Adjective Clauses

      Hello blog. Unfortunately, I am sick today :( Blogs are due though, so here I am. For the past couple of days, we've been talking about adjective clauses, which are dependent clauses that describe a person, place or thing. They contain a subject and its verb. For example, from the warm-up, "He missed his sisters and cousins, who have known him since he was  a strong, good-looking boy." (11/30) The underlined part is the adj. clause because it's talking about the sisters and cousins. It's like one long adjective, hence the name. This is a sentence with a single adj. clause and it's complex. Here's one with multiple, "These are men of chemistry, who spray the trees against pests, who sulfur the grapes, who cut out diseases and rots and mildews, and sickness." (11/30) This contains three adj. clauses. They are all modifying the subject, "men of chemistry." On 11/31, we had the example, "Sully, whose skills were already maturing, moved up from the wolves level to the lions." -Stephen King, Hearts in Atlantis. "Sully" is the subject being modified and is being described as having skills. There is one dependent clause and one independent ( Sully moved up from the wolves level to the lions), making it a complex sentence. "They gave me a cable knit sweater and an alskin jacket, which kept me dry on the wettest days."- from Keneth Donohue, The Stolen Child. This is also a complex sentence because it has an independent and a dependent clause. Yay, I'm getting extra credit!!!!! Thanks Ms. Sobrero!

More Beloved Motifs!

  More motifs! A couple days ago, we discussed motifs. After body parts, water, bodily fluids, and food was "animals," which were used to represent the dehumanization of the characters or the characters themselves. The Pauls and Sixo mated with cows at Sweet Home, showing that they were thought of as animals. Schoolteacher measured his slaves by noting their animal-like and human-like characteristics. When Paul D found out that Sethe killed Beloved, he said that she had 2 legs, not 4 (like an animal). Here Boy, the family dog, was the only owned animal.The sixth one was "color," which represented life, especially red. Paul D's red tobacco tin was his heart. Because of all he's been through, his heart has been replaced with a red container. Baby Suggs always thought of color in bed. Pink blossoms led Paul D to 124.
      The seventh motif was "triplings," which are present throughout. "Three" symbolizes balance. There were originally three people at 124, but then Paul D came. It was still 3 because he got rid of the baby ghost. Then it was 4 when Beloved came from the water, but it returns to 3 because she scares away Paul D. Beloved, Denver and Sethe symbolize the Holy Trinity. Another occurrence of tripling is found in schoolteacher + his two nephews. Denver was three weeks old when Paid brought the berries.When the four men on horses came to catch the slaves at 124, only three men unmounted off their horses. Last but not least, "names." They represent the lack of freedom for slaves. For example, there were many Pauls (Paul D, Paul A) at Sweet Home, so they lack individuality. Ella means bearer, which fits because she had to bear with helping slaves in her community who escaped. Sixo is similar to hell; he was rebellious and he was burned. Paid renamed himself after he became a fee slave. Denver = green valley. When you think of a valley, you think wide and free and Denver became independent at the end of the book.

Dehumanization in Beloved

      Today in class, we discussed study guide question two, for Beloved. Dehumanization- (n.) the deprivation of human qualities or attributes; divest of individuality. There were many ways in which the slaves were dehumanized. For example, Paul D was  given a bit in his mouth to prevent him from talking. Similarly, animals are harnessed. The incident with the Pauls and the cows reflects the fact that they feel they're the same worth as animals. Because they weren't allowed to have human relationships, they resort to this. In the chain gang, the slaves were forced to do things against their will. Schoolteacher measured his slaves by putting their animal-like features on the left. The 'lowest yet" de-humanized Ella.And their names reflect their lack of identity-having more than one Paul. When Stamp Paid's wife, Vashti, returned to him after serving a white man, he killed her. This is why he changed his name from Joshua to Stamp Paid, because he was metaphorically like a stamp that's been paid and done with. They were described as animal-like as well: Baby Suggs walked like a three-legged dog. Emasculate- (v.) to deprive of strength or vigor; to take away a man's masculinity. Male slaves were emasculated several times. For example, Paul D and the chain gang were forced to do whatever the guards wanted done. They were tied together and weren't able to do what men were expected to do in society- provide for their family. Slaves couldn't even marry. De-feminize- (v.) to take away feminine qualities. Women were de-feminized, like Sethe, who had her milk stolen by schoolteacher's nephews. That was her way of caring for children, of being a mother. But that role was taken away. To pay for Beloved's gravestone, Sethe had to lose her innocence.

Beloved Motifs

      Today in class, we assembled into groups of eight. We all shared our motifs, since we were all individual experts on our own. I learned a lot more about Beloved and its subtle symbols today. We all took turns sharing and I talked about "water." First up was "body parts." They show that the slaves were treated inhumanely. For example, Paul D had an iron bit in his mouth to prevent him from speaking. In the Clearing, where Grandma Baby Suggs preached, she said to love your body (Ch.9). She pierced this into their minds because white men never allowed them to. Sethe's scars show her harsh past & "rememories." They're on her back, meaning her past and what's behind her. Also Beloved had perfect, new feet because she never experienced slavery but Sethe, who did, had ugly feet. These things show the harsh reality of slavery.
      Next was "bodily fluids." Beloved's blood symbolized the blood of Christ; Denver "swallowed her blood right along with [her] mother's milk" (242). And when they ate, they licked the sweat off their faces to add salt to the food. Sweat means hard work. Sethe always provided for her children, with blood, sweat and tears, literally. Milk represents Sethe's love for her kids because she always had enough and it was her way of nurturing them . She was literally draining herself for her children. When Beloved appears near the steps of 124, Sethe has to use the restroom. This is like her water breaking when Beloved  was "born."
      Next was "food." Food is communion (a great rule from How to Read Literature Like a Professor). Stamp Paid collects berries and feeds baby Denver, so Baby Suggs has a party. The berries tasted "so good and happy that to eat them was like being in church. Just one of the berries and you felt anointed" (160). This eating was like a religious preparation for something. And "....Sethe was licked, tasted, eaten by Beloved's eyes" (68).
   

Water in Beloved

      Hello there, blog. Today in class, we got into our jigsaw groups of four. My group chose "water" as our motif because we saw some connections. On page 60, there's a quote about how Beloved came to 124 Bluestone Road. “A fully dressed woman walked out of the water. She barely gained the dry bank of the stream before she sat down and leaned against a mulberry tree…..Nobody saw her emerge or came accidentally by” (60). This is when Beloved came out of the water. Beloved was killed by her mother, Sethe, to save her from a life of slavery. She engraves "Beloved" on her tombstone. This unknown woman, Beloved, is reborn out of the water on the night Paul D, Sethe and Denver come back from the carnival. Water equals baptism ( from How to Read Literature Like a Professor). Believers in Christ are also reborn when they are  baptized. Becasue she was just born (again), she's baby-like. On page sixty, it says, “Exhausted again, she sat down on the first handy place- a stump not far from the steps of 124. By then  keeping her eyes open was less of an effort. Her neck, it’s circumference no wider than a parlor-service saucer, kept bending and her chin brushed the bit of lace edging her dress” (60).  And "she had new skin, lineless and smooth, including the knuckles of her hands” (61). You can tell that she is being described as a newborn. Something weird I noticed while reading Beloved the first time was that Sethe had to use the restroom all of a sudden, "for some reason she could not immediately account for, the moment she got close enough to the face [Beloved’s], Sethe’s bladder filled to capacity” (61). I wondered why Morrison put that in, it seemed unnecesary. But in fact, it's part of the symbolism. It symbolizes the breaking of water before a baby is born. Sethe's urine was “ like flooding the boat when Denver was born. So much water Amy said, ‘Hold on, Lu. You are going to sink us you keep that up.’ But there was no stopping water breaking from a breaking womb and there was no stopping now” (61). Beloved was very thirsty when she arrived. "Four times Denver filled it [cup] and four times the woman drank as though she had crossed a desert" (62). On slave ships, the "pre-slaves" being shipped to America were crammed and weren't given water or food. Beloved was a pre-slave, in a way, because she died before she got to become one. She represents the thirsty passengers of the slave ships. Now that's one complex symbol!

