Week 5: Jasmine Amin

In the play, Lysistrata, the emerging theme is feminism. The main character, Lysistrata, wants to end the war that is occurring in Athens, and her solution is to have all the women withhold having sex with their husbands. Lysistrata herself states that women are ignorant and are not given a bigger role in society other than to marry and raise children. Her wish, along with other women of Greece, is to have women make an impact on the world and change history. She concurs that more involvement needs to be made by women in society.

Lysistrata's speech about wool is a clever use of a metaphor in comparing womens' duties to Athens as a whole. This is apparent in the passage between her and the Commissioner:

Do you know anything about weaving?
Say the yarn gets tangled: we thread it
this way and that through the skein, up and down,
until it's free. And it's like that with war.
We'll send our envoys
up and down, this way and that, all over Greece,
until it's finished (Lysistrata, 198-204)

In this passage, Lysistrata is fed up with how society looks down upon women and says that women "mold society" into what it is today, by being able to fix bad situations, as is represented in the line, "Say the yarn gets tangled: we thread it / this way and that through the skein, up and down/ until it's free " (199-201). The yarn being " threaded this way and that, up and down" is a symbol of unity, of how Athens is attempting to keep society together as a whole. Women are the fabric of the community, because without them, the world would not function the way it does. In other words, Lysistrata is also describing the distress she feels about the war. She is stressing the unfairness of the men being taken away from their families to fight in a useless war. The passage is a contrast between the way men think (war) and the way women think (peace). In Lysistrata's point of view, if women were in charge, there would be no war. "Untangling wool" takes great patience, and men only believe in violence and cruel acts in war, whereas women can handle any type of situation with a more caring nature.

Continuing her speech, Lysistrata goes on to state that cruel men need to be turned away from society, that they are spoiling the earth with their presence, "Isn't there too much dirt here in Athens? You must wash those men away (208-209). In order for Athens to stay together as a city, "unclean" individuals need to be removed from power, so that the "wool" or "city" won't be spoiled.

Week 5: Lauren Hansen

Oedipus Rex: Until the Blind See 

The only ones who can truly see are blind. Teiresias, the only physically blind character in the play Oedipus Rex, is the only person that can actually see what has happened, is happening and will happen to Oedipus and the other characters in the play. In Scene 1 (lines 152-157), Teiresias and Oedipus get into an argument that can be determined by the following:

OED: But not for you, not for you,
          You sightless, witless, senseless, mad old man!

TEIR: You are the madman. There is no one here
           Who will not curse you soon, as you curse me.

OED: You child of total night! I would not touch you;
          Neither would any man who sees the sun.

Oedipus says, “You sightless, senseless, witless old man!”—a statement that is full of meaning, both literal and figuratively. The alliterative use of the ‘S’ sound makes the phrase linger longer than necessary, but its uniqueness among other lines was what initially attracted me to this passage. Each word cuts deep with its cruel meaning, but dramatic irony cleverly resurfaces before the exclamation point can be tacked onto the end of the sentence. The words ‘sightless, witless, and senseless’ may be directed at Teiresias, but they actually apply more to Oedipus. To solidify his argument, Teiresias tells Oedipus the following prophecy: “there is no one here / Who will not curse you soon, as you curse me.”

This particular section of lines stood out to me because of the use of dramatic irony, which is the most common literary device used in Oedipus Rex. Oedipus makes a show out of the fact that Teiresias is physically blind, but the audience knows that reality is quite the opposite. Dramatic irony creates a concept of knowledge that seems to be brought to life through the deeper contrast between light and darkness. In this, it appears that Oedipus’s own sight blinded him to the truth, which had been told to him many times. He decided not to listen to the truth, but instead seek it out on his own.

On more than one occasion throughout the play, Sophocles refers to the fact that Oedipus is blind to the truth just as Teiresias is blind to the world. Also, to be blind in ironical terms could also mean unknowingly doing something. I think this ties in nicely to the action going on behind the scenes with Oedipus and the fact that he doesn’t realize what he has done by killing his father and marrying his mother. Despite his intelligence, Oedipus’s lack of knowledge is the path to his downfall because he refused to follow the advice of those who knew what was happening. (Oh, the irony!)

