TyroCity: Major English Notes

The Penalty of Death

Major English XII Notes — Sat, 12 Jul 2014 05:41:42 +0000

The Penalty of Death
by H.L. Mencken

Analysis

At last, a writer who fully understands that all society wants from the justice system is “a healthy letting off of steam” (Mencken). In his satirical essay The Penalty of Death, H.L. Mencken, through use of humor, exaggeration, and mocking euphemisms and anecdotes, satires America’s use of capital punishment. His essay attacks in particular the purpose of the death penalty and the public’s light treatment of “hanging a man (or frying or gassing him)” (Mencken). Mencken’s informal essay is persuasive in the sense that it is satire and uses irony to support his thesis.

Should The Penalty of Death be taken literally, the thesis would explicitly be: “What I contend is that one of the prime objects of all judicial punishments is to afford the same grateful relief (a) to the immediate victims of the criminal punished, and (b) to the general body of moral and timorous men” (Mencken). As a satire however, Mencken ridicules this statement as he supports it, and therefore his thesis is implicit, expressing his criticism of the American treatment of the death penalty. Mencken speaks satirically in the essay as an upstanding citizen patriotically supporting his country’s justice system while, also patriotically, offering helpful suggestions to improve it. The syntax is kept simple and many colloquialisms and clichés are used to give the speaker a personal, conversational voice. Mencken writes mainly for the pro-death penalty audience, as this “patriotic” perspective is exaggerated to the point where it mocks these advocates. This tone is achieved through exaggeration, such as the first “argument against capital punishment” that is discussed, saying “that hanging a man…is degrading to those who have to do it and revolting to those who have to witness it” (Mencken). Mencken does not mention the obvious arguments against the death penalty, such as a person’s right to life, instead exaggerating the American priority on a person’s own comfort. Also contributing to the sarcastic, mocking tone is euphemism, such as the repeated use of “katharsis” as a blatant replacement for “revenge”.

The essay is structured at first in a problem-solution form. Mencken wastes no time refuting the two “arguments against capital punishment” that open the essay, and offers his satirical thesis about “grateful relief” as a solution to the problem of the death penalty’s apparent uselessness. The “grateful relief” solution is, of course, ironic; it implies that that absurd goal is the only real reason that American uses the death penalty. Through example, he supports his argument of katharsis until arriving at the issue of a prisoner’s lengthy stay on death row. Here, Mencken’s true intentions start to emerge as he begins sympathize with the condemned criminals. He describes how it is unjust that “a murderer, under the traditional American system, is tortured for what, to him, must seem a whole series of eternities” (Mencken). Now that the criminal is being viewed as human again, the Mencken’s moral argument of whether the death penalty is right becomes apparent. This ends the essay with the message that all people should be treated ethically, which is effective after the completion of four or five paragraphs that claim the death penalty is not ethical. The essay’s abrupt end, without any sort of conclusion, may be jarring to the reader but also ensures that the reader is actively thinking about Mencken’s final message when the essay is put down.

In these final paragraphs, Mencken uses strong imagery such as being “tortured…a whole series of eternities” as an appeal to pathos and ethos, stimulating the reader’s emotions and sense of ethics. While this appeal to pathos closes the essay on a serious note, the rest of the satire appeals mostly to ethos and logos. Logos is present everywhere, particularly in Mencken’s refute of an executioner’s misery and his introduction of katharsis as a reason for the penalty, which he, in sarcasm and irony, supports heavily. As the essay is a satire, ethos is called on in nearly every point Mencken makes, as he suggests “you’re not anything like the people I’m mocking, are you?”

The Penalty of Death is very effective in its delivery of Mencken’s opinions. Mencken’s sense of humor makes it clear from the beginning what he intends to discuss and how he will do it, and his detailed support of his satirical thesis “katharsis” makes his message enjoyable as well as informative. His satirical voice is believable as pro-death penalty American, but his meaning is clearly driven home when the essay, like the life of a doomed prisoner, is ended before its natural close. As Mencken suggests, maybe the judicial system needs a new “healthy letting off of steam”.

A Day in the Life of "Salaryman"

Major English XII Notes — Sat, 12 Jul 2014 05:41:42 +0000

A Day in the Life of “Salaryman”
– John Burgess

Background (With the compassion of 2 different stories)