Bilblical Allusions in Beloved

        Yesterday, we had some Beloved poster presentations. The most one that stood out to me was the one dealing with biblical allusions. I noticed them throughout the novel, not to mention the epigraph in the beginning, "I will call them my people, which were not my people, and her beloved, which was not her beloved"(Romans 9:25). Anyway, I really liked the depth of analyzing this group did. It seems like Beloved is a Jesus figure!!! She's a really complicated symbol. When you think about it, Denver drank her blood (kinda weird). In church, Christians drink wine to symbolize the blood of Jesus who died on the cross to save humanity. When Sethe, Paul D and Denver return from the carnival, they saw that a "fully dresses woman walked out of water"(60). Beloved dies once but is reborn that night, when she comes out of the water. Sounds like baptism! This resembles the rebirth of those who are baptized, "born-again" Christians. Grandma Baby Suggs represents John the Baptist because she used to preach in the Clearing, analogous to when he preached in the woods. Sethe represents Mary, the mother of Jesus. She cuts Beloved's throat and sees her die, to save her from the harsh life ahead of her. Mary witnesses the crucifixion of Jesus to save the world from their sins. And four men on horses arrived at 124- "schoolteacher, one nephew, one slave-catcher and a sheriff.... (174)." The four horsemen represent the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse mentioned in the Book of Revelation. One named Death, one Famine, War, and Pestilence.Wow. I can't believe how subtle Morrison is with these symbols. They're not too obvious because she wants you to connect the dots. I never even realized it!!!! Thanks Biblical Allusions group!

What's a Rememory?

      In Beloved, Toni Morrison uses her own word, "rememory", several times, as well as "disremember." I understand why "disremember" is used. The characters have undergone so many traumatic events in the past that they don't ever want to be reminded of again: Sethe's milk being stolen by schoolteacher's nephews, the killing of her own daughter, Beloved, Baby Suggs's death,  Paul D being shackled to ten other slaves and so much more. They seek to disremember and rather go on with the future, to leave the past behind. But "rememory" is harder to analyze. I think a rememory is a memory that is repeatedly remembered. When you think about the prefix "re-", you think of something happening over and over again. This implies that the memories of Sethe continue to be brought up several times. She "remorizes" traumatic things that occurred in her life because she can't get over her haunting past. She's gone through so many hardships in her life, such as trying to escape from Sweet Home as a slave, almost dying had Amy Denver never found her, not knowing what happened to her husband, Halle, and having the tough duty of killing her 2 year old to free her from a life of slavery. The "re" puts emphasis on the word memory, implying that it's a memory of an event or thing that is revisited due to its importance or awfulness.

I Love Beloved!

      Hello. I think Beloved by Toni Morrison is amazing on so many levels. It's so complex and I can tell, it's bursting with symbolism. I mean bursting. I read it the first time and didn't quite understand everything very well. But, I reviewed it very thoroughly and clarified whatever wasn't clear to me. I love the structure of the book: non -chronologically. It's written as someone remembers memories. When something is mentioned, something related from the past is brought up. It's confusing because everything is out of order but it's so much more interesting this way.
      I admire Morison's writing style. So complex, interesting, makes you want to read more. The book starts off with the present and as you read on, you realize why things are the way they are; you learn more about the pasts of characters, which explains their present situation. You learn  about Sethe's and Paul D's lives in strange order. The story starts off at 124 Bluestone Road, Cincinnati. You have no clue why, but you know. But then as you continue, it reveals its reason. Sethe, Paul D, Paul A, Sixo, Halle, and the Thirty Mile Woman all planned to escape from Sweet Home. Sethe runs away, pregnant, and a white woman, Amy Denver, finds her in bad condition. She helps her and spots a boat, where she gives birth.
      Symbolism. I know it's there. There are some strange moments that I don't get but noticed that I noticed them. For example, when Beloved looks out into darkness, says she sees her face and smiles. Or when she says she came from the darkness and lived on a bridge. Strange. Beloved is such a complex character. I was confused about her identity for awhile. I didn't realize that it was a manifestation of the 2 year old baby ghost Sethe killed; I thought she was a random woman that appeared on the doorstep of 124 or that she was a physical representation of Sethe's guilt or past. But she just turned out to be her baby's ghost. No big deal, right?! The characters don't notice all the weird things about her: her baby-like features, her raspy voice, or the fact that she knew about Sethe's diamond earrings. Only Paul D finds her suspicious. I like magical realism. It connects to moment in history (in this case, during the Reconstruction period after the Civil War, when slaves were being emancipated but still treated poorly) but has some magical characteristics (a ghost, Beloved, coming to life). Reality and magical happenings co- exist. I can't wait to explore the symbolism in class because what's the point of reading a spectacular book if you don't fully get the idea, the big picture? I can see how Beloved represents the baby ghost; she acts like a baby, talks like one, doesn't know how to tie her shoes and she "walked out of water"(60). I think this is a symbol for the womb, she is reborn and walks out wet, how a newborn is. Morrison is a genius. Well, I shall return.

Ist Synthesis Essay

    I thought the first synthesis essay was a little hard. It was hard to start writing (but that paper you gave us on hooks helped) and hard to come up with what to say. It was about Christopher McCandless, if we thought he was ignorant or not. I disagreed with Shaun Callarman; I thought he was being too harsh and didn't think of the matter from Chris' point-of-view. Something that made it difficult was that we were given 8 sources. I didn't know where to start because there were too many resources to use.  I used three: Into the Wild, "Where I lived and What I Loved For" by Thoreau , "Nature" by Emerson and "Self-Reliance". I used the last two the most because they both had Transcendental ideas, which relates to Chris' way of thinking. It's weird because Emerson and Thoreau seem to think just like McCandless. Once you read these essays, you get a feel of why Chris did what he did. I thought the debate was fun! It started off a little quiet and dead because everyone's shy at first but then it got heated. Not to brag, but my team had some pretty awesome ideas :) Well anyway, I'm really glad we did that because it inspired me when writing my essay. It gave me a lot of great ideas.
      It took me a while to write this essay. I thought my intro was OK but it was hard to start the body. I didn't feel very comfortable with AXES. I used my Into the Wild book for some quotes (I flipped through every single page to read my annotations; they helped big time). I finally came up with three ideas and attempted to have AXES. I remembered to staple on the rubric and I turned it in early before the bell rang. While I was taking the Beloved quiz, I got it back. I got an 88 :) Not bad. Plus 10 extra credit points. Yay! I prefer Style-analysis over this. I'd rather analyze a document than write about my opinion on something. It's more fact-based and straight forward in my opinion. Well, I'll be reading Beloved over the break. I need to reread a lot of stuff because the questions were familiar to me and I remembered reading about them, but I just couldn't remember. Hopefully I'll do better on the second quiz after I study like crazy!     
Happy Thanksgiving Ms. Sobrero!

The Awakening

       Hello, blog. It's been a while. I really loved all the hidden symbolism behind The Awakening, by Kate Chopin. I never realized that the unnoticeable things, like the birds or the ocean, could represent such big, complex themes. I really enjoyed the things we've done with this book because if we didn't go over the symbols (water, birds, clothing, music, etc.), I would've missed out and never would've knew what the book was truly about. Chopin is a genius!
      I'm glad I was assigned  the "birds"group because everything pertaining to them made sense to me. I noticed that the first line of the book was about a green and yellow parrot, speaking "a little Spanish, and also a language which no one understood..." (1). Whenever I read small, meaningless-seeming details, I don't really analyze; I just keep reading. But that's not good! Anyway, I also loved what the clothing stood for: constriction in a society Edna feels doesn't suit her. Women of the era wore tight corsets (like cages, which connects to birds!), representing the constriction they feel in society. They were expected to be "mother-women" who obeyed their husbands and would give themselves up for their children; Edna wasn't like that, though. She wasn't a mother-woman and she didn't really love Mr. Pontellier. Therefore, she felt misplaced, like she didn't belong in the Creole South. At the end, Edna stood naked on the beach, before she "died" in the gulf---she felt free and stripped of society. She gazed at the Cavalry officer, reminded of the times in Kentucky when she was free, unmarried and could have a crush. So much symbolism!
      The day before the quiz, I was so nervous. I didn't know how detailed the questions were going to be or how easy they were to remember. I read it all, but it's easy to forget stuff. When we got the quiz, I panicked but  after a while, it started coming to me. I got 100! yay!!!!

#6 How's Style-Analysis Going?

