Love- I have a lot to say on love...

Let me start by saying that while I found this story amusing, I also found it very annoying. Every two seconds I was reading this person says or that person says, even though I could tell who was speaking without all of that. It could have been written without all the redundancy. What I found amusing was the different views each character had on love. My take on previous loves is that each person has a soul mate. I am on my second marriage and while I thought I loved my ex at the time, I realize now that it wasn't real love. It wasn't this intense. My ex was abusive, like Ed. I can identify with Terri because I really believed if he didn't love me he wouldn't hit me, he would just ignore me instead. Today I know that is false. But back to soul mates. Some people go their entire lives just existing from one relationship to the next or stuck in a routine. But they never really find their soul mate and therefore never experience true, deep, intense, passionate love. Nick and Laura never comment on whether they have loved before. Mel and Terri just assume. Based on their comments and reactions to each other, I think they might have that real love. I never understood the concept of your mate being your best friend until I met Tom. I don't only love him, I really like him too. We enjoy spending time together just doing nothing. We can talk for hours about nothing at all and never get bored with each other. And basically, that's what I talk about when I talk about love. One other thing is this is a lot like the last two stories in that it links love and death, both obviously and subtly in two instances. First is the obvious- Ed. He tried to kill Mel and Terri and in the end killed himself. Second- the subtle reference is the old couple Mel saw at the hospital. The old man was sad because he couldn't see his wife and they had both almost died. Even though they didn't, it was linked because they almost died and the thought that he could have lost her and not been able to see her was a thought he could not bear and it caused him great depression and grief.

Hemingway IS just as depressing..damn

Ok so I'm not exactly pro-abortion, but let me just say--WAY better option than infantcide! The American and the girl. Right from the start Hemingway is letting us know that these are two totally different people from different walks of life. It seems that Jig is having second thoughts but wants to make everyone else happy. I like the way this was written in almost all dialogue. Rather than seeing their actions and hearing their thoughts, I felt like an observer eavesdropping or a fly on the wall. As a reader we have to infer things which are open to interrpretation. I think Jig is also in denial of sorts. She states there is nothing wrong and she is fine. She is in a state of depression. F.I.N.E. means f**cked up, insecure, neurotic, and emotional. Her boyfriend is trying to be optimistic and she is completely negative saying, "It isn't ours anymore". While it never says Jig is pregnant or having an abortion it is easy to see that is what is going on by what is said in the dialogue between them. I also found it interesting that he didn't have a name, almost like he wasn't really that important.

Jail is not good enough for these kids

When I first read this story I sat for an hour unable to move my pen on the piece of paper. It took me a lot of time to be able to comment because this story really touched me and hurt me too. Those who were in English 110 with me probably know I was incarcerated. During that incarceration I spent time at Howard Street, a minimum security drug and alcohol program.
My roommate at Howard Street was Amanda Harris, the Westfield girl who placed her infant son in a cornflakes box and threw him in a dumpster. Thankfully, Micheal survived. This little girl wasn't so lucky. As a mother this story made me sick. I became pregnant for Owen a month before my nineteenth birthday. I had options- abortion, adoption, or to raise my son and take responsibility for my actions. I chose the latter. One option I never had was to give birth and then commit murder. What really pissed me off though was that neither Jeremy nor China thought they did anything wrong. What sociopaths! They refused to accept responsibility. One December 29, 2006 I lost a son. I still struggle with the guilt and blame of this stillbirth today. I know that my addiction and alcoholism played a large part in that death and I accept responsibility for this. I realize that they were still young, but they were adult enough to engage in sexual relations. Jeremy justified his actions by saying that she told him to get rid of it. He could have dropped it off at a hospital or police station. China justified her actions by saying that she never saw the baby and thought she had a miscarriage. If she gave a damn she would ahve demanded to see the baby, even if she really thought it was dead. Even though I KNEW my baby was stillborn I still demanded to see and hold my baby. So- I guess that is enough said-the more I write the more pissed I get. Listen- I know I really shared a lot of personal stuff here and that some people might judge me for that. I needed to share all of that to get across how I feel. I made a lot of mistakes, and I totally accept responsibility for that. Ok so like I said, I'm going to stop and start on the next story- hopefully Hemingway won't be so depressing..