A slave is a person who works extremely hard under a horrible condition. He also needs to work for a long time but with very limited benefit. In George Orwells Down and Out in Paris and London, Orwell says that the dishwasher is a slave. However, is not salary-man in A Day in the Life of Salary-man by John Burgess also a slave? Actually, the answer is no. In my opinion, dishwasher is a slave, but salary-man is not.
First of all, their working hours are distinctly different. According to Orwell, George works from seven in the morning until a quarter past nine at night for six days a week. Sometimes he has to go to work on his off day too. Differently, salary-man only works from ten past nine in the morning till seven in the evening for only five days, and he does not need to work on his off days. The lunch break of Salary-man and dishwasher are different too. As George says, This was our slack time-only relatively slack, however, for we had only ten minutes for lunch, and we never got through it uninterrupted (Orwell 64). In contrast, salary-man has much more time than dishwasher during the lunch break. The salary-man does more things during this break than the dishwasher does. Over lunch, they talk of their passion, golf At lunch, salary-man sometimes manages to stop into a driving range on the roof of a building near his company (Burgess 255). Moreover, salary-man and dishwashers lives after work are totally different. For dishwasher, he has nothing to do after work because he has only few hours left and not even enough for sleeping. Nevertheless, the salary-man has a good life after work. He may have been included in a dinner at a nearby restaurant and enjoy his moment.

And the writer thus, compares and tabulates a single day life in the story by giving the following distinct background in the lines that follows.

Zeroing in on Science Friction

Major English XII Notes — Sat, 12 Jul 2014 05:41:42 +0000

Background: From Physics to Fiction

As a physics major in the 1960s, Goshgarian and a few friends were drawn to their English professor, the late James Hensel, whom he calls “the teacher of all teachers.” Goshgarian named a character in Elixir for Hensel, and another is named for former WPI president Harry P. Storke.

“We were literature geeks in an otherwise science geeky kind of place,” Goshgarian says. “In the afternoon, after classes were out, we would meet up in Jim Hensel’s office to talk about everything from Charles Dickens to Tolstoy to Albert Einstein.” The young Goshgarian put his writing talents to use as an editor of Tech News and the Peddler, and started an offbeat humor magazine called Absolute Zero.

“I was reading science fiction by the pound,” he says. By his sophomore year, Goshgarian knew that he would work with words rather than atoms. “I liked words. I could see them and manipulate them. I could not see atoms, didn’t quite believe in them.” After earning a master’s degree and doctorate in English, he joined the English faculty at Northeastern University.

In the early 1970s Goshgarian’s department head challenged him to create a new elective to boost enrollment. He saw his chance to teach quality science fiction as a reputable literary form. Some 30 years later, his courses are popular and well-respected, although parents occasionally balk, “My child is taking what?” In addition to science fiction, Goshgarian teaches a detective fiction class and has developed courses in horror fiction and modern bestsellers. He also offers a graduate-level creative writing seminar.

Required reading for Goshgarian’s classes ranges from Edgar Allen Poe to Ray Bradbury, Arthur C. Clark and Dean Koontz. A centerpiece of the science fiction curriculum is Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Discussions are supplemented with movies and guest speakers, which have included best-selling authors Stephen King, Tess Gerritsen, Robert B. Parker and Michael Palmer.

Goshgarian wants his writing students to learn “the ability to look at another person’s writing the way a carpenter looks at a house–to study the architecture of it, the freshness of the language, the narrative thrust that keeps the story going. And to see that the bones have flesh on them, that you have characters who are interesting and aren’t cardboard cut-outs.

“My goal is to make them better readers, too. That’s the secret of good writing. We do a lot of close reading. That’s what Jim Hensel taught me, way back at Worcester Tech.”

A Marriage Proposal

Major English XII Notes — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 05:41:42 +0000

by Anton Chekov

Plot synopsis

Ivan Vassiliyitch Lomov, a long-time neighbor of Stepan Stepanovitch Chubukov, has come to propose marriage to Chubukov’s 25-year-old daughter, Natalia. After he has asked and received joyful permission to marry Natalia, she is invited into the room, and he tries to convey to her the proposal. Lomov is a hypochondriac, and, while trying to make clear his reasons for being there, he gets into an argument with Natalia about The Oxen Meadows, a disputed piece of land between their respective properties, which results in him having “palpitations” and numbness in his leg. After her father notices they are arguing, he joins in, and then sends Ivan out of the house. While Stepan rants about Lomov, he expresses his shock that “this fool dares to make you (Natalia) a proposal of marriage!” This news she immediately starts into hysterics, begging for her father to bring him back. He does, and Natalia and Ivan get into a second big argument, this time about the superiority of their respective hunting dogs, Otkatai and Ugadi. Ivan collapses from his exhaustion over arguing, and father and daughter fear he’s dead. However, after a few minutes he regains consciousness, and Tschubukov all but forces him and his daughter to accept the proposal with a kiss. Immediately following the kiss, the couple get into another argument.

Further Understanding

The Play, “A Marriage Proposal”, shows how consideration of property and even our pride in property override other feelings and emotions like those generally associated with love and marriage. Even marriage is prompted by economic considerations, not by emotions.