      I really like the style-analysis essay. I like how you have to find rhetorical devices, analyze why the author uses them and use your explanation to support the author's tones. I love this easy-to-follow structure because it just makes the essay flow. You try to argue that the devices used help to convey the tones you sense from the author.  AXES makes this argument more effective. Make an Assertion, give eXamples, Explain why they're used and tie this back to the tones for Significance. Sometimes, I end up rambling and all my info is out of order, but AXES makes it neat and tidy. It's kind of, dare I say it, fun writing these essays. Don't get me wrong, I don't like writing essays. But, this kind is not bad at all, even enjoyably in a way. I like how it's usually a historical passage because what you know in history helps you to analyze why the author may be using these devices. I also like how you provided us with an awesome rhetorical mnemonic device. This way, you have somewhere to start. You can begin with diction or syntax. If you don't know how to start off your essay, look at the mnemonic device, "TADLSSNIDIPPOS", to give ideas of what to write about. Overall, I like these essays because you can easily write a well-structured, effectively argumented essay by using all the wonderful thing you've taught us so far. p.s: you're an awesome teacher Ms. Sobrero! :)
      The only thing I worry about is that I might not understand the text. They can be hard to understand sometimes and they're usually connected to an event in history. What if I'm not familiar with that event? I won't understand it well because I won't know what exactly is being talked about. For example, when we read the speech to the Virginia Convention by Patrick Henry, I was confused at first but when I noticed some key words, I realized that he was referring to the long rule of Britain. If someone wasn't aware of the colonization of America by Britain from the 17th to 18th centuries, they would be lost. They would have an idea, but not the full picture. I'll make sure to pay special attention in history class!!! I shall return, blog!!

#5 How is Reading Film Like Reading a Text?

       So, how is reading film like reading a text. It's very similar. When I was watching The Wizard of Oz, I noticed some elements similar to the rhetorical devices we're learning. For example,  I was reminded of anaphora. Every time Dorothy met someone new, such as Tin-man, Lion and Scarecrow, she sang a song starting with the same words but being changed a little to match the scenario of the character. I couldn't help but notice that the song always started off the same. Also, I noticed the repetition of "Lions, tigers and bears. Oh my!" When reading a text or viewing a film, there's always a hidden message/moral.  In the movie, the message was that you should appreciate everything you have because "there's no place like home." This is evident in Dorothy's experience in a new place foreign to her. She runs away from her Aunty Em and uncle when she feels misunderstood but when she's transported somewhere other than home, she misses it dearly. This sounds like something in a text to me!
      Films and texts can both be interpreted in many different ways, too. Rich texts, when analyzed, can have many meanings. For example, a small text like , symbolizes the flood of ideas and duties of the newcomers with the the "flood of people" (first line). You can also see that the flood of ideas is represented by the flood of parallel sentence structure and emphasis put by the constant use of "they" (anaphora). And, the story about the beheaded flower has many devices used that go hand in hand with the hidden meaning. Ex) the use of short, abrupt phrases goes hand in hand with the short, abrupt death of the flower. In movies, many meanings can be found as well.  Many morals, themes, motifs and meanings   can be found in one movie.      

1st Two Rhetorical Modes: Definition & Description

      So far, we have explored 2 of the 10 rhetorical modes: definition and description. The definition essay was pretty, dare I say it, fun. I normally  hate essays but this one didn't have very strict rules and was kind of free-form. I picked the slang word "props", which is used to give someone proper recognition for something they did. I had a little 2-sentence intro and started talking about it right away, since it was only a 200 word essay. You would think it's easier to write an essay with a small amount of words but, it's actually harder; you have to get to the point and sometimes you don't feel like you got the point across the way you wanted to because of the limit. Anyway, I looked up the etymology of "props" and it came from the phrase, "proper recognition", popularized by rappers in the 1980s. I tried to put in some quality examples, to give an idea of how to use the word. If I were to go back and change it, I would talk more about the examples, explain them (AXES), even though the word count would go over 200. Overall, it was enjoyable and not too stressful.
      The description essay was a tough one for me. First of all, I put a lot of emphasis on the artwork to pick because I have to write a whole 300-500 essay on it. It look me awhile and I finally picked Irises, by Van Gogh. I kept on thinking about "the descriptions must tie to the theme" so, I tried to pick a painting that had many noticeable descriptions that I could connect to a theme. I was down to 2 choices when I narrowed it down: Irises and a painting depicting a poor family. I liked the latter because the theme was "poverty", which could easily( I thought) be tied to the description: dark, dull colors, sullen facial expressions and .....that's all I could think of. I wanted at least 3 descriptions so, I moved on to the other choice, whose theme was "the joy found in nature." I saw that Van Gogh used bright colors, put emphasis on the vivid flowers and made them free-form, having  movement; I went ahead and chose it. Writing it was difficult to me because I wanted to just talk about what I saw but, everything had to support the theme, kind of like a thesis or claim.
      I tried my best to have AXES in my body paragraphs, stating the description(A), giving an example of it(X), explaining why Van Gogh did this (E) and then for Significance, I talked about how the description tied to the theme. I hope I did well!

The Language of Composition, pg. 1-6

      What is rhetoric? Rhetoric, as I would define it, is the act of using clever literary devices to persuade the audience to favor your viewpoint towards something. In Lou Gehrig's speech, he talks about the good things in life, trying to overshadow his bad diagnosis. He tries to persuade the stadium to believe that even though he got a "bad break", he had a lot to live for. That's basically his thesis, or claim. He provides evidence(or examples, if referring to AXES) that support this assertion, such as he has "never received anything but kindness and encouragement from [his] fans." When I first read it, I couldn't help notice that I noticed (haha) that he used repetition to convey his point: "that's something!". He said this phrase many times and this is an effective rhetorical device. Speakers also use pathos, ethos, and logos. Pathos, or appeal to emotions, was used wen he used greatest, wonderful, honored, grand, blessing, diction with a good connotation. An argument that appeals only to emotions is descibed as weak because it presents an argument against an opinion. Logos, or reason, is when speakers/writers provide rational ideas that support the claim. It is actually beneficial to mention a counterargument, an idea that opposes your point. You first concede that it may be true but then, you refute the validity by proving it wrong. For example, in a persuasive essay I wrote last year, I tried to persuade the reader that school lunches should be changed to be more healthy by using organics. I proposed a counterargument, the problem that it would be more expensive and unaffordable for all. I refuted it, however, by talking about the hidden costs that come with "cheap" industrial farming. 30% of the oil we use is used in this method of farming, for example. Ethos is character appeal. It emphasizes the shared values between the writer and audience. For example, if the speaker and audience share qualities, like their both doctors, they are drawn by the similarities.
       There are a lot of literary devices that help convey rhetoric, or effective persuasion. Included are the appeals of ethos, pathos and logos. Tone plays a key role in ethos, as well as pathos. Well, I think that sums it up. Bye!

An AP Grader for a Day

      Today, we graded AP "style-analysis" essays, which were samples from actual test-takers last year. I was kind of confused about how to write this kind of essay but today's grading cleared it up. I liked them all really, but my favorite was NNNN1, which I gave a nine. I gave out a 5, an 8, another 5, and a 9. I thought they analyzed the rhetorical strategies very well and their writing sounding sophisticated and urbane. They talked about asyndeton, polysyndeton, pathos, emotional appeal, the way the syntax was and how the diction used was. This gave me a picture of how these essays would normally be; I was kind of wondering before we read these samples.
      When grading, the first thing I do is read the thesis and see if it includes proper rhetorical strategies actually mentioned in the passage. Then I see if all the assertions support it well and provide effective examples. I liked NNNN1 a lot because his/her language was sophisticated, she seemed to know what she was doing, seemed in control and analyzed the reading well. The thesis was well supported by the body paragraphs and provided examples that persuaded me to believe what she was saying. I put a lot of emphasis on the thesis because it is basically the basis for the whole essay and every sentence you say must lead back to it. I also thought NN1 was pretty good. It seemed like she was trying to prove that Kelley used pathos, instead of rhetorical devices but I think she analyzed it well. I liked this experience and I thought it was kind of fun :) I hope my essay doesn't fall into the hands of a mean grader!!  I want them to grade by the criteria I grade by, but I'm sure that's what everyone feels as well. So, I'm not the only worried one. Bye!

