Conjoined...lovely

                “A happily ever after” is not always the case when looking at the marriage arrangements of two individuals. In the poem Conjoined by Judith Minty, the author describes an unhappy marriage as being nothing but sad and bitter. The two married individuals both feel as though they are not their own person. They have molded each other into what the other desire out of the other, which has led to nothing but heartache. Throughout the poem, the author uses literary devices such as metaphors, diction, and similes to portray the anguish a couple feels from a lifeless and broken marriage.

                The poem implies that the individuals involved in the married couple both feel as though they are not their owe person. They have molded each other into what the other person desires from the other. This is demonstrated through the metaphorical use of the onion; the indication that “two joined under one transparent skin” (line 2). The couple is trying to explain that when two people are joined together in marriage, the two souls become one. The couple has tried to transform each other in the path of the marriage; “each half-round, then flat and deformed” (line 3). When the two become one, the two individual sides of the onion become distorted and pitiful looking; the onion no longer looks edible and delicious, but rather a reject. During this type of dysfunctional marriage the two people want to be free from one another and take control of their own life. The two individuals feel discontent because they are “trapped” in a hopeless and unhappy relationship. Also, in line four, it indicates that the onion is “pressed [together] and grew against the other.” The two married people constantly bump heads and disagree with one another, but they still must conform and stay side by side, often times leading to irregularity of the onion.

                The author also uses diction to portray her views on marriage through the couple in her poem. The other uses the word choice of “monster” to expose the problem that is marriage. Within the first stanza, the author brings forth the married couple and their outlook towards their marriage, “the onion in my cupboard, a monster, actually” (line 1). This statement suggests that there is a significant problem in the marriage. The use of the word “monster” implies that the marriage is disastrous, and is therefore undesired by the two involved. It exaggerates the intensity of the problem of marriage as a whole.  The use of the word “deformed” in line three indicates that the onion is no longer sweet and tasty looking, but rather, too misshapen and malformed for consumption. The use of the word “deformed” may also explain that something about the marriage is out of place and not put together quite nicely. In essence, the diction of this poem makes it seem like the two bodies, joined together as a whole, are worn out and tired. Moreover, in line 11, the couple describes their daily experience with one another  stating “together as we move, heavy in this house.” The use of the word “heavy” was perhaps used to explain the intensity and tenseness of their marriage. It demonstrates that it’s hard to move around at all with the other person weighing the other down on a day to day basis. Additionally, the author describes the couple’s marriage with the use of the word “freaks” in line seven. This reference shows that the two people believed that the marriage was not typical, and perhaps strange. It didn’t feel right to be in that type of relationship. It is clear to see throughout the poem that the couple doesn’t feel normal and desperately wants to find a way out.

                Furthermore, the author’s use of the literary device simile is used throughout the poem to compare the marriage situation to other bizarre and dislikable things. For example, Judith Minty describes the marriage in the poem “like the two-headed calf rooted in one body, fighting to suck at its mother’s teats” (lines 5-6). With this statement, the reader can envision a two headed cow, with obvious recognition of it being a freak of nature. Just like the marriage situation, the two heads are separate cows, trapped in one body. These two, yet one, cows are forced to life their life this way, fighting and battling constantly for just a drop of their mother’s milk. Within a marriage, the two people are constantly struggling to get along with one another and adapt to each other’s nature and behaviorisms.

                In conclusion, it is easy to see that the author of Conjoined, Judith Minty, dislikes the concept of marriage and believes that people would do so much better without. However, the whole purpose of marriage is the willingness to sacrifice to be with the one you love. It is true that finding oneself is hard in a marriage, however it is not impossible. Couples feel as though their significant other is trying to clutch them back from their goals and dreams in life, which is not always the case. It has been proven that marriage can be a beautiful thing; however this is not the case in the poem Conjoined.

Maus II Review

The reviewing author of Maus II, Ty Burr, gave the novel an A+ for its interesting use of a “cartoon history.” This cartoon projects the events of the Holocaust and uses animals to portray the characters; Jews are mice, Nazis are cats, Poles are pigs, etc. he proclaims that the author did a great job in drawing his father with such defiant grace. He believes that the anthropomorphic animals are there for a reason, and there are some evidences of this from the author himself- “they give the artist and his readers the distance necessary to absorb horrors almost beyond imagining.”

