he found himself." This translation makes it seem like this event has already occurred and we are listening to someone retell the event instead of us as the audience witnessing the event for ourselves. Overall, there is not as much emotion in this version as I would like to have in a text of this subject matter
Quote 3:
This translation is similar to the first one in its descriptive diction choices except for the use of "troubled," "enormous" and "bug." This one is a mix between the first and second, with the diction being not as simple as the second but not as fancy as the first. I find the structure of this sentence to be understandable and more descriptive but definitely choppy. The use of the word "troubled" instead of "uneasy" makes the dream seem more serious. The use of the word "when to start out the sentence conveys the meaning that this event happened in the past and he noticed the difference in his body right away. The same imagery occurs as in the first quote.
Quote 4:
This translation is the most different one in all aspects. To start off, the diction that stood out was "awakening" "agitated" "monstrous" and "vermin." I thought this one was the most interesting translation because it created the most imagery through the words "monstrous" and "vermin." You can really picture how awful he must look. The syntax and structure was much different as well. The sentence contained many commas, making it very choppy and longwinded.
Through analyzing these 4 versions of the same beginning sentence, I have realized that by changing a few words and the structure, it can greatly change the way an action is perceived, even if it the exact same event. Some of the translations used more elegant diction, creating a more proper tone and some used very simple diction creating a more straightforward result. By the use of differing words some sentences made the action seem in the present and some in the past. In one of the sentences the author just wanted to get the action across but not show any emotion because he wanted to stay simple and appeal to broader audiences. However others used more literary techniques to seem more emotional and meaningful.
I think the most effective translation is the 3rd one because it is not to complex but it contains a good amount of imagery and emotion. I like the use of "troubled dreams" instead of "uneasy" because it seems more severe. I don;t like the second one because it is too simple and barely has any literary devices or emotion.
Sunday, February 19, 2017
IOC Practice Passage-The Handmaid's Tail
Personal Grade of IOC
Criterion A: 5-6 I feel like I had a pretty good understanding of the text. I definitely repeated myself a lot when I wasn't sure what to say next, so I need to work on getting all my thoughts out there without too much repeating. I used good evidence from the text to support what I was saying about the context of this passage and how Offred felt about this society. I also gave background on the context of the book as a whole and related it to themes in the book.
Criterion B: 4 I feel like I highlighted language choices well but only described in great detail the effect that similes and metaphors had, but not as well when talking about 1st person. I didn't think it was bad, but I could have done a little deeper analysis
Criterion C: 3 I thought it was somewhat organized, I talked about the elements of my analysis in the order of the passage but it could have been more organized when relating my ideas to theme and author's purpose. The conclusion was awful so I really need to work on how I'm going to say a thought provoking conclusion in the real thing in order to end on a high note instead of the confusing mess I ended with in this one.
Criterion D: 3-4 I thought overall my language wasn't too bad. I did stumble a lot but that was because I was nervous and not really used to doing stuff like this. I still need to work on clear sentences though, and not switching from one thought to another without concluding.
Sunday, February 5, 2017
Sunday, January 22, 2017
Once Upon a Time...
Abha Dawesar: Life in the "digital now"
https://www.ted.com/talks/abha_dawesar_life_in_the_digital_now/transcript?language=en
In Abha Dawesar's Ted Talk, she explains how our life is a story made up of 2 "dimensions of time," our entire lifespan and each moment/direct experience of our life. We need both in order to to experience the "flow of time" and have our own story. But she claims that technology in the 21st century is disrupting this "flow of time" because it is making each moment smaller, quicker, and harder for us to follow. The internet takes information from far off places and brings it right to our pocket to view whenever we want. The internet causes us to not have a perception of time, jumbling the past, present, and future. She calls this confusion of time and place the "digital now." She goes on to talk about how the digital now is always a few seconds ahead of us. She talks about how the digital now are not moments that will further our life's story but instead is merely a distraction that keeps us from building up moments. She discusses many personal anecdotes including her story of surviving hurricane Sandy in order to hook the audience. She challenges the audience to put down their phones and add to their life's story by living in the present in order to store up memories for the future. Her purpose in telling this to the audience is that she wants others to understand that life is more than just looking at a screen. We are here for a reason and the only way to figure out what that reason is, we have to live through life's moments to create our personal story by the end. By living in this so called "digital now" it is becoming harder and harder for people to become their true selves and discover life real wonders.