These exchanges set up the purpose of the entire play and, in a sense, foreshadow the fate of Oedipus. According to Sophocles, a person must not only be able to see something, but be able to understand it as well. After learning of his mistakes, Oedipus realizes he had never ‘seen’ his life in the ‘light.’ Ashamed of his actions, he blinds himself in an attempt to return to the ‘darkness,’ which he had previously occupied, returning to a state where he could not see the evil he lived in and the misery he caused.

Week 5 Prompt: Close Reading Plays

Due: Wednesday, September 21, by 6 pm

Explanation

This week, we begin our unit on plays. So far, our close reading exercises have attended to shorter works (or short sections of longer works), but now we will have to use our powers of explication to explore longer, more sustained texts. This at first may seem daunting, but be assured, the method is no different.

As we reviewed in class this past Thursday, close reading involves reading carefully and keeping your senses attuned to things within the text that strike you as interesting, disturbing, significant, etc. Be certain to mark the passage or passages that strike you, so that you can come back to them. Once finished, reread the striking parts, choose one that you find the most compelling, and describe how it works and what it means.

Remember, you do this by:

• identifying what rhetorical effect/s are at work within the particular passage; 
• explaining the way the rhetorical effect/s function in the context of the passage; 
• and, finally, suggesting why the meaning, derived from the effect, is important for understanding the entire work. 

Close reading always moves from the particular (passage/effect) to the universal (entire text). From the effect you will provide a new way of reading the entire work. In many ways, this new reading forms the basis of your argument.

Details

• Read both plays for this week (Oedipus Rex and Lysistrata) 
• Perform a close reading and interpretation on one and only one play 
• Focus on only a single passage 
• Identify and interpret no more than two important rhetorical effects at work within the passage. 
• Write your argument in 450 to 650 words. 
• EMAIL ME YOUR WRITTEN ARGUMENT IN .DOC OR .RTF FORMAT. 
• All assignments must be EMAILED TO ME by Wednesday, 6 pm. All late posts will automatically receive half credit. If the post is not EMAILED TO ME by Friday, 6 pm, it will receive no credit.

Week 4: George Stearn

In Sonnet 130, William Shakespeare displays his mastery of the form by not only penning a successful satire of a Petrarchan blazon, but also creating an honest love poem for his mistress. With any Sonnet the first rhetorical device to examine is the form, and this one appears to be a fairly standard Shakespearean. The key difference in this poem from the majority of Shakespeare’s work is that it is a blason; namely, the poem describes a woman by singling out her individual features in turn. It can be further sub-classified as a Petrarchan blason, or a blazon where the subject is described from head to toe. Petrarch, a 16th century Italian poet, was one of the original masters of both sonnet, and blason. This style of poetry, where the subject is described from head to toe, is named for him, as he often employed it.

When one initially reads the poem it appears to be a satire; the style and form are clearly copied from Petrarch. In addition, the similes and metaphors used to describe the subject are almost negative—Shakespeare’s honestly regarding the features of his beloved would be unheard of in this sort of poetry, and he does it all with a humorous flair. For example, in line thirteen, Shakespeare reverses the stereotypical Petrarchan “soft golden hair” and instead compares her hair to black wires sprouting from her skull: “If hairs be wires black wires grow on her head” (13). However, the obvious satire is slightly undermined by the Sonnet’s resolution in the final couplet, “And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare / As any she belied with false compare” (13-14). Those last two lines transform the meaning of the poem, altering it from a slightly rude satire, to a tender acceptance of her virtues. In lines ten and twelve, Shakespeare begins connecting subtly to his resolution, “My mistress…treads on the ground” (12). Shakespeare’s beloved, he says, is no goddess, she walks on the ground like everyone else, and an honest expounding of her virtues is more than enough to convey the love he feels. In the last line too, “false compare” surely refers to the inaccurately flattering descriptions of other poets. It’s almost as if Shakespeare is saying that his love is greater than most because he has no need to embellish, and that the exaggerations of his peers are entirely unnecessary.