Meta-Writing Essay

      Today, there was an in-class essay :( I was doing fine in my own little world until I looked up at the board: timed writing assignment. NOOO!!! I was now worried because I really hate essays, let alone in-class essays. I just tried to relax though because panicking won't help the situation. The prompt was given and I saw that it was about yourself. I wasn't too thrilled with it. The first thing I always do is think of all the specific things I'll talk about and then wrap all of it up into a nice thesis. Thesis is the most important part of the essay, I would say. I was a little puzzled by the prompt. It asks for strengths, weaknesses and goals to set. I was frazzled because I thought, "how do I come up with a thesis that sums all 3 of the requirements?" They can each be an independent essay but this essay contains all 3. So, I just mentioned my weaknesses, strengths and goals to improve as a writer in my intro & thesis and tried to support it all by my assertions. I don't think I did that great but I guess it was decent. I was under pressure and time so I just did my best. When I feel rushed, I tend to just get something down because I panic about the time limit. I didn't feel that the structure, diction, and intro was AP like. I like to include a nice hook to grab the reader's attention in the intro but I failed to do so. I wanted to add a hook to my intro but I ran out of time and I didn't know how to squeeze it in (which is a reason I like to  type essays).
      I write better in my house, on the kitchen table, spending my sweet time. But, the AP test isn't like that!!!! My weaknesses of writing are that I'm slow and I could improve my analytical skills. When I say slow, I mean slow.  My strengths were that I could come up with theses that could be well backed up and my grammar & conventions(even though I'm sure I mispelled things!). On the STAR test last year, I got 100% on the conventions part of the writing. But, I have a lot to work on as a writer and I'm sure I'll learn a ton in this class.

My Favorite Book

      I read all three books so now, which one is my favorite? I would have to say Into the Wild. It is so interesting because the author, Jon Krakauer, switches up the order of when things happened. He started off the book with a journal entry by Chris McCandless that didn't make any sense at all. Once you read on, you find out that like somewhere in the middle of the book or so, that this was written by him on his trip to Alaska and it all makes sense. He mixes up the order and later on, you find out what it means. I like the author's style of writing, too. It's not all sophisticated and  hard to figure out. There were really fascinating parts of Chris's life. He made a story about a hitchhiker who no one paid attention to really interesting. Everyone just thought that it was Chris's stupid mistake to journey alone into Alaska but Krakauer didn't. He wrote a book on him.
      On Writing comes next. I think King's language could be cleaner. haha. He cusses a lot and is often inappropriate. I like this book because it has 3 main parts: a memoir, the on writing part, and a part on On Living, about how he almost died in a car accident. The only time I read a book with 3 parts was Oedipus Rex, a summer book for the 9th grade, but that's kind of different. I like his tips, especially that one that bans excessive adverbs, but most of them were kind of obvious. Nonetheless, I liked it.
       How To Read Literature Like a Professor wasn't my favorite, at all. Foster used examples from a bunch of books that I never read, or even heard of. It was kind of hard to relate to him because the books weren't familiar. His sentences were pretty long and he used language that was pretty challenging to comprehend. It sure made me use the dictionary a lot! He was pretty funny though, with his little rules. It's never just rain, every trip is a quest(except when it's not), there's only one story, whenever people eat or drink together, it's communion. Creative mind he has there. He made me laugh a few times. I really think he helped with comprehending literature. He got me thinking of different ways I never would've thought of thinking about something. Well, I think that's it for now. Bye!

My 20th Post!!

      Yesterday, I finished reading On Writing and this is post #20! It was a special part of the book (On Living: A Postscript) about the time he almost died. It was pretty tragic and sad. He was going on his daily walk and then something terrible and unexpected happened. A man, driving out of control, hit King in his blue van. He's hit hard and when he wakes up or after his break of memory, Bryan Smith walks up to him that help's on the way. He went up to a store to get one of those "Marzes-bars." Strangely, this reminded King of one of his book characters. Funny, isn't it? How characters in books are so much like real people we know. Anyway, he's taken to a hospital to deal with his near-fatal injuries. It turns out that Smith's estimates of injuries were conservative: his lower leg broken in 9, not 5 places. But, things could've been worse, if he landed on the sharp rocks near him.
      King started writing this book in 1997 but, he took a break from it because nonfiction isn't really his thing. He finished it in 1999. So, write about what you like. I understand why King loves to write  so much. It helped him heal in the hospital. It wasn't life for him but, it was a back to life for him. He wrote and even finished this book in that time. It really helped him because it was fun and it brought him to a fun and brighter place. And, he doesn't do it for the fame or money; he does it for the enrichment of readers' lives and for plain fun. He said something that Foster from HTRLLAP said: if there's an important prop you want to bring up, mention it early on. It was so familiar and then I remembered where I heard it. He gave us a passage and analyzed it(just like Foster did in HTRLLAP. It was called "The Hotel Story", a 1st draft he wrote. After you read it, there's the edited version: 2nd draft=1st draft -10%. First of all, he changed the name to "1408", the name of the "haunted" hotel room. Then he took out an adverb and changed Mr. Ostermeyer's name to Mr. Olin, shorter and better. He took out unneeded details and brought up an important prop(lucky Hawaiian shirt) from page 30 to the beginning. Well, anyway that's about it. I liked the book a lot, mainly because there was a memoir, a "toolbox", a part on writing and a part on how to live by writing, On Living: A Postscript. Bye!

On Writing #6

      1 more day of reading On Writing and I will be DONE!!!! I have to admit, I'm proud of myself :) Well, it looks like King realizes that he doesn't quite give the most "of high thought" tips. What he says is kind of common sense, he said on page 249. It kinda annoys me that he'd spend so much time writing something so basic. I wish he told me something that I could really benefit from. I do like the memoir in the beginning pages of the story, though. It was funny and he has a likeable writing style and tone (except for the cuss word on every other page). He can be very inappropriate, but funny.
      It's important to have a supportive and sympathetic first reader(in King's case, his wife) because they motivate you and give you reliable tips for improving your hard work. He recommends sending stories to 6-8 close friends for constructive criticism(I hate hearing that there's something wrong with my work that I took so long on!). An important part to master as a writer is finding a medium for pacing, the speed at which the story unfolds. If it's too fast, it will be confusing and unsatisfying but too slow, and your readers will be bored, even the very patient ones. He doesn't like the use of flashbacks because he's interested in what's going to happen, not what's in the past. I disagree though; sometimes you need to throw in a quick flashback. Think about, it's essential to some TV shows. The best way to maintain a good pace is to keep "Ideal Reader"(as King calls it) in mind. Ask yourself as you write, "Will I.R. get bored from this long, slow pace?" or, "Will I.R. wish this part went faster?" Good strategy to me.
      Books shouldn't be too "puffy". Once, King received a letter from someone concerning his story saying that it was good but puffy. "2nd draft = 1st draft - 10%." was his advice. This changed the way King wrote fiction. Cut out the unneeded details. Every character has a history but, you don't need to tell it all. That would be unnecessary fluff. He also dislikes excessive research. Your story isn't a research paper, it's a story made for entertaining your fellow readers. Readers want to love the story, instead of being bombarded with facts. See ya later, blog!

You Can Always Rewrite It!

      Today, I read about forty pages of On Writing, again. I'm almost done with it! Slowly getting there! Maybe one more day(if I feel really determined tomorrow). Anyway, King said that description is very important, and I agree one hundred percent. If you over-describe, the reader will feel like they're buried in words but under-describing will leave readers with too little knowledge of characters. Remember, when you describe, you're setting up what you what to be visualized in the reader's head. He used an example where he described a steak house; he only used 4 descriptions. That's all you need, more and you're reader will be bored and the story will drift off topic(when I write short stories and there's food, I tend to describe a lot). I think that's good advice. Not to be mean, I don't think King really helps that much when it comes to improving your writing. I mean, he kind of says the basics: write in a room free of distraction and close the door, keep reading and practicing, rewrite, use good dialogue, don't take too long on one story. I could've thought of this stuff on my own, honestly. But, I appreciate that he took the time to write this for us aspiring writers so, thanks Mr. King. :)
      Dialogue is important as well because it tells so much about the character who's speaking. What the person says tells a lot about their personality. So, of course it's better to let your character describe himself, rather  than narrate it. He said something that I never really realized that's very true. A character that you create has a part of you in them. You made them. If the character is in a situation, you decide what he/she should do based on what you think is best. So, in a way, they are kinda part writer, part made up person. I thought that was kind of cool. Basic rules:

• Dialogue is a good way to describe characters, since it's coming straight from them. Make good use of it and try to throw in some thoughtful similes and metaphors.
• tell the truth when you write
• don't go crazy when you describe things but don't under do it.
• write exactly what's in your mind on 1st draft. You can always rewrite it. When it's time for the 2nd draft, fix spelling/ grammatical errors and find connections, patterns, underlying themes and symbolism

When you think of something worthy of a story, write it down pronto. Then when it's time to rewrite it, find symbols and themes. You don't really have to write the story with themes and patterns in mind. You can always find some with a little imagination. Also, resist the temptation to show people the story before it's complete. Keep it away from doubts and influences, it's your story! It won't go as you first  imagined it would go if someone suggests something or brings up an idea. You can brag when it's finished, though! hehe. Bye!!!

