"If [the relics are] so precious, then why are they hidden all over the house? Why didn't they take them with them?"(138)
What do the relics mean to the previous owners? The artifacts are described as unique and beautiful in their own ways. Yet, the beautiful pieces emphasizing one's faith are all left behind. How spiritual could the relics be if they are abandoned and hidden for others to find? I agree with Sanjeev as he questions the significance of the relics uncovered within their house. However, as he questions the importance of the spiritual leftovers in his home, in further separates himself from his wife.
Sanjeev sees no significance for the Christian relics. He is a Muslim, as he continues to stress to his wife. The pieces should have meaning to the probably Christians that owned them not to his own faith. He doesn't appreciate the value or beauty of the objects because they are from another religion, another owner, another state of mind. He focuses on the past and the problems of the relics. On the other hand, Twinkle takes a different approach to the relics around the house.
Instead of questioning why the relics are left to be found, Twinkles enjoys finding them. She enjoys discovering a new Christian relic simply for the pleasure of finding it. She is much more “easy going” than her husband is. He looks for at the Christian meaning of the objects, while Twinkle enjoys the beauty, uniqueness and the joy of finding the hidden treasures. Her free spirit also gives her feeling of superstition towards the artifacts from other cultures. Twinkle keeps the pieces because "it would be bad luck" to discard them. She does not keep them in spite of her faith but in respect for another religion. She does not wonder why the pieces were left behind as her husband questions. Instead, she wonders where to find the next precious treasure of her home.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Where is the Rudeness With Beauty?
Dr. Ambrose brought up the idea if Twinkle was being rude by displaying these Christian statues as art instead of being for religion belief. In my opinion, I do not think it is rude, people can find beauty in anything, and for Twinkle she found it in another religion. If I said she was being rude then I would be contradicting myself. If you ever thought a ying-yang sign was beautiful or cool....or you have a saints bracelet they now sell at the local Forever 21, or you want a tattoo of peace in Chinese lettering then you cannot say Twinkle is being rude. If you do say this, then you are contradicting yourself, because then you would be rude.
In class students said that Twinkle was offending and being rude to her religion and also the christian religion by thinking these statues as art. In my opinion, in todays society religions and cultures are mixed between friends and marriages. I think that most of the population should know a lot about other religions even if its just that they have beautiful art work or statues. This observation can help us understand the other religion more so people can connect on a better level.
Christians collect Buddhas and many other types of muslim religion items.They do not think about how this is rude to their religion or others. So why cant Twinkle think the statues are beautiful? It should be a compliment to the Christian religion that she thinks that. Sanjeev should broaden his horizion so he too can connect to more types of people.
In class students said that Twinkle was offending and being rude to her religion and also the christian religion by thinking these statues as art. In my opinion, in todays society religions and cultures are mixed between friends and marriages. I think that most of the population should know a lot about other religions even if its just that they have beautiful art work or statues. This observation can help us understand the other religion more so people can connect on a better level.
Christians collect Buddhas and many other types of muslim religion items.They do not think about how this is rude to their religion or others. So why cant Twinkle think the statues are beautiful? It should be a compliment to the Christian religion that she thinks that. Sanjeev should broaden his horizion so he too can connect to more types of people.
"that Twinkle, shes something..."
I think it was very interesting when the author talks about Sanjeev loving Twinkle. In this passage he says he does not know if he loves her or not, and that hes not even sure what love is. But he says he knows that love is not watching other people with their girlfriends, or ordering classical cds online, his mother constantly reminding him that he "had enough money in the bank to raise three families." This was really interesting because throughout the story Sanjeev is talking about how expensive things can be, when Twinkles on the phone with her girlfriend from California he gets upset because its at 5oclock "when the rates are the highest". Sanjeev is the oposite of Twinkle, shes laid back and doesn't let anything bother her. Whereas, Sanjeev gets irritated at the smallest things. When Twinkle finally gets upset its because of the Statue of Mary in the front yard. She doesn't seem to mind that its a Christian Statue she just keeps saying how beautiful it is. Sanjeev doesn't want people to see it so he yells, and Twinkle crys. He had never seen her cry before. You start to wonder if their love for each other is young or non existant, he clearly wants to be happy and have a wife and raise a family, but Twinkle may want different things. She asks him if he loves her and doesn't say so herself!
Twinkle and Sanjeev
In "This Blessed House" by Jhumpa Lahiri, Sanjeev and Twinkle are very interesting and both dynamic in their own sense. Twinkle is more of a free spirit and she seems to float around and say things airily. I initially didn't think she was dumb, but I would've bet money that she had no real intellectual bearings until Lahiri lets us know that she is working on her Master's degree and was a writer. Her free spirit and demeanor were justified. I thought it was weird how she placed the Christian paraphernalia on the mantle in her Hindu home. I thought it was worthy of keeping, but to put it in the centerpiece of a home who's principle religion views idolatry as unnecessary.
Sanjeev was smart and practical. He cared for the house and you could kind of tell that he was the brains behind the operation. He seemed annoyed by Twinkle, but also secretly taken by her freeness. He also seems so "by the books". Since they are Hindu, he saw no need to display Christ effigies in their home. It almost embarrassed him to display them and to have people question his identity as a Hindu. He also seems to have no real friends, just acquaintances, whereas Twinkle seems to make friends at first meeting.
Sanjeev was smart and practical. He cared for the house and you could kind of tell that he was the brains behind the operation. He seemed annoyed by Twinkle, but also secretly taken by her freeness. He also seems so "by the books". Since they are Hindu, he saw no need to display Christ effigies in their home. It almost embarrassed him to display them and to have people question his identity as a Hindu. He also seems to have no real friends, just acquaintances, whereas Twinkle seems to make friends at first meeting.
confused gender roles?
I was particularly interested in the view of power and gender roles in this short story. It is evident that Sanjeev is the prominent breadwinner between the two because of his frequent references to his high profile job. However I found that Sanjeev harbored a lot of resentment towards Twinkle for being so carefree and independent. As Hindus they were most likely brought up by parents who kept with traditional values. Their arranged marriage is a direct result of their traditional values. Sanjeev was most likely looking for a wife who also contained conservative and traditional values. However Twinkle was none of these and her outgoing personality caused him much distress.
I thought it was interesting how Sanjeev was frequently found cleaning and cooking. He picks up after Twinkle as if he is her mother. He is irritated by her smoking, dancing, and carefree attitude. In comparison to the other short stories I find it interesting that he (THE MAN) seems to be the individual with a lack of power within the relationship. She will not allow him to control her and she recognizes her ability to refuse to do specific duties characteristic of the housewife. He is an introvert whereas Twinkle is the extrovert. She exudes confidence and personality which gives the reader the impression that she may hold more weight within their relationship.
I thought it was interesting how Sanjeev was frequently found cleaning and cooking. He picks up after Twinkle as if he is her mother. He is irritated by her smoking, dancing, and carefree attitude. In comparison to the other short stories I find it interesting that he (THE MAN) seems to be the individual with a lack of power within the relationship. She will not allow him to control her and she recognizes her ability to refuse to do specific duties characteristic of the housewife. He is an introvert whereas Twinkle is the extrovert. She exudes confidence and personality which gives the reader the impression that she may hold more weight within their relationship.
Shrine upon a Mantel
Around the water cooler Monday morning after the party...
Douglas: That Twinkle is something isn't she?
Prabal: She sure is. She is ... "wow" (153).
Sunil: And that house... it's something else isn't it?
(mumbles of approval)
But, did any of you see the Hindu shrine?
They are Hindu right? I looked around, but I didn't see any... just that shrine of Christian artifacts on the mantel.
Douglas: Yeah that was weird. And they are Hindu, because I asked about the Madonna in the front, and Sanjeev denied any claims to Catholicism or Christianity in general.
[As I was thinking about how Christianity plays such an important role in "This Blessed House" I started to think about what role Hinduism actually did play.... Interestingly enough, I found where the Hindu artifacts should be, Christianity had taken the place of -- much like how Sanjeev's order and control has been moved to make room for Twinkle's spontaneity and chaos. ]
Diwali
Yagna from India says: “My favorite day is Deepavli. We burst crackers on the day. We go out and visit our relatives. We eat sweets and savories. We buy new clothes and wear. We give present to our kith and kin.”
On Tuesday October 28, 2008, over a billion people celebrated the Hindu festival of Diwali. Diwali, or Deepavali, is a major Hindu holiday, and a significant festival in Hinduism, Sikhism, Buddhism, and Jainism. In India and Nepal, Diwali is now considered to be a national festival and is enjoyed by most, regardless of faith.
The great legend of Diwali explains that it is the homecoming of Lord Ram of Ayodhya, after a 14-year exile in the forest, after he defeated the evil and demonic Ravan. The people of Ayodhya welcomed Ram by lighting rows of lamps. “Deepawali” literally means rows of lamps. The third day of this holiday is celebrated across the globe as the “Festival of Lights,” where interestingly the lights signify victory of good over the evil, and uplifting of spiritual darkness within every human being. It is celebrated on the new moon day, or the fifteenth day, of the month Kartika. On the day of Diwali, many wear new clothes and share sweets and snacks. Some business communities start their financial year on Diwali and new account books are opened on this day. Celebrated with lots of enthusiasm and happiness, Diwali is celebrated through festive fireworks, lights, flowers, sharing of sweets, and worship. Homes are lit up with oil lanterns and people take part in playing with sparklers, rockets, and fire crackers. The more noise the merrier.
Gulab Jamun Recipe
Ingredients
- 1 cup Bisquick
- 2 cup Carnation Powder
- 2 cup Water
- 1 1/2 cup Sugar
- 4 pods Cardamom Seeds
- 4 tbsp Butter
- 6-8 drops Rose Water
- 1/8 cup Yogurt
- 1/2 cup Milk
- Oil
Method
- Heat butter and pour in a bowl. Add bisquick, carnation powder and yogurt and blend together. Knead well adding milk if necessary.
- Make a smooth ball, cover and let rest for around 30 minutes. Make 12-14 small balls.
- Heat the water, add sugar, and bring to boil, add cardamom seeds and simmer.
- Boil, then simmer to reduce the water by half. Heat the oil until hot and fry the balls to a golden brown or until they are dark brown, almost black.
- Soak in sugar syrup for a few hours until they double in size
- Serve hot or cold
Happy Diwali!
Reliance on Imperfections
Although throughout most of Jhumpa Lahiri's story This Blessed House the Hindu couple Sanjeev and Twinkle are portrayed as somewhat of a dysfunctional couple they rely on one another quite a lot. This is more pronounced in Sanjeev's actions rather than Twinkle who seems to go with the flow rather than fight it. While I was reading this I kept wondering why Sanjeev agreed to marry this woman if he didn't like anything she did but towards the end I began to see that he actually relied on her crazy attitude to life.