Stepan Stepanovitch Tschubukov and Ivan Vassiliyitch Lomov were neighbours in a village. Natalia Stepanovna was the daughter of Tschubukov. Lomov a man of thirty-five wanted to marry. He thought Natalia was good at farm work and she was not bad looking. So he came to the house of Tschubukov one evening to propose to Natalia. Naturally he was in his best clothes befitting the occasion of a marriage proposal. Tschubukov received him cordially in his reception room. Like every young man going to make a marriage proposal Lomov was also excited and nervous. After some nervous stammering, he told Tschubokov that he wanted Natalia’s hand in marriage. Tschubokov was very excited and happy at the proposal. He went out and sent Natalia into the room to meet the suitor. Natalia was not told of the purpose of Lomov. Natalia and Lomov began to talk.

Lomov was more nervous as he was facing the bride. He made a strong preface before coming to the proposal. He told Natalia about how the Lomovs and the Tschubukovs had been good neighbours on good terms for many years. In this context, he mentioned that his meadow touched the birch woods of Tschubukov. Natalia was surprised to hear that the meadows belonged to Lomov. She claimed that the plot of land belonged to them, the Tschubukovs. A bitter quarrel ensued. Lomov claimed it belonged to him and Natalia too claimed it to be theirs. Lomov forgot his original purpose. They called each other names, even though a little while ago they were full of good neighbourly feelings. Tschubukov came in and heard their quarrel. He too claimed that the meadow belonged to him. The quarrel grew even bitterer. They called each other names and began to expose the scandals of each others’ families. Lomov had a weak heart. He used to have palpitation in the heart. He was excited and he fainted. He rose and left the house. At this juncture, Tschubukov remarked that such a fool had dared to come seeking the hand of Natalia.

The moment she heard that he had come to propose to her, Natalia changed her tone. She asked her father to bring back Lomov. Her self interest overruled all other considerations like her loyalty to her family. Lomov came back. Natalia was all politeness. She even conceded that the meadow belonged to Lomov. After all, if they were married, the meadow would come to be hers only. Lomov informed that he would go hunting after the harvest. He was sorry that his dog Ugadi limped and he began to praise his dog. He thought that a hundred and twenty five roubles that he had paid for it was very cheap for such a good dog. Natalia, however, thought that it was a very high price because her father had paid only eighty-five roubles for their dog Otkatai, which was a better dog than Ugadi.

Lomov disagreed and asserted that Otkatai had a lower jaw and Ugadi was a far better dog than Otkatai. Once again their pride in their dogs led to another quarrel. Tschubukov came in and joined the quarrel. Lomov once again got excited and he fainted.

Tschubukov who knew the importance of getting his daughter married, at once joined the hands of Natalia and Lomov and declared that Natalia agreed to the match. Natalia too, declared that she was willing and Lomov declared that he too, was happy. Tschubukov shouted for champagne to celebrate the intended marriage.

Shall I Compare thee a Summer’s Day

Major English XII Notes — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 05:41:42 +0000

SONNET

PARAPHRASE

Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?	Shall I compare you to a summer's day?
Thou art more lovely and more temperate:	You are more lovely and more constant:
Rough winds do shake the darling buds of May,	Rough winds shake the beloved buds of May
And summer's lease hath all too short a date:	And summer is far too short:
Sometime too hot the eye of heaven shines,	At times the sun is too hot,
And often is his gold complexion dimm'd;	Or often goes behind the clouds;
And every fair from fair sometime declines,	And everything beautiful sometime will lose its beauty,
By chance or nature's changing course untrimm'd;	By misfortune or by nature's planned out course.
But thy eternal summer shall not fade	But your youth shall not fade,
Nor lose possession of that fair thou owest;	Nor will you lose the beauty that you possess;
Nor shall Death brag thou wander'st in his shade,	Nor will death claim you for his own,
When in eternal lines to time thou growest:	Because in my eternal verse you will live forever.
So long as men can breathe or eyes can see,	So long as there are people on this earth,
So long lives this and this gives life to thee.	So long will this poem live on, making you immortal.

The Mad Gardener’s Song

Major English XII Notes — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 05:41:42 +0000

by Lewis Carroll

Summary and Critical Analysis

The poem ‘The Mad Gardener’s Song’ by Lewis Carroll contains the several disjointed stanzas which have a stupid mad logic as a common factor. The first line of each stanza begins with “He though he saw….” And the third line of each stanza with “He looked again, and found it was”. This revised vision leads the personal to a conclusion in the last two lines of each stanza. However, the conclusion does not match the premise from which it is drawn.
The poem starts in a common way that the speaker thinks that he saw an elephant practicing a flute but suddenly the stanza encounters with something very uncommon that the elephant practicing the flute comes to be the letter form his wife which is the bitterness of life, for him. Similarly the poem begins and ends with nonsense rhyme. The speaker says in the second stanza he thinks he saw a buffalo on the chimney but when he looks it again he finds the buffalo was his sister’s husband’s niece whom he doesn’t like because he was burden for him that’s why he wanted to send him to Police Station.

