The motivation for Hamlet’s transformation is the charge given to him by his deceased father’s ghost. Before that he is what people could consider normal if not a little depressed. Hamlet is changed to the core of his being. He becomes sharper with his speech. His comments more pointed especially towards his mother, Claudius and Polonius. Internally, it is all he can do to think about how he is to get revenge and kill Claudius.
It is convincing because while he is alone, he rants and raves about what he must do. His appearance, call it, to say is changed because towards those around him, it seems as though he has gone mad.
His transformation is not well received by those who are closest to him. It seems to them like he is pushing them away. Claudius is worried because he fears Hamlet is up to something and he feels like he needs to keep an eye on him. Both Gertrude and Ophelia are concerned for Hamlet because both of them believe that he has gone mentally insane. The change in Hamlet appears to have created a stronger bond between him and Horatio, for it seems Horatio is the only one Hamlet can trust. He is the one who Hamlet contemplates and consults with on how they are to prove that it was Claudius that murdered his father.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Formal Argument- Negative, Did Gertrude betray her husbadn and son
Formal Argument
Gertrude did not betray either her husband or her son. Hamlet feels betrayed because his mother remarried so quickly. But everyone is different. Some people take less time to get over the grieving process. What if Hamlet Sr. and his wife really weren’t that close? It gives no indication that they were. The ghost of Hamlet Sr does tell hamlet Jr not to kill Gertrude but that is because he loved her. Times and circumstances could have dictated situations that caused them to grow apart for a while and so Gertrude felt less attached. When the grieving process was finished, she had her eyes open and her goals clear. By marrying Claudius she would be killing two birds with one stone. She was keeping her position as queen, since she was not born into the royal family but married into it, and she was solidifying her son’s position on the throne should Claudius die as a result of old age or some unfortunate accident. It was all part of Gertrude’s plan. Although she appears dependent and unsure, it is a ploy, a mask to lull others into a false sense of security so that she might accomplish her own ends.
Soliloquy
Bloody bawdy villain! Remorseless, treacherous, lecherous, kindless villain! O vengeance! I would that the God’s have given me half less a mind as to deal with the unworthiness and the inanity of the lout who dares call himself my opponent. Oh Sprits! Perhaps the problem lay not in my opponent himself. Merely his arguments to say. Perhaps they hold sense only to half-wits and those who madness has deemed well enough to bestow its crippling self upon. Yes that is it. That must be it. Let that son of Satan feel the wrath of him above the kings, as all his crimes make themselves manifest. To put that monster in his place I shall speak daggers to him and use none. How in my words he be shent. To give them seals never my soul consent. Alas oh heavens strike me down now so I may be spared the most cruel and torturous death and live til my sins be purged, bound in the blackest night to hear the wail of my adversary’s concernancy. Hark I must away…
By: Tyler Keith with excerpts from William Shakespeare’s Hamlet
Gertrude did not betray either her husband or her son. Hamlet feels betrayed because his mother remarried so quickly. But everyone is different. Some people take less time to get over the grieving process. What if Hamlet Sr. and his wife really weren’t that close? It gives no indication that they were. The ghost of Hamlet Sr does tell hamlet Jr not to kill Gertrude but that is because he loved her. Times and circumstances could have dictated situations that caused them to grow apart for a while and so Gertrude felt less attached. When the grieving process was finished, she had her eyes open and her goals clear. By marrying Claudius she would be killing two birds with one stone. She was keeping her position as queen, since she was not born into the royal family but married into it, and she was solidifying her son’s position on the throne should Claudius die as a result of old age or some unfortunate accident. It was all part of Gertrude’s plan. Although she appears dependent and unsure, it is a ploy, a mask to lull others into a false sense of security so that she might accomplish her own ends.
Soliloquy
Bloody bawdy villain! Remorseless, treacherous, lecherous, kindless villain! O vengeance! I would that the God’s have given me half less a mind as to deal with the unworthiness and the inanity of the lout who dares call himself my opponent. Oh Sprits! Perhaps the problem lay not in my opponent himself. Merely his arguments to say. Perhaps they hold sense only to half-wits and those who madness has deemed well enough to bestow its crippling self upon. Yes that is it. That must be it. Let that son of Satan feel the wrath of him above the kings, as all his crimes make themselves manifest. To put that monster in his place I shall speak daggers to him and use none. How in my words he be shent. To give them seals never my soul consent. Alas oh heavens strike me down now so I may be spared the most cruel and torturous death and live til my sins be purged, bound in the blackest night to hear the wail of my adversary’s concernancy. Hark I must away…
By: Tyler Keith with excerpts from William Shakespeare’s Hamlet
Debate 2 Report
On Friday December 12, 2008, in Room 204 at 8:30am a debate was held to determine whether Hamlet, in Shakespeare’s tragedy Hamlet, was crazy or not. Judges Nicholas Leblond, Yannick Lee, and Jennifer Ross overlooked the debate. Arguing that Hamlet was mentally insane were Ilayda Williamson, Mary Collins, and Michaela Blaser. Those responsible for arguing that Hamlet was not crazy were Kelsey Campbell, Melissa Watson-Shotton, and Jessica Barton.
