Newton's Analysis of Austen's Inner Thoughts (Regarding Pride and Prejudice)

Pride and Prejudice, a book where women dominate the story, as Judith Lowder Newton would have us believe a statement on the unimportance women seem to share in their overall prospects. Newton begins her analysis by stating our author, Miss Jane Austen’s, personal circumstances. Newton points out that though Austen has since become a famous author during her life she lived with her mother and her sister and they as single women of the time were not allowed the opportunities the Austen boys reveled in themselves. Though Jane, as far as we know never complained, Newton believes the novel was a way for Jane to express these feelings. Newton uses the famous first passage of the novel to put across her point, “It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife. However little known the feelings or views of such a man may be on his first entering a neighbourhood, this truth is so well fixed in the minds of the surrounding families, that he is considered the rightful property of some one or other of their daughters” (Pride and Prejudice). In this way Newton says Austen depicts the women’s family as controlling the man, but the man with the means outweighs the woman in any circumstance; therefore, giving him the ultimate control over the matter. Newton backs the fact that Austen goes through the rest of the novel portraying the men as bumbling because she thinks that though they might possess “power” they are not powerful in romantic areas. On the flip side Newton’s depiction of Austen makes it no surprise that Elizabeth is portrayed as the most powerful figure in the entire novel. However, it was some of Newton’s final perceptions that struck me as the most interesting and persuading. Austen portrays men, throughout her novel as very independent often coming and going and doing what they please. This is quite accurate to the real life circumstances; nonetheless, Newton points out the failure of many of the novel’s male population to properly use their autosomy, and in doing so relinquish their “power” to their seemingly powerless counterparts. Newton manages to carry on this argument through many more pages, but the ultimate point she makes that I truly believe Austen was trying to portray comes near the end. Darcy possesses nearly anything he’d ever need, but his life is incomplete without Elizabeth. Though Elizabeth’s independence and powerful aura seems to diminish the closer we come to the end of the novel, we observe that it was truly Elizabeth (which Newton thinks Austen relates to all women) that held the power over Darcy (which Newton thinks Austen relates to all well-off men or anyman with any type of future ahead of him).

Referenced Critique: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3177624?seq=15

Power, Fantasy, and Subversion in Jane Austen (by Judith Lowder Newton)

Passion for Passion

Passion is a word with various meanings, but I have personally always associated it with having a deep desire or love for some aspect of life. This word has always stood out to me when I have heard others say I have a passion for this or that or that I need more of a passion for this or that. This word seems to carry a lot of weight when used in this context and that has always intreged me. Now a days passion is used in so many ways that I think it loses meaning in many people's minds. People often say I have a passion for something, but usually I deduce their definition of passion either does not match mine or such merely does not hold true. These factors have driven me to my selection of the word passion and as UCLA's football coach, Rick Neuheisel once said on The Dan Patrick Show, "you have to have your passion bucket full," and trust me my passion bucket for such a paper is filled to the brim.

Monster Mom

Female Gothic:

• "The work that women writers have done in the literary mode that, since the eighteenth century, we have called the Gothic."
• In Gothic writings the intent is to create fear in it's readers (appealing to physical reactions rather than achieving a deep emotional fear)
• Abnormal: "fantasy predominates over reality, the strange over the common place, and the supernatural over the natural"

Attraction to such literature:

• Readers become so enticed by this suspenseful fear ("the art of freezing blood") that they cannot stop reading 
• Shelley: "curdle the blood, and quicken the beatings of the heart."

Personal Experience and it's role:

• Immerses herself in the scientific theory of the day as well as the writings of the time (e.g. Wordsworth and Coleridge)
• Personal woe and depression: first baby dies early on in her life
• Shelly is the monster's mother because of her obsession with having a child which she achieves before she finishes her novel.

