Explication: Porphyria's Lover

Porphyria's Lover begins in a primarily regular rhythm, breaking occassionally, which may in fact hint at the narrator's uncertainty revealed later. The first four lines assume the rhyme pattern ABAB, then lapse with BCDCD, intermingling rhyming quartets with couplets. As the poem progresses and the reader discovers the narrator's cruel intentions and perplexed mind, the rhythm falters more frequently. Lines 39-42 give the rhyme pattern AABC, the B rhyme breaking free of all other patterns while the narrator haphazardly consoles himself by saying that he has not caused his lover pain in killing her.

The repetition in this poem is telling because not only does it foreshadow the conclusion but it tells of the circularly wild and sadistic mind of the narrator. For example, We mentions her yellow hair several times before strangling her, foreshadowing her death and the narrator's obsession alike. Also, the repetition insinuates that the narrator enjoys similarity, which may be why he kills his mistress. He has reached the epitomy of her relationship, with her love, and knows it can go no farther because it is forbidden but he doesn't want it to recede either. Thus, he kills her, and leaves her with eyes open against his shoulder, freezing her in time in love with him by killing her.

The narrator and Porphyria may not be together possibly from marriages, thus they are having an adulterous affair. This is likely causing the narrator a good deal of guilt, which is insinuated throughout the poem. He says "I listened with heart fix to break" and later thinks "a sudden thought of one so pale for love of her", discussing possibly his wife. The evidence of his guilt climaxes in the final line with his reference to God, for he is awaiting God's rebuttal for the murder but is surprised and perhaps pleased that He has "not said a word".

Music Lessons: Explication

Mary Oliver's poem "Music Lessons" tells of a piano teacher departing from her mundane existence to dive into the music. The first paragraph not only sets the scene, but builds tension, an anticipation for the performance about to begin, while "she would gaze a moment." Then, the second paragraph sets up the first half of the juxtaposition to which we are introduced; what is juxtaposed is the life of the women, rather ordinary and stern (photographs of son and serious husband), and the life she takes on when playing the piano. 

The contrast in diction paints an energetic picture of the teacher playing the piano. In the beginning, everything is petite and closed. The house is small, the windows shut. This may also be seen as the conception of a quaint yet powerful hiding place. In the final stanza, the diction is electrified; "she fled in that lick of flame." The imagery and themes also become violent, in contrast with the first stanza, which discusses mere knickknacks. The final stanza discusses impending death, abruptly and aggressively:
"the knife at the throat" seems to threaten the teacher as well as to propel her to wild, fiery, masterful playing. 

Asonance appears throughout the poem in instances such as "neat green" while rhyme makes appearances as well (though only as approximate rhyme) in instances such as with "at the throat [...] in the metronome." There is some alliteration as well, with “her sons and […] serious husband.” There is consonance. In line 6, the ‘d’ sounds appears several times, creating a rhythmic sound: vanished, formed, sound. The appearance of rhyme and carefully crafted rhythm throughout the poem gives a musical feel to the poem, which is appropriate seeing as the poem is about piano. The poem discusses the playing of music, while itself reading like a piece of music, smooth and elegant. 

The Candle by Leo Tolstoy

"The Candle" by Leo Tolstoy presents many of the same themes that "How Much Land Does a Man Need?" presents. Nature, greed and cruelty, and foolery all are visible themes. However, the most predominant theme is religion, and within it, sin, repentance, and the vitality of faith and goodness. The final sentence summarizes this succinctly: that the peasants learn of the goodness in religion and its power over evil.

First, foolery makes yet another appearance, and once again the sentiments is uttered by a hypocrite under dramatic irony. Michael calls Peter a fool, yet really it is Michael who is the fool, sent to his death by greed and cruelty. Peter, called a fool (like the elder in "How Much Land Does a Man Need?") is truthfully wise (wiser than all the other characters) for he maintains goodness, patience, and faith, as shown by the candle which burns ever-brightly.

The Christian sins appear frequently throughout this story: greed, impatience, murder, breaking Sabbath or Holy-Day, and other transgressions. Most notably, there is the contention between Peter and Vasili over the matter of murder, and whether or not it is a sin when the victim is like the Devil. Peter, quite religiously and as the hero, maintains that murder is always wrong, and that God will dish the punishments. Vasili, on the opposite hand, thinks that murder is justifiable in this case. Because it is Peter who is most victorious-- his principles win out over Vasili's-- it is evident that Tolstoy's is voicing his preference for religious values once again.