Sanjeev's character comes off to the reader as somewhat boring. He's dull and plain but seems to be responsible and focused. His wife, Twinkle, however, seems to be the complete opposite--a complete free spirit. Sanjeev, perhaps, relies on Twinkle because she makes his own life seem a little more interesting. Even though he doesn't like throwing house parties for people he doesn't really know he does it anyway and he seemed to need a wife who was going to be entertain because he didn't quite know how.
His tolerance for Twinkle is shown throughout the story but especially towards the end when he cleans up after her and allows her to keep a solid silver bust of Christ (even though they are Hindu) for the mere fact that it entertains her.
To me this seemed like somewhat of a sad almost disappointing viewpoint on marriage. As if Sanjeev merely married her because she was wild and interesting to make a better impression on others. This seemed incredibly ironic when he began to worry about her actions regarding her Christian paraphernalia repeatedly telling her to not let it be seen. And yet, here he is relying on her social skills to make him shine. In the end, Sanjeev's character is far more hypocritical than I first thought.
Sanjeev's character comes off to the reader as somewhat boring. He's dull and plain but seems to be responsible and focused. His wife, Twinkle, however, seems to be the complete opposite--a complete free spirit. Sanjeev, perhaps, relies on Twinkle because she makes his own life seem a little more interesting. Even though he doesn't like throwing house parties for people he doesn't really know he does it anyway and he seemed to need a wife who was going to be entertain because he didn't quite know how.
His tolerance for Twinkle is shown throughout the story but especially towards the end when he cleans up after her and allows her to keep a solid silver bust of Christ (even though they are Hindu) for the mere fact that it entertains her.
To me this seemed like somewhat of a sad almost disappointing viewpoint on marriage. As if Sanjeev merely married her because she was wild and interesting to make a better impression on others. This seemed incredibly ironic when he began to worry about her actions regarding her Christian paraphernalia repeatedly telling her to not let it be seen. And yet, here he is relying on her social skills to make him shine. In the end, Sanjeev's character is far more hypocritical than I first thought.
What's Up With Arranged Marriages?
Arranged marriages have always been quite interesting to me. The first time I heard about this topic, I had a hard time believing that these marriages truly exist. The thought of two people being legally wed-without their own consent- kind of threw me for a loop. I didn't understand how it is possible to love someone that you're unwillingly attached to.
When I hear the word "marriage," the first thing I think about is true love. Very often, we hear the phrase, "the one," in reference to the special someone whom we envision ourselves marrying. Because I always believed that an individual finds their own soul mate, I always wondered if couples in arranged marriages believe that their spouse is, indeed, "the one." A more modern-day example of an "arranged" marriage could be an ultimately successful blind-date. Watch "A Wedding Story" on TLC. Many of the couples allude to the fact that they met their spouse on a blind-date arranged by their friends, and the end result is a happy and beautiful wedding. Arranged marriages are even successful; for I have a friend who's parents had an arranged marriage. Thirty years later, her parents are more in love than ever. Although a blind-date is not a tradition of certain religions or cultures, it still involves two strangers, who are absent in the process of selecting their future spouse.
True, positive results can come from arranged marriages; however, there are some negative cases. For instance, observe Sanjeev and Twinkle's marriage. Clearly, the two disagree on a majority of things: music selection, cleanliness, organization, and the "collection of Christian paraphernalia" (Lahiri 137). A large percentage of "This Blessed House" revolves around Sanjeev's dismay and disapproval of Twinkle's way of functioning. Sanjeev's desire to be in control of everything creates the impression of an unhealthy relationship. I was so tired of him ordering Twinkle around just because. It is not until page 156 that Sanjeev conveys some sort of love "pang" (156) for his wife. I just find it so strange that he suddenly begins to drift back in love with Twinkle, only moments after imagining how "he could snap the ladder back on its spring into the ceiling, and they would have no way of getting down unless he were to pull the chain and let them" (155). One minute, he considers trapping his wife in the attic, along with the guest, and the next minute, he claims to experience, "the same pang he used to feel before they were married" (156). I feel like this relationship is doomed unless Sanjeev transforms into a less-demanding and more free-spirited person. Because the Twinkle and Sanjeev had no opportunity to select a mate whom they felt they were compatible with, they are forced to stay in the situation they're already in- one involving infinite differences.
When I hear the word "marriage," the first thing I think about is true love. Very often, we hear the phrase, "the one," in reference to the special someone whom we envision ourselves marrying. Because I always believed that an individual finds their own soul mate, I always wondered if couples in arranged marriages believe that their spouse is, indeed, "the one." A more modern-day example of an "arranged" marriage could be an ultimately successful blind-date. Watch "A Wedding Story" on TLC. Many of the couples allude to the fact that they met their spouse on a blind-date arranged by their friends, and the end result is a happy and beautiful wedding. Arranged marriages are even successful; for I have a friend who's parents had an arranged marriage. Thirty years later, her parents are more in love than ever. Although a blind-date is not a tradition of certain religions or cultures, it still involves two strangers, who are absent in the process of selecting their future spouse.
True, positive results can come from arranged marriages; however, there are some negative cases. For instance, observe Sanjeev and Twinkle's marriage. Clearly, the two disagree on a majority of things: music selection, cleanliness, organization, and the "collection of Christian paraphernalia" (Lahiri 137). A large percentage of "This Blessed House" revolves around Sanjeev's dismay and disapproval of Twinkle's way of functioning. Sanjeev's desire to be in control of everything creates the impression of an unhealthy relationship. I was so tired of him ordering Twinkle around just because. It is not until page 156 that Sanjeev conveys some sort of love "pang" (156) for his wife. I just find it so strange that he suddenly begins to drift back in love with Twinkle, only moments after imagining how "he could snap the ladder back on its spring into the ceiling, and they would have no way of getting down unless he were to pull the chain and let them" (155). One minute, he considers trapping his wife in the attic, along with the guest, and the next minute, he claims to experience, "the same pang he used to feel before they were married" (156). I feel like this relationship is doomed unless Sanjeev transforms into a less-demanding and more free-spirited person. Because the Twinkle and Sanjeev had no opportunity to select a mate whom they felt they were compatible with, they are forced to stay in the situation they're already in- one involving infinite differences.
Sanjeev and Twinkle
The Christian pieces found in the home of Sanjeev and Twinkle struck me, at first, as something cool that happened in the lives of the newlyweds. I would probably think it was cool to find all of these high quality Christian pieces in my new home. But as the story goes on, the things Twinkle finds become bigger, and it began to creep me out a little. I would start to get scared after things started showing up daily, I would be afraid of a ghost or nonhuman presence in my house.
This Blessed House is a short story with much opportunity for interpretation of the characters. Sanjeev, a newly married husband, and Twinkle, his wife, are two completely different people who ended up together. I think that Twinkle appreciated the fun in finding these tokens around her house, and Sanjeev let it get under his skin, just because he wasn't Christian. I think the characters' attitudes towards the things found in their house can be anticipated by learning what their names are. Sanjeev, an Indian name, can hint to the fact that he is more traditional Indian and more tied to his religion. It could be guessed that he wouldn't feel completely open to the presence of Christian items displayed in his house. This is proven throughout the entire short story when Sanjeev tries to convince Twinkle to hide the items and keep them out of view.
Twinkle, a unique and more untraditional name, could help predict that she would be more open to items of another tradition to be displayed in her house. Twinkle is proven to be more open to the items throughout the short story because she constantly wants to show off the items she finds.
I think that in the end we learn that Sanjeev does love Twinkle but is jealous of how the items are getting all of her attention. He shows this by constantly wanting to get rid of the Christian items and getting angry when she shows how much she enjoys them being around. I think the two main characters of This Blessed House are a very interesting couple.
This Blessed House is a short story with much opportunity for interpretation of the characters. Sanjeev, a newly married husband, and Twinkle, his wife, are two completely different people who ended up together. I think that Twinkle appreciated the fun in finding these tokens around her house, and Sanjeev let it get under his skin, just because he wasn't Christian. I think the characters' attitudes towards the things found in their house can be anticipated by learning what their names are. Sanjeev, an Indian name, can hint to the fact that he is more traditional Indian and more tied to his religion. It could be guessed that he wouldn't feel completely open to the presence of Christian items displayed in his house. This is proven throughout the entire short story when Sanjeev tries to convince Twinkle to hide the items and keep them out of view.
Twinkle, a unique and more untraditional name, could help predict that she would be more open to items of another tradition to be displayed in her house. Twinkle is proven to be more open to the items throughout the short story because she constantly wants to show off the items she finds.
I think that in the end we learn that Sanjeev does love Twinkle but is jealous of how the items are getting all of her attention. He shows this by constantly wanting to get rid of the Christian items and getting angry when she shows how much she enjoys them being around. I think the two main characters of This Blessed House are a very interesting couple.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Twinkle vs. Sanjeev
As I read "This Blessed House" I found myself feeling bad for Sanjeev. When I was reading the story, it seemed like Twinkle didn't really care what was going on even if it made her and her husband look bad. Sanjeev is proud of and is dedicated to his religion which is why he didn't want any of the Christian statues in the house. While Twinkle makes a valid point when she asks Sanjeev, "Why does it matter to you so much what other people think?" (147), Sanjeev and Twinkle still have reputations to uphold. Especially with co-workers coming to the housewarming party, he can't embarrass himself in front of them. Twinkle lives her life without worries and doesn't seem to care how that affects her husband.
After I make these points however, this point of view can be reversed. I thought about how my reaction would be if the roles between the two characters were switched: if Sanjeev was the female and Twinkle was the male (even though the names probably would be different). If I read this and the male was the airhead and the female was the one that was cleaning up all of his messes, I would think that this was completely normal. This is a situation that presents the typical husband and wife roles. The wife stays at home and does all the dirty work and has to take responsibility while the lazy husband comes home and does nothing. I think it's interesting how the author presented these roles.
Power Struggle
One of the issues that This Blesssed House addresses is power. Women tend to be portrayed as passive and the homemaker. Men are set in more forceful and powerful roles where they are dominate over the women in their lives. In the short story Jhumpa Lahiri twists around the expected roles of women breaking the more traditional roles they are commonly placed in.
One of the first ways that this is evident is in Twinkle's refusal to obey her husband. He gives her numerous orders to do things and she is constantly doing the exact opposite. When he tells her to throw away the items that she found she responds by placing " the statue on top of the fire mantel, which needed, Sanjeev observed, to be dusted" (Lahiri 137). This act shows an outright refusal to listen to the man in the house. Sanjeev's observation of the need for the mantel to be dusted reveals that he is responsible for the household cleaning which is normally reserved for women.
The impression that Sanjeev is more feminine is also portrayed through his physical description of himself. His actions towards his appearance also reflect the actions of a girl, "In the mirror of the medicine cabinet he inspected his long eyelashes- like a girl's...his cheeks had a plumpness to them..." (140). We also get the sense of reversed roles through the differences in height and Sanjeev's obvious discomfort with being shorter than his wife, he "had wished ever since he had stopped growing that he were just one inch taller. For this reason it irritated him when Twinkle insisted on wearing high heels..." (140). This pronouncement reveals that Sanjeev is uncomfortable with being shorter than his wife, it makes him feel less like a man.