Similarly, the speaker thinks that he saw a rattle snake which questioned him in Greek but latter on next look it was the middle of next week and he has regret for it that it cannot speak. Again, he thinks that he saw a Banker’s clerk descending from the bus but he finds it was a hippopotamus and if he stay for the dinner, there won’t be enough food left for them. Similarly, he thinks he saw a Kangaroo working at a coffee-mill but in real it was a Vegetable- Pill which can make him ill if he eats it. Next he imagines a coach driven by four horses standing besides his bed but it turns out to be a bear without head. He pities upon it thinking that it is waiting to be fed.

Similarly, the poem moves ahead with disjoint stanzas and mad logic. The speaker thinks that he saw an Albatross fluttering round the lamp but it was a Penny-Postage-Stamp in real and he advised it to go home because the nights are very damp. The garden door opening with a key turns out to be double role of three and he thinks that all its misery is clear to him. Finally the argument that proved he was the Pope turns out to be a bar of soap and he thinks that it takes away all the hope.

The Mad Gardener’s Song is composed in nine disjointed stanzas. These stanzas are similar and related only in that they follow the rhyme scheme ab ab db and all of them have a mad logic. The first line of each stanza begins with “He thought he saw….” And the third line of each stanza is “He looked again and found it was….” The last two lines carry the conclusion of the stanza but the conclusion does not match the premise from which it is drawn.

In conclusion, the whole poem is nonsense. It is simply a humorous poem written for the purpose of laughing and entertaining. If we see it deeply, it somehow turns as a satire for those people whom the poet doesn’t like and wants to show his anger to them.

Whatever is the reason, but in common this is a nonsense poem written with mad logic. The poem associates disparate elements without any intention of making sense. Although the cause and effects don’t match some stanza seems to be meaningful. Hence, the use of the uncommon style and nonsense logic as a common factor, this poem has become the example of a nonsense rhyme.

The Jar

Major English XII Notes — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 05:41:42 +0000

by Luigi Pirandello

An examination of the source of joy in a person’s life, The Jar is a thoughtful drama with a strong positive message. Where does joy come from? At a young age, Anna is presented with a mysterious jar and thinks its contents are hers to keep. As she gets older, she finds that her life is not all she expected and questions the gift that the rest of her family seems to enjoy. Meanwhile, she has neglected the opportunity to connect with others around her, including an elderly neighbor in need. Only when she reaches out for help is the secret meaning of the jar revealed.

Dream Variations

Major English XI Notes — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 05:41:42 +0000

Dream Variations
by Langston Huges

Summary of Dream Variations

The poem Dream Variations by Langston Hughes is a nostalgic lyric which poignantly expresses the singer’s wish for a carefree life away from color persecution and racial discrimination. This poem is notable for its musical changes. In Hughes’s own words, his poetry is about “workers, roustabouts and singers, and job hunters… in New York, ….in Washington or… in Chicago- people up today and down tomorrow, working this week and fired the next, beaten and baffled, but determined not to be wholly beaten…”

The poet wants to enjoy different types of games in some sunny place. He likes to move and dance until the end of the happy day. Then in the evening he wants to rest under a tall tree until it is dark. This is his dream. But the reality is different. He has to work in spite of the hot sun. He keeps on working as if he were dancing and moving round. Because he is very busy, the day passes so quickly. He feels weak in the evening and wants to have a rest. But his desire to take a rest is incomplete. His desire to find a tall, slim tree remains incomplete in the city.

The night comes painfully reminding him that he is black, not white; like the night which nobody likes. In this poem the poet longs for the freedom of a less complicated world. This nostalgic look at Africa was typical of the work of many writers at that time.

The first stanza describes the poet’s dream. He wishes for a carefree life away from color persecution and racial discrimination. In his dream even the nigh is not black: it is only dark. In the first dream he is not in the city. He is completely engrossed in the rural area. But in the second stanza, he dreams after the tiring day’s work. The dream to take a rest under a tree remains unfulfilled. The first stanza describes his nostalgic feelings which he enjoyed in the past. In the second one his dream is incomplete. There are different types of dreams described in the poem. That’s why the poem is entitled ‘Dream Variations’

In the first stanza, there are nine lines, but in the second one there are eight lines. In the first stanza we find twenty-two stressed syllables and in the second there are twenty-one stressed ones. In the first stanza mostly we find unstressed syllables between stressed ones, but in the second stanza we find two lines where there is not an unstressed syllable between the stressed syllables.” Dance! Whirl? Whirl! … A tall, slim, tree … “This quick tempo matches with the sense. To quote Alexander Pope, “The sound must seem an echo to the sense”.