Newborn Life:

• feminine appeal
• the consequences stemming from abandonment
• The importance of being a mother to Shelly caused the punishment of Frankenstein in the book
• Frankenstein abandoned the ideals of Shelly with his fleeing
• To "bestow animation on lifeless matter"

Family Importance: 

• The letters in the beginning: to doting parents and to his orphan sister
• Background on family life stress parent-child, child-parent relationships

Sir Gawain vs. The Dark Knight

    Hero, the word means various things to a wide array of people. According to Wikipedia, "the hero is often simply an ordinary person in extraordinary circumstances, who, despite the odds being stacked against him or her, typically prevails in the end." Though Wikipedia was talking about the modern fictional depiction of a hero it is this definition that embody and tie together the gallant Sir Gawain and the modern Dark Knight that Christopher Nolan has brought to life. Sir Gawain the famed knight of King Arthur's Round Table, is the ideal hero in his society of 10th and 11th century Britain. The Dark Knight on the other hand is a completely realistic, modern day depiction of a romanticized superhero known as Batman, who has been adored by the public since his conception in 1939. Two totally different superheroes in two totally different areas what possibly could they have in common? The simple answer is much more than you think. Through their mannerisms and their sense of honor, Batman and Sir Gawain will be revealed to have much more in common than the average reader may notice, yet the most noticeable difference in the modern Batman from Sir Gawain (to this point in Nolan's series) is the way each one achieves disgrace at the end of the story.
     Batman and Sir Gawain are both very important heroes to a whole era of people, and though these eras are very different many of the ideals of the time coincide, which is why it comes as no surprise that many of their mannerisms are very similar. Batman and Sir Gawain both feel a responsibility to protect their kingdom's well being (or city in modern thinking). Batman's sense of responsibility towards Gotham with regards to its protection, strongly resembles Gawain's sense of responsibility towards all of Camelot with his willingness to protect King Arthur at all costs. This also shows that both heroes are prepared to fight and potentially die for something they deem more important than themselves. Both are also similar in the sense that they live wealthy lives posed as playboys, but are prepared to fight for their cause, which we determined is the safety of their respective homes. Both of these heroes also are fighting against antagonists, who abruptly enter the scene who they can't exactly pinpoint and constantly underestimate. Though Batman finally overcomes this issue while Sir Gawain fails to really do so even by the end of the story. Both of these heroes also reveal themselves as extremely fallible as Batman___, while Gawain on the other hand has a lot of human faults the most prevalent not being his inability to resist temptation, but rather his inability to forgive himself at the end. Though these men have various things in common regarding their live styles and personalities the strongest thing that binds them together is their sense of honor and their own personal codes of honor that they live by.
     Batman and Sir Gawain both are very similar in their possession of an intense sense of honor and their efforts in maintaining such. In both Batman Begins and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight our heroes face their fears for the sake of honor and dignity. In both The Dark Knight and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight our heroes our tempted to compromise their moral code for instant gratification and both heroes stay true to their virtues and refuse to compromise their honor. In Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight the heroes are tempted by women and being realistic flawed portrayals of heroes, both have trouble dealing with such. Therefore it comes as no surprise in Sir Gawain and the Green Knight the lady of the castle is the one who causes Gawain to break his code of honor. However, it is in The Dark Knight that Batman's temptation to use any means necessary to save Commissioner Gordon and his family that forces him to break his personal code of honor. For those who have seen the movie and remember the part where Batman uses "big brother" technology to find the Joker, and think that is breaking his moral code, he never admits that it breaks his moral code, but rather it breaks Lucius Fox's moral code. Nevertheless, it is the way these heroes recover from breaking their honor code that separates them, and allows Batman to earn my never ending respect.
     Both Batman and Gawain have many differences as one could expect between society representative heroes created nearly 850 years apart; however, it is their individual reactions to breaking their respective moral codes that really separates them as heroes today. At the end of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Sir Gawain feels such a guilt about his prior actions and leaves the Green Knight in a weak state. Sir Gawain then goes home feeling ashamed and lacking of honor though his fellow citizens try to reassure him of his bravery. It is this inability to move past his mistake and attempt to fix his situation that separates him from Batman. In the end of The Dark Knight, Batman is forced to break his moral code and kill Two-Face, also known as Harvey Dent, to save Commissioner Gordon and his son. Batman, instead of pouting about breaking his code like Sir Gawain, assed the situation and determined that he needed to take the rap for all the evil Harvey had done after he became Two-Face. He decided Harvey's image was so important to the city of Gotham that he had to take the blame to best serve his city, and he had to play the villain to be the hero. As Batman states during the last scene of the movie, "You'll hunt me. You'll condemn me. Set the dogs on me, because that's what needs to happen." This is what separates Batman and his heroic ability from Sir Gawain, and why he has become the icon he is today, while Gawain has become a hero of the past.