Forget About Plot?

      I sat down today in my comfy chair and read forty-six pages of On Writing.  King started talking about paragraphs, which he believes is the basic unit of writing(not the sentence). Paragraphs in informal essays should  be well structured and should have a topic-sentence-followed-by-support-and-description format, while the paragraphs in fiction stories shouldn't really be too well thought. I mean, you shouldn't have to think too hard about when to start your next one and plus, you can always go back and fix it. It should be natural. He said something that really stuck in my mind: "The object if fiction isn't grammatical correctness but to make the reader welcome and then tell a story....to make him/her forget, whenever possible, that he/she is reading a story at all." I think that is sooo true. When I read, I want to be caught up in a great story, so interesting that you have a hard time putting it down.
      I find that King is kind of negative. He thinks that a writer is pretty much born with it and unfortunately, if you're not...you're just not. "If you're a bad writer, no one can help you become a good one, or even a competent one. If you're good and you want to be great....fugeddaboudit." Kinda brings your confidence down. I would expect a writer to really encourage future hopefuls. You have to keep reading, as he says repeatedly. How else can you improve and learn new skills?
      Some great advice he gives is to not take too long on a work you've started. Don't go for months, a couple sentences a day. Set a goal of pages per day. When it drags on, the characters seem like characters. You're excitement is lost and you lose your hold on the plot. I feel that way when I start reading a book, take a week's break, and return. I feel lost and the need to restart. Don't procrastinate and finish already!!!!! Tips:

• read a lot, I mean a lot
• write in a serene, environment free of distractions
• don't take longer than 3 months, a season, on a work
• close the door, you mean business! 

I thought it was kinda weird when King said that there isn't always plot. He said that stories should begin with a situation and then go on based on it. There isn't an exact plot, just ongoing related situations. Interesting way to look at it.

The Good Ol' Toolbox

      Hello there! Today, I read about 50 pages of On Writing. One important lesson to be learned from one of King's experiences: never give up. When he was going to toss his story in the trash, Tabbie kept it and helped him improve it. And you know what? The story, which turned into the book Carrie, was worth $400,000! So, just  because a story is hard to write or you think it won't go far, think again. That's a lot of money. King told about the time he got his first alcoholic drink. On a Washington field trip, he snook off to a liquor store and bought some cheap whiskey. Well, this little mess-up turned into a terrible lifestyle. One day, he found out that Maine enacted the returnable bottle-and can-law. After disposing the beer cans in a bin, he realized how much had piled. After a while of denial, he realized he was an alcoholic. His wife stepped in and saved him, though. He felt that his writing wouldn't be as good without drugs but, he was wrong. Writing does not depend on that, but on your imagination and creative thinking.
      I got to a page that said "TOOLBOX" at one point. He kept talking and finally explained what in the world that meant and how it related to the book. He discussed the handmade toolbox his Uncle Oren crafted himself, something that he's been familiar with since childhood. It had 3 shelves, with the commonest tools on the top shelf. He then said that you, the reader, should have a toolbox, for writing. What a great symbol! The top shelf should house the commonest tools, your vocabulary(along with some grammar). King suggests that you shouldn't force yourself to use "big" words. If you have a point to put across, put it clearly. Use the very 1st word that comes to mind because it will be closest to what you're trying to say. King was going to put a detailed section on grammar in On Writing, but changed his mind(yes!). Grammar isn't really my thing. I mean I kind of like it but I can never remember what exactly present/past participles, simple-complex sentences, compound sentences, appositives, superlatives and a whole bunch of other grammatical terms are! Oh, and he allows incomplete sentences. hehe. As you can see, I do that plenty of times in my blogs!
      For some reason, King hates adverbs. I think they add detail and "color", if you will, to sentences. For example, read this example from the book: "Don't be such a fool, Jekyll," Utterson said contemptuously. King would prefer it like this:"Don't be such a fool, Jekyll," Utterson said--without the fancy adverb. He believes sentences are weaker and less bold with them. Another pet peeve is the passive voice; always use the active voice. I think the passive voice should be used sometimes, but I agree, it takes your interest away. I'll be back soon!

On Writing #2

      Hello! I continued reading On Writing today (which doesn't seem to be on writing, but more on King's life). My reading started off with the story of Dave's Rag, which brings back my early childhood memories. It reminds me of when I was about 9 years old and my best friend, Danielle, and I set up a lemonade stand using lemons from my backyard. Well, anyway, Dave created his own newspaper, highlighting all the local news. They(Dave and Stephen) used something called a hectograph, which they hated. But fortunately, the Rag entered a "golden age" when they bought a drum printing press. King also mentioned the times he got in trouble, the many times. He sold The Pit and the Pendulum, an original, to his classmates and got in trouble  because a) it was trash and b) because he turned the school into a market. Then, he created a newspaper in high school called The Village Vomit, which had a mean nickname for all the teachers. He wasn't exactly what you'd call a teacher's pet. One day, he was called into the principal's office, by the guidance counselor, to write the Weekly Enterprise. Here, he learned more than he did in college about writing, by the counselor, John Gould...in 10 minutes.haha. He corrected him and gave him great advice.
      Why haven't I ever heard of those magazines that offer money for good stories? In King's young days, it seems like they were more common or something. Or maybe it's just because it's open mainly to writers. Well, I don't know but he got $200 from one story,The Graveyard Shift! And then, he got $500 from Sometimes They Come Back. He met his future wife(Tabby, as he called her) behind his university's bookstore one day. They grew closer at a poetry gathering. I guess poetry can help people bond! I think she was a big inspiration to him because when he was going to toss out his draft, she saved it and it turned into Carrie, a novel.
      I like the book. King kinda cusses too much and he's kinda awkward, though. But he's not boring, at least. I was looking through the book and I noticed that there's a page that says,"On Writing", which is weird because it seems like the real book starts there and everything prior to it is like a little biography. I never ran into a book like that. It's interesting though. I'll be back soon!!!

On Writing

      Today, I started reading On Writing, by Stephen King. I like King's style of writing because he speaks to you like he's in a simple conversation; it's colloquial and funny. I didn't realize that this was going to be a biography-like book. I thought it was a teaching book for how to write but, it's probably both once I read further. He's a really funny guy. He brought up one of his many babysitters,  Eula-Beulah, who used to, well....fart on him. That's mean and gross!!! I mean, he's just a helpless little kid, who couldn't do anything about it(at least she was fired). But the funny part was that he turned it into a positive by saying that she prepared him for literary criticism.
      And then there was that horrifying story of the ear doctor(or otiologist). When King was in the first grade, he missed a lot of the school year. He got a lot of health issues: measles, ear infections, fevers, and a lot of cases of strep throat. Once, he and his mother took a cab to the ear doctor, who did something to solve his ear infection. He poked his ear drum with a sterilized needle!!! Oh my gosh!!!!! I can't imagine the pain. I can't even begin to imagine it. It happened more than once, too. Of course, the doctor said, "it's not gonna hurt." But it does. Another mishap when he was young was his case of poison ivy. When he was with his brother, Dave, one day, he had to use the bathroom. Dave told him to do it in the wild, like the cowboys. He did, and used leaves to clean up; it turned out to be poison ivy that he used. Isn't that terrible?
      I think King's mom inspired him to be a writer. When he was little, he made a little book(using the words of another comic book) and showed it to her. She seemed shocked and amazed that he had been smart enough to make that but soon realized that it wasn't all his work. She told him to make another one, because she believed he could make one better than the actual comic book. He want to work, making another 4. They were about 4 magic animals who helped people. Their leader was Mr.Rabbit Trick(pretty cute). He kept submitting his unique stories to magazines, but they were all soon rejected. One day at age 16, he rewrote "The Night of the Tiger", his own original. The magazine bought it. The moral of my blog is "never give up". Well, I like this book a lot, so far. I'll return soon!