The author really utilizes the technique of pathos in her talk because of her various personal stories. She uses pathos in hopes of setting emotion in the audience in order to persuade them to listen to her ideas. She uses pathos from the very start of her talk when she describes her experience with Hurricane Sandy. She quickly relates this event with her main argument when she talks about how people were in the street charging their phones on public outlets because they were without power. People are so desperate to be locked into the net at all times that it has become as important to them as food and shelter, as she describes. The way she delivers these lines in her talk also add to the emotion that she wants the audience to feel towards what she is describing. At the end of her talk, Dawesar uses more pathos when she describes the memories she made with her grandma by asking her to teach her how to cook and skip. These moments will always be a part of her even though they passed in time. She uses this example to show how this is giving the present her full attention, unlike looking at a screen. I love doing things with my 2 grandmas, so when she was telling this story I could really relate and perfectly understand her argument.
Logos and ethos were not really used in her argument. The only point that I think would be ethos is when she references something that her yoga instructor once said. This could be ethos because it gives Dawesar someone who backs her up and shows that if others are with her then her argument is probably not crazy. Her instructor stated that "love is attention" and Dawesar uses this quote to complete her argument by saying that the "digital now" threatens the flow of love in our lives and disrupts our life story.
I chose this particular Ted Talk because I believe many of the ideas that Dawesar discussed. Although some of her points were very confusing to follow, I totally agree with her idea that digital technology is destroying the authenticity of our lives. I am the kind of person who is not really on social media and I like experience moments in life to the fullest. I wish more people would think like Dawesar would because I think that it is so sad how much social media and digital technology in general is taking over our lives.
https://www.ted.com/talks/abha_dawesar_life_in_the_digital_now/transcript?language=en
In Abha Dawesar's Ted Talk, she explains how our life is a story made up of 2 "dimensions of time," our entire lifespan and each moment/direct experience of our life. We need both in order to to experience the "flow of time" and have our own story. But she claims that technology in the 21st century is disrupting this "flow of time" because it is making each moment smaller, quicker, and harder for us to follow. The internet takes information from far off places and brings it right to our pocket to view whenever we want. The internet causes us to not have a perception of time, jumbling the past, present, and future. She calls this confusion of time and place the "digital now." She goes on to talk about how the digital now is always a few seconds ahead of us. She talks about how the digital now are not moments that will further our life's story but instead is merely a distraction that keeps us from building up moments. She discusses many personal anecdotes including her story of surviving hurricane Sandy in order to hook the audience. She challenges the audience to put down their phones and add to their life's story by living in the present in order to store up memories for the future. Her purpose in telling this to the audience is that she wants others to understand that life is more than just looking at a screen. We are here for a reason and the only way to figure out what that reason is, we have to live through life's moments to create our personal story by the end. By living in this so called "digital now" it is becoming harder and harder for people to become their true selves and discover life real wonders.
The author really utilizes the technique of pathos in her talk because of her various personal stories. She uses pathos in hopes of setting emotion in the audience in order to persuade them to listen to her ideas. She uses pathos from the very start of her talk when she describes her experience with Hurricane Sandy. She quickly relates this event with her main argument when she talks about how people were in the street charging their phones on public outlets because they were without power. People are so desperate to be locked into the net at all times that it has become as important to them as food and shelter, as she describes. The way she delivers these lines in her talk also add to the emotion that she wants the audience to feel towards what she is describing. At the end of her talk, Dawesar uses more pathos when she describes the memories she made with her grandma by asking her to teach her how to cook and skip. These moments will always be a part of her even though they passed in time. She uses this example to show how this is giving the present her full attention, unlike looking at a screen. I love doing things with my 2 grandmas, so when she was telling this story I could really relate and perfectly understand her argument.