The affirmative side opened with situations involving those mentally insane and reasons why Hamlet would go insane. There was a little bit of rambling about somewhat morbid topics. The negative opened by saying that their opponents misunderstood the situation and context of the story.
The rebuttals from both sides were strong, clear, and concise. Neither team wasted any time getting right to the point. The second point from both sides included strong arguments as to why Hamlet, or “Paul” according to the judges’ rules, was or was not crazy.
The free-for-all was not particularly interesting it seemed because the crowd seemed rather inattentive. There were some raised voices and even a few vulgar expressions as one of the team members on the affirmative side felt as if a member of the audience was encroaching upon her personal space.
Both sides continued on with strong points and counters challenging each other at every opportunity wasting no second. The side arguing the negative had a particularly strong finish. According to the rulings of the judges, the team arguing that Hamlet was not crazy, the negative side, was the winner in this extensively researched debate.
The affirmative side opened with situations involving those mentally insane and reasons why Hamlet would go insane. There was a little bit of rambling about somewhat morbid topics. The negative opened by saying that their opponents misunderstood the situation and context of the story.
The rebuttals from both sides were strong, clear, and concise. Neither team wasted any time getting right to the point. The second point from both sides included strong arguments as to why Hamlet, or “Paul” according to the judges’ rules, was or was not crazy.
The free-for-all was not particularly interesting it seemed because the crowd seemed rather inattentive. There were some raised voices and even a few vulgar expressions as one of the team members on the affirmative side felt as if a member of the audience was encroaching upon her personal space.
Both sides continued on with strong points and counters challenging each other at every opportunity wasting no second. The side arguing the negative had a particularly strong finish. According to the rulings of the judges, the team arguing that Hamlet was not crazy, the negative side, was the winner in this extensively researched debate.
Debate 1 Report
On Thursday December 11, 2008, at 1:35pm in room 204 a debate was held as to whether Miller’s definition of modern tragedy was appropriate to the modern age. The team arguing in the affirmative, composed of Dawson Lybbert, Justin Sweeney, and Ben Cousins, squared off against the team arguing for the negative, which consisted of Stephanie Boucher, Stephanie MacDonald, and Rebecca Ritchie. Presiding over the debate were Judge Seth Epps, Justice Colton Bissonette, and Keeper of the Peace Logan Lubuk.
The affirmative side opened up by stating what is essential in a tragedy and how a tragedy and a comedy are almost polar opposites. The negative side opened with an explanation of what a tragic character is according to Aristotle. Ms. Boucher also brought up the only relevant point found throughout the course of the debate. She brought up Millar’s definition of tragedy and how it applied more to Shakespearean times. Both rebuttals were more based on attacking the other teams format or way of presenting information and no real progress was made.
The second point for both teams continued on with the affirmative side suffering from a severe lack of points of interest. This resulted in attacks in the form of blonde jokes. The negative retaliated by quelling the attempted harassment of their arguments.
As the free-for-all started, mayhem ensued. It became a yelling match between the two apparent leaders, Mr. Lybbert and Ms. Boucher, of which tragedy was better and why. The rest of the debate continued in much the same fashion minus the yelling. Both teams resorted to insulting each other during the final rebuttals. The result from the judges, in the unanimous, was that the side arguing for the Shakespearean, the negative side, won by a landslide.
The affirmative side opened up by stating what is essential in a tragedy and how a tragedy and a comedy are almost polar opposites. The negative side opened with an explanation of what a tragic character is according to Aristotle. Ms. Boucher also brought up the only relevant point found throughout the course of the debate. She brought up Millar’s definition of tragedy and how it applied more to Shakespearean times. Both rebuttals were more based on attacking the other teams format or way of presenting information and no real progress was made.
The second point for both teams continued on with the affirmative side suffering from a severe lack of points of interest. This resulted in attacks in the form of blonde jokes. The negative retaliated by quelling the attempted harassment of their arguments.
As the free-for-all started, mayhem ensued. It became a yelling match between the two apparent leaders, Mr. Lybbert and Ms. Boucher, of which tragedy was better and why. The rest of the debate continued in much the same fashion minus the yelling. Both teams resorted to insulting each other during the final rebuttals. The result from the judges, in the unanimous, was that the side arguing for the Shakespearean, the negative side, won by a landslide.
Activity 1.5
There are 4 major acts that Hamlet did that can be classified in Maslow’s Hierarchy.They are: The killing of Polonius, the killing of Claudius, the killing of Leartes and when hamlet listens to the Ghost of his father.
The killing of Polonius:
This act can be classified under the Safety section of Maslow’s Hierarchy. He was talking with his mother and he assumed they would be alone. When Polonius made the call for help, Hamlet immediately took to challenge what he considered a threat. He killed Polonius without even realizing who he was. He felt that his and his mother’s safety was jeopardized so he took the appropriate steps to neutralize the threat.
