TyroCity: Major English Notes

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.

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”.

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.”

The Little Girl Saw Her First Troop Parade

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

by Carl Sandburg

Summary and Critical Analysis

When the little girl saw the troop marching, she asked the speaker what they were. H e replied that they were soldiers. Then she asked what soldiers are for. He replied that they are for war and that they fight and try to kill as many of the other side as they can. Then the girl remained silent and thought seriously. After a while she said that she knew something. She thought that one day when the soldiers fought nobody would come back. ‘The Little Girl Saw Her First Troop Parade’ is a short prose poem shows the bitter reality of war through the innocent perspective of a young girl.
A little girl sees a group of soldiers in a parade, for the first time in her life. She asks the speaker who they are. She gets the reply that they are soldiers. Her next question is who soldiers are. The speaker again replies that the soldiers are meant for war. They fight and try to kill as many soldiers as possible of the other side. When the little girl gets this reply she is silent and thinks for a while. Then she says that she has come to know something.When she is asked what it is, then she replies that “Sometime they will give a war and nobody will come.”

The history of the world is full of war in which millions of people have lost their lives. War is always evil and destructive. It affects not only those who are fighting but also numerous innocent people who have nothing to gain from the war. In spite of all these bitter realities, people are still fighting and killing each other. The present poem begins as a casual conversation between a little girl and a grown up man, but in the last line the girl presents such an insight (wisdom) that even the grownups rarely thinks about. The little girl says that there will (might) be a day when people will give a war but no one will come to fight. This line may be signaling towards that terrible war which will lead to the ultimate annihilation of the human race form the earth. Therefore, when there will be a war nobody will comes because those who have gone to war will never return, and there will be no one left anymore.

The poem may be taken as a bitter satire for the nations that are competing to accumulate (collect) as many nuclear weapons as possible. This context in the preparation of war, when a large mass of people are living in hunger seems to be futile even for an innocent girl but this is something that the so called intellectual and leaders have failed to understand. When Sandburg presents this insight (wisdom) for the perspective of a little the message becomes even more poignant.

‘The Little Girl Saw Her First Troop Parade’ is a prose poem which unfolds (open) dramatically in the form of a dialogue. But there are certain special characteristics that distinguish it from ordinary poem. The poetic elements like alliteration and assonance can be found in abundance and each line of the poem has a rhythmic quality. The success of the poem also lies in its capacity of giving each a starting (shocking) message with the use of very few words in the form of a causal talk. Like William Wordsworth Sandburg in this poem has used the language of everyday speech.

Chapter 9: The Great Gatsby

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

Summary

Writing two years after Gatsby’s death, Nick describes the events that surrounded the funeral. Swarms of reporters, journalists, and gossipmongers descend on the mansion in the aftermath of the murder. Wild, untrue stories, more exaggerated than the rumors about Gatsby when he was throwing his parties, circulate about the nature of Gatsby’s relationship to Myrtle and Wilson. Feeling that Gatsby would not want to go through a funeral alone, Nick tries to hold a large funeral for him, but all of Gatsby’s former friends and acquaintances have either disappeared—Tom and Daisy, for instance, move away with no forwarding address—or refuse to come, like Meyer Wolfshiem and Klipspringer. The latter claims that he has a social engagement in Westport and asks Nick to send along his tennis shoes. Outraged, Nick hangs up on him. The only people to attend the funeral are Nick, Owl Eyes, a few servants, and Gatsby’s father, Henry C. Gatz, who has come all the way from Minnesota. Henry Gatz is proud of his son and saves a picture of his house. He also fills Nick in on Gatsby’s early life, showing him a book in which a young Gatsby had written a schedule for self-improvement.