Bravo!!!

Bravo! That was such a bold, brave, and yet sneaky, underhanded move that Mrs. Penn pulled. I have to laugh though, because I keep thinking of when I was little. When I would run in and out of the house my mom would ask if I thought I lived in a barn. I just think it would be funny to hear Sara Penn ask Nanny or Sammy that. But for her to put her foot down and her children first was admirable. Her husband was a selfish jerk. Forty years and he let his wife live in a shack. While I was reading this I held out hope that perhaps he was building a house and was trying to surprise her. I thought MAYBE that was why he wouldn't talk about it, and even maybe Sammy was in on it. I even thought if it wasn't for Sara, maybe it was a wedding gift for Nanny. When he really built a barn I wanted to hunt him down and kick some sense into him. What a jerk!!!!! Who needs that many barns, cows, horses, etc. I think in the end though he realized the damage he had caused over the years. His crying in the end I don't think symbolized defeat but surrender. I think he realized that his wife deserved better than what he had provided all those years. He came to see that she could handle it herself and she wasn't going to settle for second or even third best anymore.

Additional thoughts about Emily..

So now that I'm over the whole 'ick' factor this story had, I can't seem to stop pondering the title. I've come up with two possible explainations, so I thought I would throw them around. One thought is it is linked to her death itself. When someone dies you usually throw a rose or some sort of flower on their casket.
Here is my other thought though. This one is much more morbid and it takes the whole 'ick' factor to a whole new level. A rose is precious. It is something that you can, and many people do, keep entombed in a book or something even after it dies. Perhaps Emily's rose was really Homer. He was precious to her, even though I'm pretty sure she killed him. She kept him even after death and entombed him in that bedroom for her joy alone.
Ok so those are my ideas on two possible explainations of the title. Any other ideas?

How sick is this??

I can truly only think of one thing to say.... EWWWW! I've heard of people not letting fo of the past, especially as they grow old, but this story took that to a WHOLE new level. I mean, she was sleeping with a dead guy. And what was up with the arsenic? So basically she killed him and then decided to stick him in bed and lay with him. I guess that puts a new meaning to never leaving someone. I think this obsession with the dead may have started with her father.
It seems like perhaps he isolated her. Upon his death she was lost and so denial set in. When they came for the body she eventually had no choice but to let the take him. Oh but what if she were to have a body no one knew about? And what better than someone not from the area who won't be missed as quickly?
It also seems that Homer wasn't her first 'victim'. How else do you explain the smell that permeated from her home. GROSS! At the same time though I can't help but feel sorry for her. It is obviously some sort of mental illness that she suffers from for her to do this. She even went as far as purchasing the arsenic from the local pharmacist and didn't even think twice that despite her sick fetish, this was murder. Seriously twisted.

Good Country People? Try Crazy people in the country...

Loneliness. Amid the people always around there is still loneliness. That is the major thing that struck me about this story. I remember when I was a teenager and I was active in school and had a lot of friends around me all the time. But even with all of that I still felt so lonely. I smiled on the outside, but was miserable on the inside.
Joy had lost her leg when she was just ten years old so she missed out on a lot of the things normal kids get to do. She grew to be cynical and she was educated so she came to think of herself as "better than".
When the bible salesman came to the house her superiority complex took hold. She thought she could get one over on him. She set out to seduce him, to play him. Funny how she ended up being the one to get played. I don't think she only lost her leg in that hay barn, but her dignity as well.
I wonder how long she was stuck up there. With her crappy attitude, did anyone even come looking for her for awhile?
As bad as it is that this guy took her leg, I have a hard time feeling bad for her. I can't help but think hey, this girl got what she deserved.
I like the title too. "Good Country People". Mrs. Hopewell liked to have faith that there were good country people out there, but in the end no one is really what they appear to be.