Another theme that appears in this short story, and one that does not appear forthright in "How Much Land Does a Man Need?", is the prevalence of democracy. The serfs go to the capitol to demand justice (though they fail). Vasili tries to call the men together; the narrator mentions clearly, in the beginning, that serfs might normally be able to essentially "vote" out their cruel master. The undercurrent of democratic society ringing through the story puts emphasis on Tolstoy's comparatively liberal, democratic values in a Russia that does not maintain such values.

How Much Land Does a Man Need? by Leo Tolstoy

Tolstoy's short story "How Much Land Does a Man Need?" presents several notable themes. First, there is social humiliation and fear of/preoccupation with foolery. One of the first observations that is made about the Bashkir elder is that he "seemed a fool," immediately demoting him from importance and emphasizing the importance of appearing cognizant. This theme appears later when Pakhom is afraid to stop because he feels the onlookers will call him an "idiot." His fear of being labelled an idiot (like a fool) propels him forth into death from exhaustion. Anxiety towards social humiliation, as the Bashkirs watch, leads to his demise-- once Pakhom hears the spectators cheers, he receives a burst of adrenaline, fueled by social acceptance in the cheers, and wins his bet, dying in the process. Tolstoy seems to be suggesting that adherence to social guidelines and desperation for social approval pose a problem, and that while Pakhom deems the elder to be a fool, he is hypocritical, for he is a fool himself for being deathly preoccupied with labeling. 

Another dominant, clear theme and message in this short story is that greed is a pernicious characteristic. Evidently, Tolstoy is suggesting that the protagonist’s avarice is a major component in his death sentence. He lusts for more land than he needs, more land than he can cover in a day, and pays the ultimate price. We are even given a blatant demonstration of this when Pakhom wonders if “I was too greedy.” This theme also plays into Tolstoy’s ongoing preoccupation with religious values. Greed is one of the traditionally Christian “Seven Deadly Sins,” thus Tolstoy’s condemnation of greed goes along with his encouragement towards religious values.

A third theme in this short story is the mastery of nature, and the inevitability of nature’s dominance. There are hints of appreciation for nature; the protagonist thiks the land around him to be “beautiful.” However, despite Pakhom literally trying to run circles around the beautiful land, nature runs circles around him. Pakhom sweats from the heat, and his feet are mutilated by the rough terrain. Also, the sun sets for Pakhom before he reaches the finish—at least at first. Nature beats him down, though he tries in vain to possess it. Also, the setting of the sun is ironically indicative of the dominance of the initially labelled “fool,” the elder of the Bashkirs. The sun sets for Pakhom on his side of the hill, signaling his impending doom, while the sun does not yet set where the Bashkirs reside. In a way, the sun represents the power of nature in the favor of the elder, also discrediting the narrator’s calling him a fool in the beginning. 

Billy Collins: Picnic, Lightning Explication

In Billy Collins' poem "Picnic, Lightning", he makes great use of tone to convey his perceptions of both life and death. The tone grows increasingly morbid between the first three stanzas, creating an aura of death which pervades through the poem and demonstrates Collins' sentiment that death is sudden, dark, and unpredictable. However, a tonal shift in the final stanza relieves the tension created by the earlier tone, and introduces a new essence of happiness and light. The final stanza, therefore, conveys Collin's perception of life, and shows his joy and vigor for life in contrast (yet also in parallel) to his feelings about death.

The title of Collins' poem is notable in that it discusses a traumatic death-- death by lightning, inflicted without warning at what is supposed to be a joyous occasion, at a picnic-- in a cavalier manner. This, however, does not fully represent Collins' feelings towards death. Rather, it expresses the suddenness with which death may often arrive, and also conveys the sense of casualty with which we are often prone to using when discussing death, no matter how traumatic.

Collins' makes extensive use of imagery to help convey his tone. His diction also leans to the negative, propelling his tone further. He describes even flowers as limp and lifeless. However, his rapid shift in diction and imagery in the final stanza serves to emphasize the polarity of Collins' emotions. The sky becomes bright, the flowers budded, and the clouds whites. There is less of a sense of grey and dismal and doom.

Lastly, another notable feature of Collins' poem is the variation in structure between the first several stanzas and the last, mirroring the negative to positive tonal shirt. The first three stanzas, for example, all begin with capitalized letters, giving a sense of urgency and formality, while the last stanza begins with a lowercased word. This less formal, more fluid form of letters relaxed the final stanza and dispatches it from the rest of the poem.