Logos and ethos were not really used in her argument. The only point that I think would be ethos is when she references something that her yoga instructor once said. This could be ethos because it gives Dawesar someone who backs her up and shows that if others are with her then her argument is probably not crazy. Her instructor stated that "love is attention" and Dawesar uses this quote to complete her argument by saying that the "digital now" threatens the flow of love in our lives and disrupts our life story.
I chose this particular Ted Talk because I believe many of the ideas that Dawesar discussed. Although some of her points were very confusing to follow, I totally agree with her idea that digital technology is destroying the authenticity of our lives. I am the kind of person who is not really on social media and I like experience moments in life to the fullest. I wish more people would think like Dawesar would because I think that it is so sad how much social media and digital technology in general is taking over our lives.
Sunday, January 8, 2017
Don't HYDE from this Blog Post!
Part 1
Quotes:
Mr. Hyde: -From chapter 2: Mr. Utterson stepped out and touched him on the shoulder…, ending with ...he had unlocked the door and disappeared into the house.
Dr. Jekyll: - From chapter 3, where the text starts: To this rule..., ending with This is a matter I thought we had agreed to drop.
The excepts I chose were the two that showed the audience Utterson's first encounters with Mr. Hyde and Dr. Jekyll (even though Utterson already knows Jekyll, it was the first time the audience saw the way they acted together). The first was when Mr. Utterson stops to introduce himself to Mr. Hyde before he goes into his house. By the way Stevenson describes it, this scene seemed to have a tense and almost frightening tone to the audience. When Mr. Utterson first gets Mr. Hyde's attention, the audience instantly gets a clear understanding of Hyde's displeasing behaviors. Stevenson writes, "Mr. Hyde shrank back with a hissing intake of the breath" (Stevenson 9). As the two engage in conversation, Hyde uses an angry tone of voice when he speaks to Mr. Utterson and is very defensive towards him when Dr. Jekyll's name comes up. Through his short syntax and simple dialogue, is easy to tell that Mr. Hyde does not like talking to other people, especially people he doesn't know. From the way he is described, he is an unusual looking man who keeps to himself most of the time. Mr. Utterson does not care much for Mr. Hyde and neither do others.
In contrast, Jekyll is basically the exact opposite of Hyde. When the audience reads this encounter, a completely different tone is portrayed. From the beginning of the author's description of Jekyll, the audience immediately feels calm by the words, "a large well-made, smooth faced man of fifty...perhaps every mark of capacity and kindness" (Stevenson 12). Unlike Mr. Hyde, Dr. Jekyll likes the company of others and cares very much for Mr. Utterson. He greets him with open arms and talks to him nicely and calmly. He is also better looking and way more friendly. However, as the conversation goes on, a similarity between Jekyll and Hyde comes to the surface. When Mr. Utterson mentioned Jekyll's name to Mr. Hyde, the tone became even more intense, as Hyde starts to question Jekyll's actions. When Mr. Utterson mentions Mr. Hyde to Dr. Jekyll, Jekyll's personality immediately shifts and the tone becomes more serious and tense. Jekyll's attitude begins to shift just as Hyde's did. Each of these people have a little bit of each other inside them, even though it is deep beneath the surface. By the end of chapter 5, it is clear that both Jekyll and Hyde are keeping secrets from Mr. Utterson.
Poem
Dr. Jekyll Mr. Hyde
I am Jekyll
I am Hyde
People think I am a pleasant
person
People don't like my personality and stay away from me
I like that
I like that
I think that the community comes
first
I think that my self comes first
I need to be around people in order
to be happy
I cannot stand to be around these humans, they disgust me
That man Mr. Utterson really cares
about me and I like him
That man, Mr. Utterson is asking too many questions
I want to tell him the truth about
what he asks me, but I cannot
I do not have to tell him anything,
he should mind his own business
Some stones are better left unturned
Some stones are better left unturned
The purpose of this poem is to basically sum up what is known about these characters so far in the book (first 5 chapters). We know that these two have contrasting characteristics and that they have both met up with Mr. Utterson. In the poem I started by listing things that made them opposites, but then I slowly transitioned to things that made these two characters become more similar. Including their relation with Mr. Utterson and the questions he is asking. The final line is meant to show that although these characters are completely different on the outside, internally they both have secrets that they are keeping and I believe these secrets probably relate to one another.
