I'm really glad that I took this course. It was an awesome class, and I definitely learned a lot. Personally, I liked every single thing that we read in this class. A lot of these works had humor mixed in, which made the books, short stories, plays, etc. even more interesting. I also liked a ton of the characters. Although some of them may have seemed strange, I thought their "weird" personalities brought the best out of the books. I also liked that we read a variety of types of writings. We didn't just read novels; we read novels, poems, and short stories and watched plays, movies, and videos on YouTube. I think that by having a variety, you are really immersed into the subject of english, which is great since this is an english class.
The last thing that I would like to point out was that I learned a lot. With a title of College Literature, this class truly lived up to its name. We were exposed to works that everybody has read by the time they leave college. Also, I really liked that we were forced to take a test in the form of what a college exam would be. Yes, I would've rather had no test at all, but if I am going to have one, I would like it to help prepare me for the future. Overall, I just really feel like this class has helped prepare me for college and has exposed me to pieces of art that were awesome and important. Thank you, Mr. Kunkle, for making this class so awesome. I know you chose the works based on what your favorite ones are, so all I can say is that you have extremely good taste.
Monday, June 6, 2011
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Monday, May 30, 2011
Maus and Persepolis
Last quarter I read a graphic novel called Maus. It is a memoir where the author Art Spiegelman listens to his father retell his Holocaust survival story. It goes back and forth between past and present, so readers are able to experience the actual situation while also experiencing the father's current feelings. It is an awesome read, and it is even the only comic book to have won the Pulitzer Prize. Immediately as I began to read Persepolis, I started to make numerous connections between the two books. Aside from the obvious connection of them both being graphic novels, I found similarities in the drawings, technique, quality, and historical aspects.
The first connection I made had to do with the simplicity of the drawings. Maus definitely had a bit more detail than Persepolis; however, both styles manage to draw your eyes towards the important aspects of the scenes. They are also both in black and white which makes it less distracting on the eyes.
The second connection that I made had to do with just overall quality of the books. Although I haven't completely finished Persepolis, the beginning has definitely caught my attention. This leads me to believe that, just like with Maus, Persepolis will be an excellent read.
The last connection that I made was that both books had some very important historical events. Both Art Spiegelman and Marjane Satrapi managed to capture this importance while also incorporating some humor into the novel. Both books first come off as if they aren't serious, but as you read further and further into the book, the seriousness of the events are surprising. This is perhaps why graphic novels are often challenged in school settings. People are often upset with the idea of having a funny work of art cover a serious, horrible event. What those people don't realize is that the books actually help a lot in understanding the event. By reading these books, you are reading a style that you are not used to which makes you pay attention more and more. Also, with graphic novels, you are exposed to pictures that reveal emotion and usually historical accuracy about the event. As you can probably tell, I think that graphic novels should be regarded as high as normal novels. Do you like this graphic novel? Should we even be reading it in school?
The first connection I made had to do with the simplicity of the drawings. Maus definitely had a bit more detail than Persepolis; however, both styles manage to draw your eyes towards the important aspects of the scenes. They are also both in black and white which makes it less distracting on the eyes.
The second connection that I made had to do with just overall quality of the books. Although I haven't completely finished Persepolis, the beginning has definitely caught my attention. This leads me to believe that, just like with Maus, Persepolis will be an excellent read.
The last connection that I made was that both books had some very important historical events. Both Art Spiegelman and Marjane Satrapi managed to capture this importance while also incorporating some humor into the novel. Both books first come off as if they aren't serious, but as you read further and further into the book, the seriousness of the events are surprising. This is perhaps why graphic novels are often challenged in school settings. People are often upset with the idea of having a funny work of art cover a serious, horrible event. What those people don't realize is that the books actually help a lot in understanding the event. By reading these books, you are reading a style that you are not used to which makes you pay attention more and more. Also, with graphic novels, you are exposed to pictures that reveal emotion and usually historical accuracy about the event. As you can probably tell, I think that graphic novels should be regarded as high as normal novels. Do you like this graphic novel? Should we even be reading it in school?
Sunday, May 22, 2011
Slaughterhouse-Five
I really enjoyed this book because of the writing style of Kurt Vonnegut. I thought it was awesome how Vonnegut explained a lot of the least meaningful details really far in depth, while he was super vague on some of, perhaps, the most important parts. I also found it kind of amusing how Vonnegut was so abrupt about what was happening. For example, the first sentence of chapter nine on page 182 was "Here is how Billy Pilgrim lost his wife, Valencia." Furthermore, I thought it was interesting how he stated her name at the end. Did we really need him to clarify who he was talking about? Maybe it's just me, but I would think it was pretty clear considering that just pages before they were having their 18th wedding anniversary. I just think that overall Vonnegut's style was super cool, and it made the book really good.
I do have to say, however, that I don't completely know if I caught on to the purpose of the book. I figured out that Vonnegut is a fan of repetition (well, at least he is in this book), but I don't think I understood the full meaning of all the repetition. I think that I will have to read the book again to understand it entirely.
I do have to say, however, that I don't completely know if I caught on to the purpose of the book. I figured out that Vonnegut is a fan of repetition (well, at least he is in this book), but I don't think I understood the full meaning of all the repetition. I think that I will have to read the book again to understand it entirely.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
Life Is Beautiful (war movie)
Life is Beautiful:
This movie is about Guido Orefice, a Jewish Italian, who is imprisoned at a concentration camp with his family, and he has to use his imagination to keep his son and wife alive. Guido and his son are separated from his wife, and Guido is left to keep his son alive while not knowing what is happening. Guido creates a game to keep his son optimistic. He wittingly goes against all the rules and does what nobody would have ever consider doing. His main goal is to reunite with his wife, and he constantly sends little messages to tell her that they are still there and alive. This was a really good movie, and it was different from other movies in the way that it included a lot of humor. Some people may ask whether a war movie can be humorous and serious at the same time, and this movie definitely showed that it can. I don't cry while watching movies, but if I did, this would definitely be one of those movies where I both laughed and cried.