Sick of the East and its empty values, Nick decides to move back to the Midwest. He breaks off his relationship with Jordan, who suddenly claims that she has become engaged to another man. Just before he leaves, Nick encounters Tom on Fifth Avenue in New York City. Nick initially refuses to shake Tom’s hand but eventually accepts. Tom tells him that he was the one who told Wilson that Gatsby owned the car that killed Myrtle, and describes how greatly he suffered when he had to give up the apartment he kept in the city for his affair. He says that Gatsby deserved to die. Nick comes to the conclusion that Tom and Daisy are careless and uncaring people and that they destroy people and things, knowing that their money will shield them from ever having to face any negative consequences.

Nick muses that, in some ways, this story is a story of the West even though it has taken place entirely on the East Coast. Nick, Jordan, Tom, and Daisy are all from west of the Appalachians, and Nick believes that the reactions of each, himself included, to living the fast-paced, lurid lifestyle of the East has shaped his or her behavior. Nick remembers life in the Midwest, full of snow, trains, and Christmas wreaths, and thinks that the East seems grotesque and distorted by comparison.

On his last night in West Egg before moving back to Minnesota, Nick walks over to Gatsby’s empty mansion and erases an obscene word that someone has written on the steps. He sprawls out on the beach behind Gatsby’s house and looks up. As the moon rises, he imagines the island with no houses and considers what it must have looked like to the explorers who discovered the New World centuries before. He imagines that America was once a goal for dreamers and explorers, just as Daisy was for Gatsby. He pictures the green land of America as the green light shining from Daisy’s dock, and muses that Gatsby—whose wealth and success so closely echo the American dream—failed to realize that the dream had already ended, that his goals had become hollow and empty. Nick senses that people everywhere are motivated by similar dreams and by a desire to move forward into a future in which their dreams are realized. Nick envisions their struggles to create that future as boats moving in a body of water against a current that inevitably carries them back into the past.

Chapter 8: The Great Gatsby

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

Summary

After the day’s traumatic events, Nick passes a sleepless night. Before dawn, he rises restlessly and goes to visit Gatsby at his mansion. Gatsby tells him that he waited at Daisy’s until four o’clock in the morning and that nothing happened—Tom did not try to hurt her and Daisy did not come outside. Nick suggests that Gatsby forget about Daisy and leave Long Island, but Gatsby refuses to consider leaving Daisy behind. Gatsby, melancholy, tells Nick about courting Daisy in Louisville in 1917. He says that he loved her for her youth and vitality, and idolized her social position, wealth, and popularity. He adds that she was the first girl to whom he ever felt close and that he lied about his background to make her believe that he was worthy of her. Eventually, he continues, he and Daisy made love, and he felt as though he had married her. She promised to wait for him when he left for the war, but then she married Tom, whose social position was solid and who had the approval of her parents.

Gatsby’s gardener interrupts the story to tell Gatsby that he plans to drain the pool. The previous day was the hottest of the summer, but autumn is in the air this morning, and the gardener worries that falling leaves will clog the pool drains. Gatsby tells the gardener to wait a day; he has never used the pool, he says, and wants to go for a swim. Nick has stayed so long talking to Gatsby that he is very late for work. He finally says goodbye to Gatsby. As he walks away, he turns back and shouts that Gatsby is worth more than the Buchanans and all of their friends.

Nick goes to his office, but he feels too distracted to work, and even refuses to meet Jordan Baker for a date. The focus of his narrative then shifts to relate to the reader what happened at the garage after Myrtle was killed (the details of which Nick learns from Michaelis): George Wilson stays up all night talking to Michaelis about Myrtle. He tells him that before Myrtle died, he confronted her about her lover and told her that she could not hide her sin from the eyes of God. The morning after the accident, the eyes of Doctor T. J. Eckleburg, illuminated by the dawn, overwhelm Wilson. He believes they are the eyes of God and leaps to the conclusion that whoever was driving the car that killed Myrtle must have been her lover. He decides that God demands revenge and leaves to track down the owner of the car. He looks for Tom, because he knows that Tom is familiar with the car’s owner—he saw Tom driving the car earlier that day but knows Tom could not have been the driver since Tom arrived after the accident in a different car with Nick and Jordan. Wilson eventually goes to Gatsby’s house, where he finds Gatsby lying on an air mattress in the pool, floating in the water and looking up at the sky. Wilson shoots Gatsby, killing him instantly, then shoots himself.

