Woks Cited in my Blog

Works Cited

Glaspell, Susan.  “Trifles.”  Class Reader 46-55. Print.

Hwang, David Henry.  “Sound of a Voice.”  Class Reader 26-40. Print.

Hwang, David Henry.  “Trying to Find Chinatown.”  Class Reader 41-45. Print.

Neruda, Pablo.  “Walking Around.”  Class Reader 1. Print.

Satrapi, Marjane.  Persepolis. New York: Pantheon, 2003.  Print.

Websites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_materialism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_materialism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic

http://www.ipl.org/div/graphicnovels/gnsHistBasics.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphic_novel

Marx vs. God in Perspolis

Hello once again,

I have been thinking about the relation between Marx and God in Persepolis.  I think that young Marjane experiences a conflict between her faith in her religion and her desire to follow a social philosophy that purported to champion equality.When Marjane was very young, she primarily believed in her religion.

 As she got older, however, she learned about Marxism, the revolution, and the political heroes of Communism.  

As she became more experienced, she began to see that Marxism and a faith in God were incompatible.  

The more she embraced Marxism, the less she was able to commune with God.

Satrapi represents the conflict she experienced through the use of a few short scenes that capture the childlike need to find the truth.  Where an adult might allow contradictory ideas to coexist in his consciousness, inventing rationalizations for each, children are too simple and innocent to accept blatant contradictions.  For example, Marjane wanted to believe in the Marxism that her parents promoted, but it bothered her deeply that her father drove a Cadillac and they had a maid who was not invited to join the family at meals.  The scenes that illustrate her internal struggle involve the characters of “Marx” and “God”.  These characters are like the imaginary friends that a child might have.  They come and go, offering comfort and communion until there is something wrong with the imaginary world she has created.  Once she adopts some of the ideas of Marxism and wants to emulate Che Guevara and Fidel Castro, God does not appear.

Race, Ethnicity, and Identity in "Trying to Find Chinatown"

Many of the readings for my English class this quarter have dealt with "identity".  They often make me consider such questions as "who am I?", "what do others think of me?","what factors are important to me in defining myself?" and "what factors are important to others?".

It seems like there are a number of factors that are integral to identity.  Here are some of them:  language, race, culture, social group, social class/status, and accomplishments.

In “Trying to Find Chinatown”, Hwang considers the role of race and ethnicity in how we identify ourselves and how others identify us.  Are “race” and “ethnicity” the same thing?  It seems that people often use the terms interchangeably, but really they are different although overlapping concepts.  The American Heritage Dictionary defines “race” as “A group of people identified as distinct from other groups because of supposed physical or genetic traits shared by the group.”  That is a relatively simple concept compared to “ethnicity”:  “Of, relating to, or characteristic of a group of people sharing a common cultural or national heritage and often sharing a common language or religion.”  While race is manifested in physical characteristics regardless of your choice, ethnicity is the recognition of belonging to a cultural group, usually, but not always racially connected.

Hwang uses a particularly clever construct for exploring the separateness and intersection of race and ethnicity in how we identify ourselves and in how others identify us.  He uses two characters, Benjamin and Ronnie, to illustrate his ideas.  Benjamin is blond and blue-eyed; he is not racially Asian.  Ronnie on the other hand looks Asian.  The strange part is that Benjamin insists that he is Chinese because he was brought up by Chinese parents (he was adopted), while Ronnie wants to distance himself from his racial origins.  He doesn’t want to be limited by the stereotype of a young Asian American man and so vigorously demonstrates his differences in his behavior, his clothes and his choice of music.  In other words, Benjamin is ethnically Chinese without being racially Chinese, and he is content with that.  Ronnie, however, is not content.  He recognizes that he is racially chinese but does not identify with the culture.  Perhaps he would go so far as to say that he is not ethnically Chinese.  It would seem that they should be in agreement that one’s race and his ethnic identity can be independent of one another.  So why does their conflict continue to the end?