Admin Post- Week 5

Hey boys and girl. Your friendly admin had her life consumed by Anatomy and Physiology and so is very late delivering this prompt:
Respond to Good Country People by Flannery O'Connor, p169

A Kinky Rose for Emily sounds better

Boy, guys, the end of this one was pretty good, huh? I enjoyed this story quite a bit for several reasons. First, it reminded me of my grandmother (NO she did not sleep with dead guys, you guys are gross) in that she lived in a house somewhat like Emily's, once a beautiful home in it's rite but eventually an outcast amonsgt the inevitable growth of a town, and she also aged there (alone and stubborn to offers at buying her land) while society moved on and she didn't. Secondly, I liked that there were a few words that I had to look up (self-admitted word geek) like gilt and coquettish and august which made me happy. But mostly, I enjoyed the style and content of the story; how it kind of wound around a bendy road but kept it's thread so that it was understandable but still able to completely astonish me at the end. Only the best of authors can get away with this as stealthily. Faulkner did a great job describing everything in just the right amount of detail to keep me focused, in keeping the story always interesting and in literally turning my stomach after my first reading. I'm reading too many books right now, but eventually, I would like to read more by him. I wonder if all of his work is as elegantly presented? Just one question? Why is it called A Rose for Emily? Does she get a rose and I missed it or is Faulkner referring to the flowers for her grave or what? I must have missed something. Someone throw it at me, ok?

Extremely Loud

Would anyone like to figure out some time that we can form some type of study group for "Extremely Loud"? If so let me know. My email is kdougherty1726@hotmail.com.
Thanks! Kim D

Jonathan Safran Foer

Hi everyone! Kim D. here. Ok so I know that we haven't really started in with "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close" yet, however I just have to put the comment up to say I loved this book! I am so grateful to the powers-that-be over at the DBC who chose this book. I finished it in 2 1/2 days. It is so refreshing to finally have a book that I would read in my spare time as a book that I have to study. Hands down it was so much better than the monkey book...err.. "Primates Memoir".
With that said I get to the point of why I am posting this. The first novel written by Jonathan Safran Foer is titled "Everything is Illuminated". I just recently took this book out of my local library for the sole fact that I really love his style of writing.
So my fellow Foer fans, if you like his style then I seriously suggest checking this other book out for reading in your spare time. You will not be disappointed. The style of writing, the bluntness, and the humor are well worth it. I am only about a quarter way into the book and I can't put it down, nor can I stop laughing. Happy Reading!!

The things they carried- kim's views

Let me start by saying I really loved this story. One thing that struck me was that O'Brien kept going back to lists of different items the men carried. But what they carried with them was so much more than the physical. It was the mental and emotional baggage of the war itself as well as what they had at home. I think the one most obvious example of this was the torch that Cross carried for Martha.
There was a lot more to this story than just what they carried and all that implies. This story was about war itself and also about the effects of war and how it affected the men.
There really isn't much more that I can say about this that hasn't already been said. It was an awesome short story and if anyone wants to check it out, they have the whole book downstairs in the bookstore or at Barnes and Noble. If you do and it's good, let me know!

Matthias' take on...

"The Story of a Hour" by Kate Chopin
"A&P" by John Updike and
"The Things They Carried" by Tim O'Brien

Before I go further, I'm just going to make it clear that I know I've been lax in putting stuff up here. I mean, I really don't have an excuse because I know how there's nothing else taking up my time at all... Anyway, point is, I'll try to get this stuff up faster.

"The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin

This was an interesting curio of a short story. Structurally, it was very tight. The reason I bring up tightness is that film is a major interest of mine, I mean... I really like looking into films, and reading some of my favorite screenplays. Anyway, I bring up tightness and structure because a good screenplay, in its written form, must be as tight and as well structured as possible, both to save onscreen time, but also so that all the events in the film make some sort of narrative sense. Anyway, "The Story of an Hour" is a really good example of economy of prose. However, I felt that with such compression of prose dampens the emotional effect that the events of the story have. It also makes it more difficult to give the emotional linger typically associated with moments of gravity within a story. If less time is spent on something, the dramatic effect is usually lessened. But anyway, I'm speaking like I'm giving a Robert McKee seminar... As far how it made me feel, I gotta say... I didn't feel that much emotion coming off of the page. Granted part of it is the way in which it was presented, but I think that because I've never really been overwhelmed by happiness (or sadness for that matter) that I couldn't feel the way the protagonist feels, and so there was, for me, a certain emotional detachment.

