English 144: King Lear

Whoa... What a way to end a play. No happiness whatsoever.

It is sad how there never seems to be any true, pure happiness/ love throughout the play. Love is seen as a way to betray someone... From the very beginning people (Regan, Goneril, and Edmund) confess to their father how it is them who love their father the most. They use the human emotion of wanting to be loved and feel like you are the greatest thing, to destroy their fathers. Now these two fathers (Lear and Gloucester) other children also show their love, but in a way that is down played from their siblings. Cordelia who tells her father she loves him but that half her love will go to her husband, once married, is punished for not claiming to love her fahter above everything. Same goes for Gloucester's other son, Edgar, who truly loves his father but is made out as the bad guy because Edmund sets him up.

In the end it is Cordelia and Edgar that end up being the faithful and loving children that both fathers had truly longed for. Goneril, Regan, and Edmund only wanted to get more powerful and rich... so they lied about their love in order to impress their father which then allowed them to be able to betray him more easily. The whole play is very weird and messed up.

There is no real love that survivies... Everyone seems to use love as a way to gain more power and control--> which in the end doesn't matter because everyone dies who was trying to betray each other. Actually, even the good ones die too. I don't know... This play has too many turns and twists. At first you think it is about love but then it turns into betrayal and hate. However, I still enjoyed the play and thought it was interesting that Shakespeare took this direction in the play...

English 174: Invisible Man

It is interesting how after the narrator finds out that Dr. Bledsoe has screwed him over and that he has really nothing to look forward too, he is still hopeful. Of course he does meet some nice people along the way that seem to really help him, like Mary. Mary seemed legit, just out to help not trying to screw people over to make sure she got ahead of them. I am sad that the narrator left her place to join this "Brotherhood" Jack has created.

I don't trust Jack. There is something about him I can't really describe, but I feel like the narrator is going to end up getting screwed over. Jack starts by complimenting the narrator and telling him that this "brotherhood" he has created is used to help fight for the people whose heritages have been dispossessed of. Why the narrator joins is beyond me, especially after Jack has him change is name and housing. Seems a bit weird that you have to leave everything behind, find a new place to live, get a new name, and create a new identity to be in this brotherhood. I think it is a way for Jack to have control over people... Interesting how the narrator's name is changed, along with his identity, and the reader still has no name for him. I think this helps with the whole idea that the narrator doesn't know who he is yet, and so the reader isn't supposed to know either. And once you give someone a name, you begin to identify them as someone... you know? Also, how does this group get money? When the narrator first joins, they just give him $300 to pay off debt and then some more to buy new clothes. On top of all that, they are going to pay him $60 a week. This whole thing just seems a bit shady.

I can't wait to see how this situation turns out... not good I know because we already know how bitter the narrator turns out.

English 144: King Lear

So King Lear's daughters Goneril and Regan are the definition of evil, yes? I cannot believe all the bad and evil things that the children do in these two acts. Goneril and Regan throw their father out into the storm when he refuses to give up everything... They are first evil for trying to make him give up everything and become nothing, but then they take it to the next step by basically disowning him. They do not care if he lives or dies, as long as they get all the power and kingdom for themselves. How can someone have such hate for their parent? Family betrayal seems to be the key in this play though.

Gloucester is also betrayed by a child, his illegitimate son Edmund. Thanks to Edmund, Gloucester gets tied up by Regan and Cornwall and tortured. In the end, Gloucester's eyes are ripped out by Cornwall. Thankfully Cornwall gets stabbed and is wounded so him and Regan leave, allowing the servants to help clean Gloucester's face and send him away. Some of the things these children do to their parents... how do they live with that?

It seems like the children that proclaim their love to be the greatest for their parent are the ones that betray them. Is that part of the moral of this play- don't trust children that claim to love you the most? What the heck?! Full on evil right there.... I hope those three characters (Goneril, Regan, and Edmund) all get punished and fully pay for their betrayals.

English 174: Invisible Man

What is up with this Dr. Bledsoe guy? He is supposed to be the president of the university, which to me means he is supposed to look out for each student. At the beginning he seemed to really care about students getting a great education but then as "punishment" he expels the narrator. I understand that Dr. Bledsoe believes the narrator has ruined the school and disgraced the African-American race, but he doesn't even try to make something work so that the boy can continue to learn and become better. In my opinion, Dr. Bledsoe is worse than the white men are. He may know how the system works, but he is careful to make sure he has all power (or at least he thinks he has more power than whites). Really he is just like the narrator by trying to fit in and become better than what society tells them they are. Only thing is that Dr. Bledsoe has the power to ruin the narrator's life whereas the narrator is still naive and trying to just fit in with society.