Anglo-Saxon Lifestyle

          The Anglo-Saxons, made up the majority of British citizens for nearly six centuries and, yet we as average citizens know very little about their everyday lives. In Anglo-Saxon England many different groups adopted many different lifestyles. Nevertheless, the most significant differences in citizen’s lifestyles emerge within the class distinctions.

The king and the noblemen, known as the thegn, had the laborious responsibility of ruling over their followers, which they usually carried out through the use of personal shire-reeves also known as sheriffs. Other than ruling over their kingdom, their only real responsibility was to host dinners and to portray their wealth and power in lavish ways. The exception to the stereotypical noble life, were the nobles who became fierce some warriors, these men, like Beowulf, traveled the lands using their talents to achieve glorious feats. Therefore, these men spent most of their lives merely being waited on hand and foot. During this time schooling for young boys usually occurred in the comfort of their own home. For leisure this “privileged” class enjoyed falconry and hawking, dancing, theatricals, and competitive games such as dog and horse racing.  

The ordinary freedmen, known as the ceorl, took up the majority of society and were split into many groups based on financial standing. As young boys these freedmen usually attended school in a nearby monastery and many boys and girls grew up to work in these same monasteries. Ceorl children had many forms of leisure: playing board and dice games, playing with carved wooden animals, playing with rag dolls, playing with toy swords, playing wooden flutes, and juggling. Ceorls had a variety of professions ranging to everything from farmers to the shire-reeves that carry out the nobility’s dirty work. During the time of the Anglo-Saxon’s, farmers made up a large majority of the population and at first freedmen owned their own land, but the greedy nobles eventually started to take the farmer’s lands and basically insert them into indentured servitude. In thegn ruled, Anglo-Saxon society, the freedmen served the nobles as shire-reeves. These freedmen looked out for the nobles’ financial concerns, by collecting taxes, and they also enforced the law of the area. Outside of this, many freedmen with special skills used their skills to finance themselves entering professions such as blacksmith, woodworker, potter, shoemaker, beekeeper, and swineherd. Many freedmen also worked as traders and fishermen to support themselves. Women, on the other hand, usually worked within the house and produced fine embroidery, many pieces of this of since become very famous. In their free time, the ceorl often shared stories and created riddles to attempt to fool each other. Ceorl men enjoyed athletic activities such as wrestling, weightlifting, and horseracing. 

The slaves were the lowest class of society; they served the master as long as necessary, in the task he chose. The slaves also made up the majority of their area’s army, due to the fact that local armies were usually only a mere couple hundred men. These slaves had the same forms of leisure as the freedmen, but they of course had much less time for leisure.   

Finally, by the end of the Anglo-Saxon era, all classes of Anglo-Saxons enjoyed a game called Taefl, which has been described as a predecessor of chess. Due to this game along with many others gambling was extremely popular in this time period.

Works Referenced

"BBC - Primary History - Anglo-Saxons." BBC - Homepage. Web. 22 Sept. 2011. 

      <http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/primaryhistory/anglo_saxons/>.

"Anglo-Saxon Life." UK Travel and Heritage - Britain Express UK Travel Guide. Web. 22 Sept. 2011. 

      <http://www.britainexpress.com/History/anglo-saxon_life.htm>.