These character traits are deliberately given to Sanjeev and Twinkle. They serve a purpose to reverse the roles that normally are associated with men and women. This could be done to reveal what the consequences can be when situations are reversed and how they can alienate a person because they are not in their comfort zone. It also makes a point to show how women's expected roles are constricting to them.
Lahiri creates these reverse roles to take a stance about something, these roles weren't just given to Sanjeev and Twinkle, they have a purpose.
One of the first ways that this is evident is in Twinkle's refusal to obey her husband. He gives her numerous orders to do things and she is constantly doing the exact opposite. When he tells her to throw away the items that she found she responds by placing " the statue on top of the fire mantel, which needed, Sanjeev observed, to be dusted" (Lahiri 137). This act shows an outright refusal to listen to the man in the house. Sanjeev's observation of the need for the mantel to be dusted reveals that he is responsible for the household cleaning which is normally reserved for women.
The impression that Sanjeev is more feminine is also portrayed through his physical description of himself. His actions towards his appearance also reflect the actions of a girl, "In the mirror of the medicine cabinet he inspected his long eyelashes- like a girl's...his cheeks had a plumpness to them..." (140). We also get the sense of reversed roles through the differences in height and Sanjeev's obvious discomfort with being shorter than his wife, he "had wished ever since he had stopped growing that he were just one inch taller. For this reason it irritated him when Twinkle insisted on wearing high heels..." (140). This pronouncement reveals that Sanjeev is uncomfortable with being shorter than his wife, it makes him feel less like a man.
These character traits are deliberately given to Sanjeev and Twinkle. They serve a purpose to reverse the roles that normally are associated with men and women. This could be done to reveal what the consequences can be when situations are reversed and how they can alienate a person because they are not in their comfort zone. It also makes a point to show how women's expected roles are constricting to them.
Lahiri creates these reverse roles to take a stance about something, these roles weren't just given to Sanjeev and Twinkle, they have a purpose.
The Many Questions of Interpretation
One aspect I have found to be significant with the understanding of each short story, with a focus upon This Blessed House, is interpretation. I feel as though each story has given us a lot of freedom to interpret meaning and emotion through the use of vague words, sharp transition between ideas, and the careful style of the narrator. In This Blessed House, some may think that the narrator clearly emphasizes a broken house, distance between Twinkle and Sanjeev, and the difference in personalities of these two characters. With this emphasis, it seems as though some have automatically assumed that they don't love each other or the marriage is a bust. It is true that the differences and problems are there, but are they not a part of most marriages? Maybe this is what the author is implying? Can the "blessings" of the house still be found within the narrators story? Of course it is up to you- the interpreter!
Here are some examples of how the author uses style and word choice to push the reader to interpret and understand the characters: On page 155, the story jumps from Twinkle exclaiming, "My God I need a cigarette," to the exhaustion of Sanjeev. The closeness in ideas may lead a reader to find a relationship between them, probably negative. More importantly, the end of "This Blessed House" startles the reader, leads the reader to question Sanjeev's feelings and, perhaps, encourages the reader to interpret the story in a way that may be different than what they originally figured. Sanjeev reflects that,"the pang intensified... the same pang he used to feel before they were married..." As a reader, you must interpret what this pang is now, what it once was and the significance it has to the story while paying close attention to its placement within the story.
It is interesting when authors give the reader the room to make of the stories and characters as they wish- but the next question is "Why would the author chose to do this?"
Smoking?
Something that I found interesting in “The Blessed House” is the repetitive references to cigarettes and smoking in the first half of the story. This is obviously a part of Sanjeev’s and Twinkle’s lifestyle, but it seemed the author purposely used the action of smoking to perhaps enhance certain situations. The direct act of smoking is only portrayed by Twinkle, especially in situations of relaxation and happiness. For example she, smokes in the tub, and while she was ecstatically describes the Jesus poster. Contrary to the that, Sanjeev seems to always pick up Twinkle’s ashes and cigarette buds. So what does all this mean? Why is she portrayed smoking and not him?
There could be many interpretations of these findings. I think, perhaps the act of smoking enhances some of the meaning in the story. Sanjeev disposes of her waste, placing him in a position of subservience, and inferiority in relation to her. Twinkle’s act of smoking reveals the carefree attitude of her position. Sanjeev is never shown to participate in a similar activity, because he is displayed concentrating his attention on her, and not himself. He does not have the luxury of living this untroubled lifestyle. Thus, the luxury of smoking is used as an example to show the differences between the husband and wife. The author may have included this aspect in order to reveal Sanjeev’s confusion with his relationship and surrounding world. He cannot simply have a smoke, but struggles to realize why he cannot enjoy the simple pleasures of life, like his wife.
There could be many interpretations of these findings. I think, perhaps the act of smoking enhances some of the meaning in the story. Sanjeev disposes of her waste, placing him in a position of subservience, and inferiority in relation to her. Twinkle’s act of smoking reveals the carefree attitude of her position. Sanjeev is never shown to participate in a similar activity, because he is displayed concentrating his attention on her, and not himself. He does not have the luxury of living this untroubled lifestyle. Thus, the luxury of smoking is used as an example to show the differences between the husband and wife. The author may have included this aspect in order to reveal Sanjeev’s confusion with his relationship and surrounding world. He cannot simply have a smoke, but struggles to realize why he cannot enjoy the simple pleasures of life, like his wife.
Green with Envy
We are jealous creatures in one way or another. Yes, that means you too. Even if it is for a fleeting moment, we all experience that twinge of envy, that desire to obtain something that does not belong to us.
Reading the short story, "This Blessed House," Sanjeev's jealously was palpable. His free spirited, intelligent, charismatic, beautiful wife, Twinkle,being the focus of his envy. Looking at Sanjeev, he appears to be a man that would have no need to be jealous of anyone. He is educated, powerful, wealthy, orderly and seems to have many friends and family that love him (as apparent by the turn out of his wedding and house warming party). So, why would he be jealous of his wife?
Here are a few reasons why:
1. She is admired for her lovely looks, while he is likened to a girl because he is of, "average build" and "his checks had a plumpness to them; this, along with the eyelashes, detracted, he feared, from what he hoped was a distinguished profile" (Lahiri 140).
2. Also, "he was of average height as well," yet Twinkle insisted on wearing heels (Lahiri 140). She is a woman unafraid to be taller than a man, both physically and socially. Because there is a sense of power in that, Sanjeev is jealous.
3. She is not bound to any role, including the socialized tasks of females. Although Sanjeev would like her to "sweep the attic," it is not required of her to do so (Lahiri 141). Yet, he feels bound by his role to be a good provider.
4. Twinkle "had not grown out of her girlhood," which is apparent in her adventurous attitude that seeks to find excitement in everyday (Lahiri 142). Sanjeev, on the other hand, had been a man for years, consumed with thoughts of his persona and unable to tap into the carefree spirit like that of a child.
5. When Sanjeev decides to hold a house warming party (with my of his co-workers/ friends attending) it is Twinkle who is the star of the party, for "they laughed at her anecdotes and observations, forming a widening circle around her" (Lahiri 152). He is jealous of the attention she commands of the room because it reminds him of his inability to "Twinkle" in a crowded room.
But most of all, Sanjeev is jealous of Twinkle because he knows that she does not need him, yet he knows he needs her. When reflecting on his single years, Sanjeev only remembers the pressure from his family to meet someone and the sadness he felt during the years of being alone. Marrying Twinkle is a way to escape a lonely, seemingly unfulfilled life. Therefore, he needs her in his life if he is to feel accomplished and "happy". Twinkle, on the other hand, is independent, strong, intelligent and captivating. She has that spark that propels someone towards happiness and success. Her life is not bound to Sanjeev, but Sanjeev's envision of life is bound to Twinkles' existence in his.
Reading the short story, "This Blessed House," Sanjeev's jealously was palpable. His free spirited, intelligent, charismatic, beautiful wife, Twinkle,being the focus of his envy. Looking at Sanjeev, he appears to be a man that would have no need to be jealous of anyone. He is educated, powerful, wealthy, orderly and seems to have many friends and family that love him (as apparent by the turn out of his wedding and house warming party). So, why would he be jealous of his wife?
Here are a few reasons why:
1. She is admired for her lovely looks, while he is likened to a girl because he is of, "average build" and "his checks had a plumpness to them; this, along with the eyelashes, detracted, he feared, from what he hoped was a distinguished profile" (Lahiri 140).
2. Also, "he was of average height as well," yet Twinkle insisted on wearing heels (Lahiri 140). She is a woman unafraid to be taller than a man, both physically and socially. Because there is a sense of power in that, Sanjeev is jealous.
3. She is not bound to any role, including the socialized tasks of females. Although Sanjeev would like her to "sweep the attic," it is not required of her to do so (Lahiri 141). Yet, he feels bound by his role to be a good provider.
4. Twinkle "had not grown out of her girlhood," which is apparent in her adventurous attitude that seeks to find excitement in everyday (Lahiri 142). Sanjeev, on the other hand, had been a man for years, consumed with thoughts of his persona and unable to tap into the carefree spirit like that of a child.
5. When Sanjeev decides to hold a house warming party (with my of his co-workers/ friends attending) it is Twinkle who is the star of the party, for "they laughed at her anecdotes and observations, forming a widening circle around her" (Lahiri 152). He is jealous of the attention she commands of the room because it reminds him of his inability to "Twinkle" in a crowded room.
But most of all, Sanjeev is jealous of Twinkle because he knows that she does not need him, yet he knows he needs her. When reflecting on his single years, Sanjeev only remembers the pressure from his family to meet someone and the sadness he felt during the years of being alone. Marrying Twinkle is a way to escape a lonely, seemingly unfulfilled life. Therefore, he needs her in his life if he is to feel accomplished and "happy". Twinkle, on the other hand, is independent, strong, intelligent and captivating. She has that spark that propels someone towards happiness and success. Her life is not bound to Sanjeev, but Sanjeev's envision of life is bound to Twinkles' existence in his.
This Blessed House
Sanjeev and Twinkle's love is questioned throughout the story. "[Sanjeev] did not know if he loved her. He said he did when she had first asked him" (147). In the rest of this passage Sanjeev questions his love for her and vice versa. I think that they liked the idea of getting married but did not truly ever love each other.
Towards the end of the story Sanjeev describes how he found the house by himself. He decided himself about the house and did not consult Twinkle about it. He was determined to like the house was blinded by his idea of what their life would be like in the house. He didn't realize the problems with the house: "...was determined that he and Twinkle should live there together, forever, and so he had not bothered to notice the switch plates covered with biblical stickers..."(145). I think that he did the same thing with the house that he did with Twinkle.