The Big Fish

Major English XII Notes — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 05:41:42 +0000

by Daniel Wallace

Summary

Edward Bloom (Albert Finney), a charismatic teller of tall-tales, is a source of frustration to his grown son, William (Billy Crudup). At Wills wedding, Edward embarrasses him by telling the guests an impossible-sounding story about the day of Will’s birth, involving a giant catfish that ate his wedding ring. Will believes that his father tells lies to get attention and confronts him angrily. They don’t speak to each other for three years.

Will receives news that Edward is very ill, and that he might not have long to live. Will and his pregnant wife Josephine (Marion Cotillard) travel to Ashton, Alabama, Wills hometown. Edward is weak and bedridden, but he and Will finally speak again. Will asks to know the truth about his father’s life. Edward retells his version of his childhood.

In a flashback, a young Edward and his friends meet a local witch (Helena Bonham Carter), who has a glass eye which reveals the eventual death of anyone who looks into it. Edward sees how he will die (though the audience does not), and decides that he can now take unreasonable risks because he knows they cannot kill him. Soon afterward, Edward begins to grow at an alarming rate and is hooked up to a machine in bed, as his muscles and bones cannot keep up with his “body’s ambition.” In an encyclopedia, young Edward reads that a goldfish will remain small if kept in a small bowl, but will grow bigger if kept in a larger area. He decides that, because he is growing so fast, he is meant for bigger things.

As a teenager, Edward Bloom (now Ewan McGregor) is a star athlete, entrepreneur, and local hero. When a mysterious “monster” comes to town and eats livestock during the night, he volunteers to talk to it and get it to leave. Edward tracks down the culprit, a gloomy but goodhearted giant named Carl (Matthew McGory), and convinces him to move to a bigger city. Edward explains that Ashton is too small a town for men of Carl’s size and of Edward’s ambition. The two leave town, and Edward is given the key to Ashton by the mayor.

They approach a forest, which Edward wants to take a shortcut through. He promises to meet Carl on the other side, and ventures through the woods (which are full of thorns, spiders, and bees). He stumbles across the town of Spectre, a seemingly perfect place where no one wears shoes. After spending the day there, he shocks the townspeople by politely excusing himself to get on with his journey. His shoes are flung up onto a high rope along with many other pairs that were taken from each townsperson upon their arrival to Spectre in an effort to keep them there, but Edward continues his trek barefoot. He promises a smitten little girl named Jenny that he will return someday.

Edward and Carl stumble upon a circus, where Carl is immediately hired as an attraction by the owner and ringmaster, Amos Calloway (Danny DeVito) and his clown/attorney Mr. Soggybottom (Deep Roy). Edward glimpses a beautiful girl in the big top audience, but she is whisked out the door with the crowd before he can speak to her. She turns out to be a family friend of Calloway. Certain that she is the woman he will marry, Edward begs Calloway for a job, asking for only one piece of information about the girl for every month of work. Edward toils at the circus, and learns that the girl loves daffodils and music, that she is going to college, and that her name is Sandra Templeton. Edward bids farewell to Mr. Calloway (who also happens to be a werewolf), and sets off to find Sandra.

Meanwhile, the elderly Edward befriends his daughter-in-law, Josephine, but is still at odds with his son, who believes him to be a liar. Will begs his father to be himself, but Edward firmly retorts Ive been nothing but myself since the day I was born, and if you cant see that, its your failing, not mine!

Upon reaching the university where Sandra Templeton (Alison Lohman) is a student, teenaged Edward finally meets her and explains that he loves her. She is kind to him and had heard of his accomplishments in Ashton, but is already engaged (to Edwards hapless rival, Ashton native Don Price). Still determined, Edward finds not-so-subtle ways to woo Sandra. One morning, Sandra awakens to find her lawn covered in daffodils provided by Edward. However, Don Price appears and begins to brutally beat Edward, who had promised Sandra he would not fight back. But as Sandra sees Dons cruelty, she breaks the engagement, and eventually does marry Edward.

While recovering in the hospital from his fight injuries, Edward receives a draft notice, forcing him to enlist for the Korean War. While sad to leave his new wife, Edward knows from the glass eye that nothing in the war will kill him. Thus, he volunteers for the most dangerous missions in hopes of being sent home sooner. While parachuting into a Korean army camp during a performance for the troops, Edward meets struggling Siamese twin singers Ping and Jing. He offers to help them break into American show business if they can help him get home. However, the Army lists him as missing and presumably dead, sending a telegram to a heartbroken Sandra (in the present day, Sandra finds the telegram and shows it to Will, proving that there is some truth to Edwards stories). Edward eventually rejoins his wife, and takes a job as a travelling salesman to buy them a better house.

In line at a bank one day, the younger Edward encounters Norther Winslow (Steve Buscemi), a native of Spectre he had met years before. Norther has since become a criminal, and Edward is roped into assisting him in robbing the bank. However, the bank has literally no cash for them to steal. Norther resolves to go to Wall Street where the money is. He later sends Edward $10,000, which he uses to buy a house for Sandra and a young Will.

