THUNDER CAT!!! N!KONESS!!! >=[

Musings:

Bokononism and its followers reflect the piety present in many real religions, but it does so with cynicism. This contrast serves to call attention to the role of over-positivity—dogmatism—and expose the actions religious people make that stem from their religions when their religions can be just as big of a lie as Bokononism. The aphoristic parables—which come in the form of calypsos—can be equated to scripture, but rather than sparking thought and consideration in the hearts of the religion’s followers, Bokonon uses them to condemn thought at all. Thoughts lead to beliefs and beliefs lead to declarations and declarations lead to disputes, to controversies, to fights, to wars, to death. By eliminating thought, or characterizing it as an enemy, Bokononism aims to end the violent part in violent, religious dogmatism.

Spark notes comparison:

We touched on some of the same material but I entirely forgot to consider the Bokononist apathy. Life is planned already. Why strive? That totally does attempt to solve the problem of dogmatism. There is no bad and good really, just what is meant to be.

How does Felix mock the prevailing notion that “evil” is humanity’s biggest problem?

Musings:

The mocking stems from two crucial characteristics. The first—Felix is undoubtedly a problem to humanity. He is more than capable to destroy the world. He is the inventor of the atomic bomb – which ended the world for many, and he developed ice-nine which actually ended the world for everyone. His ability to influence humanity forever on a whim makes him a problem. The second—the doctor’s childishness and near childlikeness serves to contrast this terrible power not with a genius evil man but with the opposite—a man who does something for the innocent curiosity not for the money like everyone else. How can evil be humanity’s biggest problem when the man who can end its continuance is the epitome of innocence??? Haha

Spark notes comparison:

I am confident in my ability to analyze literature. Though spark notes has different and more specific details. My answer was spectacularly close. (I swear I didn’t peek ^_^)

How does the commencement speech delivered at Frank’s high school graduation mock the valorized status that science occupies as a means to discover “truth?”

Musings:

The situation in which the commencement speech was given mocks science’s status. Dr. Breed and Dr. Felix are so symbolic of different facets of science that they almost feel like a personification of it. Dr. Breed ends up covering for Felix just like science can be used to cover the flaws of other sciences. Another thing to consider, context wise, is the need to call another speaker when Felix doesn’t show. The truth the school would not want people to know is that they asked him to do it last minute. Science is supposed to be about truth and yet people have to cover it up with lies as they try to make it sound believable.

Spark notes comparison:

Weak. That is what I have to say about what spark notes had to say. The only bit I could salvage from that mess of a shorthanded answer is the idea of inadequacy. But the question does not declare science as adequacy or all that is necessary to bring happiness to one’s life but to “truth.” Spark notes did not address its own prompt. FAIL.

How do Hazel and Lowe illustrate the irrational grouping behaviors of human beings?

It starts with their reliability in titles. They are willing to move to San Lorenzo because the people are “Christian.” They associate Christianity with all things good. A title is a title, not any real depth into someone’s character. It is not consideration or understanding. You can call poop excrement and make it sound fancy, but it is still poop. Also, the title of Hoosier automatically makes them hold Jonah in a much higher degree of regard. Once he’s a Hoosier, he is Hazel’s son. She actually tells him to call her mom. A mother typically knows everything about the character of her son. Hazel knows NOTHING about Jonah. It does not make sense to randomly treat a stranger with such respect and love. Lowe exemplifies the same feeling toward whomsoever declares himself a Cornell student. Nonsense. How much of all that composes a human being can be summarized in a single title? Answer? Such a small fraction that it might as well be nothing.

My father is a suck up.

This is what I discovered through my conversation with my father. At work, he HATES his boss. He is always complaining about how he condescends to him and how unfair he is, but if you talked to his boss, you would never know how my father feels about him. When the annoying man comes around my father is all smiles and for obvious reasons. He has to be. If he wants to keep his job, a seemingly positive relationship is crucial to his employment. If his boss knew how much he abhors his presence, surely my dad will not stay employed long. Sucking up also serves other purposes. When the chance for a promotion comes around, my dad will most certainly –as one of his boss’s favorites—be a fine candidate for consideration. Although there is an issue of morals, I believe my father is making the right decision. He maintains this illusion for his family. He will do anything to provide for me in every way he can. Though it is a lie, he shows what really matters and that certain sacrifices are necessary. Illusions, in the case of my father, are critical.