He liked the idea of Twinkle and having a wife so much, that he did not see the aspects of her that he did not like. And now when he is getting to know her better, just as he is discovering things in the house, he is not liking what he is finding. "When, after moving in, he tried to scrape it off, he scratched the glass." (145). If you parallel the house to Twinkle, it shows that if Sanjeev tries to change Twinkle it will not be successful.
Towards the end of the story Sanjeev describes how he found the house by himself. He decided himself about the house and did not consult Twinkle about it. He was determined to like the house was blinded by his idea of what their life would be like in the house. He didn't realize the problems with the house: "...was determined that he and Twinkle should live there together, forever, and so he had not bothered to notice the switch plates covered with biblical stickers..."(145). I think that he did the same thing with the house that he did with Twinkle.
He liked the idea of Twinkle and having a wife so much, that he did not see the aspects of her that he did not like. And now when he is getting to know her better, just as he is discovering things in the house, he is not liking what he is finding. "When, after moving in, he tried to scrape it off, he scratched the glass." (145). If you parallel the house to Twinkle, it shows that if Sanjeev tries to change Twinkle it will not be successful.
Insecurity
I found it interesting, and almost irritating that the majority of "This Blessed House" was seen from Sanjeev's perspective. Although he was not the narrator, the author seems to focus more on his inner thoughts and feelings than on Twinkle's. This focus on Sanjeev takes the spotlight from Twinkle and her true character. I believe the author did this to show Sanjeev's insecurity and place in Twinkle's shadow.
From the right get-go of the story we learn that Sanjeev studied engineering at MIT. It isn't until 8 pages later that we learn that Twinkle is working on her master's degree from Stanford. Up until then, I pictured Twinkle as a very flighty "California-girl" with a carefree attitude. The picture the author paints is one of a very typical girl - she wears "suede three-inch leopard-print pumps" (141), and enjoys talking on the phone to girlfriends, taking bubble baths, and just the simplest pleasures in life. Even the name "Twinkle" made me think of a girlish character that was difficult to take seriously.
Sanjeev, however, is quite different. While we know he is highly educated and intelligent, it is said that Twinkle was writing her master's thesis on "an Irish poet whom Sanjeev had never heard of" (145). Maybe the reason he tried to be so controlling over Twinkle is possibly because he was threatened by her intelligence, the one thing he had going for him. Also, throughout the story as Twinkle is collecting the various Christian relics he continues to threaten to get rid of all of them, but he never takes any action.
Sanjeev's insecurity is what made this story entertaining for me.
From the right get-go of the story we learn that Sanjeev studied engineering at MIT. It isn't until 8 pages later that we learn that Twinkle is working on her master's degree from Stanford. Up until then, I pictured Twinkle as a very flighty "California-girl" with a carefree attitude. The picture the author paints is one of a very typical girl - she wears "suede three-inch leopard-print pumps" (141), and enjoys talking on the phone to girlfriends, taking bubble baths, and just the simplest pleasures in life. Even the name "Twinkle" made me think of a girlish character that was difficult to take seriously.
Sanjeev, however, is quite different. While we know he is highly educated and intelligent, it is said that Twinkle was writing her master's thesis on "an Irish poet whom Sanjeev had never heard of" (145). Maybe the reason he tried to be so controlling over Twinkle is possibly because he was threatened by her intelligence, the one thing he had going for him. Also, throughout the story as Twinkle is collecting the various Christian relics he continues to threaten to get rid of all of them, but he never takes any action.
Sanjeev's insecurity is what made this story entertaining for me.
The Importance of Religious Statues
Twinkle is excited to hunt for the treasures in her new house. She loves finding each new Christian statue and can't wait to put it on the mantle even though she is not Christian. Why are these things so important to her? As Sanjeev says, "she had yet to shed a childhood endearment", which demonstrates her sometimes childlike outlook on life (p 142). The reason these relics might be important to her is because of the thrill of the treasure hunt which every little kid would love to go on. Sanjeev is not able to participate in her fun because he is too steeped in his own seriousness and ordered world to see the fun of finding all of these objects in their new house.
Additionally, I think these statues are important to her because it makes her a part of the house and it is what she loves about the house. Every time she finds a statue she is filled with excitement and she is proud of the house in that moment. For example, when she leads her guests into the attic this is her way of showing off her house by displaying the hidden treasures that were left behind. Unlike Sanjeev who loves the house for its staircase, floors, windows, and the grandeur of living in a well built house that is his. I think most people would love their houses as Sanjeev did, for its floors, kitchen, and its possibility to house a family. On the other hand, some people love their houses ,as Twinkle does, with their history and character adding to the importance of the house.
Finally, Sanjeev says that Twinkle "was like that, excited and delighted by little things" which gives her an even more childlike outlook. (p 142) Obviously, she is more content and appreciative of the things around her while Sanjeev feels left out or "stupid" in her presence. (p 142) I think that throughout the whole story Twinkle is happier than Sanjeev with her childlike view of the hunt for the statues while he is always serious.
Sanjeev's Displacement
While I was reading "This Blessed House" it occurred to me that Sanjeev is displaced in his own world and even in his own home.
Sanjeev is a graduate of MIT with a degree in engineering. He likes to be organized. For example, he "pinched [the ashes] between his fingers, and deposited them in his cupped palm" (pg. 140). Sanjeev also likes to listen to Bach and Mahler, whom Twinkle despises.
Sanjeev does not like all of the Christian paraphernalia in his home. He does not know what to make of them. At one point he even states, referring to the statue of Mary, "For now I am going to put it in the garage. Then tomorrow morning on my way to work I am going to take it to the dump" (pg. 148). Twinkle, on the other hand admires these objects, which makes Sanjeev feel uncomfortable. At the end of the story he says, " Most of all [I] hated it because [I] knew that Twinkle loved it" referring to the silver bust of Christ that was found (pg. 157). Sanjeev finds it difficult to accept something for himself, even if he does not believe in it.
Also, Sanjeev feels uneasy about his marriage. He does not know if he loves Twinkle or if she even loves him, as stated on page 147. I think the whole process of marriage seemed ideal for Sanjeev while he was single. Now, however, he has to live with Twinkle, and he finds it difficult to adjust, especially because Twinkle gets along easily with everyone, unlike Sanjeev.
Sanjeev is a graduate of MIT with a degree in engineering. He likes to be organized. For example, he "pinched [the ashes] between his fingers, and deposited them in his cupped palm" (pg. 140). Sanjeev also likes to listen to Bach and Mahler, whom Twinkle despises.
Sanjeev does not like all of the Christian paraphernalia in his home. He does not know what to make of them. At one point he even states, referring to the statue of Mary, "For now I am going to put it in the garage. Then tomorrow morning on my way to work I am going to take it to the dump" (pg. 148). Twinkle, on the other hand admires these objects, which makes Sanjeev feel uncomfortable. At the end of the story he says, " Most of all [I] hated it because [I] knew that Twinkle loved it" referring to the silver bust of Christ that was found (pg. 157). Sanjeev finds it difficult to accept something for himself, even if he does not believe in it.
Also, Sanjeev feels uneasy about his marriage. He does not know if he loves Twinkle or if she even loves him, as stated on page 147. I think the whole process of marriage seemed ideal for Sanjeev while he was single. Now, however, he has to live with Twinkle, and he finds it difficult to adjust, especially because Twinkle gets along easily with everyone, unlike Sanjeev.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Should You Marry Someone Similar or Differnet Than You?
After reading, "This Blessed House" the thought of marriage popped up in my mind. Don't worry, Not the idea of how I want to get married, but the idea of who I should marry. My father always talks about how you need to marry your best friend. In fact, my stepmother and him just changed their "song" to Best Friend by Jason Mraz and Colbie. This song talks about how they are so lucky to be in love with their best friend. Now, when I think of a best friend, I figure they have similar tastes such as, favorite restaurant, music and hobbies. In this short story, Twinkle and Sanjeev have nothing in common.
Throughout the story we put Sanjeevs puzzle pieces together to realize he is a very organized person, almost to the fact of OCD. For example on page 1 the narrator talks about how Sanjeev is "organizing his texts from MIT in alphabetical order on a bookshelf." This shows that Sanjeev always needs to be in control of everything, which Twinkle is does not feel this way.
Twinkle is a free spirit. She loves to explore and be spontaneous. When she finds the vinegar she tells Sanjeev about how she is going to use it to make something for dinner. After preparing the meal, Sanjeev asks if she wrote the recipe down, and she explains how she made it up and will remember it. This drives Sanjeev crazy. In a way, Twinkle is something he cannot control and he hates it. This idea of control could start to seperate the relationship and cause problems.
In conclusion, after reading this short story, I have decided that two TOTALLY differnet personalities do not work. You need a mixture. Although Sanjeev does balance out the free spirit of Twinkle, it still causes problems in Sanjeev which makes him a little more control crazy. I think both of them would be well off marrying someone who is more like them.
Throughout the story we put Sanjeevs puzzle pieces together to realize he is a very organized person, almost to the fact of OCD. For example on page 1 the narrator talks about how Sanjeev is "organizing his texts from MIT in alphabetical order on a bookshelf." This shows that Sanjeev always needs to be in control of everything, which Twinkle is does not feel this way.
Twinkle is a free spirit. She loves to explore and be spontaneous. When she finds the vinegar she tells Sanjeev about how she is going to use it to make something for dinner. After preparing the meal, Sanjeev asks if she wrote the recipe down, and she explains how she made it up and will remember it. This drives Sanjeev crazy. In a way, Twinkle is something he cannot control and he hates it. This idea of control could start to seperate the relationship and cause problems.
In conclusion, after reading this short story, I have decided that two TOTALLY differnet personalities do not work. You need a mixture. Although Sanjeev does balance out the free spirit of Twinkle, it still causes problems in Sanjeev which makes him a little more control crazy. I think both of them would be well off marrying someone who is more like them.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
O, Othello, and the Question of Race
One element of Tim Blake Nelson's film, O, that we haven't discussed in depth is the decision to anchor the disconnect between Odin and the film's other characters in modern racial tensions. In other words, in Othello, the title character represents an appropriated "Other" (Othello rises to success as a Moor in Venetian society), yet nonetheless reminds audiences of Europe's anxieties over racial, religious, and geographic difference (though a Christian and a Venetian, Othello reminds Europeans of their North African Muslim neighbors to the South). Does something similar go on in the film? Is Odin both an appropriation and an anxiety? Are the worries about O as multidimensional in this American southern prep school as they are in 16th-century Venice? Or, is something else going on?
Othello in real life
I love watching "O" in class! I'd never seen it before but I am really excited i get to finally watch it. I think a few reasons Shakespeare is universal is becasue the topics of his plays are still around today. His plays revolve around love, death, marriage, jealousy, infidelity, and soo many other issues that we still deal with on a day to day basis. I love that "O" uses modern language. I think it is way to hard to use all of Shakespeares verse in movies that supposed to be present tense, because we don't talk the same way and its very hard for audiences to understand whats going on.