"A & P" by John Updike

Good stuff. It's a cool example of what the expansion of what would (real time) be no more than twenty minutes with impersonal, informal semi-stream of consciousness prose. If it were at almost any other time of day, and/or any other period in this Sammy kid's life, then Updike wouldn't have the liberty of expounding upon what's running through Sammy's head. What I liked most about it was that the story lacks the feeling of being written. There aren't any overt metaphors, an obvious dramatic foil, hell, there isn't even some sort of improbable action as the crux of the story: it's about a kid who quits his job. In distancing the story from the overtly literary, the characters and setting feels closer: you've been in the grocery store with some teenage kid ringing you up plenty of times. This gives Updike the freedom that he only has to observe the settings, and characters, etc... from the perspective of this nineteen-year old Sammy, instead of actually writing them. However, that isn't to say that it's no less thematic. I thought that the best thing that Updike did in this story was that he was able to weave the collusion of things (Sammy's co-worker, "queenie"'s attitude about the girls' attire, Sammy's Manager, etc...) into this defining moment in Sammy's life, hence the expansion of themes at the very end: "...I felt how hard the world was going to be to me hereafter," and to do it all so naturally. (Okay, I know that was a really poorly-written sentence, but I'm quite tired, so I'll fix it later... maybe ;)

"The Things They Carried" by Tim O'Brien

A fascinating short story. There is almost a ton of thematic opportunity that war provides writers (cf. All Quiet on the Western Front, The Best Years of Their Lives, Paths of Glory, Apocalypse Now, Platoon, The Thin Red Line, Saving Private Ryan, etc... and that's only films), and so it's quite apt that O'Brien is able to (I don't want to say "pile"...) many themes upon one another (Jimmy Cross, prose techniques regarding the Everyman in war, etc...) . However, as I wrote in my essay, the one that I found most interesting was the idea of the Platoon of the Everyman vs. the Collective Platoon, i.e. the group versus the individual. Such a comparison, and by extension conflict, is often forced upon the individual soldier (Charlie Sheen's character in Platoon, wherein he is forced to choose between two completely different ideologies personified in the two different sergeants played by Willem Dafoe and Tom Berenger, each representing the ideas of the preservation of individual freedom as a soldier in war, and yielding to the collective for the benefit of all others and winning the war, respectively). This theme is best explored in, what I consider to be, one of the best of all war films, The Thin Red Line written/directed by Terrence Malick. There are quite a few obvious parallels between both "The Things They Carried" and The Thin Red Line, primarily the narrative structure of both: they both primarily focus on a particular soldier at any one time. In doing so, they both create the effect of studying the the Everyman in war, personified in some way by each member of the platoon. Granted every war film necessarily does this (you can't have a platoon of the same guy twelve times), but of the works I've seen, "The Things They Carried" and The Thin Red Line are the only two whose primary aim is to do a character study set during war.

Admin Post- Week 4

It's your friendly neighborhood admin here. Recovering from a horrid case of the stomach flu. Sorry this is absolutely ridiculously late but here's your prompt for the week:

Respond to "A Rose for Emily" by William Faulkner, pg 315

Don't forget to read "Good Country People" and choose your paragraph for close reading!

Kim's take on A&P

Ok so honestly I didn't really care for this story and I don't really care too much for Updike anyhow. I have to agree with Katie on this one. I felt that what was said in 5 pages could have honestly been reduced to about 2 1/2 to 3. In this story Sammy, the clerk at the A&P, talks about seeing these three girls and lusting after them. In turn he quits his job. Sorry to the guys reading this (Matthias) but seriously that is so typical. He sees a cute girl and just up and follows her out. And does he even get the girl? Nope. Not at all. The girl probably didn't even realize he existed. Although this was just a job at a grocery store, and not a career, he will probably spend the rest of his life bouncing from job to job to job. I realize that he is young, but still the irresponsibility that is demonstrated is just assinine. I really don't have much more to say on this story except that I really really really did not enjoy reading it- not one bit. I found it incredibly long and dry for a short story. Kim D