I don’t think Mel Gibson brought much fire at all to the role of Hamlet… He was less boring than the other Hamlets but taking him out of the comparison, he was still lame. I thought this film brought a new take on several scenes. It was the only likeable quality… I think my bias against these films following the four hour one is due to the trimming and repetition. I feel like I know the material too well. There is no longer any intrigue. But I digress. Getting back to the new angles, It was interesting to see Hamlet so aware of what was happening around him. The book does not clarify certain scenes where Hamlet could have or could not have noticed the presence of other individuals. This keeps it ambiguous and leaves his sanity up for debate. In this film, from the very start of his scene with Ophelia, Hamlet is aware of Claudius’ and Polonius’ presence. This explains his rudeness to Ophelia and aides the debate for his sanity. The scene Hamlet had with Gertrude in this film is a new perspective I did not want to see. YUCK! They are related! What is with this play and incest??? If it’s not Ophelia and Laertes, it’s Hamlet and Gertrude!!! EWW. That’s my reaction. Eww.

The idea of this modern day twist on Hamlet had me excited up until the first line. I assumed a more current setting would entail a more accessible speech pattern and syntax. The language of Shakespeare and exact names Shakespeare used in Hamlet made what could have been an interesting new take on a timeless play seem dated and awkward. Who in the 90’s was named Laertes or Ophelia? No one! It wasn’t all bad though. Some of the modern twists like Hamlet’s use of film rather than plays to portray his knowledge of Claudius’ betrayal were very clever. But the vast majority of the film failed miserably in spite of an intriguing cast. Ethan Hawk just plain sucked. All this Hamlet did during his soliloquies was stand there looking ticked. I found myself falling asleep whenever Hamlet was alone. The film does however reflect Hamlet’s indecisiveness and lack of action. There was NO action. Nothing was even remotely exciting accept Ophelia’s crazy scene, the murder of Polonious, and the end scene of course. The ghost wasn’t even creepy! I think the awkward 90’s phase only contributed to the already awkward language. Parachute pants can be very distracting from a performance that is at best forgettable. In three words—lifeless, awkward, annoying.

Sweet mother of God! This is perhaps the longest movie I have ever seen! The actor playing Hamlet hammed it up a bit too much. He did a nice job of portraying ambiguity through his encounters with other characters. I could not tell if he was an actor acting insane or an actor playing a man who was acting insane. But, his soliloquies were too far over the top. As far as emotional ties go, it was too fake for me to form any type of attachment. It is ironic because there is a scene where Hamlet directs the actors to act in a believable way yet he himself—the actor—is pushing his character to such a point that it becomes unrealistic.

The film, though it was several hours long, did stir some excitement in the reading. As the reading progressed and I reached moments where I could not visualize what was happening, the familiarity of the scene and how this director set it in the film proved to be most valuable. When the play says a few characters and “others” enter the scene, I did not imagine hundreds of people! The film reminds the reader that this is a kingdom with thousands of subjects. Altogether, it was long but quite enjoyable; over the top but helpful.

There were several things I could not help but notice about Alice Walker through her writing. The first, her sense of detail. She does not just notice the buildings of Eatonville, she notices how they are set with no particular pattern. She does not just not the unpleasant disposition of Mrs. Moseley, but the fact that she responds unsmilingly when asked about Zora and the old woman’s peculiarly straight posture. Her sense of analytical detail is so impressive that it likens Mrs. Patterson’s voice to “a singer who smokes a lot.” The second, Walkers fan-girl like qualities. Yes, Hurston was amazing, but Walker knew things about Hurston that people who have actually met her know. She is very well versed. Her excitement and anticipation plays into this fan-girliness as well. The opening sentence makes her utter joy in even flying over and looking at the place Hurston grew up. The last thing I noticed was Walker’s deceptive genius. The lie about being Hurston’s niece serves her through this whole adventure. She also uses other tactics like flattery and sympathy to get what she wants. She would make a great investigatory journalist.

Mrs. Turner is a pitiful case. She does not look like other black people. Black people—like Tea Cake—make fun of how weird she looks. Turner recognizes her physical differences to be those of Caucasians. She sees that the white side of her is more present than the black. Since whites dominated that age in America, Turner took her white features to be something that made her a cut above everyone else—the black people. Janie—being a mulatto child herself and a beautiful one at that—is a natural magnet for this mindset.

Turner starts to obsess over Janie and tries her best to mix Janie’s mixed blood with her own family’s mixed blood clearly because she wants to rid the world of all things black. The mixed blooded offspring of Janie and Turner’s brother would be one step closer to achieving Turner’s dream of being white. Since she cannot change her blood, she’s trying to make sure those related to her at least get as far as she has.