I think that the point of this film was to show how innocent people were affected by war. It really emphasized the fact that some of the victims of war were optimistic and never gave up; in fact, the victims often helped eachother out even though they barely had enough for themselves. This movie showed how the people who were considered "unhuman" were perhaps the most human in their attempts to live in the terrible conditions. The filmmaker most likely wanted to show that good often shines through all the bad.
I don't know if there are really many similarities or differences. One of the similarities that I noticed was the idea of sticking together during war. In Slaughterhouse-Five, Roland Weary and the two other scouts banded together to become "The Three Musketeers." In Life is Beautiful, Guido and his family come together to fight until the end. Another similarity had to do with the theme of childhood. In Life is Beautiful, one of the main characters is a child, and the movie really showed how war affected his childhood, beliefs, and how the father had to treat him. In this movie, the idea of childhood innocence plays a huge role. One difference I noticed was the role of the characters. Slaughterhouse-Five is about the soldiers of the war, while Life is Beautiful is actually about the Jewish victims. Both have to do with the people of war, but they played different roles in the actual war.
I think that Mary O'Hare would have enjoyed this movie. It really showed how bad the effects of war were on the victims. It involved not only adults but also children to show that the young and the innocent were also affected. Mary O'Hare didn't like that many books/movies encouraged war, and this movie definitely did not. Some people don't like the humor in the movie, but the filmmakers did an awesome job of capturing the pain, truth, and trauma of war.
This movie is about Guido Orefice, a Jewish Italian, who is imprisoned at a concentration camp with his family, and he has to use his imagination to keep his son and wife alive. Guido and his son are separated from his wife, and Guido is left to keep his son alive while not knowing what is happening. Guido creates a game to keep his son optimistic. He wittingly goes against all the rules and does what nobody would have ever consider doing. His main goal is to reunite with his wife, and he constantly sends little messages to tell her that they are still there and alive. This was a really good movie, and it was different from other movies in the way that it included a lot of humor. Some people may ask whether a war movie can be humorous and serious at the same time, and this movie definitely showed that it can. I don't cry while watching movies, but if I did, this would definitely be one of those movies where I both laughed and cried.
I think that the point of this film was to show how innocent people were affected by war. It really emphasized the fact that some of the victims of war were optimistic and never gave up; in fact, the victims often helped eachother out even though they barely had enough for themselves. This movie showed how the people who were considered "unhuman" were perhaps the most human in their attempts to live in the terrible conditions. The filmmaker most likely wanted to show that good often shines through all the bad.
I don't know if there are really many similarities or differences. One of the similarities that I noticed was the idea of sticking together during war. In Slaughterhouse-Five, Roland Weary and the two other scouts banded together to become "The Three Musketeers." In Life is Beautiful, Guido and his family come together to fight until the end. Another similarity had to do with the theme of childhood. In Life is Beautiful, one of the main characters is a child, and the movie really showed how war affected his childhood, beliefs, and how the father had to treat him. In this movie, the idea of childhood innocence plays a huge role. One difference I noticed was the role of the characters. Slaughterhouse-Five is about the soldiers of the war, while Life is Beautiful is actually about the Jewish victims. Both have to do with the people of war, but they played different roles in the actual war.
I think that Mary O'Hare would have enjoyed this movie. It really showed how bad the effects of war were on the victims. It involved not only adults but also children to show that the young and the innocent were also affected. Mary O'Hare didn't like that many books/movies encouraged war, and this movie definitely did not. Some people don't like the humor in the movie, but the filmmakers did an awesome job of capturing the pain, truth, and trauma of war.
Sunday, May 15, 2011
The Life of Tralfamadorians
The further and further I get into Slaughterhous Five, the more I like the way Tralfamadorians live. Everything they do and think just sounds so smart and sophisticated. They live life so simply and don't ask questions; in fact, their life is so simple that they don't even waste their time with speaking. They communicate telepathically, which to me seems much easier than actually speaking. Contrary to popular belief, I am not capable of speaking telepathically with my twin, so I am completely jealous.
They don't worry about people dying; instead, they believe that the person may be not doing well in this moment, but they are doing just fine in plenty of other moments. If humans on earth believed this, people would probably live much more happily. They don't ask why because they say "there is no why" because the "moment simply is." They don't believe or even know what free will is...well now they technically know what it is because they've studied Earth for a while.
Ever since I have learned these things about Tralfamadorians, I've had major problems deciding whether or not their way of life is better than ours. On the surface, Tralfamadorians seem to live smartly, but is it really what it seems? If you could choose to be a Tralfamadorian or stay as you are, would you change?
They don't worry about people dying; instead, they believe that the person may be not doing well in this moment, but they are doing just fine in plenty of other moments. If humans on earth believed this, people would probably live much more happily. They don't ask why because they say "there is no why" because the "moment simply is." They don't believe or even know what free will is...well now they technically know what it is because they've studied Earth for a while.
Ever since I have learned these things about Tralfamadorians, I've had major problems deciding whether or not their way of life is better than ours. On the surface, Tralfamadorians seem to live smartly, but is it really what it seems? If you could choose to be a Tralfamadorian or stay as you are, would you change?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)