The killing of Leartes:
This act can also be classified under the Safety section. Hamlet and Leartes were dueling and after both Hamlet and Leartes are wounded, both realize that they are to continue fighting until one of them should fall. Hamlet kills Leartes to protect his own livelihood. Although he is unsuccessful in keeping his life, he made attempts to keep it and that is what really counts.
Hamlet listens to his father’s ghost:
This could be considered the Esteem part of the Hierarchy. It could be considered esteem because Hamlet needed a lot of confidence to follow a ghost. He was proving to himself and those with him that he was not too afraid to follow and find out what the requests of a ghost were. He was doing it so he would be able to feel comfortable with himself knowing he did all he could to fulfill the request of his late father.
The killing of Claudius:
This could be considered Self-actualization. Hamlet feels that his reason for being is to kill Claudius once he learns that it was Claudius who was responsible for his father’s death. Having Claudius alive was what Hamlet considered a problem. He took the appropriate measures to solve that problem. He makes it his sloe purpose in life, his being, his thoughts, his morals, all change to accommodate what he must do to rid himself of Claudius.
Activity 1.3
Hamlet transforms the actual reality into his own by basically ignoring everything that is going on around him and focussing on his single goal: avenge his father by killing Claudius. He lost sight of his education. He ignored the possibility of the threat posed by Fortinbras. He became single-minded in his determinations.
Gertrude creates her own reality by essentiall living in a dream world. She ignores her late husbands death and instead focusses on her new husband and her supposedly depressed and suicidal son. She stays under the self induced illusion that everything is going well and that there are no problems in her life.
Claudius lives in a scared reality he created himself by murdering Old Hamlet. He lives in constant suspicion of everyone. He relies on only those whose emotions he can manipulate. He fears Hamlet most because he knows that Hamlet is the rightful heir to the throne. He plots to have Hamlet killed so that he can finally live in peace without fear of being dethroned.
The family unit was once critical to society. As time progresses the family becomes less and less important. One of the reasons for this is that divorce and separation are becoming more prevalent. It was the basis with which society founded its rules. It made those rules to reflect the values of the family. To quote "Together we stand, divided we fall," is applicable here. The fmaily is the backbone of society. This is because every working member of society is either working for themselves or for their family. If the family starts to crumble then the people within the society will begin caring and thinking for only themselves. If that happens, and compassion between people is lost, society and it's rules will cease to exist. This is why the family unit is important
Gertrude creates her own reality by essentiall living in a dream world. She ignores her late husbands death and instead focusses on her new husband and her supposedly depressed and suicidal son. She stays under the self induced illusion that everything is going well and that there are no problems in her life.
Claudius lives in a scared reality he created himself by murdering Old Hamlet. He lives in constant suspicion of everyone. He relies on only those whose emotions he can manipulate. He fears Hamlet most because he knows that Hamlet is the rightful heir to the throne. He plots to have Hamlet killed so that he can finally live in peace without fear of being dethroned.
The family unit was once critical to society. As time progresses the family becomes less and less important. One of the reasons for this is that divorce and separation are becoming more prevalent. It was the basis with which society founded its rules. It made those rules to reflect the values of the family. To quote "Together we stand, divided we fall," is applicable here. The fmaily is the backbone of society. This is because every working member of society is either working for themselves or for their family. If the family starts to crumble then the people within the society will begin caring and thinking for only themselves. If that happens, and compassion between people is lost, society and it's rules will cease to exist. This is why the family unit is important
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Activity 1.4 Advertisement
Does that odour from your dog stink up the house? Does car reek because of your son’s gym clothes? Is you bathroom aroma not the greatest?
Look no farther for the air freshener that’s perfect everywhere. It needs absolutely no electricity and doesn’t take up very much room. This perfect little thing can go with you anywhere. Comes in so many varieties you can’t count them. It's even got a smile to brighten up any bad day. All you need is A Father’s Cure.
If you’re still not convinced, check our customer feedback.
Telmah Roines: “But soft, methinks I scent the morning air”
Anne Stains: It’s incredible. It actually works.
A Father’s Cure. The Solution to Everything*
Activity 1.4
Thesis
Did Hamlet really love Ophelia? (Yes he did)
Outline
Reason: He told her he loved her.
Example: “I did love you once” (Act 3, Sc 1, line 115)
Explanation: This phrase was said in anger to try and provoke an emotion from Ophelia. Even though it was said to provoke he was being truthful. He was using the truth to elicit a reaction.
Reason: He sent many letters to her.
Example: “And with them words of so sweet breath composed as made these things more rich. (Act 3, Sc 1, line 98-99)
Explanation: Ophelia was referring to letters that were addressed to her from Hamlet. This as she was returning them unopened. For Hamlet to react with anger, as he did, means that he put a lot of thought and probably poured his heart out to her in those letters.