The narrator's desire to belong is very strong. He so badly wants to fit in and become better than he is that, like Dr. Bledsoe, he will step on fellow African-Americans to do so. When the farmer gets money from Mr. Norton, the narrator gets upset. He believe he should deserve that money because he actually goes to school and is making a difference with his life, unlike the farmer. Again, there is this hatred for fellow African-Americans when the narrator goes to this bar called Golden Day. When any of the others pose a threat to his future, he becomes filled with hate for them. In the end, I guess his reasons were valid since he then gets expelled for everything that happened to Mr. Norton on that day. Which I still don't see how Dr. Bledsoe can blame all on the narrator. He (the narrator) was only doing what Mr. Norton asked him to do, and yet Dr. Bledsoe says that white men should never be listened too. It is all rather confusing.

*Anyone else find it interesting how our narrator has no name? I think it helps with the whole invisible feeling. If someone is invisible to the world, certainly no one will no their name, right? When you never see someone nor never think of them, to you they have no name... I wonder what Ellison's real reason for it is.

English 144: King Lear

I think I have read this play before because I remember the beginning with the father asking for all of his daughters to praise him with their love in order to get their third of the kingdom. Now Cordelia does not do the same as her sisters but says that she loves him, obeys him, and cares for him BUT can only half give herself to her father for if she marries then half of herself becomes her husband’s. Was she just trying to be smart in this speech or did she truly mean it and did not want to lie like her sister’s were? I mean, by doing this her father disowned her but by losing everything she gets the King of France who still wants her. So I mean, in a way she got someone who will love her when she has nothing at all, unlike her sister’s who will marry because of the land they got. To me, Cordelia comes off as the smart, real, and true character. She is not going to lie to saver herself or to get rich. She tells her father how she honestly feels and accepts full punishment for it. Also, she does not seem to want to marry for money and power. When the Duke of Burgundy no longer wants her because she is nothing to the kingdom of Britain, she is happy and say how she will never be his wife. That is when the King of France says he still wants her, so she ends up with a man who is not completely centered on power and moneyà or so I hope. I do not remember how the play ends, but I am very interested to see what happens. I still cannot believe that King Lear disowned his favorite daughter for her being honest that half her love, care, and duty will go to her husband. Oh man… he sounds like a self centered man.

English 174: Invisible Man

WHOA! I am really enjoying this book. I have only gotten to chapter six so far but I am liking it a lot. I decided that I should just jump ahead to this novel if we were going to be spending more time talking about it. I am really glad I did too. I mean, the book is great although it has taken be a bit of time to get through these first chapters. Ellison's writing is just so easy to read and he paints a picture for the reader that is amazing. I think it is so interesting how he feels invisible. The way he describes his (the main character's) life makes everything seem so unreal in a setting and time when feelings like that were so real. That probably makes no sense... What I mean is that the main character talks of himself as being invisible to the world--> as if he truly is invisible and no one can see him. That isn't the case though, it isn't that the world can't see him but the fact that the world chooses not to see him. Yeah? It is so true though. People, in my opinion, only see what they want to see. Right after slavery, many whites still thought of African-Americans as nothing, for sure not humans with equal rights. That is exactly what Ellison captures, that emotion of being looked past because people did not want to see. Like I said, I am really enjoying this book and am actually really excited to see where this ends as well as where our class conversations go!

English 117: Elizabeth I and Her Age

Both the readings, “Epigram on the Earl of Essex” and “Letter to Essex in Ireland,” seem to be about Essex leading Queen Elizabeth’s army in Ireland. In the letter that Elizabeth writes to Essex, she comes across as upset. Yet she never comes out and straight up tells him that he has distanced the army from the council, that he has not been successful in the battles, and that he needs to be taking the army in a different direction. What she does is beat around the bush about it. She starts off telling him something, then goes into a huge explanation about it, and then finally is like—oh yeah; by the way… you fail. At least this is the impression I got from the letter. If I was Essex, reading this letter would not motivate me to do anything. The letter could have been more direct and to the point, especially if she wants him to do more with the army.

As for the poem, it is like the letter. The poem just sums up the letter, which if the poem was that short and got the point across, the letter could have been way shorter and the same message would have been conveyed. The poem talks about how the Queen sends Essex to war because of “her wrath.” She wanted him to go north, but he wanted to go south… However, the Queen’s will is what matters in the end, so he had to go north. At least that is what I got from this poem.

I don’t know. It will be interesting to discuss these two in class and get everyone’s opinion on them.