1984

This summer with advice from my parents I decided to read George Orwell's novel, 1984. I started into this book expecting a book along the lines of Animal Farm the story, which I didn't thoroughly enjoy as a young 7th grader. Nevertheless, 1984 was a story that mentally stimulated me as few have in my short lifetime and I loved it. Therefore, I believe 1984 as a whole was an example of masterful storytelling, but I'll key in on a two examples that separated it from many other fantastic stories I have read. Orwell’s character portrayals, especially those of Winston and O’Brian, along with his well thought out political purpose, make this book a great piece of storytelling.

In 1984, Orwell creates excellent portrayals of characters making them relatable in a seemingly un-relatable world. First off, Orwell's characterization of Winston Smith is excellent, which he accomplishes by taking the reader inside Winston's thought process and showing the reader what Winston is seeing and feeling, all while using the third person. Orwell soon proceeds to express the difference between Winston and the other members of the society by introducing the diary and, therefore, his desire to take a stand against his society. Winston's desire to stand up to society is authentically heroic and the most interesting thing is he knows that he is destined for death once the idea of fighting the established order arises in him, but he still decides to fight. His sense of death is represented by the phrase he constantly uses throughout the book, "Now he had recognized himself as a dead man it became important to stay alive as long as possible."(Orwell, 36) Nevertheless, coinciding with Orwell's final political message his hero Winston gives into the oppressive establishment and becomes an obedient member of society through unbearable torture.

Another character in Orwell’s novel that really stands out as an impressive character is O'Brian's, which is nearly flawless. O'Brian plays Winston and the reader like a card, he poses as a member of the resistance and he somehow reads Winston's mind through his body language. He even goes so far as to reveal himself as loyal to the party in a way no one is able to conceive at the time when he assures Winston, "We shall meet in the place where there is no darkness,” (308). Then by the end he unveils his seemingly seamless disguise and turns into the most loyal party member of them all villianizing himself to all those engaged in the story. Then O'Brian represents himself as a human manifestation of the party telling Winston that Winston is mentally deranged for remembering anything that existed before the party, and says, " Fortunately it is curable" (310). O’Brian proceeds to isolate Winston as the only remaining rebel and slowly turn him into a loyal member of society before he is exterminated from this so-called “perfect society”. This total one-eighty was a pure stroke of genius for Orwell as it really got his viewpoint across. Though these two characters are Orwell’s Pièce de résistance, Orwell does a good job of making all of his characters fit into his political message.

Even character with as small of a role as Parsons, who seems as though he is the embodiment of the party, has a significant purpose by the end of the book. In the beginning Parsons is portrayed as a man who would never betray the party and by the end the reader still feels this way. However, because he talks against the party in his sleep he is given up by his own children and therefore is captured and meets Winston in the place of no return. Even at this point he denies that the party is wrong in their purpose, “You don’t think the Party would arrest an innocent man, do you?”(294). Parsons represents the blind loyalty most citizens have to this all-powerful party, and how it still can backfire on them, expressing the hypocrisy of the society.

In 1984, Orwell does a fantastic job of portraying his strong political message through all means available to him. Orwell uses the observations of Winston to portray all the wrongs in the modern society on an individual level without outright saying it. Then Orwell uses O’Brian’s falsified rebellion novel as a way to express the wrongs in the modern society at a much larger level while also expressing how the national governments are able to obtain such absolute power by outright saying it, but in a clever enough way as to tie it in with the story. Then by using his well developed plot line Orwell describes the futility of fighting such a society by showing that the whole secret life Winston seemed to be getting away with was all a set up. Winston’s life had become a study on rebellion for government officials, such as O’Brian, starting with the bookstore in the proles’ side of town that he first committed thought-crime within. Mr. Charrington was seemingly just an old man with a secret room without a telescreen, but by the end we learn he was a thought police. This wasn’t the only thing that led to Winston’s downfall, as O’Brian reveals they tracked his every move and knew of all his crimes, which Winston thought they were very cautious to do in secret. The one thing Orwell's story doesn't make clear is why O'Brian and the others lead him on for so much longer than was necessary. Once they decided he was insubordinate to Big Brother why did they keep leading him on instead of arresting him earlier? Nevertheless, Orwell's political views are very interesting and the detail that he uses in discussing them is extremely impressive.