How to Write About Africa: A Response

I found Wainaina's "How to Write About Africa" to be highly effective and humorous, conveying valid points in the gauze of satire. Several descriptions struck me as particularly comical, because I was most clearly able to connect the image with something I have seen or read about Africa. For example, mentioning a big-hearted woman called "Mama" resonated with me, since it seemed particularly cliche. 

The piece rose issues that I have thought about, which rang true, as well as issues that I had not given as much thought to and that struck me. For example, insinuating that Africa is often treated as one, uniform country, in particular one of starvation and war, I felt to be highly relevant. I believe that many Westerners, or anyone with a knowledge of Africa as a whole, is susceptible to lapsing into this prototype. This I expected and firmly agreed with. However, later the piece discussed the lack of depth of character attributed to African people, which had not before crossed my mind and which I found to be telling. The piece satirically said, "Avoid having the African characters laugh." It dawned on me then that African people, in the eyes of Westerners, are all too often oversimplified-- they are portrayed as miserable people, unprofound people. 

Overall, I agreed with the points made by the article. I also began to wonder, if I were to write a novel about my experience in Africa, how would I write it? Would I, not having previously read and pondered this article, have been trapped by many of the devices listed by Wainaina? I like to hope not. In any case, my experience of travelling to Tanzania enlightened me to the variety of cultures and people in Africa further than my formal education, and it allowed me to make connections to people on another continent who I might have oversimplified otherwise. 

My Number v. I had heard it's a fight

 Both the poems "My Number" and "I had heard it's a fight", by Billy Collins and Edwin Derby respectfully, ponder death and the tone that it brings along with it. They differ not only in rhetorical method but in perception of death. The first, "My Number", presents itself differently from the getgo, with the stark and upright title, capitalized, and convicted. The second, in contrast, is lowercased, aloof, and in the past tense. My Number is a personification of death, a disturbing portrayal of the character and its actions and the places it might visit. An overall description of death is given, leading to the image of a dark, brooding figure that comes up frighteningly, invisible, to take away one's life. 

Contrastingly, Derby gives not a personification of death, which would lend itself to an image of death as a figure, but he describes what he felt using imagery. He uses pleasant diction to demonstrate his pleasure in death, often using the word "sweet". 

It is Derby's and Collins' perceptions of death and their approaches towards the inevitable which oppose one another the most. Collin's view is that death is unavoidable, and that one must avoid it. It is revealed in a turning couplet at the end that she is attempting to talk to death and avoid her own. Derby, on the contrary, enjoys the feeling of dying, as evidenced by his imagery, choice of diction, and loosely dreamy tone. He sees death as avoidable, since he mentions that he brushed with death but decided against it "like a cute schoolchild". He invites it, and discusses it as a dreamer would a vision, or an addict would a kicked habit, saying “I can’t get over that minute of dying so quit” in the final couplet, similar in form but not in content to the final couplet of Collins’ poem.

Apocalypse Now v. Heart of Darkness

The most obvious differences between film and book exist in the plot. In the movie, the setting is in the Vietnam War, while the setting of the book is the Congo Free States. The time periods differ, and the contexts differ; the film’s theme centered around war in Vietnam, while the book’s theme centered around colonization. However, these glaring differences matter little. The essential theme of the book persists within the movie, and in both forms of media there remains a sense of battle and of contempt with the native peoples, and a sense of infiltration into a foreign land. Other plot points matter somewhat more, and are intriguing. For example, Kurtz is murdered by the main character in the film. Opposingly, in the book, Kurtz dies of natural causes, watched over by the main character, Marlow. The death of one of the story’s central characters varies. Furthermore, the pieces end differently. The film concludes with the wind murmuring “the horror”, while the book ends with Marlow meeting a woman who loved Kurtz, and he tells her that his last words were her name. This difference has minimal significance simply because the book ends with the main principle—that Kurtz murmured “the horror” upon his death, and that this haunted the main character.

Of course, there are also plot similarities which are striking. The steersman of the boat in both pieces is speared, and dies before the protagonist; afterwards, a character becomes distraught by some minute detail (in the book, it is Marlow, by the blood in his shoes; in the movie, it is Lance, by the loss of the puppy, comparatively minor). There are also heads on the stakes; Kurtz is dying; there is a woman present, idolizing him. These inclusions of elements from the book into the movie emphasize their importance in the story.