Week 4: Nathan McQuarrie

In Langston Hughes’ poem “Cross,” the speaker talks about how his family is divided by race and the conflict that comes upon him at their deaths. The first two lines of the first stanza, "My old man’s a white old man / And my old mother’s black," set up the parallelism that is to continue throughout the poem. For the rest of the poem, the speaker continues this contrast of race while he asks forgiveness from his parents in the lines

If ever I cursed my white old man
I take my curses back.

If ever I cursed my black old mother
And wished she were in hell,
I’m sorry for that evil wish
And now I wish her well.

It is interesting that he does not ask for forgiveness from both his parents together; instead, he addresses them separately. This parallelism becomes even more blatant in the final stanza, where he describes how both of his parents died:

My old man died in a fine big house,
My ma died in a shack.
I wonder where I’m gonna die,
Being neither white nor black?

The parallelism is an important reminder of the time that Langston Hughes lived in. He wrote the poem “Cross” in 1925, which in the United States was in the middle of the Roaring Twenties and at the height of the Jim Crow South. In this time period, the Ku Klux Klan was rampant throughout the Deep South, and anyone who was white (like the speaker’s father) segregated the people who had darker skin (like the speaker’s mother). The parallelism within the poem reflects the racial segregation within that time period.

The most important aspect of this poem, however, lies in the final stanza.

The irony of the poem finally becomes obvious with the contrast of how the parents died. To understand the irony in this stanza, one must look at the context of the poem. Again, this poem was written when blacks were viciously segregated. This last stanza reveals that the speaker is not white or black, but of mixed race which at the time was called “Mulatto.” This term denoted a distinction of the mixed race people born of a white and a black parent; therefore, because they were viewed as not white, they were treated the same as blacks by white Americans. With this in mind, while the speaker states that he doesn’t know where he’ll die, it is clear that he knows perfectly well that because he is of a mixed race, it is almost certain that he will die poor like his mother.

Week 4: Katherine Sung

Emily Dickinson’s poem, #214, is written as a quatrain with alternating lines of tetrameter (4 measures or 8 syllables) and trimeter (3 measures or 6 syllables) in each stanza of four lines. Aside from the first stanza, the each stanza follows a rhyming scheme of ABCB. The speaker uses the metaphors of drunkenness or inebriation throughout the poem to describe his or her transcendental experience with nature.

In the first stanza,

I taste a liquor never brewed,
From tankards scooped in pearl;
Not all the vats upon the Rhine
Yield such an alcohol!

The speaker claims that he or she has "taste[d] a liquor neverbrewed." This is an oxymoron because all alcohol (the liquor being referred to) must be fermented or brewed in order to be liquor. This presents a question: does the liquor really exist? He or she goes on to say that it was served in "tankards scooped in pearl." This phrase presents to the reader, a picture of a cup (especially for drinking liquor) decorated in pearls, and also gives the reader a feeling that the liquor is exquisite, expensive, and luxurious. The speaker then goes on to describe the liquor itself by saying that "not all the vats upon the Rhine [could] yield such an alcohol." The Rhine is a river in Germany, an area that is famous for its wine.

In the second stanza,

Inebriate of air am I,
And debauchee of dew,
Reeling, through endless summer days,
From inns of molten blue.