Years later, Edward is nearing middle age. He reconciles with Jenny (also played by Bonham Carter), the little girl he met in Spectre, who now lives in a dilapidated old house and gives piano lessons. Seeing the condition of her home, Edward begins to fix it up himself, with the help of Carl the giant. After he restores the house, Jenny reveals that she still has feelings for him after many years. Edward gently tells her that he loves only Sandra, and departs.

Back in Ashton, elderly Edward weakens more and more. However, he repeatedly tells his family that this is not the death he saw in the eye. Will spends some time alone, still believing that he will never have a chance to know his fathers true character. Shortly after, Edward has a stroke and is hospitalized. Will encounters the family doctor, who had delivered him and is now treating Edward. Will asks to know the real story of his birth, having heard only his fathers catfish story in the past. The doctor explains that it was simply a normal birth, and though Edward exaggerated it, hearing his story was entertaining and comforting. Will decides to reconcile with his dying father.

At Edwards bedside, Will steps into his fathers shoes and begins an impromptu story: Edward regains strength, and he and Will escape the hospital. Jumping into Edwards old car, they speed to a nearby river, where all their family and friends are waiting. Instead of a funeral, they are holding a goodbye party, and Edward happily bids them farewell as he transforms into a catfish and swims away.

Will is the only one present for Edwards death, and is deeply happy that they connected at last. At Edwards funeral, Will is astonished to see characters from Edwards stories show up to attend: Mr. Calloway, Carl (not a giant, but still very tall), Ping and Jing (not conjoined twins, but identical), and many others. Edward had combined his love of storytelling with his own reality, which finally makes sense to Will. When his
own son is born, Will passes the stories on to him.

Contributed by bored_with_chicken

Major Characters of The Great Gatsby

Major English XII Notes — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 05:41:42 +0000

Jay Gatsby

The title character of The Great Gatsby is a young man, around thirty years old, who rose from an impoverished childhood in rural North Dakota to become fabulously wealthy. However, he achieved this lofty goal by participating in organized crime, including distributing illegal alcohol and trading in stolen securities. From his early youth, Gatsby despised poverty and longed for wealth and sophistication—he dropped out of St. Olaf’s College after only two weeks because he could not bear the janitorial job with which he was paying his tuition. Though Gatsby has always wanted to be rich, his main motivation in acquiring his fortune was his love for Daisy Buchanan, whom he met as a young military officer in Louisville before leaving to fight in World War I in 1917. Gatsby immediately fell in love with Daisy’s aura of luxury, grace, and charm, and lied to her about his own background in order to convince her that he was good enough for her. Daisy promised to wait for him when he left for the war, but married Tom Buchanan in 1919, while Gatsby was studying at Oxford after the war in an attempt to gain an education. From that moment on, Gatsby dedicated himself to winning Daisy back, and his acquisition of millions of dollars, his purchase of a gaudy mansion on West Egg, and his lavish weekly parties are all merely means to that end.

Fitzgerald delays the introduction of most of this information until fairly late in the novel. Gatsby’s reputation precedes him—Gatsby himself does not appear in a speaking role until Chapter 3. Fitzgerald initially presents Gatsby as the aloof, enigmatic host of the unbelievably opulent parties thrown every week at his mansion. He appears surrounded by spectacular luxury, courted by powerful men and beautiful women. He is the subject of a whirlwind of gossip throughout New York and is already a kind of legendary celebrity before he is ever introduced to the reader. Fitzgerald propels the novel forward through the early chapters by shrouding Gatsby’s background and the source of his wealth in mystery (the reader learns about Gatsby’s childhood in Chapter 6 and receives definitive proof of his criminal dealings in Chapter 7). As a result, the reader’s first, distant impressions of Gatsby strike quite a different note from that of the lovesick, naive young man who emerges during the later part of the novel.

Fitzgerald uses this technique of delayed character revelation to emphasize the theatrical quality of Gatsby’s approach to life, which is an important part of his personality. Gatsby has literally created his own character, even changing his name from James Gatz to Jay Gatsby to represent his reinvention of himself. As his relentless quest for Daisy demonstrates, Gatsby has an extraordinary ability to transform his hopes and dreams into reality; at the beginning of the novel, he appears to the reader just as he desires to appear to the world. This talent for self-invention is what gives Gatsby his quality of “greatness”: indeed, the title “The Great Gatsby” is reminiscent of billings for such vaudeville magicians as “The Great Houdini” and “The Great Blackstone,” suggesting that the persona of Jay Gatsby is a masterful illusion.

Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us.