Story of an Hour

Marriage. One word means so much. To truly understand the word you have to look at it in the context to the time period and setting in which it is used. In todays society it is used so loosely that the meaning of the word has becomed skewed. In the society we live in marriage has become non-committal in some aspects as divorce rates soar. I myself am on my second marriage all before the age of thirty. In the time of this story, however, marriage meant something totally different. Vows were taken differently- honor and obey- till death do us part. Marriage was about committment, duty, and obedience.
In the beginning Chopin refers to Mrs. Mallard as being ' afflicted with a heart trouble'. The use of 'a' before 'heart trouble' is interesting because it infers that there it is so much more than just heart disease. She was trapped in a marriage that probably started when she was really young and was most likely a marriage of convenience. It states that she didn't always love him. Love was not an important component of marriage at this time. When she learned of his alleged death, she retreated to her room because she was happy, felt free, and probably felt guilty for feeling this way. It is clear she was not happy, and perhaps that contributed to her illness. I think that when you are in an unhappy marriage, sometimes you don't feel that there is an escape. It doesn't say if they had children, but in my first marriage I stayed a lot longer than was necessary because of my children.
"Free, Free, Free" is the phrase that she muttered over and over again to herself once she was alone. I think that the use of the word free three times is important- free of a loveless marriage, free of the illness afflicting her, and free to live a life-HER life.
Discovering Brently was alive killed her not out of shock. It seems that through death, she accomplished the freedom she sought.

Why do we study literature?

I guess the question could be asked, "why do we study anything?" The process of studying is for the purpose of obtaining something-knowledge. Literature, like many subjects, has many layers and many different sections (genres). I guess the main reason to study it would be to understand the different scopes of humanity. I enjoy studying literature because it takes me into the lives of the characters, into the world in which they live. I like to see the way they react to certain situations and I enjoy being inside their heads and feeling what they feel. Even when reading non-fiction, the knowledge that I gain from reading literature is immensely valuable. In studying literature it opens up so many different doors to knowledge. The possibilities for what you can obtain and learn are limitless.

I finally figured out this blog!

Ok everyone, so I am a little dense sometimes. I've been handwriting all of my journal entrys because I didn't know how to use the blog, and was a little intimidated by it. Kim C- thank you for the time to show it to me. Bear with me, I will be putting up a lot of posts over the next few days as I try to play catch up.
What is literature anyway?
Well the literal definition is the art of the written works. This comes from the Latin work littera, which means letter. It usually consists of the categories of fiction and non-fiction. Literature, however is so much more than just the literal definition. Literature is the way a story touches our hearts. When an author sits down to write a story, there are many ways in which he/she can try to reach the audience. This is literature to me. It is when I can sit and read a story, regardless of the genre (as many critics think only of classics as literature), and I can look at the ways in which it relates to my experiences. A narrow view of this would be only text, or in todays ages text and didgital media, however symbols (egyptian hieroglyphics) and even some sculptures can be referred to as literature. As I mentioned before some critics feel that literature is only the classics, such as Dickins or Wordsworth. They shun specific genre fiction such as romance, crime books, sci-fi, and horrow. In my opinion, while Dickins, Wordsworth, and such as indeed great authors, literature is so much more vast with a history dating back centuries and we should keep our minds open.

Okay so there is my first post. I tried to condense what I actully handwrote out. I would REALLY appreciate it if people could comment, just to let me know if I am getting the right idea of this blog. I kind of feel like my post is a little too much like an essay, as opposed to my thoughts on it. I know that what I wrote for our short stories is more emotionally responsive. So again, please let me know if you have any comments or suggestions. Thanks! Kim D.

Just wondering...

Hey, guys- when can we start talking a little about Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close?? Can someone set up a label for it and we kind of throw thoughts around as they come up, not necessarily as structured as the weekly reading blog? I'm gonna pee in my pants, the book is so good. Also, can I have a label for my name too?