The speaker states that they are inebriate or drunk. The structure of the first sentence also suggests being drunk because it differs from the others. Instead of saying "I am inebriate of air," a total reverse of the pattern is used, similar to drunk incoherent speech. We assume that the speaker is drunk because of the alcohol that was drunk in the first stanza but they go on to elaborate that they are drunk because of "air" and "dew." Air and dew are both part of nature, so we can assume that the speaker is saying that they are drunk on nature. The fact that the liquor was "never brewed" also supports this and the drunkenness can be perceived as a metaphor for how nature makes them feel: drunk, sensual, and timeless. The use of the word "reeling" also supports the drunken tone throughout the text. Because this stanza is based on nature, we can assume that the "molten blue" the speaker is referring to is the sky and is a very good use of imagery. When the word "molten" is used, we usually think of something warm and melted, kind of like lava; there is a kind of layered texture to it. In the last sentence, "from the inns of molten blue," we learn that the earth is the speaker’s home, or perhaps, rather temporary home, through the use of the word "inn."

The third stanza,

When landlords turn the drunken bee
Out of the foxglove’s door,
When butterflies renounce their drams,
I shall but drink the more!

The first two lines of the stanza are similar to the third because they both reference stopping drinking. In the first two lines, the "drunken bee" is forced to stop drinking by the landlord, and in the third line, the "butterflies" recognize that they are too drunk and use self control to stop drinking. The fourth line, "I shall but drink the more!" sets the speaker apart from everyone else because he or she is not only continuing to drink but also being proud for doing so (juxtaposition). Using "foxglove," an ornamental, purple-tinted flower, was interesting because this flower is also poisonous to humans. Another interesting point was that the foxglove flower is in the shape of a cup or chalice, which parallels the tankard the speaker drinks out of in the first stanza.

The last stanza,

Till seraphs swing their snowy hats,
And saints to windows run,
To see the little tippler
Leaning against the sun!

is a continuation of the third stanza. The speaker is saying that he or she will drink until the "seraphs swing their snowy hats, and saints to windows run." Seraphs are the highest-ranking angels in heaven and reside above the throne of God. A saint is defined as one of the blessed dead in Heaven. The way the stanza is phrased, offers the idea that heaven is the narrator’s true home and the seraphs and saints are excited and celebrating the return home. The third and fourth line still echo the idea of drunkenness. The "little tippler" in the third line is the speaker referring to his or her tipsy self "leaning against the sun" as if he or she is gaining support from it. Something that was interesting to me was the use of the word "sun" because is it a homonym to the word son, which can be referred to as Jesus Christ.

Week 4: Keagan Tice

In Langston Hughes's poem "The Weary Blues" the persona uses repetition to create a drowsy or weary effect on the audience. This is true from the first line, "Droning a drowsy syncopated tune." Here Hughes uses two words that have a weary effect, "Droning" and "drowsy," to emphasis the title's meaning. It works, too. Right away the audience feels the effects used from the simple repetition of two similar words, and it doesn’t stop there. In line seven Hughes repeats line six: “He did a lazy sway . . .” The repetition here is actually quite genius because the lines reflect what they convey. To sway is to move listlessly from side to side and that is what lines six and seven do; they sway from side to side then again from side to side. This direct repetition adds to the overall effect of weariness that is consistently repeated throughout the poem.

The next instance that the persona uses repetition is in lines ten and seventeen where the persona personifies the piano's noise, when played, as a "moan." In line ten the persona says, "He made that poor piano moan with melody." This gives the image that the piano is being played softly. In line seventeen the piano again moans, "I heard that negro sing, that old piano moan--," here the auditory image is repeated for emphasis. Lines eighteen and nineteen use anaphora, "Ain't got nobody in all this world, Ain't got nobody but ma self." Repeating verses can be in itself tiring, when a lazy word such as "Ain't is used it contributes to the weariness that is construed from the anaphora.

In the final section of the poem the persona repeats three words in line twenty two, "Thump, thump, thump, went his foot on the floor." Here the onomatopoeia of the thump, a lazy one at that, reinforces the weary tune on which this poem is built upon. In lines twenty four through twenty seven, lines twenty four and five are repeated but not to the letter. "I got the Weary Blues, And I can’t be satisfied. Got the Weary Blues, And can’t be satisfied--." The lines that are repeated are without the pronoun "I"; perhaps the persona was lax in repeating the lines so he or she simply left them out. The repetition in this poem creates an effect of weariness that not only affects the audience but the persona as well.