Into the Wild #6

       I finished Into the Wild today! yay. woohoo! But, the story was a really sad one. I feel terrible for the McCandless family, who will never get over this loss. Today, the reading started off with Krakauer's visit to the Stampede Trail in Alaska where Chris died. He lived in Fairbanks bus 142, an old, weathered bus on the Sushana River. Krakauer took two Alaskans with him, Roman Dial and Dan Solie, as well as Andrew Liske. They tried to discover how Chris died. When they arrived, they met the 2 men who saw his dead body. They made a fool of Chris for shooting a caribou, which he recorded as a moose. Krakauer discovered that it was a moose though!! Althogh Chris wrote in his diary mainly about the food he hunted, doesn't mean he didn't appreciate nature, as some belived. I mean, he risked his life to live somewhere he loved, nature. How could he not appreicaite it? I dislike how people make fun of him without knowing enough of his life's story.
       There were some weird things put out there about McCandless: he had "short man's complex"(an insecurity), which led him to want to show the world that he could survive in the wild and that he was manly. Um, I don't think that's the case but anyway, when Krakauer visited the bus, he investigated what may have killed him. In his Alaskan plant encyclopedia, Tanaina Plantlore, potato seeds are said to be poisonous. This struck Krakauer because according to Wayne Westerberg, he may have purchased potato seeds in South Dakota, in hopes of having a small garden. A kind of wild potato, H. alpinum, grows in the bus's region. The book also says that a wild sweet pea, H. Mackenzii, could be easily mixed up(which is poisonous) with it because the only thing that distinguishes them is the structure of veins under the leaves. At first, Krakauer thought that he mixed them up, but he didn't. He sent samples of the wild potato seeds to a professor, who examined them. They didn't contain any alkaloids. He was baffled(and so was I!). He stumbled across an article about deadly fungus, which rang a bell. He realized that he didn't die from the seeds, per se; rather, he died from the R. leguminicola(fungus) that grew on them, since Chris kept them in a damp Ziplock bag. What a sad ending. This evil fungus inhibits an enzyme necessary for metabolism, so no matter how much Chris ate, he would've starved. I really liked this book but, it was very sad and unfortunate. The epilogue was pretty sad too, but his mother stayed strong during her visit to Fairbanks bus 142. Until next time!
     

Into the Wild #5

      "The Stikine Ice Cap" was a really interesting chapter(well, there's 2 of 'em). It's about Krakauer's journey to climb to the summit of the treacherous Devils Thumb in Alaska. This is probably why he was so interested in McCandless's case: because he knows the feeling, why he wanted to journey out into the wild, alone. He shares the same logic, going out to the wild to escape the unfitting society and to achieve his goal with strong determination. He wanted to be able to tell himself that he could do it, despite the danger.
      While reading, I picked up a few similarities between Chris and Jon. They both ventured into Alaska when they were youngsters,  they both abandoned their cars in the middle of nowhere(Jon couldn't afford a plane ticket so, he drove to Washington and then abandoned it), share determination, courage, and and both have shaky relationships with their fathers. Also, they were inspired to love nature by their family members(Chris by his grandfather, Loren Johnson and Jon by his father, Lewis Krakauer).Their lives are actually pretty similar. Similar enough for Krakauer to write a 200 page book about a man he never met, Chris J. McCandless. Well anyway, today Krakauer told about his twenty-day Alaskan adventure. He was determined to climb to the never-before climbed top of the Devils Thumb. He left from Boulder with a salmon seine to Petersburg. From there, he got a ride from some tree planters, who took him to a the head of Thomas Bay. He began to plod all the way to the mountain. When he was there, he almost starved, suffered through blinding storms, and even burned part of his new tent. At one point, he was going to quit because he kept hitting rock, not ice when he was climbing. But, he wanted to fulfill his goal so, he went back when the weather cleared and made it. He went to the top of the Devils Thumb. Wow.
      Back to their similarities. Both their fathers pushed them to be successful and go to college and both sons hated that. They were pushed to excel academically, which caused bad relationships, along with the discovery of their faults: Jon realized that his dad was only human and Chris realized that his father had two women in his life. In "The Alaska Interior"(ch. 16), Krakauer explains Chris "Alaskan Odyssey." I was kinda confused in the beginning of the story because it started in the middle of the full story. He cleared it for me. Chris left Carthage, South Dakota and came upon Liard River Hotsprings. Then a truck driver, Gaylord Stuckey, gave him a ride to Alaska. He drove him to the University of Alaska campus, where he got a book of Alaskan plants. He then walked along the highway leading to the Stampede Trail, where he met Jim Gallien(who was mentioned in the  beginning). Chris reached the Teklanika River, which he couldn't cross when he planned on returning home. He was forced to go back into the wild.

Into the Wild #4

      I really like this book. But, it just keeps getting sadder and sadder. I felt so bad for his parents, Billie(which I learned today is not her real name!) and Walt, and especially bad for Carine, his beloved little sister. When Chris Fish, her husband broke the bad news to her, she started balling nonstop and gradually lost 10 pounds. Poor girl. I felt he was her best friend, not just her brother. And I just wish that Chris was a little more considerate and appreciative of his parents, who started from nothing and worked day and night to send him to a great college. But, I really think Chris is good person. He was the kind that loved to help the less fortunate and he didn't fit in with the capitalist society because he thought money was corrupt and a bad thing to have too much of. I admire him for having this outlook, because money isn't everything and sometimes it becomes peoples' idols. We should appreciate nature more and the good stuff in life. I can't believe he dedicated some days to buying meals for homeless people that could've been a harm to him. He doesn't care though; he's a helper.
      Well, today I read like thirty pages and it started off with "fairbanks", where Gallien, the man the book started off with driving "Alex", recognized who the dead man was in The New York Times: Alex (I like how Krakauer started the book with a character we don't know but will be later introduced).Westerberg did too and gave his Social Security number. His family was crushed when they found out. They really loved him; his poor mom lost 8 pounds, being already petite. Chris's grandpa, Loren Johnson, was a great influence in his life; he was a man who loved animals and had a great interest in the wild. He had a great impact in his life. In a way, I wish they never met, even though he really adored his grandfather. I don't think he'd be inspired to trek to Alaska on his own had he met an adventurer like his grandfather. I also wish that Chris took his beloved dog, Buckley, before he went journeying after high school. He wouldn't take the risks he did with him, because he wouldn't want anything bad to happen to him. He was a dear friend of his. I feel bad for Chris when he found out that Walt was married previously, to Marcia. It left him mad deep inside for quite a while. I would be hurt and frustrated too. He barely contacted his parents after he left, he just sent a few postcards. He kept them worried and terrified. Well, I hope it doesn't get even sadder!

Into the Wild #3

      Into the Wild is so interesting to me, mainly because the author switches between time periods throughout the book. In chapter eight, the author says that many people thought McCandless's death was foolish. Of course, it wasn't very smart of him to venture into danger-filled Alaska with hardly enough supplies but, I admire him for his determination, his passion for pursuing the life he longs, and the courage he had to go to Alaska, alone on top of that. I don't really like how the author started talking about other people who went to dangerous places and died, such as John Waterman and Everett Ruess. I think the story should be focused on Chris's life.
      Anyway, the author brought up a man, Gene Rosellini, who designed an anthropological experiment to see if  it's possible to live independent of technology. His hypothesis was that "man could become a Stone Age native." He learned that it's not possible, though. I thought that this was kind of ironic when you compare his mentality to McCandless's; they're complete opposites. John Waterman, a man who died on his journey, reminded me of Chris because they both were courageous and did what they wanted. Carl McCunn also reminds me of him; they were both fascinated with the harsh side of nature. The author then talks about  Everett Ruess, a 20 year-old who walked into the desert and never came out. After he got his diploma, he was out on the road, like McCandless. Ruess's letters are so similar to Chris's. They both talk about how they can't stand life how we live it and they go on and on and on about the beauty and freedom of nature. They feel the same way about life: it should be lived to the fullest, in beautiful nature where there are no rules or laws. McCunn, McCandless and Ruess really have a lot in common. Both Chris and Everett gave themselves new names: "Alexander Supertramp" and "Lan Rameau"(which changed to Evert Rulan and then back to his real name), suggesting that they wanted to start new lives. And lastly, they can both be compared to the Papar, people from Ireland who moved to the island of Papos in the 5th and 6th centuries A.D. They were courageous people who risked their lives for better lives. Until next time!