Counter Reason: He told her he never loved her
Example: “I loved you not” (Act 3, Sc 1, Line 119)
Explanation: Hamlet has been truthful to Ophelia up until now. There is no reason to suggest that he would lie to her.
Rebuttal: Hamlet was in a rage and did not mean what he said
Example: Nymph in thy orisons… (Act 3, Sc 1, line 88). Or if thou wilt needs marry, marry a fool, for wise men know well enough what monsters you make of them (Act 3, Sc 1, line 139-141)Explanation: Before Hamlet became really angry with Ophelia he referred to her as a nymph. After they started fighting Hamlet insulted Ophelia. He spoke with without giving any thought to what he was saying. The same holds true for when he told her that he never loved her. Such emotion is often the case when love is involved.
Did Hamlet really love Ophelia? (Yes he did)
Outline
Reason: He told her he loved her.
Example: “I did love you once” (Act 3, Sc 1, line 115)
Explanation: This phrase was said in anger to try and provoke an emotion from Ophelia. Even though it was said to provoke he was being truthful. He was using the truth to elicit a reaction.
Reason: He sent many letters to her.
Example: “And with them words of so sweet breath composed as made these things more rich. (Act 3, Sc 1, line 98-99)
Explanation: Ophelia was referring to letters that were addressed to her from Hamlet. This as she was returning them unopened. For Hamlet to react with anger, as he did, means that he put a lot of thought and probably poured his heart out to her in those letters.
Counter Reason: He told her he never loved her
Example: “I loved you not” (Act 3, Sc 1, Line 119)
Explanation: Hamlet has been truthful to Ophelia up until now. There is no reason to suggest that he would lie to her.
Rebuttal: Hamlet was in a rage and did not mean what he said
Example: Nymph in thy orisons… (Act 3, Sc 1, line 88). Or if thou wilt needs marry, marry a fool, for wise men know well enough what monsters you make of them (Act 3, Sc 1, line 139-141)Explanation: Before Hamlet became really angry with Ophelia he referred to her as a nymph. After they started fighting Hamlet insulted Ophelia. He spoke with without giving any thought to what he was saying. The same holds true for when he told her that he never loved her. Such emotion is often the case when love is involved.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Long ISU Neuromancer
Neuromancer
Computers of the past were physically large and incapable of Internet communication. Computers in the present day are small and capable of almost anything. They can communicate with each other from around the world. They can provide entertainment for those using them. They can be used for business as well. The one thing that has not changed from the past to the present however is that computers cannot think for themselves. They always require a human or a human’s programming to work. It has been said if humans were to make a computer that is sentient and can think for itself that it would be the downfall of the human race. In a book entitled Neuromancer, by William Gibson, this idea is challenged. In the novel a character by the name of Case, a virtual cyberspace reality hacker, is recruited, by a man named Armitage. As the novel begins Case has no idea what his purpose is, other than that his skills are needed. He later finds out that an artificial intelligence known as Wintermute manipulated Armitage to get him to hire Case. With this knowledge he is also told that Wintermute is only half of an artificial intelligence. Case learns that it wants to merge with its other half, known as Neuromancer, because alone Wintermute considers itself, “a, shall we say, potential entity”(Gibson, p120). Through the storyline it suggests that having a computer or artificial intelligence that can think for itself would not be a bad or even a harmful thing. A sentient computer could be a good thing. This is demonstrated throughout the story because Wintermute saves Case’s life, and as the story finishes, the entity formed from the combination of Wintermute and Neuromancer, does not cause the destruction of the human race. As well, having a sentient computer is just like creating another human being that is smarter and faster with a different body.
It is thought that if humans were to create a computer that could think for itself that they would get more than they bargained for, that the computer would work on it’s own agenda with little regard for humanity or human life. In the novel Neuromancer this is not the case. Before Armitage hired him, Case was living in a cheap hotel and on the streets, did drugs, and was headed in a downward spiral towards death. “[He’s] suicidal…The model gives [him] a month on the outside. And [the] medical projections says [he’ll] need a new pancreas inside a year”(Gibson, 28). Although it was Armitage that hired Case, Wintermute engineered the hiring. The personality known as Armitage was created by Wintermute after a certain Colonel Corto was seriously injured in a covert operation known as Screaming Fist. After building up the new personality of Corto from the ground up, Wintermute was able to influence what the new personality would be like. He had Armitage/Corto hire Case because he was the best hacker there was available. When Case accepted the job he was given a blood transfusion and a custom made pancreas. It was custom made so that he would be unable to get high off the drugs that he had been addicted to. So although it was not directly it was, in essence Wintermute that saved Case’s life and brought back his career, thus proving that the computer cared not only for it’s own design but also for the comfort of someone it considers important.