Between movie and book, the main character differs. In the book, Marlow travels because he craves adventure, and he becomes disenchanted by what he finds. In the film, the main character journeys because he is forced to by the army, on a predestined mission to terminate Kurtz, unlike Marlow, who believes he is merely going to visit Kurtz. While motivations contrast, the relationship between the main character and Kurtz remains intact. Marlow is undyingly curious about Kurtz, and is drawn to him, while the main character of the film is also drawn, studying papers and history of Kurtz in his spare time. The mystery enveloping Kurtz remains in both stories.

The emphasis on the natives between book and film are somewhat similar. In the book, Marlow witnesses disturbing scenes, such as the Valley of Death, but he does not focus on them. Similarly, the film views scenes which are disturbing—dangling dead bodies, natives shot—but does not focus on them. Rather than the idea, the essence of the horror with the natives is given both in film and in the book.  The book, however, has a more modern view on racism—it seems to decry it more so, fixating more on the death of the natives rather than discussing unlikeable traits of their culture, like Heart of Darkness is prone to do.

Finally, the character of Kurtz is largely similar. Kurtz is powerful, mysterious, reads poetry—yet in the film, he is large and strong, and determines his death, wanting to go like a soldier. In the book, Kurtz steps over the ledge, but it is a ledge of the natural world, not on of murder. His impact is great. Yet, in the movie, the relationship between Kurtz and the protagonist seems to be fostered more. In the book, there is almost no evidence of a developing relationship until after the fact, leaving the reader confused. This, I believe, is a strongsuit of the film that the book failed to deliver. Again, though, both movie and novel capture the main principles surrounding Kurtz and his death, despite minor plot and character differences. 

Poetry Explication: Siren Song

This poem in its entirety is what it claims to be merely about. The speaker claims to be discussing a "siren song", speculating what it is about, and what makes it so "irresistible." The second and third stanzas allude to the legends of Siren’s song, that men would leap overboard to reach the Siren’s despite knowledge of imminent death. Both stanzas are formed in similar manner, beginning with “the song”, with lowercase letters, like an ongoing reminiscence. The tone for the rest of the poem is set here: speculative, wondrous in the mystery, and moreover, grim (“anyone who has heard it is dead” (9).)

The structure and rhythm of the poem are interrupted by the fourth stanza, which begins with a capitalized word “Shall” (10) and if in the form of a question. Here, the intrigue is introduced. Framed by the reflections of the legend in previous stanzas, the curiosity of the reader is provoked. Furthermore, curiosity is spiked when the speaker mentions that they are donning a “bird suit”. The reader is propelled further by wonder and intrigue.

The following two stanzas, encompassing lines 12 to 18, begin to appeal to stereotypical desires of man, to be powerful, heroic, and a rescuer of a damsel in distress. The image of a damsel in distress is constructed by the two identical lines which say “I don’t enjoy it here…”

The following stanza further appeals to men by making them feel “unique”, a rescuer “Help me!”, and special “I will tell the secret to you, to you, only to you.” All appeals are made to the male reader, curiosity and bravado are piqued, and the reader is drawn: what is the siren’s song?

The final stanza reveals that the entire poem is the song of the Siren. It is understood when the speaker says “it works every time” that the reader (male figure) has been drawn into the Siren’s grip, and as revealed by the tonal shift, from intriguing and sensuous to plain and bored, that the reader has perished like the men whose “beached skulls” are a failed reminder to others of the dangers of temptation. 

The Secret Sharer: Character Evolution

The captain (and narrator of the short story) changes in subtle yet noticeable ways over the duration of the short story "The Secret Sharer". In the beginning, he is tentative, a new captain on a ship that he is unfamiliar with, surrounded by crew members who doubt him and are suspicious of his youth. It is revealed that the captain does not give orders to his crew when he mentions upon giving one that it is his first. Some of his first instructions to them are, also, not commanding in nature. He gives them a rest from their duties, something unusual and perhaps more timid an act than a noble one.

The captain is also consumed by the belief that he is insufficient and by the fear of rejection by his crew. He says: "My strangeness, which had made me sleepless" (21), an indication that he is plagued by thoughts of his own newness. In the beginning, the captain overall is therefore timid, weak, and preoccupied.