Nick hurries back to West Egg and finds Gatsby floating dead in his pool. Nick imagines Gatsby’s final thoughts, and pictures him disillusioned by the meaninglessness and emptiness of life without Daisy, without his dream.

For Prodigal Read Generous

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

by Edward Estlin Cummings

In the poem For Prodigal Read Generous poet asks the reader to be generous if she or he wants to understand what is prodigal. Only an unselfish person can give large amounts freely. Similarly, ‘age’ will tell him the value of youth. The old person reminds the reader that he too was young and his youth had already passed and that youth is so short. If the reader knows what mere surprise is, he will understand what a pure miracle is. Miracle is the intense form of surprise. After this, the reader is asked to study other aspects of life.

If the reader knows what satisfaction is, he will experience what pure joy is. A satisfied person is very happy. The monotony of prose will show how lively a poem is. If the reader is careful and attentive enough to avoid danger he or she should be curious. Otherwise his curiosity will lead to destruction. After this he is asked not to pay attention to something. Cummings asks the reader to read one set of words and to understand something else for each word. Finally, the reader is asked to close the eyes, probably with satisfaction that is obviously false.

To close the eyes is also not to pay attention to something, not to take notice of it, to ignore it. Thus concepts change from generation to generation. There is the absence of capital letters in this poem. The poet may mean to say that nothing is more important than anything else. In other words, he wants to say that all are equal. The literary devices he developed were intended to show how the outer appearance reinforces the inner vision. His disordered syntax (sentence construction) and typographical disarrangements were intended, not to bewilder, but to heighten the understanding. The poet has dropped the conventional punctuation. We don’t get a period at the end of the sentence in this poem.

The first line of the poem reads “for prodigal read generous” and the third line reads “read for sheer wonder mere surprise”. In the third line the verb ‘read’ is placed first and its object ‘mere surprise’ has been placed at the end. In fifth line the order is completely different: first there is the object ‘contentment’ and after the object is the verb ‘read’ and then is the adjunct of ecstasy. Seventh line also follows the order of fifth line except the fact that there is no verb. The poet has reversed the usual or natural order of words for emphasis. The emphatic words are placed either in the beginning or at an end. The end position is more important than the first. Therefore ‘generous’, ‘surprise’ ‘ecstasy’ and curiosity’ have been especially highlighted in lines 1, 3, 5 and 7 respectively.

In all the eight lines of this poem, the poet has used the imperative form of the verbs read, turn and close. He is asking his reader to read different things, to turn the page and to close the eyes and thus to experience different aspects of life by himself. The poet uses the phrase ‘to close your eyes’ to mean ‘not to pay attention to something’ ‘not to take notice of it’ ‘to ignore it’ and ‘to show satisfaction.’

Musee des Beaux Arts

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

by W. H. Auden

The basic premise of the poem is response to tragedy, or as the song goes “Obla Di, Obla Da, Life Goes On.” The title refers to the Museum of Fine Arts in Brussels. Auden visited the museum in 1938 and viewed the painting by Brueghel, which the poem is basically about. Generalizing at first, and then going into specifics the poem theme is the apathy with which humans view individual suffering.

Auden wrote that “In so far as poetry, or any of the arts, can be said to have an ulterior purpose, it is, by telling the truth, to disenchant and dis intoxicate.”

The poem juxtaposes ordinary events and extraordinary ones, although extraordinary events seem to deflate to everyday ones with his descriptions. Life goes on while a “miraculous birth occurs”, but also while “the disaster” of Icarus’s death happens.

For those cultural barbarians who don’t know the story of Icarus, here it is, in condensed form. Icarus was a Greek mythological figure, also known as the son of Daedalus (famous for the Labyrinth of Crete). Now Icarus and his dad were stuck in Crete, because the King of Crete wouldn’t let them leave.