It could be considered unethical to give a computer it’s own personality and the ability to think. The concept however is no different than having children. Aside from the obvious physical difference there is nothing distinguishing the difference between creating an entity that can think for itself and learns as it grows. This can be applied to either an infant or an artificial intelligence. It is stereotypical in the basic mindset of humans that a computer that is essentially conscious would go to any lengths to achieve that which it has set out to do. To really think what it would mean to have a sentient computer however means that the computer would rationalize and make decisions. Depending on the personality that would go with the ability to think for itself, it would or would not pursue its goal with blind ambition. Just the same as some humans pursue their goals without thought to how it affects others, a computer could be the same. A computer, though it could think for itself could be reclusive and quiet and still think for itself. It is often thought that computers, given awareness would go on a rampage for their goals just because they have the means to and don’t tire like ordinary humans. A computer could still have compassion on people who helped it attain its awareness. When Wintermute finally did mesh with Neuromancer, the first act was removing the poison sacs that lined Case’s blood that Armitage had put there to ensure that Case did as he was supposed to.
Once Neuromancer and Wintermute become a single unit, a single being, the end of the world does not happen. Case is rewarded for his troubles and life goes on as it would have if nothing had ever happened. If anything Case’s life is improved as a result of his dealings with Wintermute. The only difference being that a family would now be without the artificial intelligence that it had before, it having moved on. For some, life didn’t change. This cascade of events affected only a small majority of the society mentioned. It also goes to prove that since the computer could think for itself that it could think and choose not to ruin the careful balance that is known as life, and could instead choose to preserve it.
There is the argument that sentient computers would not be beneficial towards humanity however. There are reasons as to why there are some people who still believe this. Two reasons are that sentient computers can toy with death, and either prolong it’s coming or quicken it, and that computers have almost absolute freedom with humans being powerless to stop them before the single deed is done. In Neuromancer there are many who are opposed to the combination of Wintermute and Neuromancer to form a conscious computer. One of these so-called characters is Neuromancer itself. It works with all it has to prevent Case and Wintermute from succeeding. It even tried to lure Case into a place “hoping…to keep [him there]. But [it] failed. […]”(Gibson p 259). Neuromancer was against the merge from the beginning. It knew what would be created worked to stop it.
Although it would be difficult for a computer to go on a long-term rampage, it would not be difficult for them to commit a certain act and then not care about the consequences. Much the same way a sociopath commits a crime and then proceeds not to care about the penalty. This can be shown when Case is being arrested by what is known as “Turing.” He was being taken to a more convenient spot where his accusers could better interrogate him, when Wintermute intervened. Though he did not appear in person because he had no body “[he] killed ‘em,” Case panted, running. “Crazy [mother-trucker], [he] killed ‘em all…” If a computer were to turn this sort of attention on a high political figure, such as a president or prime minister than it could throw entire countries into chaos, this because of a lack of a leadership figure.
Another reason that some people could be against an artificial intelligence with thoughts of it’s own, is that it has more power over death than humans do. Both their own and the death of those who created it. For one thing, a computer never really dies. Until the casing and materials begin to decompose the computer will remain. What is more disturbing to some is that computers could have control over whether they live or die than they do. Some people believe that there is a “time” to die. A time when they feel they’ve accomplished their life’s goals and are ready to move on. A computer bent on keeping a person alive would know exactly what to do that would prevent the person from passing on. This would be considered, by some, as disrupting the natural way of life. This could be a big problem with many people because stereotypically, humans are opposed to change. Though it is one of their downfalls they would rather keep something they already have than change or exchange it. Even if only the person’s memory or a likeness of the person were kept alive it could be a problem. But to some it doesn’t matter, “to live [there] is to live. There is no difference.”(Gibson, 258) Being sentient, computers could come up with reasons for doing such things too. Being as highly sophisticated at they are computers would be able to see
It is placing too much power in something that humans have too little control over. This makes many uneasy because typically humans will lean towards wanting control of their own destiny rather than place it in the hands of something else.
Neuromancer was against the merger between itself and Wintermute. To have ideas such as this, Neuromancer would have to be at least partially sentient. To recognize that the fusion of the two halves would create something that the world had never known beforehand, and that that fuse would bring about change unlike anything else. To resist that urge to change, Neuromancer would have to be thinking by itself. It would not have an outside source to govern it. This is known because the Wintermute/Neuromancer was an AI, an artificial intelligence, used to look after the family who owned it while their bodies were frozen cryogenically until a time of re-awakening.
Stereotypically it is thought that computers given, consciousness would have little regard for human life if it got in the way of their goal. To be thinking for oneself, it means that the individual makes their own decisions on a variety of circumstances that appear throughout the lifetime. To have a computer making it’s own decisions based on what it thinks does not mean that it would kill people for no reason. The reality of the situation is that the essentially living computer would be about as likely to kill a person or people as a certain human is to kill another being. The chances are slim to none. Although computers do have a wider range of capabilities in certain areas than humans do, they have more limitations physically. True, sentient computers would be free to do as they choose, but all humans can do whatever they want. Having a sentient computer would be no more dangerous to a country or economy than a child being born would. The only exception is that computer would learn and grow far quicker. Humans are manipulated by laws and customs to get them to behave a certain way. These are however not binding. There are consequences should certain laws be disobeyed but if a person had their heart set on something in particular thy would work as hard as they possibly could to obtain that goal. Everything sentient thing can do whatever it wants.