Following his peculiar relationship and interactions with his "double", the fugitive he has hidden on his ship, the Captain undergoes an interesting change. In the end, he directs his crew in an orderly manner, instructing them to turn the ship towards land despite their doubts and trepidations. He also realizes at this point that he barely knows the ship of which he is the Captain, and resolves within himself to get to know his property as a captain should. He shrugs off his preoccupation with his inadequacy, coming to fulfill the role of a captain with more confidence and conviction.

The reason for this transformation: the captain is introduced to another part of himself when he lets Leggatt onboard his ship. Leggatt is always stoic, calm, and strong, whereas the Captain is nervous and feeble. Leggatt is like the Captain's alter-ego, which intrigues him greatly (he always calls the fugitive his "double" with great affection). After rescuing the man representing his alter-ego, the Captain sees more so in himself the traits that Leggatt embodied, and decided, perhaps, the embody them himself.

The Metamorphosis Analysis: First Two Paragraphs

The first sentence sets the tone for the entirety of the novella with its frankness, dry humor, and strangeness. Suspense is also built within the first sentence and is then relieved with the purpose of the sentence revealed at the end: that Gregor has transformed into an enormous bug. The remainder of the paragraph serves to contribute to the subtle humor of the introduction by describing the uncomfortable, awkward situation in which Gregor finds himself. He is not merely an insect with a shell and legs, but a creature with a brown belly “on top of which the blanket, ready to slip off altogether, was just barely perched” and fruitlessly flickering legs. The imagery provided here is vivid and comical—one pictures an upended bug struggling confusedly, knowing that a man’s thoughts reside within. The description of this passage also emphasizes Gregor’s helplessness. His legs are “pitifully thin” while he is stuck lying on his back.

The brevity of Gregor’s first aloud statement serves as a stark contrast to the breathy syntax and unusual events occurring in the first few sentences. He asks what has happened to him, revealing no semblance of shock as one might expect. This first reveals an essence of Gregor’s character—he is a man who is not excitable in the least, who is measured and mellow. The second paragraph proceeds to describe Gregor’s bedroom, mentioning in detail the swatches strewn on the table and a hung picture but only very briefly and in an off-hand way that he is a traveling salesman. This hints at the monotony or plainness of Gregor’s work without commenting on the nature of it whatsoever. Lastly, in the end of the second paragraph, a picture which Gregor has framed is described. It is a woman in furs, the sole image on the walls—implying both a sexual perversion and idolization which makes the reader suspicious of Gregor’s normalcy. 

"Elegy on a Toy Piano" by Dean Young

By happenstance I stumbled across a poem called “Elegy on Toy Piano” and was superficially drawn first and foremost to the promise in the title of a piano. I am familiar with pianos and find my own poetry within them, and my intrigue was sparked. I read the poem, quickly, and was struck—not by the lack of relevance to what I had anticipated but to the depth and beauty in the simple words, crafted beautifully with powerful imagery. I was also struck upon first glance by the resemblance of the poem to my own style. Like my own, the style of the poem is one of clipped descriptions that weave together gradually to develop an idea. Even the syntax and word choice resonated with me because I was familiar with it in my own linguistic mind.

I find I am most attracted to artworks which dance the line between joyous and dark, major and minor, yellow and blue; this poem appealed to me greatly because it, too, weaved itself along this tantalizing line. In own moment, there is a glimmer of hope, and in the very next, melancholy—yet never joy or despair. “The injured gazelle falls behind the  herd. One last wild enjambment.” In this clipped stanza it is shown most clearly, the dance between good and evil. An injured gazelle falls, presumably to his demise, yet his fall is not tragedy by a “last wild enjambment.”

Lastly, the author tinkers with words in a way to make them appealingly bizarre (which, to me, resembles the style of T.S. Eliot). For example, he says, bluntly and unapologetically, “Your head becomes a peach pit.” I do not yet understand the intricacies or even the more basal meanings of this lovely poem, yet I know from the instant tonal and rhetorical appeal that I will love to find out. 

1984: A Beautiful Conclusion

I thoroughly enjoyed the ending of 1984, albeit it was not what I initially expected. I wrongly expected of Orwell a more generic finish to the overdone storyline. Angry dissenter causes anarchist eruption in face of evil government and overthrows the evil against all odds. Orwell’s conclusion was not at all this. In fact, following a course of logic concurrent with the novel, the end makes more sense. Angry dissenter dreams about inflicting change, yet is conquered brutally by the omnipotent, tyrannical government. As history will often tell us, oppression so powerful as Ingsoc will extinguish opposition. Thus, Winston and Julia are snubbed even before they have a chance to ignite—even before they finish reading Goldstein’s book.