You have an appointment with the Patrician…

Poor Ronnie . . . he is rather confused, isn’t he.  He wants to have it both ways:  he wants to be free of his racial “Asianness” with respect to how others identify him.  But, by denying that Benjamin could “be Asian”, he unwittingly argues that being racially Asian is of the most basic importance in “being Asian”.

"I Have a Dream" (video)

Martin Luther King, Jr. made this speech in 1963, 100 years after the Emancipation Proclamation.  It has since become one of the most famous speeches in American history.  The speech is notable for its frequent use of metaphors and anaphora.

Here is the actual video of Dr. King making his speech!

Marjane Satrapi's Character

Throughout Persepolis Marjane Satrapi is a fiercely independent character who is searching for the truth.  She can't find an ideology or worldview that seems to fit what she feels is right, so she is continually adopting and then abandoning them.  Her constant quest to find something she can believe in is what gives the story purpose.

I think Marjane's strong, independent character is primarily a result of her parents' influence.  She was an only child so she must have had her parents attention more than children who had siblings.  Her parents took politics very seriously, and they probably influenced her to think likewise.  She was also encouraged to read about religion, politics and social views.  These factors must have been at least part of what shaped her strong character.

You have an appointment with the Patrician...

I have decided to respond to the post above, having found it mildly interesting.

It is plain that young Marjane is looking for a worldview to adopt as her own, but I cannot see that she is particularly independent.  In point of fact, I would say that she is constantly following the views of others.  All through the story she constantly hears other people's worldviews and adopts them as her own.  For example, at school she is told that the king was chosen by God.  She believed this and repeated back to her parents.  I think that for most of the story Marjane is simply adopting the ideas and views of other people.

Hello again, Henry here.

I want to add something to my ideas from earlier.

I think that Marjane can hardly be blamed for accepting some of the ideas that she has been given.  She is only a child, after all, and that's what children do.  The truly unusual thing about her is how she keeps rejecting the ideologies she was given because of her experiences.  For instance, she loses her faith in God when her uncle Anoosh is executed.  Also, at the beginning of the story Marjane wants to believe that communism is good because her parents support it, but she is confused by the fact that her father drives a Cadillac and that they have a maid.  What is remarkable about Marjane is that she is willing to pursue the truth and do the right thing even when it is harmful to herself.

Persepolis and Graphic Novels

Graphic Novels

What is a graphic novel?  A graphic novel is basically a book that uses words in tandem with pictures to tell a story.  It is a novel in comic book form.

After the golden age of comics headed by Superman in the 1930’s and 40’s, comics writers started to experiment with forms other than the classic, short strip.  Naturally they tried creating longer, even book length comics stories.  By the 1960’s the term “graphic novel” had appeared to describe these extra long comics.  It was not until the late 1970’s (and the publication of Will Eisner’s A Contract with God) that the graphic novel became a commonly known genre distinct from the comic book.  A decade later, graphic novels had reached their summit.  Many of the most well known graphic novels (including Maus by Art Spiegelman, Watchmen by Alan Moore, Batman: The Dark Knight Returns  by Frank Miller, and Sandman by Neil Gaiman) were published about this time.

Persepolis

When I heard that we were going to be reading a graphic novel for my English class, I was I bit surprised.  I didn’t really know very much about graphic novels, and so I imaged that my teacher had assigned a comic book to the class to read.  I later discovered that Persepolis (the graphic novel assigned by my teacher) is not a comic book.  It is a novel about serious material presented in comic book form.  Persepolis is an autobiographical account of the human impact of war, revolution, violence and cultural tyranny in Iran.  In it, we get to know about Marjane, a young girl growing up in the midst of political and religious turmoil.  The brilliance of conveying her story in comic book form is that we learn about this history in a most poignant way:  through the eyes of a child.  The narrator is a child and telling her story largely with drawings and speech bubbles conveys her innocence and humanity.  Not only does this encourage us to trust her perspective but it is likely to reach a wider audience than it would if it had been written as a more traditional autobiography.  In particular, I expect this book would be much more likely to reach the hands of young people;  people who might not otherwise ever read about this important but of modern history.