As the novel progresses and Fitzgerald deconstructs Gatsby’s self-presentation, Gatsby reveals himself to be an innocent, hopeful young man who stakes everything on his dreams, not realizing that his dreams are unworthy of him. Gatsby invests Daisy with an idealistic perfection that she cannot possibly attain in reality and pursues her with a passionate zeal that blinds him to her limitations. His dream of her disintegrates, revealing the corruption that wealth causes and the unworthiness of the goal, much in the way Fitzgerald sees the American dream crumbling in the 1920s, as America’s powerful optimism, vitality, and individualism become subordinated to the amoral pursuit of wealth.
Gatsby is contrasted most consistently with Nick. Critics point out that the former, passionate and active, and the latter, sober and reflective, seem to represent two sides of Fitzgerald’s personality. Additionally, whereas Tom is a cold-hearted, aristocratic bully, Gatsby is a loyal and good-hearted man. Though his lifestyle and attitude differ greatly from those of George Wilson, Gatsby and Wilson share the fact that they both lose their love interest to Tom.

Nick Carraway

If Gatsby represents one part of Fitzgerald’s personality, the flashy celebrity who pursued and glorified wealth in order to impress the woman he loved, then Nick represents another part: the quiet, reflective Midwesterner adrift in the lurid East. A young man (he turns thirty during the course of the novel) from Minnesota, Nick travels to New York in 1922 to learn the bond business. He lives in the West Egg district of Long Island, next door to Gatsby. Nick is also Daisy’s cousin, which enables him to observe and assist the resurgent love affair between Daisy and Gatsby. As a result of his relationship to these two characters, Nick is the perfect choice to narrate the novel, which functions as a personal memoir of his experiences with Gatsby in the summer of 1922.

Nick is also well suited to narratingThe Great Gatsbybecause of his temperament. As he tells the reader in Chapter 1, he is tolerant, open-minded, quiet, and a good listener, and, as a result, others tend to talk to him and tell him their secrets. Gatsby, in particular, comes to trust him and treat him as a confidant. Nick generally assumes a secondary role throughout the novel, preferring to describe and comment on events rather than dominate the action. Often, however, he functions as Fitzgerald’s voice, as in his extended meditation on time and the American dream at the end of Chapter 9.

Insofar as Nick plays a role inside the narrative, he evidences a strongly mixed reaction to life on the East Coast, one that creates a powerful internal conflict that he does not resolve until the end of the book. On the one hand, Nick is attracted to the fast-paced, fun-driven lifestyle of New York. On the other hand, he finds that lifestyle grotesque and damaging. This inner conflict is symbolized throughout the book by Nick’s romantic affair with Jordan Baker. He is attracted to her vivacity and her sophistication just as he is repelled by her dishonesty and her lack of consideration for other people.

Nick states that there is a “quality of distortion” to life in New York, and this lifestyle makes him lose his equilibrium, especially early in the novel, as when he gets drunk at Gatsby’s party in Chapter 2. After witnessing the unraveling of Gatsby’s dream and presiding over the appalling spectacle of Gatsby’s funeral, Nick realizes that the fast life of revelry on the East Coast is a cover for the terrifying moral emptiness that the valley of ashes symbolizes. Having gained the maturity that this insight demonstrates, he returns to Minnesota in search of a quieter life structured by more traditional moral values.

Daisy Buchanan

Partially based on Fitzgerald’s wife, Zelda, Daisy is a beautiful young woman from Louisville, Kentucky. She is Nick’s cousin and the object of Gatsby’s love. As a young debutante in Louisville, Daisy was extremely popular among the military officers stationed near her home, including Jay Gatsby. Gatsby lied about his background to Daisy, claiming to be from a wealthy family in order to convince her that he was worthy of her. Eventually, Gatsby won Daisy’s heart, and they made love before Gatsby left to fight in the war. Daisy promised to wait for Gatsby, but in 1919 she chose instead to marry Tom Buchanan, a young man from a solid, aristocratic family who could promise her a wealthy lifestyle and who had the support of her parents.

After 1919, Gatsby dedicated himself to winning Daisy back, making her the single goal of all of his dreams and the main motivation behind his acquisition of immense wealth through criminal activity. To Gatsby, Daisy represents the paragon of perfection—she has the aura of charm, wealth, sophistication, grace, and aristocracy that he longed for as a child in North Dakota and that first attracted him to her. In reality, however, Daisy falls far short of Gatsby’s ideals. She is beautiful and charming, but also fickle, shallow, bored, and sardonic. Nick characterizes her as a careless person who smashes things up and then retreats behind her money. Daisy proves her real nature when she chooses Tom over Gatsby in Chapter 7, then allows Gatsby to take the blame for killing Myrtle Wilson even though she herself was driving the car. Finally, rather than attend Gatsby’s funeral, Daisy and Tom move away, leaving no forwarding address.