Janie is not enraged with Tea Cake’s gambling because she does not see it as an individual thing. Janie sees it as part of the whole Tea Cake—her husband, the man she loves. Tea Cake’s intentions when he gambles also contribute to Janie’s compliance with the gambling. Tea Cake only does it for Janie. He gets money to do things for her—to make up for their financial differences so the age gap is not so apparent. When there are multiple reasons not to be together, they culminate into a break up. Secure finances hide the age discrepancy. She also compares this problem with the problems of other men and sees that gambling is very minor. He just wants to get some money, at least he is not a liar, cheater, drunk, thief…Oh wait… How could she be mad though knowing what money means to Tea Cake and the joy he brings to the community when he has money?

The money’s meaning shifts. Initially, it represented safety. No matter what happened, the money assured Janie a way out. After it disappeared, however, the money came to represent trust. When Janie lost it, she lost her trust. Tea Cake had to have been the one who took it. Without that trust doubt began to trouble her. She doubted her lovability and Tea Cake’s love for her. When he returned so did Janie’s trust. Tea Cake explained what he did with the money establishing yet another representation. Money meant a good time—a day in the life of a rich person lived by a poor man who has dreamt of what he would do if he had the money to do it. Unfortunately, Tea Cake had exhausted his borrowed source—the good time was over. To make it up and to maintain the stable relationship as outlined above, Tea Cake had to dabble in the darkness. Money became a necessity—the glue that held the relationship in a happy state. Thankfully, he got more back than the amount he set out to make. But money came at a cost. Tea Cake was wounded by the shady creatures of the underworld. Fortune only smiled upon Tea Cake this time. Who’s to say his luck will not run out? Money therefore ends ultimately as a precursor. If a tragedy is to occur, money or gambling, or the need for it will probably be the source.

The mule serves several purposes. Its relationship with the people of the town symbolizes three different structures addressed within the book. First, we must analyze the literal in order to examine the figurative. There are three specific stages of the mule’s tale. The first stage is the people’s oppression of the working mule. The second stage is Jody’s liberation of the mule. It is free to do what it will and hilariously is mistaken for a person. The third stage is the mule’s death and a depiction of mule’s heaven at which all of the town’s people laugh.

Although the mule’s tale is an open symbol, it has three undeniable interpretations. One is the relationship between white society and African-American people after the Emancipation Proclamation. The slaves were set free just as Jody set the mule free. This is the transition from stage one to stage two. They jokes the town make about the mule looking like and acting like a human parallel white society’s perception of the newly freed slaves. “It is strange how these people act it is almost like they are one of us’” exclaimed white society. The third stage is white society’s perception of the future at the time. The mules are depicted as angels who are masters of humans. They ride humans around like humans ride mules. The people all laugh at this notion like white society did at the idea of blacks one day commanding whites. It was so ridiculous to them that they do not even consider the possibility of it in this life. The mule has to die before this is considerable.

The second interpretation is the relationship between man and woman. In the story, women are unmistakably depicted as beneath men. Hurston herself even calls women the work mule of society. Women have not even reached the second level in the novel. In Janie’s relationship with Jody—which is the third structure—Janie’s inner self cries out for level two, but whenever she strives to obtain that equality, Jody either puts her down or her own thoughts hold her back.

The buzzards add a dynamic to Hurston’s structural analysis. The buzzards consume the corpse of the mule. They signify the end to the town’s fun. Hurston uses the symbolic motion of the buzzards circling over head to illustrate the circle of life or rather the continual beginning and end of life. One day, the cycle of this structural oppression will end. The creation of mule-heaven is the town’s hypothetical creation. The consumption of the mule is what happens in the book’s reality. Hurston is saying that though white society laughs at the idea of African-Americans leadership and although women are kept down by men, a day will come when this ends no matter if the end is the supreme end- the end of the world – or society’s acceptance – mule-heaven.

Ahhh America! The power of its people to rally together, gain support, and influence global affairs never ceases to amaze me. The persistence and skepticism toward government is what keeps America from degradation. It is appalling to think so many of the families searching for their loved ones have worked so hard only to come up fruitless. One thing that the POWMIA article glosses over however, is how the native Vietnamese suffer from their losses. It has always made my stomach turn over—hearing about how Americans get star treatment wherever they are. We were missing tens of thousands and numerous searches were conducted on our behalf by both the Vietnamese government as well as our own, but Vietnam is missing hundreds of thousands yet the article does not speak of a single government based search for the missing Vietnamese.