One advantage of writing Persepolis in graphic form is that the images used can convey emotions and feelings in a way unique from words.

This picture shows what Marjane thought of
when she was told that her grandfather was a prince.
It shows a child's perspective
which might be difficult to illustrate in words.

When Marjane went on vacation,
it was like living in a fantasy world.

Here we see a political prisoner being tortured
 and finally executed.
This image gives us a strong emotional response
that letters do not communicate as well.

You have an appointment with the patrician...

I have a few quibbles with Henry's ideas.

If why did Marjane Satrapi write Persepolis in a form that appeals to children if the material she was trying to express is adult?  It seems rather a strange idea.

Also, words can convey any idea that a picture can illustrate.  In fact, the process of formulating ideas into words is the primary process by which we understand those ideas.  The graphic novel form seems to me a rather crude form of communication.

"Trifles"

In "Trifles" a small group of men and women investigate the murder of Mr. Wright.  The only suspect is Mrs. Wright.  The men investigate by examining the physical facts of the murder, such as examining the windows for signs of being forced open.  The women however observe several little details about the state of Mrs. Wright's kitchen and her possessions.  These little details, these "trifles", give the women an understanding of Mrs. Wright.  In the end, the women discover that Mrs. Wright is guilty without really meaning to, but the men are stumped by the case and can't find any evidence.  The women sympathize with Mrs. Wright and don't tell the men what they have discovered.

Hello all.  I enjoyed reading "Trifles" immensely.  Here are some of my thoughts about it.

It is apparent that the men, in their dismissal of the women's "trifles", are missing what is most important.  It would seem that  Susan Glaspell is saying that men should treat women and their concerns with more respect and interest.

I believe that in reality many people, both men and women, look down upon what they do not know.  They treat subjects, people and ideas that they do not think of as their own with some condescension.  This type of view should be avoided.  It is unpleasant and immature.  The play illustrates this clearly.  However, I must here disagree with Glaspell.  I don't believe that this condescension complex is limited to men.  I think that this tendency is about equally distributed among men and women.  We as individuals must strive to see other people's points of view, and attempt to understand each person fully.

You have an appointment with the Patrician...

Despite being in charge of an entire city, I still find time to read once in a while.  I have, in fact, just read a play named "Trifles".

One of the themes central to "Trifles" is the interaction of the law, justice, and personal feelings when it comes to judging a person guilty of a crime.  In the play the two women are forced to make a choice: do they reveal that Mrs. Wright is the murderer, or do they hide the evidence they have found to protect Mrs. Wright?  Taken out of context this seems like an obvious choice; of course they should do everything in their power to ensure that the murderer is punished and prevented from harming anyone else.  The situation is not that simple though.  Both women can relate to Mrs. Wright.  They understand her.  They sympathize with her.  In fact, they so appreciate her motives that they find it impossible to condemn her.  The internal struggle the two women face forms the conflict of the story.

This conflict raises some questions:  What would we do in their place?  What should we do?  What does Susan Glaspell think about this?  The fact that she seems to be on the Women's side would lead me to believe that she thinks that the two women did the right thing by protecting Mrs. Wright.  This would suggest that Glaspell believes there is a flaw in the justice system.  Perhaps she thinks that a system should be created where personal feelings should be taken into account.  How would a system like this be created?  Would it even be possible to have a system of this sort with constant, unchanging rules?  I believe it is not likely that such a system could work.  I think Glaspell does not intend us to see the women as doing the right thing, she is merely showing us what is natural for them to do under the circumstances.

well then, don't let me detain you...

"The Sound of a Voice"

Hello, this is henry here.

I have been pondering the play "The Sound of a Voice" and I have come up with a few ideas.

The man is trying to forge an identity for himself.  He wants to be a strong, independent, manly character.  He doesn’t like it when the woman tries to take care of him because he can’t be independent.  In many areas the woman’s strength, skill or wisdom is superior to the man’s.  This contradicts the image that the man is trying to create for himself.  When the woman takes the man’s sword away because she is afraid he will hurt himself, the man finally feels that he has been defeated; the woman took away part of his independence and now the man feels he is in serious danger of being peacefully imprisoned.  He comes to overpower and defeat a witch, but finds himself powerless against the woman’s attempts to care for him. He ultimately feels he must “leave in shame” because he is neither able to defeat the woman, nor relinquish his strong, independent identity.