If you enjoyed Maus II, then it would be a good idea to go back and read the first volume of Maus which contain chapters originally released in the new-wave comic Raw. This earlier book follows Vladek through his early years in Poland; his romances and marriage, the gathering Nazi threat, his imprisonment in labor camps, and then ending on a cliffhanger on the doorstep of Auschwitz; as if to pause of a breath of air. With Maus II, it continues this journey. Parts of the novel are exceedingly grim; this is no display of atrocities. Instead, it’s an astonishingly rich portrait of survival through wit and sheer luck.

One of the author’s key points is that in reality, his father really didn’t survive the Holocaust; at least not as the clever, urbane Vladek from the first book. Framing the Auschwitz segments are scenes set in modern day New York, in which the Art, the narrator, sweet-talks his ailing father into recording his memories (he later died in 1982). In this book, the father is a bitter and needy old man; a neurotic hoarder who drove his wife, Art’s mother, to suicide. It’s not a great thing to think about, nor is the artist’s portrait of himself as a rebellious son torn between coming to terms with his father while keeping him at arm’s length.

Maus II is an attempt of understand a man and his place in history through small, evocative drawings. At the very end of the novel, Spiegelman prints a photo of his father in 1945; with this one simple step he leads the readers back into the world of man.

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,316195,00.html

Postmodernism in Cat's Cradle

We’ve been considering, all along, how Cat’s Cradle helps us see an emphasis in postmodern literature on the construction of reality, rather than the objective representation of it. The idea of ‘postmodern literature’ can be interpreted in many different ways. Some would say it’s any written piece after World War II took place, or it could be described as literature with views going against those ideas occurring during the Enlightenment period. With keeping these two aspects of postmodernism in mind, it is very easy to apply the concept of postmodernism occurring in the novel Cat’s Cradle.

One reason would be that Cat’s Cradle was written in 1963; roughly ten years after World War II took place. This was about the time all postmodern concepts started to emerge within literature. In Cat’s Cradle, the idea of Newt, a character in the novel, paints a picture which seems off, or abnormal, some might say ugly, to the character of Julian Castle who states, “it’s black. What is it- hell?” Newt just nonchalantly replies, “It means whatever it means.” The idea of this dialog being postmodern is that it shows that postmodernism may conclude to no absolute truth, or maybe people are just a product of their own culture i.e. Bokononism.

Vonnegut’s playfulness with language, especially his invention of new words for Bokononism (such as karass and sin-wat) seem very postmodern. Bokononism is the belief or representation that people are a product of their culture or ‘social norm’. Because of this novel, everyone is secretly a Bokononist, or so it appears to be. This could be debated because everyone says everyone believes in the same thing, Bokononism. Others would say they’re restricted from believing anything else because of the social norm of that society. When it comes down to it, the people in this novel are influenced by their culture, whether negatively or positively, and this reflects a very postmodern viewpoint.

Gattaca, Medical Ethics, and Brave New World

Okay, so I guess it’s time for another essay to be written. I’m not going to lie; this moment has come way too soon. When stopping to think about all the different aspects of Brave New World, I think I’ve decided to compare this novel to my medical ethics unit in my Biochemistry CART class. During this unit, we had to watch the movie Gattaca and analyze the problems within that society.

This movie was about an unpleasant future; Vincent, the main character, is one of the last “natural” babies born into a sterile, genetically-enhanced world, where life expectancy and disease likelihood are ascertained at birth, wants to travel into space. Because of his “natural” birth, society has categorized him as less than suitable given his genetic make-up and he has become one of the underclass of humans that are only useful for unskilled jobs. To pursue his life-long dream of traveling to the stars, he takes the identity of Jerome Morrow, a perfect genetic specimen who is a paraplegic as a result of a car accident. Vincent learns to deceive DNA, hair, skin, and urine sample testing to match Jerome, not himself. During this time society analyzes your DNA and determines where you belong in life. This futuristic society now discriminates against your genes, not your gender, race or religion. Because Vincent was born with a congenital heart condition which would cast him out of getting a chance to travel in space, he assumes the identity of an athlete who has genes that would allow him to achieve his dream.

I feel this movie we analyzed in class really relates to the futuristic society of Brave New World. One obvious example of this is that all the babies in this society are genetically engineered and given synthetic enhancements, instead of just the natural birth process. This movie and medical ethics are outside sources that I would like to compare and relate to this novel, Brave New World.