In Michael Almereyda's version of Hamlet, with Ethan Hawke, they set the movie in modern times yet they use all of Shakespeares original verse. I think it very hard to follow and super confusing. If I want to hear Shakespeares original verses I would like the play or movie to be set in the same period as the words. One of the worst things is to sit in a movie theatre watching something you don't understand. I really like the way "O" was written (the script) because it takes modern high school problems and relates them to the same problems in Shakespeare. Iam really glad we get the opportunity to watch this film in class.
In Michael Almereyda's version of Hamlet, with Ethan Hawke, they set the movie in modern times yet they use all of Shakespeares original verse. I think it very hard to follow and super confusing. If I want to hear Shakespeares original verses I would like the play or movie to be set in the same period as the words. One of the worst things is to sit in a movie theatre watching something you don't understand. I really like the way "O" was written (the script) because it takes modern high school problems and relates them to the same problems in Shakespeare. Iam really glad we get the opportunity to watch this film in class.
O v. Othello
The modern adaptation of Othello in "O" is well represented in my opinion. I feel as if some of the biggest plot twist that made Othello were well represented in the movie and make for an interesting take on a modern adaptation. For instance, when O gives Desi the scarf that has been in his family a long time, this directly resembles the handkerchief that Othello gives Desdemona. I think the director of the film was also able to capture the overall dark mood of the play and possibly the rap music helped. The rap music used in the movie also helped to personify aggression, as it was not the type that one would usually dance to.
Desi's encounter in the office was similar to when Desdemona first spoke to her father about her love for Othello in front of the Senate. The words used were different, but the underlying meaning resonates. It also makes sense that a modern adaptation of Othello would feature some disparity amongst class and portray that black guy as a basketball star.
Desi's encounter in the office was similar to when Desdemona first spoke to her father about her love for Othello in front of the Senate. The words used were different, but the underlying meaning resonates. It also makes sense that a modern adaptation of Othello would feature some disparity amongst class and portray that black guy as a basketball star.
Modern Adaptations
I know that the modern adaptations are supposed to bring the Shakespeare stories to a new audience but I personally feel that they take away from the beauty of his original works. I like most other people have a very had time reading Shakespeare but I believe that is part of understanding him. When I watch these modern adaptations created by young and popular actors it seems to me like they are trying to hard to match the story. I would much rather they hide the story behind their own events. Take the Disney movie The Loin King after watching it many people can see that the story mirrors Shakespeare's story of Hamlet but at the same time weaves a story that is new and exciting. I really enjoy the effect this creates and how it does not appear fake, anymore than talking animals normally would. The movie O, I believe, tries too hard to put a Shakespeare story in a modern day setting. Things like that just would not happen the way they would then, there are other things involved in teenage lives today. I think the movie takes away from the overall experience of Shakespeare.
Charleston's Own Hoop Town
"I guess the truth that I told him, must have drove him insane
.......... The poisoned lyrics make you sick quicker than liquor
So go blast your gun, I'm gonna be the one who'll be yellin' victory"
.......... The poisoned lyrics make you sick quicker than liquor
So go blast your gun, I'm gonna be the one who'll be yellin' victory"
- That's just a taste of the new single from Borialis- "Mightier Than The Sword"... Let us know if it's worth it or kick it? And remember the first person to give what movie this single should appear in and a valid reason as to why wins a pair of concert tickets...
O-Nasty: Caller One, you've reached the Hoop Town, Charleston's very favorite radio show...
Caller One: Hey man, is this DJ O-Nasty?
O-Nasty: Caller one, if you need to ask, you shouldn't be on. Goodbye.
O-Nasty: Caller two, you there?
Caller Two: Oh my gawd! Oh my gawd! The perfect movie would definitely have to be um like "O" because isn't that movie like totally based off of Shakespeare? or maybe not? but whatevs.. That's totally my movie pick!!!
O-Nasty: And caller two, why would you pick "O"?
Caller Two: Um like totally because,... uh because it's like about how youcantellsomeone, thatyou'regoing totellthemthetruth, butliketotally not tell them the truth, youknow? andlike when youdon'ttellsomeonethe whole total truth, youcanlike t o t a l l y manipulate themsothatyoubecome like the master becausetheytotallythink thatlikeyou'retotally helping them, when you're really not!! riight?
O-Nasty: Uhh, right? well, maybe if I could understand that you would win, but 'you know, I like totally can't riight?' so goodbye.
O-Nasty: Sigh, Caller Three you're on the line...
Caller Three: Hey OOOOOOOOO-NAASSSSSTTTYYY!!! whad up? I would pick Old School! Because that movie rocks and that song rocks, so they both should rock together!
O-Nasty: Congratulations Caller three, you may not have had the best answer or the best movie, but I'm bored with this game... ....
[I've just been thinking about how the music seemed to fit so perfectly with the music, because at first glance, rap music with a seemingly all-white prep-school seems to be an odd pairing, yet the music fit. I feel like the music fits because the lyrics express what is going on perfectly in the scene they are accompanying, and because the connotations associated with rap/ hip hop music help to show that a prep-school is not all fun and games -- it is a socially treacherous arena. Also, the music stands out against the prep-school life just as Oden stands out on the basketball court and in the hallways. And just as I am searching for reasons why it fits so well, Hugo is searching for ways to overthrow the social hierarchy in his life.]
Not Your Average Weekend Warrior
How do you go through 5 pairs of shoes, 18 pairs of socks and 3 toenails? Well if you’re Dean Karnazes, aka Ultramarathon Man, you do it by running 50 marathons in 50 states in 50 consecutive days.
I was having a difficult time thinking of a new, original blog discussion pertaining to the movie “O”, and since this is an open topic, I decided to blog about one of my favorite books, UltraMarathon man: Confessions of an All-Night Runner. I had the pleasure of randomly and accidentally coming across this book. Needless to say, I came away completely amazed and inspired.
Dean Karnazes, the writer and subject of Ultramarathon Man, is a wild man. He is a rock star in the world of ultra marathons. He is the leader of Team Dean (which has a nice support crew consisting of his family, but only one athlete). The man’s a machine. He runs marathons as training jogs. He eats pizza and drinks Coke while out running to keep his energy up. He has run 50 marathons in 50 days and how he finds time to juggle his position as president of a health food company and be a Dad in a family of four is beyond me.
Dean seems as determined to push the human body to its limits as Nelson Mandela was in pushing human equality and freedom in South Africa. Just think, for this 50/50 challenge he wakes up after four hours of sleep, and runs a 26.2 mile race. Next day, 26.2 miles. Day after that? You bet, another 26.2 miles. Repeat for 50 days straight. His 50th marathon of the challenge was the prestigious NYC marathon. In addition, Dean has completed a 199 relay race solo. He once ran 350 miles nonstop. He ran 10 marathons in 24 hours on a treadmill in Times Square. He won the 135 mile Badwater Ultramarathon in Death Valley’s 130 degree temperature. He ran a marathon in South Pole in 40 below weather.
Incredible, you say? Possibly insane, you say? With a laugh, he often admits to being a little crazy. And you might be saying, well, what does any of this extremism have to do with my life, I’m not much of a runner? His message throughout his books and his film speaks to anyone regardless of athletic ability or talent. He just encourages people to get off the couch and exercise. When asked about the film, Dean says, “This movie is about more than running. It’s about pushing oneself to be the best that one can be. To take the next step and go for something.”
Basically, I’m a big fan and great admirer of the Ultramarathon Man.
Modern Day Shakespeare
I remember having a class discussion about whether or not Shakespeare's plays are universal, in particular, "Othello." I could relate to Desdemona's relationship with her father; for my dad is quite strict, and he went into ultimate panic mode when I started dating my boyfriend in high school. Besides the father-daughter relationship, I couldn't really apply any other specific situation in the play to a similar, typical situation in real life. However, the movie, "O," truly illustrates the modern, yet, accurate approach to the classic play.
Because I am a visual learner, seeing a portion of the movie certainly illustrated "Othello," in a completely different light. It was after watching some of the film that I was able to relate Hugo's (Iago) secretive lust for Dezzie (Desdemona) to a common situation where a guy is madly in love with his best friend's girlfriend. It was not until I watched the film that I better understood Roger's (Roderigo) vulnerability and gullible nature that led him to agree to do anything just to fit in. This reminds me of watching my middle school friends morph into completely different people, as we ventured into high school, just so they could supposedly "fit in" and be well-liked.
Having a visual outlook to compare to the play allowed me to relate much more with "Othello."
When referring to Bible, some of the text is a few thousand years old; however, the general ideas and morals within the scriptures still appear prevalent in our daily lives. Similarly, "Othello" alludes to many universal situations that still pop up today. Establishing this connection between present day relevance that still translates into modern lessons, has allowed me to gain a great amount of respect for Shakespeare and his works of literature. Genially, he captures the essence of social issues and conflicts that still appear over the course of time.
Because I am a visual learner, seeing a portion of the movie certainly illustrated "Othello," in a completely different light. It was after watching some of the film that I was able to relate Hugo's (Iago) secretive lust for Dezzie (Desdemona) to a common situation where a guy is madly in love with his best friend's girlfriend. It was not until I watched the film that I better understood Roger's (Roderigo) vulnerability and gullible nature that led him to agree to do anything just to fit in. This reminds me of watching my middle school friends morph into completely different people, as we ventured into high school, just so they could supposedly "fit in" and be well-liked.
Having a visual outlook to compare to the play allowed me to relate much more with "Othello."
When referring to Bible, some of the text is a few thousand years old; however, the general ideas and morals within the scriptures still appear prevalent in our daily lives. Similarly, "Othello" alludes to many universal situations that still pop up today. Establishing this connection between present day relevance that still translates into modern lessons, has allowed me to gain a great amount of respect for Shakespeare and his works of literature. Genially, he captures the essence of social issues and conflicts that still appear over the course of time.
Racism in the 21st Century
Charles Gallagher surely discussed the issue of racism in a bold and direct fashion. As soon as the lecture began, he looked out into the audience, and asked students to confess to issues of racism they have observed/experienced on campus this year. If this didn't grab everyone's attention, I don't know what did! Going into the lecture, I had a general idea of what Mr. Gallagher would discuss; however, I still found myself shocked initially.
The basis of the lecture circled around the question of how racism will look in the 21st century. According to Gallagher, the younger generation (aged under 25 years old) is being socialized to be colorblind. In other words, this younger generation is more likely to go about solving racial issues with more of a liberal perspective than the generation of our parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.
Though Gallagher alludes to an improvement of racism, he eventually discusses some of the negative issues that are still apparent. For instance, he says that "taking race into consideration is racist." To support this idea, he incorporates examples based on the current presidential election. According to Gallagher, the fact that we have an African American man running for president is legendary. However, he still considers it "racist" that many people still consider Barack Obama's race before considering his abilities. Although I know it's true that Obama's race is taken into consideration quite frequently, I don't feel like using the term "racist" to describe people who do this is the appropriate term. I mean, it SURE IS A BIG DEAL that the final presidential race is between a caucasion man and an African American man for the first time in history; therefore, it seems like many people's normal behavior would be to notice Obama's race. I do, however, agree that the term, "racist," could be applied to people who hold Obama's race against him, and who choose not to vote for him, solely because of his race.