The whole premise of Orwell’s novel was to portray an all-powerful government and the need for people to rebel as a united force as not to allow such a government to ensure total control over the world. Through his characters, setting, and plot he really managed to express his objective. Nevertheless, it was this political philosophy as well as his near flawless incorporation of all his characters that really made this novel a great piece of story telling. 

Stories that define me

The Complete Stories and Poems of Edgar Allen Poe: I recall bringing this book home from my school library as a young lower school child. It was one of the books suggested during halloween time for older kids, but my dad was very fond of Edgar Allen Poe, so I checked out the book. I remember reading it as a little kid and not being able to put it down though it gave me terrible nightmares. The stories captivated me interest and ever since when I have had to read them for class, once I start in the memories from getting that book flow back into my head.

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone: My mom tried reading this to my sister and I when I was around 6 years old and it gave both of us nightmares because of the vivid images we drew from the language of the book. At this point my mom stopped reading it to us for fear of more nightmares; however, less than a year later I asked about the book and I began reading it myself. This is the first time in my memory that I read such a substantial and difficult novel and it was this novel that spurred on my love for the Harry Potter books. I became addicted to the new books as soon as they would come out and though the movies are decent in their own regard they will never compare to the novels themselves in my eyes.

The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes: I recall reading Arthur Conan Doyle's collection short stories because it was suggested for school in 9th grade, and I am so thankful it was. For this collection of short stories is one of the most captivating and mentally engaging things I have ever read. Though "The Final Problem" story was very shocking too me and I never quite grasped the fact that Doyle had killed off his main character, but it turns out that neither could he which is why Holmes reappears in The Hound of the Baskervilles.


1984: I read George Orwell's novel this summer and it was extremely captivating to me. I loved his writing it all flowed so well and once again was very vivid. The political concepts behind the book were also fascinating and were very intellectually stimulating. There is no emotional connection to this book for me like my story with Harry Potter; however, 1984 is hands down one of the best books I have ever read and I will ever read.

Killer Angels: Last year I read Michael Shaara's book after having read his son's 3rd WWII book for my I.D. book and in my opinion it blew his son's book out of the water. Don't get me wrong I throughly enjoyed my I.D. book and it's glance into the Nazi High Command was extremely interesting, but Killer Angels makes you feel like you are actually at Gettysburg. Plus I happen to adore the Civil War and having visited Gettysburg just before Junior year I could really relate everything and imagine just where all the generals had been in the area I had explored by foot for hours. I could imagine the men in camp where I had been and I could hear the generals talking as I read their parts, it was a very realistic experience that I adored.

Angels and Demons: Two years ago I read Angels and Demons and it was a wonderful book, it was very intellectually engaging to try to figure out all the twists and turns as Robert Langdon was attempting to do the same thing. It was a very interesting book and a very realistic one that became even more enjoyable when the twist in plot reveals itself in the end. Unfortunately, I believe the movie doesn't do the book justice, and while I'm sure that if it weren't tied to the book it would've been decent, it was a bad depiction of the book.

To Kill a Mockingbird: In 8th grade we read this book and being told from a young girl's perspective the book really appealed to me and allowed me to relate to the story. The whole racial issue that it presented was also really interesting and I loved the book as a whole.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: When this book first came out I nearly read it all in one sitting. This book captured my interest even better than the other Harry Potter books, everything had importance and things in other books that were of seemingly little importance came to have importance again in this last book. The whole book was extremely captivating.

The Great Gatsby: I really enjoyed the book as a whole and way the book way written was very captivating. This is one of the few books I've been required to read during school that I throughly enjoyed.

Artemis Fowl: The first book of a series I didn't completely like, but when I first read this book nine years ago it was just the right time and it really captured my interest.