Peace,
Katie

Katie on The Things They Carried

I have to start this with the confession that I (really) have never read a war story or seen a war movie before I read this story. (Seemed to me that everyday life could be bleak enough without adding blood and guts- shallow, I admit it) So, given that, I opened up the book and saw that this was a story about Vietnam. Uggg, I thought. I'm a good doobie, though, I started to read it because I was told to do so and then I realized that I didn't want to stop reading. O'Brien took me right out of my living room and put me somewhere above Jimmy Cross' platoon to watch the action. To me, that is the true sign of a talented writer, when all time and place are forgotten in the passion of reading the words on the page. Anyway, I read my first war story. I'm not going to say that I was shocked by the backbone as I expected the blood and guts, maybe not a severed thumb as a gifted charm, but I had no idea, really, what a soldier's day would look like. For instance, the weight that they carried despite the heat, the way they had no place to call base and were forced to carry all of their living arrangements on their backs along with the various weapons, the way they just wandered around in constant fear. I finished the story wondering to myself how situations like that were (are) even real. Who could live for a day like that, much less months at a time? Certainly, I would be the one who shot my eye ball out and wouldn't care a rat's bum what anyone thought of me because it seems so unnatural to me that one would choose to withstand the intense pressure and pain that O'Brien described. I wasn't so much drawn to the plot of the story as I was overwhelmed with the emotional background. I mentioned in class that I had gone so far as to call the Martha issue a subplot, which I now realize really was the main plot (but my mind still put it in sheep's clothing...). It's funny how differently two people can read the same piece and almost read two different stories. But yes, Jimmy Cross is much more an important figure than I first read him to be (because I reread the story after I presented my point of view to the class and amazingly, got a lot more out of it than the first 2 times I read it!). And, I absolutely loved the inferrence, Prof, to the initials J.C. I so wish that my brain was smart enough to come up with things like that on my own. I'm disappointed in myself for missing the mark on the plot thing, but I'm really glad to have read this story. I ordered a novel by O'Brien because I enjoyed this so much.

Katie spouts about A&P

Hi Guys. Finally found you!

Anyway. A&P by John Updike.... For what it's worth, I thought the story was somewhat 'eye candy' (I'm not a big fan of Updike) but took from it some interesting thoughts. The biggest thing, and I know a lot of people, including you, Prof. disagreed with me, is how insightful and almost wise(?) Sammy is in the story. I really believe that Updike meant for him to be that way on purpose (probably to spice up a kind of boring plot). I think the dichotomy between a volatile teenager and the same kid being abnormally observant/smart is kind of interesting. Also, (again mostly everyone disagreed) I found the attention to detail -minute detail, at that- to be another reason to read the whole story without falling asleep before the end. I mean, the nubble on the girl's bathing suit and how Queenie placed every foot step so purposefully, those details are the action, really. The best part was when Queen pulled the money out of her cleavage... I could almost see the look on Sammy's face at that one. Yes, I suppose there are deeper ideas to be taken from this story about responsibility and character flaws, but I just can't bring myself to enjoy it enough to analyze it much more. Sorry, guys.

Thoughts on The Things They Carried to follow shortly.

Admin Post- Week 3

Hi there from your friendly neighborhood Admin! Here with your extremely late weekly post for week 3!
This week's prompt is:
Respond to "Eveline" by John Updike, pg 4

Thanks for Doing This

I look forward to reading your posts and adding my own thoughts to the discussion, but this first one is mostly intended to thank you (Kim) for establishing this blog and everybody else for agreeing to participate in it as part of your honors work. I'm excited about all it will offer. So what's literature? Imaginative writing works as a shorthand definition in some people's minds, although where's the place for nonfiction prose - essays, travel writing, memorable speeches - in that definition? And is all imaginative writing, even really bad imaginative writing, literature? 'Seems to me it's both a matter of the nature of the work and some judgement about the quality of its presentation. But then there's the whole "who decides what's good/" question comes in the room. Truman Capote said of Jack Kerouac's ON THE ROAD, "That's not writing. That's typing." (ouch) There's another way of looking at literature that puts the premium on how the texts are read. Easy example: courses titled The Bible as Literature look at Scripture through a particular lens, one different, certainly, than a religion/ theology class would although both classes are reading the same pages. So maybe it's like the Supreme Court def. of pornography: "I don't know what it is but I know when I see it."