Quotes:
Mr. Hyde: -From chapter 2: Mr. Utterson stepped out and touched him on the shoulder…, ending with ...he had unlocked the door and disappeared into the house.
Dr. Jekyll: - From chapter 3, where the text starts: To this rule..., ending with This is a matter I thought we had agreed to drop.
The excepts I chose were the two that showed the audience Utterson's first encounters with Mr. Hyde and Dr. Jekyll (even though Utterson already knows Jekyll, it was the first time the audience saw the way they acted together). The first was when Mr. Utterson stops to introduce himself to Mr. Hyde before he goes into his house. By the way Stevenson describes it, this scene seemed to have a tense and almost frightening tone to the audience. When Mr. Utterson first gets Mr. Hyde's attention, the audience instantly gets a clear understanding of Hyde's displeasing behaviors. Stevenson writes, "Mr. Hyde shrank back with a hissing intake of the breath" (Stevenson 9). As the two engage in conversation, Hyde uses an angry tone of voice when he speaks to Mr. Utterson and is very defensive towards him when Dr. Jekyll's name comes up. Through his short syntax and simple dialogue, is easy to tell that Mr. Hyde does not like talking to other people, especially people he doesn't know. From the way he is described, he is an unusual looking man who keeps to himself most of the time. Mr. Utterson does not care much for Mr. Hyde and neither do others.
In contrast, Jekyll is basically the exact opposite of Hyde. When the audience reads this encounter, a completely different tone is portrayed. From the beginning of the author's description of Jekyll, the audience immediately feels calm by the words, "a large well-made, smooth faced man of fifty...perhaps every mark of capacity and kindness" (Stevenson 12). Unlike Mr. Hyde, Dr. Jekyll likes the company of others and cares very much for Mr. Utterson. He greets him with open arms and talks to him nicely and calmly. He is also better looking and way more friendly. However, as the conversation goes on, a similarity between Jekyll and Hyde comes to the surface. When Mr. Utterson mentioned Jekyll's name to Mr. Hyde, the tone became even more intense, as Hyde starts to question Jekyll's actions. When Mr. Utterson mentions Mr. Hyde to Dr. Jekyll, Jekyll's personality immediately shifts and the tone becomes more serious and tense. Jekyll's attitude begins to shift just as Hyde's did. Each of these people have a little bit of each other inside them, even though it is deep beneath the surface. By the end of chapter 5, it is clear that both Jekyll and Hyde are keeping secrets from Mr. Utterson.
Poem
Dr. Jekyll Mr. Hyde
I am Jekyll
I am Hyde
People think I am a pleasant
person
People don't like my personality and stay away from me
I like that
I like that
I think that the community comes
first
I think that my self comes first
I need to be around people in order
to be happy
I cannot stand to be around these humans, they disgust me
That man Mr. Utterson really cares
about me and I like him
That man, Mr. Utterson is asking too many questions
I want to tell him the truth about
what he asks me, but I cannot
I do not have to tell him anything,
he should mind his own business
Some stones are better left unturned
Some stones are better left unturned
The purpose of this poem is to basically sum up what is known about these characters so far in the book (first 5 chapters). We know that these two have contrasting characteristics and that they have both met up with Mr. Utterson. In the poem I started by listing things that made them opposites, but then I slowly transitioned to things that made these two characters become more similar. Including their relation with Mr. Utterson and the questions he is asking. The final line is meant to show that although these characters are completely different on the outside, internally they both have secrets that they are keeping and I believe these secrets probably relate to one another.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)