Daedalus made some wings for the both of them and gave his son instruction on how to fly (not too close to the sea, the water will soak the wings, and not too close to the sky, the sun will melt them). Icarus, however, appeared to be obstinate and did fly to close to the sun. This caused the wax that held his wings to his body to melt. Icarus crashed into the sea and died.

Some have even claimed to find hints of Auden’s eventual re-conversion to Christianity in the poem. Richard Johnson, author of “Man’s Place: An Essay on Auden”, believes there is a touch of Christian awareness in the poem, especially the timeline. The reader of the poem is placed in front of the Breughel painting in a museum, and at the same time is expected to project those images and truths to the world outside. There is also a sort of continuity through the poem as you read it and are allowed to see what the poet means. This allows a reader to become aware of his human position.

The poem first discusses a “miraculous birth”, and at the end “the tragedy” of a death. The theme in the poem is human suffering. If you add these things together, and stir really well you might even get some hints at religion, mainly at Christianity.

Also, the poem suggest a religious acceptance of suffering (example: eating your morning breakfast while watching coverage of a serious train-wreck on CNN). Religious acceptance basically means coming to terms with the ways of the world.

Poem

About suffering they were never wrong,
The old Masters: how well they understood
Its human position: how it takes place
While someone else is eating or opening a window or just walking dully along;
How, when the aged are reverently, passionately waiting
For the miraculous birth, there always must be
Children who did not specially want it to happen, skating
On a pond at the edge of the wood:
They never forgot
That even the dreadful martyrdom must run its course
Anyhow in a corner, some untidy spot
Where the dogs go on with their doggy life and the torturer’s horse
Scratches its innocent behind on a tree.

In Breughel’s Icarus, for instance: how everything turns away
Quite leisurely from the disaster; the ploughman may
Have heard the splash, the forsaken cry,
But for him it was not an important failure; the sun shone
As it had to on the white legs disappearing into the green
Water, and the expensive delicate ship that must have seen
Something amazing, a boy falling out of the sky,
Had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on.

The Use of force – Question Answers

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

by William Carlos Williams

‘The Use of Force’ is a short story that depicts the conflict between an unnamed doctor and his patient, a sick little girl. The story is written in a first person narrative and does not use any quotation marks, making the dialogues inseparable from narrator’s own words. The story presents an important question of whether using force on someone, even for a good purpose is moral or not.

General Questions:

What is the nature of the conflict in the story?

The nature of the conflict in the story is both physical and emotional. We see the conflict that occurs in the story to be the conflict that happens between the doctor and Mathilda, however, there is another form of conflict presented; that is the conflict that arises inside the doctor as he debates within himself whether using force on the child is justifiable or not.

Why does the doctor respect the child but find the parents “contemptible”?

The doctor respects the child and infact he has taken a liking to her, as he says ‘I had already fallen in love with the savage brat’. He liked Mathilda so much as she was a beautiful child, she had magnificent blonde hair, which made the doctor think about picture-children that appeared in advertising leaflets and photogravure sections of the Sunday papers, then, he also respected her so much since he was impressed by her determination to defend herself from him. Though, he found the parents to be contemptible because although they were eager to cooperate they were also distrustful of him. His contempt escalates from being implied to plain obvious when they started coaxing the child, calling the doctor a ‘nice man’, their efforts were useless, and rather than helping they hindered the doctor’s efforts.

What does the story tell us about the use of force? How is the doctor affected by resorting to the use of force? How is the child affected by being forced to open her mouth against her will?

The story tells us that although the use of force on something or someone may be justifiable, what compels it makes people have difficulty in separating their emotions and the standards they have set for themselves. The doctor, at first seems very professional and decides to take a more standard way of approaching the child. He smiled in his ‘best professional manner’, he then attempted to coax her, but as she was reluctant and as she started becoming more and more defensive, he could not control his emotions, which in turn made him mad with fury and use force on the child. Here, the wooden tongue depressor is a kind of metaphor for the doctor’s tolerance. As it breaks, the doctor’s tolerance also breaks, and he shuns rationality and uses force on the child, even though it was for a good purpose.