The violent, politically charged ending of the novel apologizes for the monotonous, monochrome storyline up to this point. Throughout the book, Winston has appealed as Hamlet’s foil, acting rashly on decisions which propel him forwards towards wisdom, insight, and rebellion.  However, this never reaches its climax. Instead, we are left with a character more Hamletine in appearance and in impact, a grand disappointment, when Winston is hauled away. In effect, the development of Winston’s promising character is abruptly halted by his incarceration, leaving me with a sort of lingering disappointment. At least we are given a dramatic twist to charge the otherwise lacking plot and set. We are taken from a grey city clouded by Winston’s uncertainties and unelaborated trysts, and we are plunged into a place “of no darkness” where truths are revealed. Through the finale is graphic and grim, the reality of Orwell’s dystopia is revealed in its full, ugly light, and in parallel, we are given a glimpse into the dystopian societies of today.

I am pleased that Winston, at the end of the book, loves Big Brother. Not because of the stunning political commentary framed by Orwell (though indeed it is impressive) but because of the extermination of tension. Throughout the novel there is an undying, repressive tension in Winston’s thoughts, actions, expectations, and from the Party to the proles. Once Winston surrenders, the tension dies and we can breathe a sort of sigh of relief. Yet I wonder, what does this opinion voice about by own tendencies or dispositions? Does it hint that I am a reluctant power, and would rather succumb to the delicious simplicity of surrender? 

"The Book" Blog

"The Book", in my opinion, legitimizes the complaints and assumptions of those opposed to the Party. It causes me to further dislike the Party, much as Winston does, and to see it as a system achieving nothing other than circuitous self-destruction. It is made clear by the book that the wars of the Party are essentially worthless, and that the wars circulate within the society itself, producing a weakened, war-torn population. 

I understand the Party more so now as being a digressive rather than a progressive entity, though to what avail I know not. Technologies have regressed, and the only leaps made have been in technology for the purpose of war. The knowledge of society has decreased; the number of poor has increased; all for a war without a foundation. The Party no longer seems at all like one that propels itself forwards technologically or otherwise, like other futuristic societies are often portrayed as doing. 

What I found interesting that was mentioned in "The Book" was that the distribution of wealth is not quite as disproportionate as I originally assumed. It points out that the members of the Party have only few more possessions than the proles, since it is mere necessities that separate the haves from the have-nots in the society. This is contrary to the societal critique I originally expected from Orwell. I imagined that he would have separated the wealthy from the poor greatly as a commentary about the poor distribution of the wealth. Instead, he seems to be commenting on the poverty of the entire society—still a plausible concern, but not what I would have imagined. 

I was also intrigued by mention of the fighting areas. I wonder whether we will be told more about the floating fortresses. I found it interesting that the fighting happens in the disputed territories only. Since this is the case, do the rocket bombs that frequently fire, killing many proles (yet no Party members) originate from the Party itself? If so, then Orwell is making his commentary on the evil nature of a totalitarian power even more clear. 

Explication of A Considerable Speck by Robert Frost

Frost's poem "Considerable Speck" at first conveys the notion that Frost thinks "idly" of a microorganism; likely a bit of dust dancing across the paper, in all other instances invisible. Frost does not think of the dust's "life," a thing which he later attributes to it despite recognition in the "collectivistic regimenting love with which the modern world is being swept."

Frost conveys a sense of compassion for the speck to the reader by personifying it, giving the thing emotions, anger, fear, and most potently, a desire to continue living. The speck has "inclinations", and "suspicion" of the pen which Frost contemplates using to end its life. Frost, too, makes it apparent his own affirmed belief in the speck's life with strong diction such as "plainly" in describing the intelligence of the organism. We are made to sympathize with the speck when we are alerted that it very much "didn't want to die."

The speck then pauses, awaiting the fate appointed by Frost, pen poised, and we wish that Frost will not terminate it. Frost leads us then to a disclaimer in his disbelief of the love of the modern world, though follows his statement by undercutting it with "But this poor microscopic item now!" Frost is doing precisely what he decried-- attributing life and a love for a piece of dust.