In all, I appreciated Mr. Gallagher's lecture. I feel like he aims to encourage young people to be more open-minded and respectful towards others and their diverse backgrounds, as well as to inform them about the prospective path of racism. Although Mr. Gallagher was quite bold in his discussion of racism, such an impacting topic may very well require strong delivery, in order to make the overall message more effective.
The basis of the lecture circled around the question of how racism will look in the 21st century. According to Gallagher, the younger generation (aged under 25 years old) is being socialized to be colorblind. In other words, this younger generation is more likely to go about solving racial issues with more of a liberal perspective than the generation of our parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc.
Though Gallagher alludes to an improvement of racism, he eventually discusses some of the negative issues that are still apparent. For instance, he says that "taking race into consideration is racist." To support this idea, he incorporates examples based on the current presidential election. According to Gallagher, the fact that we have an African American man running for president is legendary. However, he still considers it "racist" that many people still consider Barack Obama's race before considering his abilities. Although I know it's true that Obama's race is taken into consideration quite frequently, I don't feel like using the term "racist" to describe people who do this is the appropriate term. I mean, it SURE IS A BIG DEAL that the final presidential race is between a caucasion man and an African American man for the first time in history; therefore, it seems like many people's normal behavior would be to notice Obama's race. I do, however, agree that the term, "racist," could be applied to people who hold Obama's race against him, and who choose not to vote for him, solely because of his race.
In all, I appreciated Mr. Gallagher's lecture. I feel like he aims to encourage young people to be more open-minded and respectful towards others and their diverse backgrounds, as well as to inform them about the prospective path of racism. Although Mr. Gallagher was quite bold in his discussion of racism, such an impacting topic may very well require strong delivery, in order to make the overall message more effective.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
"O"
The one scene in "O" that really caught my attention was when Desi and Oden are lying in bed with both of their shirts off to create a bigger impact on the viewer of the differences in skin. I felt like this scene was filmed really well to just heighten the differences between the two characters. The dialogue, although I don't believe quite as important as the shot itself, was also done quite well as it helped the audience relate more the the relationship Oden and Desi shared.
I related this shot a lot to a photography class I took in high school that talked a lot about the impact opposite colors have on the human eye. As the eye looks towards one color, such as white the impact of black in the same scene can create a dramatic impact on the visual aspect of the shot or picture.
The director probably created this scene in such a fashion for this very reason, to not only shock the human eye (though maybe not the human mind) but also metaphorically show the differences the two main characters have in relation to one another. The dramatic differences in skin tones only highlights their different childhoods, attitudes on life, and in some cases pressures of daily life.
I related this shot a lot to a photography class I took in high school that talked a lot about the impact opposite colors have on the human eye. As the eye looks towards one color, such as white the impact of black in the same scene can create a dramatic impact on the visual aspect of the shot or picture.
The director probably created this scene in such a fashion for this very reason, to not only shock the human eye (though maybe not the human mind) but also metaphorically show the differences the two main characters have in relation to one another. The dramatic differences in skin tones only highlights their different childhoods, attitudes on life, and in some cases pressures of daily life.
Desdemona v. Dezzie
It is quite interesting how movies often reflect, however indirectly, changes within society. One major difference between the play Othello and the film "O" that proves this idea is the focus on the inequality of women. There are various encounters with this inequality during the play, such as: Desdemona's lack of voice, criticism of women by Iago, Desdemona's duty to be loyal to her husband, etc. In contrast, the film "O" never implies this inequality, but rather hints at the power that a woman has gained at the time of the film. The scene that emphasizes this takes place in the coaches office and involves Oden, Coach, Des and her father. Des is confronted, although acting by her right to keep her business to her self, barely makes eye contact, refuses to discuss the matter, and continues to do as she pleases. This was so different from the scene in the play when Desdemona dutifully and outspokenly defends her husband, never acknowledging any idea of privacy. Obviously the movie and play are different when it comes to the rights of women, but why is this significant??
This difference in the film and play reflects the fact that the identity of the woman has changed over time. The greatest influence on identity is, without a doubt, society. This impact of society is reflected within the arts; various paintings, plays, novels, and films have revealed the way the identity of a woman has changed over time and how they are seen in society. The reflection that has been created by the arts is very important to understanding and developing history! Othello and "O" are one great comparison that enable the audience to recognize the developed power and status of a woman.
Popularity Through the Ages.
I have really enjoyed this modern-day adaptation of Othello. It really goes to show how history has a way of repeating itself in that many of the concepts found in Shakespeare are relevant in today’s society. For instance individual’s desire for popularity will never fade. This need for popularity may in turn result in the desire for power and control over the network of people who look up to these individuals. In the movie O this issue of popularity is prominent in the high school setting because Hugo, a senior desires the popularity Odin possesses. Because he is not as well-liked as Odin he is determined to bring about his demise because he is consumed with jealousy and malice. Hugo is jealous of the fact that Odin has athletic abilities, the love of his own father, and the admiration of the students. He wishes to possess these qualities and will do whatever he can in order to rise to popularity. I find myself relating Hugo’s cunning practices to those of politicians. This comment may seem over generalized but I feel as though many politicians are willing to do whatever they can in order to gain popularity even if it requires individuals to “push the envelope.” Clearly these issues are present even today (maybe not AS extreme!) suggesting humanity rarely changes over time which I find to be a remarkable feat.
I am really enjoying this adaptation of Othello because I think it is extremely helpful in my understanding of the play. I also thought the producer found the perfect actors to portray the characters in the original play. It is like a game, drawing similarities between the play and film trying to draw out the producer analysis of the original.
I am really enjoying this adaptation of Othello because I think it is extremely helpful in my understanding of the play. I also thought the producer found the perfect actors to portray the characters in the original play. It is like a game, drawing similarities between the play and film trying to draw out the producer analysis of the original.
Power & Equality
Truly this movie “O” reveals how the ideals in Shakespeare’s Othello are timeless, yet ideas progress to show differences in perceptions. I think this movie does a very good job of adapting Othello to modern day standards. Specifically I will center on a certain scene. This is the scene where Oden is called in the Dean’s office where he accused of attacking Desie. The Dean portrays Barbantio, while the coach, plays the duke as a mediator. I think it was interesting to notice Othello’s actions in this scene. In Shakespeare’s play, Othello’s initial reaction is not as much of a defensive denial as Oden. Oden is surprisingly outraged, telling the Dean he did not do it, and would never do anything like that. Othello on the other hand calmly tells Barbantio how he did woo her, but not with magic drugs.
Why are these reactions different? I think it is due to the fact that ideals of equality have been ingrained in our society. We live a world that has seen horrendous conflict from decades gone past and thus we have strived to erase the bonds of discrimination. With his high status, Othello is not worried that Desdemona’s father can challenge his convincing word. However, in modern society we have struggled for inequality, so people of high status can still be held accountable for their crimes. Therefore, even though Oden is the star basketball player, he still is fully, if not even more so, held accountable for this accusation.
Today we have learned to critique our leaders, giving them ratings. Certainly, President George Bush’s ratings have not been favorable in the last few years. In Othello’s time, one would be unlikely to directly confront another of high power with their outright approval. However, today we in fact often seek to evaluate those in power, because those people are the ones that have often caused inequality to exist in the first place.
Why are these reactions different? I think it is due to the fact that ideals of equality have been ingrained in our society. We live a world that has seen horrendous conflict from decades gone past and thus we have strived to erase the bonds of discrimination. With his high status, Othello is not worried that Desdemona’s father can challenge his convincing word. However, in modern society we have struggled for inequality, so people of high status can still be held accountable for their crimes. Therefore, even though Oden is the star basketball player, he still is fully, if not even more so, held accountable for this accusation.
Today we have learned to critique our leaders, giving them ratings. Certainly, President George Bush’s ratings have not been favorable in the last few years. In Othello’s time, one would be unlikely to directly confront another of high power with their outright approval. However, today we in fact often seek to evaluate those in power, because those people are the ones that have often caused inequality to exist in the first place.
Charles Gallagher Lecture
Charles Gallagher and his idea on Color Blind Racism in the 21st century is affected by many current situations. He suggests, through his theory of incidental racism, that although today's generation is in fact completely colorblind the issue of race will now become related to other more general topics instead of the color of one's skin. For example, while a person may not see a person's skin color anymore, they will notice the neighborhood they live in or the job they hold. It just so happens that the majority of poor neighborhoods are in fact mostly black or of other minority races.
Several times in his open discussion he would bring up the fact that American schools are poorly integrated especially within the inner cities. 85% of suburban school populations are white. Gallagher relates this to laissez-faire racism which means while the government does not condone or encourage racism there is still a general understanding of the advantage whites hold over the minority races.
But I honestly was somewhat offended by his generalization of American schools. Though it might be supported by facts and figures every persons experiences with race are different. In fact, in my high school I was the minority. Our population was split very nicely between a variety of races from Asian, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and a variety of other cultures and creeds. And though race was not entirely ignored in my high school it was generally respected.
Although Charles Gallagher had some interesting, some might call revolutionary, ideas on race and its influence in the future I'm not entirely sure I buy his theories or ideas but perhaps if I read them in more detail I might understand it a little bit better.
Several times in his open discussion he would bring up the fact that American schools are poorly integrated especially within the inner cities. 85% of suburban school populations are white. Gallagher relates this to laissez-faire racism which means while the government does not condone or encourage racism there is still a general understanding of the advantage whites hold over the minority races.
But I honestly was somewhat offended by his generalization of American schools. Though it might be supported by facts and figures every persons experiences with race are different. In fact, in my high school I was the minority. Our population was split very nicely between a variety of races from Asian, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and a variety of other cultures and creeds. And though race was not entirely ignored in my high school it was generally respected.
Although Charles Gallagher had some interesting, some might call revolutionary, ideas on race and its influence in the future I'm not entirely sure I buy his theories or ideas but perhaps if I read them in more detail I might understand it a little bit better.
oh "O"
I would just like to say that "O" is a great modern day performance of Shakespeare. I love the film so far. As we said in class, it is easy to follow the references from the original text. Yet, it is new and inventive in its own way. The one thing i find truly inventive is the emphasis placed on "O."
In the original text Shakespeare place emphasis on Othello by calling him "the moor." He is the only moor ever mentioned. this proves his uniqueness. But Shakespeare also idealizes Othello because he says "THE moor." Othello is not just any other solider. Othello is the one an only "moor" and is of equal importance.