What the woman wants in the play is to have a human companion to be with and care for.  She wants “an escape” from the cycle of visitors coming, staying for a while, and then leaving forever.

What the man wants is to be strong and independent.  Later in the play this is complicated by the fact that he grows to care for the woman.  He has an internal struggle between his natural desire to shape his identity, and his desire to be with the woman.

At the end of the play, the man is put into the woman’s place.  Since the woman is now dead, he is alone.  He tries to play the Shakuhachi to relieve his loneliness.  I believe that he will take the woman’s place and become the one longing for the sound of a voice.  This cycle will continue indefinitely.

Poetry

Hello all, this is Henry here.

I have recently read several interesting poems, and I decided to write a post  about poetry.

Poetry is a very powerful medium of communication because it appeals to our emotions and our subconscious.  Because of this poetry can be much more persuasive than simple logical argument.  It is also very useful for describing ideas that are hard to express rationally, such as the authors fears or wishes.  If poetry is stripped of its descriptive, vivid words and expressed in straightforward language, it loses its persuasive power to disarm the reader through emotion.

For whatever reason,
               I am reminded of Beethoven
                by the title "Walking Around"

For example, “Walking Around” by Pablo Neruda is a poem with very dark themes that are hard to explain rationally. The descriptive language of the poem conveys the author’s feelings, although it would be difficult to say exactly what those feelings are and where they come from in simple words.

Despite the fact that I found this poem to be a little depressing, I still admire the power of phrases such as “certain streets hideous as cracks in the skin” and “The smell of barbershops makes me break into hoarse sobs”.  These phrases tell me how Neruda is feeling far more effectively than just stating “I am feeling dark emotions”.

A poem is like a jigsaw puzzle; it is composed of fascinating, interlocking pieces which are put together to reveal a picture.  I find poetry entertaining because I enjoy both listening to the vivid, interlocking words, and trying to discover and understand the author's message.

Here is a link to "Walking Around": http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/walking-around/

Dialectical Materialism

Hello, this is Henry.

I have recently been reading “Persepolis” by Marjane Satrapi for my English 1A class.  In “Persepolis” young Marjane’s parents are Marxists.  Marjane is given a comic book called “Dialectic Materialism” which becomes her favorite book.  So what is Dialectic Materialism?

 

Dialectical Materialism is a philosophy that Karl Marx developed to explain his socio-economic ideas.  As its name suggests, it is a combination of Dialectics and Materialism.

Dialectics is a method of argumentation in which two people (or groups) who disagree use reasoned arguments to arrive at the truth.  It is unlike other forms of discourse in that arguments are based on logic rather than on emotion or ethics. This method originated with the Greek philosophers, especially Plato, Socrates, Aristotle and Zeno.  Dialectic argumentation has been - and is still – widely used in the Western world to resolve disputes and advance our knowledge.

            Materialism is the concept that the universe is composed solely of matter or energy.  It admits the existence of thought and the metaphysical only as a product of matter.  Materialism is contrasted with idealism, which holds that the universe is composed solely of mind or spirit, and that the material is only a product of the mind.  Materialism revokes idealism, claiming that the world is made up of the material, not the mental.

            Marx combined these two ideas to form his philosophy of Dialectical Materialism in order to describe historical change as the result of conflict over material goods.  Here is an example of Marx’s ideas that illustrates Dialectical Materialism:  He believed that all societies undergo changes that are a result of tension between members of society that have wealth and those that do not.  Society in its primitive form is one in which material goods are communally owned but there is generalized poverty.  People who don’t have enough want more and this conflict produces another stage in the development of society:  private ownership and more wealth.  Because the wealth is in the hands of only a portion of the population, another round of conflict produces the final stage in society’s evolution:  communal ownership of generalized wealth.