Frost comments that he let it lie "to sleep" for the reason that he knew no evil of it. Here, Frost seems to be making a comment: that we all too often attribute evilness to objects undeserving. In the final stanza, Frost changes the rhyme scheme to signal the close of the poem and his final thoughts. He leaves us with this: that the inanimate object on his paper to him represents a mind, which no matter the size or relevance, is to him worth saving.

1984: Julia

Julia's declaration to Winston that she loves him is, in my opinion, highly suspect. She knows nothing about him other than what her impressions are, and what his name is. She has also never spoken to him. I don't believe that Julia loves Winston-- I believe she is using him to rebel only. She calls him "dear," a term of endearment usually depending upon the longevity of a relationship, yet she uses the term immediately, removing some of its value. Her falsified love is a rebellion. In contrast, Winston's love for her is a mixture of rebellion and affectionate emotion.

Julia appears to be rash, unguarded, deceptive, careful, and unwise. She said that her first love affair occurred at the age of 16 with a 60-year-old Party member who committed suicide. She does not seem to care for the man at all, since she says to Winston "Better off that he died, since he couldn't tell anyone about me." Winston, on the other hand, seems to show at least slightly more concern for the people around him and for love and marriage. And yet, their outlook on relationships does share a similarity: Winston disregards his wife, while Julia disregards her lovers.

Winston's wife poses another disparity between himself and Julia. When Winston tells Julia that he contemplated shoving her over a cliff, he afterwards modifies his opinions, saying that killing her would not have resolved anything. Julia, on the other hand, argues that killing Catherine at the time-- a rash, dangerous, inconsiderate act-- would have been an excellent decision. This also demonstrates, as Winston pointed out, Julia's lack of wisdom and experience. She seems unable to forsee consequences to her actions.

Winston and Julia share an overwhelming similarity of contempt for the Party. Julia's is, however, much more acute, angry, and vocalized. Winston feels afraid to express his displeasure, while Julia is loud, even swearing about the Party.

1984 Blog and Twitter Posts

Blog English

Winston appears to be significantly diverging from the path the government wishes for him to walk. He not only walks among the Proles, but he goes into a shop to purchase delicacies no longer approved by the government/society. However, he does not do so without trepidation. His guilty conscience wracks him with physical ailments. Also, his desire to discover the past among the proles is not powerfully driven yet; he seems to be merely looking to confirm, or discredit, the words of a child’s textbook out of a latent curiosity. He does not persist long in trying to obtain information from the old man, therefore he is likely not yet motivated to the point of taking any sort of decisive action.

It is clear that Winston is dissatisfied with his government. He writes it in his journals; however, I don’t believe that he yet knows why he is dissatisfied. He knows that the government allows people to live wretched and poor, yet he cannot pinpoint what it is he lacks: he suggests that his bones ache for what they know is missing, yet he can’t trace the desire. Still, Winston has taken active steps to pursue the source of this desire, trying to find what is missing, by wandering among the proles. For this reason, I believe that Winston is beginning to become a rebel against the government actively rather than inactively, albeit he still harbors a significant amount of self-doubt.

Winston’s dissatisfaction is progressing. Where will it end? It is not likely to end soon. My prediction is that he will become a full-blown anti-government character, a sort of anarchist, fighting for the plight of the all-too-accepting proles. He will incite their power, of which he has already alluded to, and drive the masses against the government, a leader. All he must do is leap beyond himself, his fears, and his self-consciousness, to focus on the anger that he feels.

TWITTER POST:
Hamlet Summary in Newspeak

H c Ghost=ungood, go mad, C&Pol test w/ O, c no unlove. H kill Pol, scr unjoy ma. H-> Eng by C, O selfkill, H goback, ma, C, H dual unlive.

Lear Summary Newspeak

L unluv C, land->G&R. G&R mk L ungood, L->storm unjoy. Edm plot nomore Edg, trick Glou. Corn uneye Glou, Edm Erl, FrXEng, C,L,G,R, Glou die.

Privacy Threats: 1984 and 2013

Thusfar in the novel 1984, there have been a nearly infinite number of threats to privacy expressed. Telescreens invade life at every moment. Spies are a perpetually undisclosed threat. Thought police monitor such private things as personal thoughts, and the repercussions of violating thought policies are extremely harsh.

These violations seem extreme, and clearly suppress opposition, such as Winston. He is intimidated into submission, afraid of expressing thoughts or even facial expressions that betray his displeasure towards the Party. However, these violations are not nearly as extreme as they seem, since they occur within our daily lives, unbeknownst to us.