Into the Wild #2

I like Into the Wild a lot, even though it's kind of sad. It's a little confusing how the author switches from different time periods throughout the book. For example, McCandless's death was mentioned in the beginning of the story and then as you read on, it talks about his journey to Alaska. It's okay though because it makes it more interesting that way. Well, anyway, I read three chapters today. Sometime after he went to Las Vegas, he went to Bullhead City, Arizona. He got a job at McDonald's and on a few pages, his manager and assistant manager talk about him: he was a little strange, but he was a reliable, good boy. In chapter 6, Chris meets Ronald Franz, an eighty year-old who really grew attached to him. The chapter starts off with a letter sent from him asking for a copy of the Outside magazine that talks about Chris's death. Then, the chapter talks about how they met and so on. I like how the author kind of fast-forwards and then starts with the beginning of the story. It catches your attention. One day at the bajada, Chris meets Franz, who offers a ride. He accepts and tells him to go past Oh-My-God Hot Springs(strange name, there). Franz gets really close to him, teaches him how to work with leather, and gives him a ride to San Diego, just because he wants to be with him. While they were driving, he asked Chris if he could adopt him as his grandson but, he kind of ignored it. This was really sad to me because Franz really liked him, enough to fill the gap of his dead son. Chris didn't want to have anything to do with relationships and human intimacy, though. Franz even took his advice to live a new life similar to Chris's new life, a free life on the road full of adventure.When he found out he died in Alaska, he was so crushed. :( Chris later returned to Westerberg in Carthage for work, to earn money for his "great Alaskan odyssey". It seems everyone was fascinated by him: Borah, Westerberg, Franz, Bob and Jan Burres, and even Mrs. Westerberg, who wasn't fond of any of her son's employees; he was special. On April 27, 1992, Chris sent letters to Westerberg and Jan and Bob Burres that this would be the last time they'd communicate. He now walks into the wild.

Into the Wild

Today, I began reading Into the Wild by Jon Krakauer, and I really like it so far. It's a really interesting story about a 24 year old man who journeys into Alaska. I've never read a story similar to it and I think it's pretty unique. So, Chris McCandless, or "Alex" ventures into Alaska basically to invent a new life, a non-materialistic, free one. He escapes federal law and "things." He gives $25,000 to OXFAM, a charity, and burns the rest of it. The story starts off with Jim Gallien's discovery of "Alex" and picks him up in his Ford. Near the Stampede Trail, a bus has been left, in which 3 men get into. Later on, they find a note from Chris and his body, dead in the bus. This kinda surprised me, that the death came so early into the book. Well anyway, in Carthage, he met Wayne Westerberg at a bar, who took him to his friend's home, whose wife cooked him a nice meal.They became fond of each of other and he gave Chris a job, until he was arrested. So, he left and headed for a nomadic life. In  Detrital Wash, Chris crossed the "do not enter sign" or whatever it said with his yellow Datsun and it got stuck in a flash flood. He decided to just leave it there(the park rangers made good use of it). I got to the part-chapter 5- where Chris got a ride from some men to El Golfo de Santa Clara, where he dragged his found canoe to the ocean, followed by the beach. He's now in Las Vegas. I really like the author's style of writing because he doesn't try to write all "fancy" with a lot profound words. You feel like  he's talking with you or something. I planned to read a certain amount of pages today but it was so interesting that I kept going! Well, anyway I looked up some words. congenial-(adj.) agreeable, suitable, or pleasing contumacious-(adj.) stubbornly perverse or rebellious enigmatic-(adj.) perplexing, mysterious convivial-(adj.) friendly, agreeable. See you later, blog!

Awesome Ending

Today, I finished How To Read Literature Like a Professor! I liked chapter 25, "Don't Read With Your Eyes." I was kind of puzzled when I first read the title but, once you read on, it becomes clear what he means. He means that you shouldn't read with your eyes and your eyes only; you should look at things with different perspectives. In Homer's The Iliad, Achilles throws a fit because his slave has been taken from him and he slaughters every Trojan in his sight. We would see this as evil, terrible, unjust and just plain bad. But to an ancient Greek, this would appear different. You can't look at things in one way. In chapter 26, Foster talks about irony. Once again, he says' "Irony trumps everything." A nice example of irony: in Waiting For Godot, two men are stranded in a desolate country and they have the option to travel a road near them. But they don't. They choose not to, even though they can escape their desolation by going. Pretty ironic, I'd say. In the last chapter, ch. 27(my favorite), Foster gave us a test case, "The Garden Party", by Katherine Mansfield, a short story to analyze. I really liked it. The Sheridans are having a garden party that starts off with a marquee being placed in their beautiful garden full of karaka-trees, lavender, and fruit clusters. They're quite wealthy and have a cook, who prepared 15 kinds of sandwiches. yummy. Out of nowhere, Laura sees Sadie, cook, and the Godber's man staring at something in shock. At what? A dead man! Out of the blue. It was a man from the cottages below their home who had been killed. Laura told Jose that the party must be thrown off but she, along with her mother, thought that it was unnecessary. It seems like Laura is the only one with a heart; no one else cared. When the party ended, Laura had the idea of giving the leftovers and lilies to the family of the lost man. When she went on over with her gift basket, a woman answered the door and told her to walk in, ordered her to. She saw the "beautiful", in her words, dead man laying in bed. She let out a loud sob and when leaving, saw Laurie.
So, what does this story signify?
My answer: I think that Mansfield is trying to say that you shouldn't take things for granted. Laura comes from a wealthy family, as seen by the hundreds of fancy lilies, a personal cook, and their satin hats. When Laura goes over to the family of the dead man, she sees how other peoples' lives can be. They are poor and the cottages they live in are known for being filthy. There's a big difference between the quality of living of rich and poor. I believe that's why she cried in their home. She said to Laurie when she returned, "Isn't life-" and couldn't finish. I don't know what she wanted to say but you could tell that she was sad and didn't know how to express it.
Foster asked 3 people the same thing and I came pretty close to 2.(I'm kinda proud of myself :) ). The college major said that it signifies the indifference of the dominant class of people to the suffering of others and the other said pretty much the same. The 3rd compared it to birds and flight. Amazing analysis. I really liked the ending and it got me thinking like a professor. Bye!

There's Only One Story!

How To Read Literature Like a Professor

Seasons matter. We always associate seasons with decline. mid age, tiredness, yet harvest. That's why poets use seasons, either obviously or subtly, to bring ideas we're familiar with to our minds. For example, poet W.H. Auden uses the gloomy connotations  of winter to describe the death of dearly missed W.B Yeats. Or in Shakespeare's Sonnet 73, he talks about the season's coming of end, but the poem's really about his coming of old age. Pay attention to seasons! My favorite chapter is "One Story" because it's so fascinating. Foster says "There's only one story". I never realized it: there really is only one story, if you think about it a certain way. Yes, One. The number 1. That's it. When poets write something, they either talk about us-and-the-world or us-in-the-world. There's a connection between everything; no story is fully original. John Barth complains that all the stories have been used. Funny! But really, it's true in a way. When writers write, they are, whether they're aware or not, influenced by what they have read in their lifetimes. History of the things we read never leaves us. It's a part of us. This even falls into movies. Example: Movie westerns are inspired by other movie westerns that have been influenced by you guessed  it, other movie westerns. It rattles my mind because it's so true. Foster says himself in this chapter, "The movies you have seen were created by men and women who had seen others, and so on, until every movie connects with every other movie ever made." Couldn't have said it better myself. In the next chapter, he says that a physical deformity shouldn't be looked over because it means something. Just think of Harry Potter's scar and you'll believe it. Oh, and "It's never just heart disease." Nope. Think about what the heart symbolizes. Love, passion, stuff like that. So if a guy has heart disease, he might have had(metaphorically speaking) bad love, cruelty, or loneliness in his life. In "The Man of Adamant"(1837), the man, with a stone heart, thinks all people are sinners and avoids human contact by living in a limestone cave. Because of the calcium in the water, his heart literally turns to stone. Well, I found these chapters to be really relate-able to and interesting. Bye!!

Why, Hello There, Blog!