Admin Post- Week 2

Hey there, it's your friendly neighborhood admin post.
Week 2's prompts are:

• Respond to A&P by John Updike, pg 376
  
• Respond to The Things They Carried by Tim O'Brien, pg 99

Just a quick note, be sure to use the labels feature! That way when David looks at the responses for each week he can just click the label for whatever week it is and get all the responses for that. Don't worry if you mistype or accidentally omit it, your friendly neighborhood admin can and will fix it for the first few weeks until you get the hang of it. After that, you will be teased. Fair warning.

Matthias' take on Literature.

Literature.

Well, I'd say that literature is anything that covers the creative, intentional work within writing. But then again, I don't know how... complete that is. The idea that literature has a sort of... completeness; layers, various ideas, the writer's craft and mind finding textuality in places that the regular mind wouldn't exactly think of... Hard to describe. The main idea that I think literature is the innovative product of creative thought of the writer to with words used to imitate things, and being as innovative and clever as possible to do so. In short, literature is art.

To study literature is the attempt to break a work down into the parts of it to understand what about it gives it its artful quality or what makes it clever. Perhaps I'm being to succinct for my own good, but I can't think of anything else to say. Anyway, hopefully Kim D. will dopeslap me, and make me think of something.

Week 1- Kim C.

Everybody feel free to respond to my stuff and/or critique it or discuss it with me. In fact, I encourage it, since I'll be doing the same with you.

What is Literature anyway?
The word literature has many meanings. They range from very broad definitions that describe it as anything utilizing the written word to far more restrictive interpretations, which limit it to only creative writing of a widely recognized value. Literature can be and is both of these things; the definition of the word depends upon the context in which it is used. One can speak of a body of literature referring to all written works relating to a subject, such as motorcycle repair literature. On can also consider literature to be a more highbrow academic body of works of recognizable authors or titles, such as the works of William Shakespeare (whose inclusion in a group labeled "highbrow" is always questionable) or the novel The Grapes of Wrath. In a class devoted to the study of literature as a broad topic, the definition of the word is likely restricted to written works of a clearly recognizable value, most likely with commonly used literary devices.

What does it mean to study literature?
The study of literature is a multifaceted thing. It can be compared to the study of a science in that it requires some knowledge of background information and the ability to apply the background information to more complex concepts, knowing that what an ion is aids in the concept of pH just as knowing what a metaphor aids in the understanding of a paragraph rife with them. There is more to understanding literature, however, than simply the sum of its parts. While knowing various literary devices greatly aids in appreciation of a piece of writing, many more things come into play. One’s own personal grasp of language and personal experiences all color comprehension and thus study of literature. Also different from the study of a science is the assignation of worth. While deciding that a pH of 7 is wussy would be amusing, the statement has no scientific significance, whereas one can read a short story or a novel and decide whether the work has literary value or not.

Respond to “Story of an Hour”
This story is very feminist. Perhaps not blatantly so in modern times, but in the time that it was written it would have been feminist almost to the point of insult. Mrs. Mallard was probably married at a young age, perhaps an in a marriage arranged by her parents, and it was not a love match by any means. At the time this story was written marriage was more of an economic institution of necessity than the more modern idea of marriage matches made for emotion. While some people married for love, it was far from common, and as the story states, sometimes she had loved her husband, but often not. Therefore to her the death of her husband was something to be mourned, certainly, but also represented a new period of freedom for her. In that time it was expected that wives would bend to the will of their husband. So her new state of widowhood was one of freedom, not misery. Due to this fact and the fact that the reader is inside her head when she reaches this realization her elation is not something that inspires contempt and horror, but something that allows the reader to rejoice with her.

Admin Post- Week 1

All admin posts will be labeled as such. We'll post each week's topic(s) under these tags as well as any important info you might want to read. So if you decide not to read any other posts, please read these, they'll always be important. On that note:

This week's topics are :

• What is literature anyway?
• What does it mean to study literature.
• Respond to "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin, pg 227
  

Have at, everyone.