Odin also stands apart from the rest of the cast. But O isn't recognized simply by being the only one. Instead the director of the film uses several "O" shaped references throughout the start of the film. For example, the white birds in the opening scene are resting on a circle of a building. Another "O" reference appears in the deans office. The room is a green color. This green causes a clock to stand out on the wall. The white clock is lined with a black rim. The rim creates another "O" on the wall. Another tribute to Odin is the circular balloons in the stands at the basketball game. Several members of the crowd hold up long balloons curled to make a circle. Finally, when the basketball game is won the crowd surrounds Odin and lifts him into the air. It is no surprise that the crowd forms a circle. But what is unique, is Odin is surrounded by the circle, making him the primary focal point. At that moment Odin is THE man. He may not be referred to as the only moor but is undoubtedly the star and the primary factor of the film.
In the original text Shakespeare place emphasis on Othello by calling him "the moor." He is the only moor ever mentioned. this proves his uniqueness. But Shakespeare also idealizes Othello because he says "THE moor." Othello is not just any other solider. Othello is the one an only "moor" and is of equal importance.
Odin also stands apart from the rest of the cast. But O isn't recognized simply by being the only one. Instead the director of the film uses several "O" shaped references throughout the start of the film. For example, the white birds in the opening scene are resting on a circle of a building. Another "O" reference appears in the deans office. The room is a green color. This green causes a clock to stand out on the wall. The white clock is lined with a black rim. The rim creates another "O" on the wall. Another tribute to Odin is the circular balloons in the stands at the basketball game. Several members of the crowd hold up long balloons curled to make a circle. Finally, when the basketball game is won the crowd surrounds Odin and lifts him into the air. It is no surprise that the crowd forms a circle. But what is unique, is Odin is surrounded by the circle, making him the primary focal point. At that moment Odin is THE man. He may not be referred to as the only moor but is undoubtedly the star and the primary factor of the film.
"O" What a Movie
I'm just going to throw this out there: I really like this movie so far! I love that everything about it screams Othello. From names to character qualities, "O" hits Othello dead on while simultaneously modernizing the play in an incredibly relatable and fun way. That being said, there is one area of the adaptation that doesn't quite sit the same. What I am referring to is the circumstances surrounding Des' character.
By this, I mean to say that there is something about the "O" Des that just doesn't sit the same way it does in the play, Othello. Specifically, in the modernized movie version, Des is a sexual being, whereas, in the play, she is the image of purity and chastity. Why would the director of "O" chose to portray her in this way that seems contradictory to the original image of Des? Thinking of the possible answers to this question, I wonder if maybe it would have been unrealistic to remove sex from the modern relationship between Des and Oden. As a successful adaptation, the movie may have needed to incorporate more sex into the modern version because, let's face it, our recent society is dipped in sexuality.
But then, maybe the director is attempting to suggest that the original Desdemona was not as virginal and pure as the words used to describe her suggest. Although I suspect this to not be the case and, in fact, quite unlikely, I still wonder if the director of "O" imagined there to be some truth to the accusations against Desdemona in which she is accused of being unfaithful. Maybe his suspicions about the true nature of Desdemona's character led him to portray the movie Des in a much less innocent way.
I guess the reason I was drawn to these sorts of questions is because the movie does well to stick to the play and its original portrayals, but I feel there is a lingering, almost unidentifiable, difference in Des. As we continue to watch the movie, you can bet I will be keeping a close eye on her....
By this, I mean to say that there is something about the "O" Des that just doesn't sit the same way it does in the play, Othello. Specifically, in the modernized movie version, Des is a sexual being, whereas, in the play, she is the image of purity and chastity. Why would the director of "O" chose to portray her in this way that seems contradictory to the original image of Des? Thinking of the possible answers to this question, I wonder if maybe it would have been unrealistic to remove sex from the modern relationship between Des and Oden. As a successful adaptation, the movie may have needed to incorporate more sex into the modern version because, let's face it, our recent society is dipped in sexuality.
But then, maybe the director is attempting to suggest that the original Desdemona was not as virginal and pure as the words used to describe her suggest. Although I suspect this to not be the case and, in fact, quite unlikely, I still wonder if the director of "O" imagined there to be some truth to the accusations against Desdemona in which she is accused of being unfaithful. Maybe his suspicions about the true nature of Desdemona's character led him to portray the movie Des in a much less innocent way.
I guess the reason I was drawn to these sorts of questions is because the movie does well to stick to the play and its original portrayals, but I feel there is a lingering, almost unidentifiable, difference in Des. As we continue to watch the movie, you can bet I will be keeping a close eye on her....
Shakespeare meets the big screen
When I was a freshman in high school I got to see the modernized version of Romeo and Juliet. I was a little skeptical at first because I didn't think anybody could re-create a play by Shakespeare. To my surprise, it was a fantastic movie that matched up with the original play quite well. Even though we've only seen a small amount of the movie O, there are a lot of similarities between the play and the movie.
One of the similarities between the movie O and the play are the names of the characters. For example, Othello is "Oden" in the movie, Desdemona is "Desi", and Iago is "Hugo". This makes it easier for the audience to follow along with the movie.
However, there are some differences. In the play, Desdemona was presented as a girl an innocent girl with a rebellious side. As we see in the movie, Desi is straight up rebellious. She was in a relationship with Oden without her father's awareness and she had no intentions of ending that relationship when her father found out.
Also, the character that plays Emilia is different. In the play Emilia is married to Iago. In the movie, Emilia is single and wants Iago. She knows that she can't have him and is always drawn to him wherever they are.
It will be interesting to see how the rest of the movie plays out.
The Movie "O"
The movie O is a good rendition of Shakespeare's play Othello. The movie opens with with doves contrasting against a black background. This opening scene foreshadows the contrast between good and evil, dark and light. Opening the scene with this enables the director to show the audience what the movie is going to focus around, however in a play the writer is able to use words to construct the imagery. This is not the first place we see the contrast. During the basketball game, everyone is white and the only black person or object is Oden. Another scene where we see a contrast is when Oden and Desi are in bed together and their skin on skin contact draws the attention to the difference. I found it interesting how the director chose to constantly remind the audience of the black and white separation, I thought it was emphasized very well.
The movie shows us that Shakespeare is applicable to everyday life. Without knowing the movie is based off of Othello the audience is able to believe in the it. The plot is not a stretch from reality, everything that happens in the movie in some sense can happen in real life. The director does a good job of translating what happened in Othello to what would happen in modern life if the play was to be written now. It was nice having all of the characters of the movie resemble the characters from the play. This also helps the audience be able to relate the movie back to the play.
One of the differences in the movie was Hugo's addiction to steroids and their responsibility for his actions. The play does not have anything responsible for Iago's actions, his actions are based off of revenge and pure jealousy. Another difference was the ages of Desi and Oden. I thought it was interesting that the director chose to cast them as the same age instead of creating an age gap as Shakespeare did in his play.
Overall I thought the director did a good job of interpreting Othello and translating it into a modern day movie.
The movie shows us that Shakespeare is applicable to everyday life. Without knowing the movie is based off of Othello the audience is able to believe in the it. The plot is not a stretch from reality, everything that happens in the movie in some sense can happen in real life. The director does a good job of translating what happened in Othello to what would happen in modern life if the play was to be written now. It was nice having all of the characters of the movie resemble the characters from the play. This also helps the audience be able to relate the movie back to the play.
One of the differences in the movie was Hugo's addiction to steroids and their responsibility for his actions. The play does not have anything responsible for Iago's actions, his actions are based off of revenge and pure jealousy. Another difference was the ages of Desi and Oden. I thought it was interesting that the director chose to cast them as the same age instead of creating an age gap as Shakespeare did in his play.
Overall I thought the director did a good job of interpreting Othello and translating it into a modern day movie.
O Comments
I think that the movie O does a great job of making a modern day Othello. The characters' names in O, first of all, parallel so well with the names of the characters in Othello that it is really easy to know who the characters are supposed to be. For example, Dessy in O is Desdemona in and Hugo in O is Iago in Othello. It also was easy to note that Hugo's plan was to destroy the goodness of Odin (Othello); his success in basketball, his girlfriend, and possibly his life. This plan was obvious in the first words of the film, when Josh Hartnett's character says that he wants to rise above others like a hawk does.
The hawk in the film is an interesting theme throughout the movie. I cannot quite figure out the full meaning, but it is obvious that it means something because the opening scene began with birds gathering and the mascot of the basketball team is the hawk. I think that it might represent Hugo and his plan to "rise above" Odin and take away his happiness.
I am excited to continue watching O and find out more parallels between the movie and Othello as well as expand my ideas of what I think the hawk means.
The hawk in the film is an interesting theme throughout the movie. I cannot quite figure out the full meaning, but it is obvious that it means something because the opening scene began with birds gathering and the mascot of the basketball team is the hawk. I think that it might represent Hugo and his plan to "rise above" Odin and take away his happiness.
I am excited to continue watching O and find out more parallels between the movie and Othello as well as expand my ideas of what I think the hawk means.
"O"
The opening scene presents an interesting sight with the white doves and the hawk that Hugo talks about. They are white doves typically representing peace and innocence. On the other hand, when I think of a hawk I picture a strong bird that is searching for prey. As Hugo is talking he says that he has always wanted to be a hawk. This is possibly one representation of Hugo as the Hawk who knows his prey, O. Also the white doves could be represented by O and Desy even though they are not portrayed as being completely innocent as in the actual play Othello.
Imagining Hugo as the Hawk and Desy and O as the white doves adds another dimension to the story and started the movie out with the right feeling. These two birds are normally not put together because the hawk will be a danger to the doves. It is a premonition as to what is going to happen. Hugo will become the Hawk preying on the doves. As shown by the use of the birds there is so much more you could do in a movie and this is one example of artistic freedom that added to the story.
The use of drugs in "O"
In the movie "O" drugs play and important role, yet most of the references are not literally relatable to the play. One tie that I think can be drawn from the play to the movie regarding drugs is Brabantio's speech regarding Desdemona's love for Othello.
"...I therefore vouch again
That with some mixtures powerful o'er the blood,
Or with some dram conjured to this effect,
He wrought upon her" (Act 1, Scene 3,Lines 105-108).
In this instance Brabantio is accusing Othello of using "mixtures powerful o'er the blood" to influence Desdemona's behavior. The "mixtures" could be referring to drugs or witchcraft. Brabantio believes that the only way Desdemona could fall in love with Othello is if she was influenced by drugs.
The movie equivalent to this scene might be in the coaches office when the Dean asks Dessie if Oden has ever done anything to overpower her. While he is not referring directly to drugs, he can not understand that Dessie could love Oden, which is the same situation as in the play.
The movie uses drugs, such as the steroids, to explain irrational behavior. Also I thought that a good point brought up in class was that Hugo's use of steroids highlighted his inadequacy.
Charles Gallagher's Lecture Reflection
Charles Gallagher's lecture on race's role in the media was very interesting. He also taught a class of mine later that afternoon, I was luck to be able to listen for longer since I had to leave early from his noon lecture because of a one o'clock class.