Describe the relationship of the parents with the child.

The Olsons had a fairly good relationship with their daughter. Yet, they were not fully aware of her feelings, they were stuck in conflicting emotions themselves, and they were unsure whether they should hurt their daughter in order to save her, or let her have independence. The parents cared for Mathilda, they wanted her to get better, they wanted her to live, but since they were facing conflict within themselves they could not react properly. The father provides a good example of their weakness, when he tried to hold down his daughter he failed because of the fact that she was his daughter, he was ashamed at her behaviour, and he feared he might hurt her.

Write a paragraph about the reaction of the child during the crisis.

It is obvious that Mathilda was afraid of the doctor, her behaviours change from being indifferent to violently defensive. She was not aware of the fact that he was going to save her life; he even justifies ‘the damned little brat must be protected against her own idiocy’. Everyone saw her reaction as shameful, but no one actually cared enough to understand her feelings and how hurt she was. She reacts negatively to the force being used on her; she shrieked hysterically, ‘Stop it! Stop it! You’re killing me!’ She even hurt herself while breaking the tongue depressor with her mouth.

Do you think a doctor’s use of force like this on a patient is justifiable? Give reasons for your answer.

The use of force on a sick child by a doctor is not very justifiable, even if it is justifiable; the reason why it was done would not be ethical. The doctor explains that he used force on the child because he was saving her from her own idiocy; he was merely trying to save her life. But still, we cannot take his actions as justifiable, since there was another way, the doctor says himself that he could have come back in an hour and tried later. His use of force on the patient cannot be condoned as he was compelled by his emotions, and that is not what a doctor does, he failed to maintain his composure. He broke his own standards, followed his emotions and hurt the child, even though he was saving her life.

The Valvet Homgover

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

The Valvet Homgover
by Vaclav Have

Summary of The Valvet Homgover

In 1990 the Czech Republic became a democracy. Vaclav Havel was elected its President. It was an exciting time for the country because a new government system was being made. However, when Havel started working as President after the elections he didn‘t know what to do. He felt lost and tired. He was afraid he would not be good enough for the task of rebuilding his country.

Someone asked Havel to write a speech, but he found this difficult. He decided to write about fear and how it affected the Czech people. He wrote, “The people are afraid now as they face an uncertain future. They have won freedom, but fear it.” He also wrote, “Although life was difficult before, everyone understood the system. Now there are many questions. People who fear the past also fear the future. And people who fear the future also fear the past. Everyone must learn to be honest, because truth destroys fear.” Fear and negative feelings can also cause people to act in a good way. Havel ends his speech by asking people to look into the past, present and future with confidence, not fear.

In the speech Havel refers to four different types of fear:

fear of ourselves and our own ability,
fear of unknown things,
fear of the past present and future and
fear of lies and the truth.

Note
Velvet Revolution refers to a revolution in which there is no violence. In 1990 Czechoslovakia had a velvet revolution. A hangover is the feeling of illness caused by drinking too much alcohol. In this essay Havel describes his hangover like feeling after the velvet revolution.

The letter ‘A’

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

The letter ‘A’
by Christy Brown

Summary of The letter ‘A’

Christy was born on the 5th of June in l932. He had 2l brothers and sisters. His birth was difficult and his mother almost died when he was born. When Christy was 4 months old, his mother saw that something was wrong with him. He could not hold his head up, his hands were twisted, and he could not eat correctly. His parents took Christy to the hospital. The doctors told his parents that he was stupid and that there was no hope for him to get better. Christy’s mother did not believe the doctors. She took care of Christy herself. She did not leave him at the hospital. She wanted to show people that Christy was not stupid. She treated him normally, like her other children.