Although changed is looked upon fearfully, sometimes it is necessary. As times change, so do people. With the growing era of technology, sometimes it is important to retain that knowledge by retaining the memory of the person or people who conceived it. As far as human abilities go, it would be impossible to keep another persons mind alive just through memory. By preserving a persons memory, it is preserving everything they have done in their life, everything they have worked for and everything they have accomplished. Humans broke the “natural order of life” once they began building cities, using metal and concrete, and being concerned with more than food and survival. This does not mean that it is a bad thing it merely means that as times change, events and items around the society need to change with it. Rather than “tear it all down and start building again […] it’ll change something”(Gibson, 260). Falling into a rut is one thing that humanity on a whole needs to strive to avoid. Falling into a rut. Once this happens goals become meaningless, and actions towards those goals cease. Life becomes useless and void of purpose because the same thing would happen day after day. Sentient computers are a way to change life, give it a new twist, and possibly prevent a calamity that would ultimately prove the downfall of the human race.
Computer will continue to be a part of human life whether people like it or not. They are here to stay. As humans constantly work to make their lives better, often by making them easier, they will turn more and more to computers. Eventually the only way to go will be to give computers their own thoughts so fast is technology progressing. The computers of today “[…] don’t know, because they can’t know […].” As a result of the way they have been made, it is impossible for computers to have thoughts of their own. Until the computer is re-designed to integrate the possibility of personality, then the innovative world has come to standstill. New computers are being made faster and faster with more memory, but there are no new concepts being introduced. Neuromancer shows this is entirely possible. William Gibson, the author, suggests that while it is not only possible, it would be worthwhile to have computers with sentience. They can save lives, and further the knowledge and productivity of the human race. One of the desires of humans is to be able to play as a God figurehead as well. By being able to create, essentially, life in a moment and have that entity learn and grow, it fulfills one of a human's most coveted goals. To be able to give life.
Bibliography
Gibson, William. Neuromancer. Tenth Anniversary Speical. New York: The Berkley Publishing , 1986.
Computers of the past were physically large and incapable of Internet communication. Computers in the present day are small and capable of almost anything. They can communicate with each other from around the world. They can provide entertainment for those using them. They can be used for business as well. The one thing that has not changed from the past to the present however is that computers cannot think for themselves. They always require a human or a human’s programming to work. It has been said if humans were to make a computer that is sentient and can think for itself that it would be the downfall of the human race. In a book entitled Neuromancer, by William Gibson, this idea is challenged. In the novel a character by the name of Case, a virtual cyberspace reality hacker, is recruited, by a man named Armitage. As the novel begins Case has no idea what his purpose is, other than that his skills are needed. He later finds out that an artificial intelligence known as Wintermute manipulated Armitage to get him to hire Case. With this knowledge he is also told that Wintermute is only half of an artificial intelligence. Case learns that it wants to merge with its other half, known as Neuromancer, because alone Wintermute considers itself, “a, shall we say, potential entity”(Gibson, p120). Through the storyline it suggests that having a computer or artificial intelligence that can think for itself would not be a bad or even a harmful thing. A sentient computer could be a good thing. This is demonstrated throughout the story because Wintermute saves Case’s life, and as the story finishes, the entity formed from the combination of Wintermute and Neuromancer, does not cause the destruction of the human race. As well, having a sentient computer is just like creating another human being that is smarter and faster with a different body.
It is thought that if humans were to create a computer that could think for itself that they would get more than they bargained for, that the computer would work on it’s own agenda with little regard for humanity or human life. In the novel Neuromancer this is not the case. Before Armitage hired him, Case was living in a cheap hotel and on the streets, did drugs, and was headed in a downward spiral towards death. “[He’s] suicidal…The model gives [him] a month on the outside. And [the] medical projections says [he’ll] need a new pancreas inside a year”(Gibson, 28). Although it was Armitage that hired Case, Wintermute engineered the hiring. The personality known as Armitage was created by Wintermute after a certain Colonel Corto was seriously injured in a covert operation known as Screaming Fist. After building up the new personality of Corto from the ground up, Wintermute was able to influence what the new personality would be like. He had Armitage/Corto hire Case because he was the best hacker there was available. When Case accepted the job he was given a blood transfusion and a custom made pancreas. It was custom made so that he would be unable to get high off the drugs that he had been addicted to. So although it was not directly it was, in essence Wintermute that saved Case’s life and brought back his career, thus proving that the computer cared not only for it’s own design but also for the comfort of someone it considers important.