One point I disagreed with Charles Gallagher about was his view of inter-racial relationships and marriages. He mocked the idea that one would get married solely based on love, and it seemed that he did not think there was a realistic possibility of inter-racial marriages. His reasoning was a valid point, because of geography and residential uniformity there is a better chance of meeting people of one's own race. While a city may be statistically diverse there is a good chance that the neighborhoods are still separate.
He brought up a statistic that "70% of whites generally approve of black/white marriages." Another statistic is that "7% of marriages are inter-racial." He explained the difference by saying that it is easier to say that something is acceptable but not take part in it. I think a very important aspect to explain the difference is the difference of generation's views on this issue. Our grandparents and maybe some parents were more likely to be raised with a view that inter-racial marriages were not accepted. While their views may have come around, it is likely that they are already married, which throws off the statistics.
These factors affect inter-racial relationships but I think that if two people are meant to be together these factors should not prevent from being married. Therefore, the percentage of inter-racial marriages is not very high, but things are changing. I really enjoyed Mr. Gallagher's talk! He is very knowledgeable on this subject and I learned a lot, but I think he is a bit cynical on the subject of inter-racial relationships.
Side note: If you want to see how residentially diverse your city is, Google: Index of Dissimilarity (city name). It is on a scale from 0-90, zero being completely diverse and ninety being most separated. South Bend is about 70, this is something he told us about later that I thought was pretty interesting.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Ads & Stats
As an advertising minor, I found Charles Gallagher's presentation to be phenominal. While I had been aware of advertiser's attempt to be politcally correct and incorporate all races into an ad, I had not realized how intense it had gotten. It is true tho - when I look at an ad, I want to see myself. Whenever there is an advertisement for lotion, clothes, make up, or whatever it be, I find myself looking for a fair skinned brunette with green eyes. "Well, she looks like me so that dress would look good on me too." Advertising to a perfection. They had me sold.
When he showed the statistics about how white people think of black people, the audience chuckled because they knew they were not correct. Although I cannot remember specific facts, there were undeniably untrue. Often times I think white people feel they have to lie about their relationships with people of other ethnicities in order to feel like they are not racists. Much of the fact, however, is that geographic location plays a large part in whether or not you are in a diverse enough location for those statistics to be true.
I had to leave the lecture a little early because of my 1pm class, but I wish I did not have to. His way of presenting and use of images and facts kept the audience's attention and encouraged participation. I thoroughly enjoyed his talk.
When he showed the statistics about how white people think of black people, the audience chuckled because they knew they were not correct. Although I cannot remember specific facts, there were undeniably untrue. Often times I think white people feel they have to lie about their relationships with people of other ethnicities in order to feel like they are not racists. Much of the fact, however, is that geographic location plays a large part in whether or not you are in a diverse enough location for those statistics to be true.
I had to leave the lecture a little early because of my 1pm class, but I wish I did not have to. His way of presenting and use of images and facts kept the audience's attention and encouraged participation. I thoroughly enjoyed his talk.
Basketball Hero
Although we have just begun watching "O", our class has already pointed out several interesting similarities and differences. One point that was brought up was how Othello was a hero on the battlefield and O in the movie is considered a hero on the basketball court.
At my high school, this may as well have been the case.
Basketball stars were treated like royalty at my high school. Teachers automatically became partial and girls inevitably became attracted. Like Othello as a war hero, the stars of the basketball team were seen as of a higher status and nearly worshipped after a good game.
One major similarity I see in this comparison is that of humility. Othello often sang his own praises when saying how awesome he was for being a good military genius as well as scoring a beautiful woman. The basketball players at my high school also often ran through the halls cheering before a game or after a big win. Sometimes, however, Othello was considered to be humble and noble,especially by Desdemona. This dose of humility was dealt heavily to the basketball players my senior year when they lost all but three games.
Another interesting comparison between Othello and O in the movie is that they both were famous for what they were already good at. While many of us will travel through life without a celebrity status, both these men were adored and respected for their talents. They also did not seem to have any skills to back this fame up. If they were injured and Othello was no longer able to fight and O was no longer able to play, their lives of glory would cease in existence.
We could go on for hours with the comparing and contrasting of the play to the film, but for the purpose of this blog I was interested in thebasketball scene. I look forward to being able to comparing and differentiating more about the play and the film as we continue to watch.
At my high school, this may as well have been the case.
Basketball stars were treated like royalty at my high school. Teachers automatically became partial and girls inevitably became attracted. Like Othello as a war hero, the stars of the basketball team were seen as of a higher status and nearly worshipped after a good game.
One major similarity I see in this comparison is that of humility. Othello often sang his own praises when saying how awesome he was for being a good military genius as well as scoring a beautiful woman. The basketball players at my high school also often ran through the halls cheering before a game or after a big win. Sometimes, however, Othello was considered to be humble and noble,especially by Desdemona. This dose of humility was dealt heavily to the basketball players my senior year when they lost all but three games.
Another interesting comparison between Othello and O in the movie is that they both were famous for what they were already good at. While many of us will travel through life without a celebrity status, both these men were adored and respected for their talents. They also did not seem to have any skills to back this fame up. If they were injured and Othello was no longer able to fight and O was no longer able to play, their lives of glory would cease in existence.
We could go on for hours with the comparing and contrasting of the play to the film, but for the purpose of this blog I was interested in thebasketball scene. I look forward to being able to comparing and differentiating more about the play and the film as we continue to watch.
Goodbye Paper 1
I must say that Paper 1 was one of the most difficult papers that I ever had to write. I did, however, discover some new techniques and facts about my writing style that I feel are very important and that I will use in the future.
Mind maps, lists of quotes, and rereading are all efficient techniques that helped me to write this paper. After I utilized these techniques, filling the paper with my ideas and integrating my quotes was simple. The challenge was in what lay ahead: creating a good thesis statement. I have never been good at writing theses and here was another one staring me in the face. After the thesis workshop on Friday, however, I felt that I was ready to meet this challenge and write a sufficient one.
Then came the editing process. I took advantage of peer editing and also took into account everything that Professor Ambrose said to me during office hours. I spent a very long time over the weekend trying to make all of my thoughts connect and then connect to my thesis.
Now that this paper is over I feel that I will be more prepared for Short Paper 2 and Paper 2.
Mind maps, lists of quotes, and rereading are all efficient techniques that helped me to write this paper. After I utilized these techniques, filling the paper with my ideas and integrating my quotes was simple. The challenge was in what lay ahead: creating a good thesis statement. I have never been good at writing theses and here was another one staring me in the face. After the thesis workshop on Friday, however, I felt that I was ready to meet this challenge and write a sufficient one.
Then came the editing process. I took advantage of peer editing and also took into account everything that Professor Ambrose said to me during office hours. I spent a very long time over the weekend trying to make all of my thoughts connect and then connect to my thesis.
Now that this paper is over I feel that I will be more prepared for Short Paper 2 and Paper 2.
Othello the Play versus "O" the Movie
As I watched the film "O" today in class, I sometimes found it difficult to understand how certain events related to the play "Othello," while other parts were easily based off the play.
For example, I did not understand what the birds at the beginning of the movie had to do with the play. During the discussion, however, it was mentioned that the birds could symbolize Iago desiring to rise above everyone else and fly away like a bird.
The scene where Desi, Oden, Desi's father, and the coach were speaking in the coach's office was very much similar to the scene in 'Othello.' Desi's father was very upset to find out that Desi was "together" with Oden for four months. Brabantio was upset when he found out that Desdemona had married a Moor. I did not think that Brabantio in the play would have been as angry as Desi's father, but I think the director portrayed this scene well overall.
One scene which I did not see a parallel to "Othello" was when Oden beat up Mike. In the play, Othello never does anything dangerous to anyone, except Desdemona, when he kills her at the end. Until then, he does not beat anyone else up, but only gets angry.
Also, though Desi and Oden laid in bed together, this did not actually happen in Othello, but rather, it was implied. I thought it was interesting how the director of "O" placed this scene in the plot, even though Emilia's character was present.
For example, I did not understand what the birds at the beginning of the movie had to do with the play. During the discussion, however, it was mentioned that the birds could symbolize Iago desiring to rise above everyone else and fly away like a bird.
The scene where Desi, Oden, Desi's father, and the coach were speaking in the coach's office was very much similar to the scene in 'Othello.' Desi's father was very upset to find out that Desi was "together" with Oden for four months. Brabantio was upset when he found out that Desdemona had married a Moor. I did not think that Brabantio in the play would have been as angry as Desi's father, but I think the director portrayed this scene well overall.
One scene which I did not see a parallel to "Othello" was when Oden beat up Mike. In the play, Othello never does anything dangerous to anyone, except Desdemona, when he kills her at the end. Until then, he does not beat anyone else up, but only gets angry.
Also, though Desi and Oden laid in bed together, this did not actually happen in Othello, but rather, it was implied. I thought it was interesting how the director of "O" placed this scene in the plot, even though Emilia's character was present.
Capturing My Image
I think it is very interesting the types of images people have in their mind while reading a play or a book. For instance, my favorite book is P.S. I Love You, I read it every couple months because I love the image in puts into my mind. When the movie P.S. I Love You came out I was so excited to see it! I went to the movie theater with my stepmother carrying our books, after the movie ended we were appalled. Nothing was similar, we pictured the main character with blond hair not blond and they missed all the key points we read in the book. I think as film writers it is very hard to capture what a book is telling us.
Although, after watching the first part of "O" I noticed some images that were in the movie that I had in my head while reading the play. For example, all the characters I imaged looked similar to the ones in the film. I pictured Othello a person of color, Desdemona was a tiny blond, and Iago was a brown haired man.
Another similarity I saw was when Desy and Oden were laying in bed, Desy had white sheets, just as I pictured in the play. It created the sense of purity that Desy has. I also noticed that Desy father refers to Oden taking drugs and not staying "clean" this also occurs in the play. In Act 1 Brabantio says Othello is nothing, and implies him taking drugs. This same scene also occurs but in an more modern way..
Although some film writters may not be able to capture the image of the characters, or the details readers notice in the novel, short story, or play. So far after watching the movie, "O" today I think this writter does a very good job finding all the details.
Although, after watching the first part of "O" I noticed some images that were in the movie that I had in my head while reading the play. For example, all the characters I imaged looked similar to the ones in the film. I pictured Othello a person of color, Desdemona was a tiny blond, and Iago was a brown haired man.
Another similarity I saw was when Desy and Oden were laying in bed, Desy had white sheets, just as I pictured in the play. It created the sense of purity that Desy has. I also noticed that Desy father refers to Oden taking drugs and not staying "clean" this also occurs in the play. In Act 1 Brabantio says Othello is nothing, and implies him taking drugs. This same scene also occurs but in an more modern way..
Although some film writters may not be able to capture the image of the characters, or the details readers notice in the novel, short story, or play. So far after watching the movie, "O" today I think this writter does a very good job finding all the details.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