When Christy was 5 years old, he could not speak or even sit up by himself. He always moved in funny ways. His mother tried to teach him to talk. She would show him pictures and ask him questions. Christy understood his mother, but he could not answer her.
Christy could use his toes to touch things, especially the toes on his left foot. One day in December, Christy’s life changed. He was watching his brother and sister doing math problems on a small chalkboard with yellow chalk. Christy wanted the yellow chalk, so he took it with his left foot. He drew on the chalkboard and everyone was looking at him. His mother took the chalk and drew the letter ‘A’ on the floor. She told Christy to copy it. Everyone waited. He tried, but he could not do it. His mother asked him to try again. This time, Christy drew the letter ‘A’. His mother cried because she was so happy. Now Christy could write. People could know what he was thinking about by looking at his writing.

Chapter 6: The Great Gatsby

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

Summary

The rumors about Gatsby continue to circulate in New York—a reporter even travels to Gatsby’s mansion hoping to interview him. Having learned the truth about Gatsby’s early life sometime before writing his account, Nick now interrupts the story to relate Gatsby’s personal history—not as it is rumored to have occurred, nor as Gatsby claimed it occurred, but as it really happened.
Gatsby was born James Gatz on a North Dakota farm, and though he attended college at St. Olaf’s in Minnesota, he dropped out after two weeks, loathing the humiliating janitorial work by means of which he paid his tuition. He worked on Lake Superior the next summer fishing for salmon and digging for clams. One day, he saw a yacht owned by Dan Cody, a wealthy copper mogul, and rowed out to warn him about an impending storm. The grateful Cody took young Gatz, who gave his name as Jay Gatsby, on board his yacht as his personal assistant. Traveling with Cody to the Barbary Coast and the West Indies, Gatsby fell in love with wealth and luxury. Cody was a heavy drinker, and one of Gatsby’s jobs was to look after him during his drunken binges. This gave Gatsby a healthy respect for the dangers of alcohol and convinced him not to become a drinker himself. When Cody died, he left Gatsby $25,000, but Cody’s mistress prevented him from claiming his inheritance. Gatsby then dedicated himself to becoming a wealthy and successful man.

Nick sees neither Gatsby nor Daisy for several weeks after their reunion at Nick’s house. Stopping by Gatsby’s house one afternoon, he is alarmed to find Tom Buchanan there. Tom has stopped for a drink at Gatsby’s house with Mr. and Mrs. Sloane, with whom he has been out riding. Gatsby seems nervous and agitated, and tells Tom awkwardly that he knows Daisy. Gatsby invites Tom and the Sloanes to stay for dinner, but they refuse. To be polite, they invite Gatsby to dine with them, and he accepts, not realizing the insincerity of the invitation. Tom is contemptuous of Gatsby’s lack of social grace and highly critical of Daisy’s habit of visiting Gatsby’s house alone. He is suspicious, but he has not yet discovered Gatsby and Daisy’s love.

The following Saturday night, Tom and Daisy go to a party at Gatsby’s house. Though Tom has no interest in the party, his dislike for Gatsby causes him to want to keep an eye on Daisy. Gatsby’s party strikes Nick much more unfavorably this time around—he finds the revelry oppressive and notices that even Daisy has a bad time. Tom upsets her by telling her that Gatsby’s fortune comes from bootlegging. She angrily replies that Gatsby’s wealth comes from a chain of drugstores that he owns.

Gatsby seeks out Nick after Tom and Daisy leave the party; he is unhappy because Daisy has had such an unpleasant time. Gatsby wants things to be exactly the same as they were before he left Louisville: he wants Daisy to leave Tom so that he can be with her. Nick reminds Gatsby that he cannot re-create the past. Gatsby, distraught, protests that he can. He believes that his money can accomplish anything as far as Daisy is concerned. As he walks amid the debris from the party, Nick thinks about the first time Gatsby kissed Daisy, the moment when his dream of Daisy became the dominant force in his life. Now that he has her, Nick reflects, his dream is effectively over.