Call me a conspiracy-theorist, but I believe firmly that the government and police watch us when we do not expect it. We already know that they spy on our emails, phone calls, and other interactions. They also spy on us visually...perhaps even via the tiny camera in our laptop monitor.

I spoke the other weekend with a homeless woman sleeping on the street. She was well acquainted with what transpires on the streets of Boston. She stated that the owner of the store in front of which she slept had had a video camera installed by his front door against his volition, and that he could not take it down with a "special laser that the police bring in" which can take years to acquire. Albeit the woman's words should be taken with a grain of salt, I believe her story is a true representation of what is occurring in our society today. Cameras are everywhere, against our will, watching us. Why? Certainly they are only searching for signs of terrorism, so the officials claim. But my question is, what can they define as terrorism, and will that definition change? Will the definition one day be "thoughtcrime", as in the novel 1984? And, more importantly, will be all submit to the terror of privacy invasion, as Winston does?

Poem Explication: Weighing the Dog

Weighing the Dog commences abruptly, divulging immediately into a sentence without commas during the first two lines of the first stanza. The imagery in the first stanza also creates an image of unease and discomfort and awkwardness in lines such as "small bathroom" and "shaky blue scale". It is possible, also, that Billy Collins chooses the color blue for the scale because it is a commonplace and docile color, not fitting to the discomfort and oddness of the event occurring upon it.

The second stanza is the only one the does not begin with a capitalized word, leading it to serve as an explanatory thought for the first stanza. It is an excuse stanza, elaborating on why he is weighing the dog on a small scale. The author also conveys somewhat of a sense of the difficulty of training a dog to sit on a scale with his use of lengthy syntax, conveying the amount of time it could take.

The third stanza continues with the previous idea of perpetuating the awkwardness and arduousness of the situation and the poet writes out the process of subtraction in relatively expansive detail given to arbitrarity of the task: "with pencil and paper I subtract my weight from our total to find out the remainder that is his."

The third paragraph differs from the rest because there are no commas to break it up, like a run-on thought, only a period at the end. It is a confirmed statement, and this was it is made more pronounced and profound. The poet speaks the message of the poem here, saying that he never knew what his dog amounted to until he was subtracted from the equation.

The final stanza demonstrates the relationship that Collins has with his dog. It also has the same syntax as the previous stanza, preserving the aforementioned profundity, for Collins is saying that the he and his dog have remained important to one another through difficult times.

Poetry Explication: To His Coy Mistress

Andrew Marvell addresses his lover in an argument that is dissected into three stanzas, the first speaking in a sweet, positive, and somewhat hypothetical tone. The second stanza contrasts the relaxed imagery of the first by insinuating an urgency, and the previous positive tone is quickly reverted to one that is miserable. The third stanza concludes with a proposal of a dismal sort, that he and his lover should, instead of basking in time's love, race through time to avoid the consequences of ages: they should "Rather at once our time devour" (39).

In the first stanza, Marvell marvels at how he would love without the bonds of time. To express the infinity of time and the irrelevance of time should he allow his love to drawl, Marvell alludes to biblical stories in referencing "the conversion of the Jews" and "the Flood". He also terms his love as "vegetable," a thing which grows slowly and becomes a round, wholesome food and which requires time and nourrishment. He references empires, which develop over a period of time to become masterful. All this is to emphasize the slow and meticulous "rate" at which the author would love his lover, for it is what he believes she deserves.

The second stanza is a stark contrast to the first. It moves with speed; time's chariot hurries, and eternity is metaphorically linked with deserts, vast and empty. Deserts, here, also contrast the "Flood" imagery of the previous stanza. His diction alludes to a cemetery in this stanza: worms, vaults, graves, and dust all appear in the phrases. The contrast serves to illuminate the urgency which the author feels, pressed by time, that he cannot and therefore should not take his time loving, particularly when the result is represented in the imagery of dark, dust, and crawling worms.

Finally, the third stanza brings about Marvell's concluding proposition to his mistress. The imagery is less dark, indeed, but it maintains the same sense of urgency. Though there is a "youthful hue" in the skin, and fire in the pores, the author also makes the simile that they are like birds of prey, rapidly and aggressively devouring time instead of languishing. Urgency is further conveyed in the "torn pleasures" and the image of the running sun, which serves as a metonym for time itself. By the conclusion of the poem, it is clear that Marvell is opposed the "languishing in time", languish itself a juxtaposition with the language in the first stanza.