Like Zelda Fitzgerald, Daisy is in love with money, ease, and material luxury. She is capable of affection (she seems genuinely fond of Nick and occasionally seems to love Gatsby sincerely), but not of sustained loyalty or care. She is indifferent even to her own infant daughter, never discussing her and treating her as an afterthought when she is introduced in Chapter 7. In Fitzgerald’s conception of America in the 1920s, Daisy represents the amoral values of the aristocratic East Egg set.

Wet Saturday

Major English XI Notes — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 05:41:42 +0000

Wet Saturday
by John Collier

Summary of Wet Saturday

It was a Saturday in July. The weather was wet Mr. Princey, his wife, his daughter, Millicent and his son. George was in their house. They were discussing the bad thing Millicent had done. She had killed the local priest; Withers Millicent had been in love with Withers. She met him in the stable. He told her that he was going to marry another girl. Millicent became very angry and hit Withers on the head with a metal stick. She killed him.

Mr. Princey thought no-one would have seen Withers come to their house. He was saying, “Who would kill Withers?” when a man called Captain Smollett came in. Captain Smollett laughed because he thought Mr. Princey was making a joke.

Mr. Princey asked Smollett to go to the stable. They told him that Millicent had killed Withers because they were afraid Smollett would guess the truth anyway. Mr. Princey said he would kill Smollett if he told anyone that Millicent had Withers. Mr. Princey said he couldn’t trust Smollett, so he made it look as if Smollett had murdered Withers. George hit Smollett in the face to make it look like there had been a fight. He made Smollett touch the post that used to kill Withers, so that his fingerprints would be on it. Mr. Princey pointed a gun at Smollett and forced him to drag the dead body into a drain.

Now many things made it look as if Smollett had killed Withers. Mr. Princey said he did this to make sure Smollett would never tell anyone about the murder. However, as soon as Smollett had left the house, Mr. Princey called the police.

She was a Phantom of Delight

Major English XII Notes — Sun, 08 Apr 2012 05:41:42 +0000

by WILLIAM WORDSWORTH

Wordsworth writes about his changing perspective on his wife, Mary Hutchinson, who he describes as the “Phantom of delight.” At first he sees her as he did as a youth, as a spirit “to haunt, to startle, to way-lay,” but by the third stanza, he sees her with mature eyes. She has become a real woman with “reason firm, the temperate will,/Endurance, foresight, strength, and skill.

Figurative Analysis:Wordsworth compares his wife to a “Phantom of delight” to show how smitten he was with her in his youth. He calls her an “Apparition” as well and givers her stars for eyes. He continues using metaphors to describe her change, comparing her to a machine that can travel between life and death. She has morphed from a phantom to an angel by the end of the poem as Wordsworth illustrates her change from mystery to reality. The poem reflects Wordsworth’s emotions tempered by the tranquility of wisdom through his use of figurative language.

Application of Poetry Terms:1. Simile: Wordsworth utilizes similes and metaphors throughout the poem. For example, he compares his wife to twilight, writing “Her eyes as stars of Twilight fair;/Like Twilight’s, too, her dusky hair.” Wordsworth uses similes throughout the poem to show first the unreachable qualities of his wife and later her real qualities as well.

Rhyme Scheme: Wordsworth utilizes a consistent rhyme scheme throughout the poem. The scheme is AABBCCDDEE in each ten-line stanza. The rhyme scheme unifies the poem and emphasizes the beauty of the woman through the natural beauty of the rhyme. The use of rhyming couplets may reveal a simplicity of purpose as well.
Alliteration: Wordsworth uses alliteration for aural effect in the poem. For example, he repeats the soft “s” consonant writing “For transient sorrows, simple wiles,” possibly to slow down the speaker and affect the speed at which the poem is read aloud for emphasis of his wife’s real qualities. Also, the soft “s” sound likely reflects the softness of the woman, a quality Wordsworth is trying to demonstrate in the poem.

Poem Lines
She was a Phantom of delight
When first she gleamed upon my sight;
A lovely Apparition, sent
To be a moment’s ornament;
Her eyes as stars of Twilight fair;
Like Twilight’s, too, her dusky hair;
But all things else about her drawn
From May-time and the cheerful Dawn;
A dancing Shape, an Image gay,
To haunt, to startle, and way-lay.
I saw her upon nearer view,
A Spirit, yet a Woman too!
Her household motions light and free,
And steps of virgin-liberty;
A countenance in which did meet
Sweet records, promises as sweet;
A Creature not too bright or good
For human nature’s daily food;
For transient sorrows, simple wiles,
Praise, blame, love, kisses, tears, and smiles.
And now I see with eye serene
The very pulse of the machine;
A Being breathing thoughtful breath,
A Traveller between life and death;
The reason firm, the temperate will,
Endurance, foresight, strength, and skill;
A perfect Woman, nobly planned,
To warn, to comfort, and command;
And yet a Spirit still, and bright
With something of angelic light.