It could be considered unethical to give a computer it’s own personality and the ability to think. The concept however is no different than having children. Aside from the obvious physical difference there is nothing distinguishing the difference between creating an entity that can think for itself and learns as it grows. This can be applied to either an infant or an artificial intelligence. It is stereotypical in the basic mindset of humans that a computer that is essentially conscious would go to any lengths to achieve that which it has set out to do. To really think what it would mean to have a sentient computer however means that the computer would rationalize and make decisions. Depending on the personality that would go with the ability to think for itself, it would or would not pursue its goal with blind ambition. Just the same as some humans pursue their goals without thought to how it affects others, a computer could be the same. A computer, though it could think for itself could be reclusive and quiet and still think for itself. It is often thought that computers, given awareness would go on a rampage for their goals just because they have the means to and don’t tire like ordinary humans. A computer could still have compassion on people who helped it attain its awareness. When Wintermute finally did mesh with Neuromancer, the first act was removing the poison sacs that lined Case’s blood that Armitage had put there to ensure that Case did as he was supposed to.
Once Neuromancer and Wintermute become a single unit, a single being, the end of the world does not happen. Case is rewarded for his troubles and life goes on as it would have if nothing had ever happened. If anything Case’s life is improved as a result of his dealings with Wintermute. The only difference being that a family would now be without the artificial intelligence that it had before, it having moved on. For some, life didn’t change. This cascade of events affected only a small majority of the society mentioned. It also goes to prove that since the computer could think for itself that it could think and choose not to ruin the careful balance that is known as life, and could instead choose to preserve it.
There is the argument that sentient computers would not be beneficial towards humanity however. There are reasons as to why there are some people who still believe this. Two reasons are that sentient computers can toy with death, and either prolong it’s coming or quicken it, and that computers have almost absolute freedom with humans being powerless to stop them before the single deed is done. In Neuromancer there are many who are opposed to the combination of Wintermute and Neuromancer to form a conscious computer. One of these so-called characters is Neuromancer itself. It works with all it has to prevent Case and Wintermute from succeeding. It even tried to lure Case into a place “hoping…to keep [him there]. But [it] failed. […]”(Gibson p 259). Neuromancer was against the merge from the beginning. It knew what would be created worked to stop it.
Although it would be difficult for a computer to go on a long-term rampage, it would not be difficult for them to commit a certain act and then not care about the consequences. Much the same way a sociopath commits a crime and then proceeds not to care about the penalty. This can be shown when Case is being arrested by what is known as “Turing.” He was being taken to a more convenient spot where his accusers could better interrogate him, when Wintermute intervened. Though he did not appear in person because he had no body “[he] killed ‘em,” Case panted, running. “Crazy [mother-trucker], [he] killed ‘em all…” If a computer were to turn this sort of attention on a high political figure, such as a president or prime minister than it could throw entire countries into chaos, this because of a lack of a leadership figure.
Another reason that some people could be against an artificial intelligence with thoughts of it’s own, is that it has more power over death than humans do. Both their own and the death of those who created it. For one thing, a computer never really dies. Until the casing and materials begin to decompose the computer will remain. What is more disturbing to some is that computers could have control over whether they live or die than they do. Some people believe that there is a “time” to die. A time when they feel they’ve accomplished their life’s goals and are ready to move on. A computer bent on keeping a person alive would know exactly what to do that would prevent the person from passing on. This would be considered, by some, as disrupting the natural way of life. This could be a big problem with many people because stereotypically, humans are opposed to change. Though it is one of their downfalls they would rather keep something they already have than change or exchange it. Even if only the person’s memory or a likeness of the person were kept alive it could be a problem. But to some it doesn’t matter, “to live [there] is to live. There is no difference.”(Gibson, 258) Being sentient, computers could come up with reasons for doing such things too. Being as highly sophisticated at they are computers would be able to see
“ […] death coming. In the patterns [one] sometimes imagined [one] could
detect in the dance of the street. Those patterns are real. [It is]
complex enough, in [its] narrow ways, to read those dances. [It] saw her death
in her need for [him] […] As clear to [it] as the shadow of a tumor to a surgeon
studying a patient’s scan […] and her deepest wish was that [he] would pursue
and punish her –[it] intervened. [It] brought her there. Into
[itself].”(Gibson, 259)
It is placing too much power in something that humans have too little control over. This makes many uneasy because typically humans will lean towards wanting control of their own destiny rather than place it in the hands of something else.
Neuromancer was against the merger between itself and Wintermute. To have ideas such as this, Neuromancer would have to be at least partially sentient. To recognize that the fusion of the two halves would create something that the world had never known beforehand, and that that fuse would bring about change unlike anything else. To resist that urge to change, Neuromancer would have to be thinking by itself. It would not have an outside source to govern it. This is known because the Wintermute/Neuromancer was an AI, an artificial intelligence, used to look after the family who owned it while their bodies were frozen cryogenically until a time of re-awakening.