How to Read Literature Like a Professor

I'm sorry, I'm going to be frank and say it flatly. I don't like this book very much. Foster keeps using examples from books I've never even heard of and it's hard to relate to him because I'm not familiar with the stories. But, I still think he is pretty funny. Anyway, I read a lot today. Woohoo! So, in chapter 18, he got my attention by asking' "I'm walking down the road and suddenly I fall into a pond. What happens?" Then he said,"I mean, if you drown, you drown. If you get out, maybe all it means is you can swim." I thought that whole discussion was kinda funny. Well, he kept on going and started to talk about the significance of surviving a fall in water. Basically, when someone falls in water and makes it, it's baptism. That kind of shocked me for a moment because well, that's an analysis I wouldn't ever think about. It sounds weird, but why else would an author throw in a random drowning scene. In Ordinary People (1976), 2 brothers sail on Lake Michigan. They start to drown. One makes it and the other sadly, doesn't. Everyone thought it was weird that the "stronger", older brother didn't make it, while the younger did. Anyway, the younger one hung on the boat and survived. So what, you ask? Well, symbolically, he was reborn (that's the baptism part). He came back as a new person with a new position in the world, because of his missing brother. I thought that was a really good example to convince me. Another example: in The Horse Dealer's Daughter (1922), Mabel is rescued by a local doctor when she's drowning. When she's out of the water, she's covered in some fluid, naked and is then cleaned by the doctor. Does that ring a bell? It's like being born again. Baptism. Kinda weird stuff but I think Foster used good examples to prove his point. I think it's really cool how little things in stories can take on such huge meanings. It makes me want to analyze everything I read now. Just in case. Oh and also, I learned that geography can play a big part in setting mood and in character development. That is all. Bye!  
Vocab:    
Traverse-(v.) to make one's way through, across, or over Sordid-(adj.) not clean
Dalliance-(n.) activity engaged to amuse oneself Serendipity-(n.) luck, good fortune Umpteen-(adj.) innumerable, many

Almost There!

How to Read Literature Like a Professor 

"It's All Political." Foster discussed how lit can sometimes mention politics. He found connections to politics in the Christmas Carol(he uses A LOT of examples to help prove his point). He pointed out that the story attacks the way we look at our social responsibilities, by using grumpy old Scrooge. Weird, huh. I wouldn't have thought of it. In my opinion, Political lit is pretty interesting because it involves current world issues and stuff going on now. And in "Rip Van Winkle, there's a political meaning behind it, even though it just seems like a weird, pointless story. After he sleeps for 20 years (weird), he wakes up and arrives home to his dead wife and different hotel signs. It turns out though that the American Revolution has taken place when he was asleep. The hotel sign that once had a picture of King George now has a picture of pres. George Washington. Once again, I NEVER would've guessed. Yep, Foster is really analytical. Even though this book is kinda hard to understand, Foster is pretty funny. "I took just enough physics in high school to master one significant fact: human beings cannot fly." and "If it isn't human, it flies." and "But a Christ figure doesn't need to resemble Christ in every way,  otherwise......he'd be Christ." I like how he doesn't speak very formally, he says some jokes and little funny things, kind of like in a conversation. Here's another of his sayings: flight is freedom. Oh, and irony trumps everything. Now, chapter 16 was um, well.....awkward. Real awkward. Let's just say it's about a subject that's inappropriate. Yeah, we'll leave it at that. Anyway, I'll be back soon!  :)

Reading, Reading, Reading

 How to Read Literature Like a Professor

I thought it was really funny when the author said, "It's never just rain." It's much more special than just droplets of water falling from the sky; there's some meaning to it. Foster said that at times, Noah is what it signifies. Ya know, plenty of rain, the flood, the giant ark and of course, the peaceful rainbow at the end. There can be a biblical parallel when you find a rain scene. Rain sets a mood of scariness and mysteriousness. I mean, when haven't you wanted to start off a scary story with "It was a dark and stormy night"? That's the first line that pops up in my mind. Rain can  be cleansing, symbolically. In A Farewell of Arms(1929), the grieving protagonist walks out of the hospital into pouring rain. Rain's associated with life-giving in the the spring, not with death. That's strangely ironic. Well, as you can see, rain can be used for a lot of different reasons. He also talks about what's so special about fog, snow, and rainbows. Rainbows symbolize peace between heaven and earth. So, next time I read literature and spot a rainbow, I'll advance past the pot of gold and leprechauns and try to find the underlying message. I think Foster thinks of some pretty strange analyzes, but they're funny and really get you thinking about different ways to look at things. Not just simply reading, but reading in between the lines. If a symbol can be reduced to only one meaning, it's not symbolism, it's allegory. Symbols can have many meanings, however you interpret it.

Vocab!!!

1. Malicious- (adj.) having a desire to cause harm to someone
2. Verisimilitude- (n.) the quality of depicting realism
3. Bludgeoning- (n.) a hit with heavy impact
4. Indignant- (adj.) feeling or showing anger because of something unjust
5. Grandeur- (n.) magnificence

Reading Like a Professor

I read four chapters of How To Read Literature Like a Professor today. It isn't easy to understand sometimes. Foster uses a lot of words that I'm not familiar with, endless sentences, and a lot of examples from books I've never read. But, I'm doing my best :) In chapter 6, he talks about how often writers use Shakespeare as an example in their works. I thought it was pretty funny when Foster said, "It makes them sound smarter?" when he asked why we turn to Shakespeare as our example when writing literature. It's true, Shakespeare uses sophisticated, profound language that just sounds fancy. In chapter 7, Foster talks about parallels with books he read to the Bible. For example, he compares a young boy from "Araby"(1914) to "The Fall", when Adam and Eve eat the forbidden fruit. In both stories, he finds a common theme: the loss of innocence. Humanity now bears a sinful nature after Adam and Eve's disobedience and the young boy loses his innocence when he discovers that he likes a girl. This comparison and others he used show me how similar all books really are. I learned something from this book, something that her keeps on mentioning in every chapter: Writers use earlier, familiar works into their own. So true. When you read a book, it often reminds me of another familiar story or fairytale I read. In chapter 8, he talks about how writers often use "kiddie lit" in their stories to incorporate familiarity, while putting their on twist on it to make it original. Ironic, huh? haha. That's smart because what kid isn't familiar with Sleeping Beauty or Alice in Wonderland? In a nutshell, I learned that writers often incorporate one or more of three kinds of myth into their works: biblical, fairy tales, or Shakespearean lit. I I'm forced to look up a lot of words in order to find out what Foster's talking about. So, I  learned some vocab:

1. Hapless- (adj.) unfortunate
2. Obscure- (adj.) dim; gloomy
3. Ubiquitous- (adj.) omnipresent
4. Aspire- (v.) to seek to attain or accomplish a particular goal
5. Confer-(v.) to grant

Bye!

Hello There!

How to Read Literature Like a  Professor  Thomas C. Foster


When I read the first couple of pages, I realized that the author, Thomas C. Foster, is very analytical.When I
read the opening example of Kip, who went on a trip for some bread, I was thinking it was a trip. But no, it was much more-a quest.I never thought about it that way. A creative analysis. I really like the author, he's funny at times and gets the point across using examples. Every trip is a quest was his first sentence in bold. Followed by whenever people eat or drink together, it's communion. I mean think about it, why would the author throw in boring dinner scenes without a descent reason. It makes sense to me, it's to show how the characters relate to each other as a community at a shared table. I really like the author's style of writing- pretty colloquial, so that you can relate. I also like the chapter about sonnets, where he talks about what makes  up a well-structured sonnet. "It's a square." Funny. I learned that there's more to it: a 14- lined poem that follows iambic pentameter(10 syllables), ending with a couplet. There's one thing he mentioned that I don't quite agree with 100%- there's only one story. Well yes, you can find parallels between many written works, but are they really that related. Maybe if I keep reading, I'll find out that it's perfectly true. I really like this assignment. I think it's pretty cool that we get to write about what we read and tell our observations online-much better than writing it all by hand!

I learned some new vocab:

1. Apocryphal- (adj.) not genuine; false; spurious
2. Propriety- (n.) the quality of being proper or suitable
3. Convoluted- (adj.) intricate; involved
4. Expatriate-(adj.) living in another country
5. Dynamic- (adj.) of or relating to physical force or energy

Well, I hope this blog wasn't too long. Until next time! :)