America's School Systems and Brave New World Philosophies

A parallel I found right off the bat from this video, RSA Animate- Changing Education Paradigms, is between the American school system and the society of Brave New World. For starters, the older generations of society constantly drill into their students and kids that in order to be successful in life you need to go to school, get a college degree, to in turn obtain a good job and make decent money. Adults see the importance of this system; however it has been proven that a college degree doesn’t necessarily equal success in life; especially when it takes the identity of the child away to better fit in with the norm. This aspect of American culture best ties into how the society of Brave New World raises their children. Each is treated equally in that they are synthetically born and developed all in the same routine. “Liquor was drawn off from the test-tubes; how it was let out drop by drop onto the specially warmed slides of the microscopes; how the eggs which it contained were inspected for abnormalities; counted and transferred to a porous receptacle…to undergo Bokanovsky’s Process” (Huxley 17). Each embryo is processed identically the same as all the others so that every single being can be equal. Just like the way America’s educational system drills students into taking the same paths to success, the society of Brave New World drills the idea that each embryo needs to be evolved in the same matter to each equal productivity and success.

Also, the narrator of the video demonstrates the idea of divergent thinking; in that there’s no one “right” answer to every single question. As an example he uses the paper clip; how many different ways can a paper clip be used that you can think of? Most adults would range about 10-15 different ways, children on the other hand, before they’re introduced into the school system, can think of around 99 ways. This shows that our school system narrows our minds into thinking there’s only one correct answer, when in actuality there could be numerous answers. This philosophy pertains to Brave New World; everyone in that society believes there’s only one way to do things because the government has told them since they were merely infants. Because it’s all they’ve ever known, they are unable to consider other possibilities to do things.

Finally! The Start of Something New :)

In Brave New World, particularly in chapter 3, the passage demonstrates on how the society of this world is manipulating humans both genetically and psychologically. This society genetically engineers its embryos to fit some sort of purpose later on in life. The scientists of this world produce a certain number of smart people and a certain number of ‘dumb’ or ‘not so smart’ people so that the economic work force can always stay in balance. (For instance, the smart people become the scientists and the dumb people become the factory workers.) To a certain group of children, scientists classically condition their infants into hating books and flowers by giving them an electric shock every time they go to grab one of the two. This allows them to hate books, therefore they won’t accidentally become infatuated by books and fail to attain their true purpose in life; which was the only reason they were created.

“One hole produces a strong jet. However, many small holes produce calm streams of water.” This indicates that the mentality of this society believes that strong human emotion, whether it be inspired by family relationships, sex, and delayed satisfaction of desire, goes directly against stability and productivity. Without this stability, civilizations will cease to exist.

Furthermore, the date of the launch inauguration of the Model T by Henry Ford was chosen as the start of the new, production era. All the crosses had their tops cut off to make them look like ‘Ts’. Soon after, the new discovery of soma reached the shelves, and the problem of old age and suffering was solved; people could retain the mental and physical structure of their 30’s throughout their entire life span. Additionally, no one was allowed to sit alone and contemplate; no one was allowed “leisure from pleasure.”

A Somewhat Weird Warm-Up to the Actual Tempest Essay...

In discussions of The Tempest, by William Shakespeare, one controversial issue throughout the play has been whether or not Shakespeare meant to convey a particular view on imperialism. When looking at the opinion of George Will, The Tempest would be about this very issue. Portrayed in the story, Caliban is a native that is “civilized” and taken advantage of by outsiders. This is considered the traditional, black and white-cookie cutter view… what most people consider the play to be about. But could there be another “traditional” view? I mean after all the play was written over five hundred years or so ago. Will argues that “critics strip literature of its authority. Criticism displaces literature and critics displace authors as bestowers of meaning.” So, in this sense, is traditional meaning and historically accepted the same thing?

On the other hand, we have critics like Stephan Greenblatt that believe that “the painful, messy struggles over rights and values” is what ultimately begins progression and prevention of cultural compliance. The Tempest can be interpreted as a direct parallel to someone else’s own experiences, and not just the traditional view. Greenblatt believes that students in this day and age are passive and simply accepting everything they are being told by teachers… just like the traditional way of learning; a teacher lectures, you listen and take notes, study, then regurgitate it on a multiple choice test, forgetting everything the very next week. Stephen Greenblatt would argue that people need to start challenging the ‘traditional’ interpretation of literary works.

All in all, I would have to say that both views have their strengths and weaknesses. Classics become classics because they can be interpreted in ways that can relate to each day in age, every new and emerging decade can benefit from its message. However I do believe it is important to consider its original or perhaps “traditional” meaning.