Stereotypically it is thought that computers given, consciousness would have little regard for human life if it got in the way of their goal. To be thinking for oneself, it means that the individual makes their own decisions on a variety of circumstances that appear throughout the lifetime. To have a computer making it’s own decisions based on what it thinks does not mean that it would kill people for no reason. The reality of the situation is that the essentially living computer would be about as likely to kill a person or people as a certain human is to kill another being. The chances are slim to none. Although computers do have a wider range of capabilities in certain areas than humans do, they have more limitations physically. True, sentient computers would be free to do as they choose, but all humans can do whatever they want. Having a sentient computer would be no more dangerous to a country or economy than a child being born would. The only exception is that computer would learn and grow far quicker. Humans are manipulated by laws and customs to get them to behave a certain way. These are however not binding. There are consequences should certain laws be disobeyed but if a person had their heart set on something in particular thy would work as hard as they possibly could to obtain that goal. Everything sentient thing can do whatever it wants.
Although changed is looked upon fearfully, sometimes it is necessary. As times change, so do people. With the growing era of technology, sometimes it is important to retain that knowledge by retaining the memory of the person or people who conceived it. As far as human abilities go, it would be impossible to keep another persons mind alive just through memory. By preserving a persons memory, it is preserving everything they have done in their life, everything they have worked for and everything they have accomplished. Humans broke the “natural order of life” once they began building cities, using metal and concrete, and being concerned with more than food and survival. This does not mean that it is a bad thing it merely means that as times change, events and items around the society need to change with it. Rather than “tear it all down and start building again […] it’ll change something”(Gibson, 260). Falling into a rut is one thing that humanity on a whole needs to strive to avoid. Falling into a rut. Once this happens goals become meaningless, and actions towards those goals cease. Life becomes useless and void of purpose because the same thing would happen day after day. Sentient computers are a way to change life, give it a new twist, and possibly prevent a calamity that would ultimately prove the downfall of the human race.
Computer will continue to be a part of human life whether people like it or not. They are here to stay. As humans constantly work to make their lives better, often by making them easier, they will turn more and more to computers. Eventually the only way to go will be to give computers their own thoughts so fast is technology progressing. The computers of today “[…] don’t know, because they can’t know […].” As a result of the way they have been made, it is impossible for computers to have thoughts of their own. Until the computer is re-designed to integrate the possibility of personality, then the innovative world has come to standstill. New computers are being made faster and faster with more memory, but there are no new concepts being introduced. Neuromancer shows this is entirely possible. William Gibson, the author, suggests that while it is not only possible, it would be worthwhile to have computers with sentience. They can save lives, and further the knowledge and productivity of the human race. One of the desires of humans is to be able to play as a God figurehead as well. By being able to create, essentially, life in a moment and have that entity learn and grow, it fulfills one of a human's most coveted goals. To be able to give life.
Bibliography
Gibson, William. Neuromancer. Tenth Anniversary Speical. New York: The Berkley Publishing , 1986.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
1.2 Family Unit project
The major family units it the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare are:
-The Family of Hamlet
-The Family of Polonius
The Hamlet Family
The family tree of Hamlet is this. Hamlet (senior) and Gertrude are married and they have a son named Hamlet (junior). Claudius is the brother to Hamlet (sr) and an uncle to Hamlet (jr). He becomes Hamlet (jr)’s stepfather once he marries Gertrude after Hamlet (sr)’s murder. The crisis that affects the Family of Hamlet is that of the death of old Hamlet. The way Hamlet copes with the death is by distancing himself from his mother and his uncle. He becomes snide in his remarks and very unpredictable. Gertrude on the other hand does not see overly bothered by her husband’s death. She goes on with life as though nothing happened. She remarries rather quickly and does not spend much time mourning. Claudius is not bothered in the least by Hamlet’s death, possibly because it was by his engineering that Hamlet died.
The Polonius Family
The family tree of Polonius is this. Polonius is the father of Ophelia and Leartes. There is no mention of the mother. The crisis that affects this family is the death of Polonius himself. He is murdered by the unknowing Hamlet. Ophelia takes her father’s very harshly. It drives her to insanity and eventually to suicide. Leartes reacts with anger. He swears revenge against Hamlet and promises his downfall.
The roles of stereotypical family are fulfilled in this play using the family of Hamlet before old Hamlet's death. It had Hamlet (sr) as the father and Gertrude as the mother, with Hamlet (jr) as the son. This continues until the death of Hamlet (sr) and Gertrude remarries Claudius. This then becomes an extended family.
-The Family of Hamlet
-The Family of Polonius
The Hamlet Family
The family tree of Hamlet is this. Hamlet (senior) and Gertrude are married and they have a son named Hamlet (junior). Claudius is the brother to Hamlet (sr) and an uncle to Hamlet (jr). He becomes Hamlet (jr)’s stepfather once he marries Gertrude after Hamlet (sr)’s murder. The crisis that affects the Family of Hamlet is that of the death of old Hamlet. The way Hamlet copes with the death is by distancing himself from his mother and his uncle. He becomes snide in his remarks and very unpredictable. Gertrude on the other hand does not see overly bothered by her husband’s death. She goes on with life as though nothing happened. She remarries rather quickly and does not spend much time mourning. Claudius is not bothered in the least by Hamlet’s death, possibly because it was by his engineering that Hamlet died.
The Polonius Family
The family tree of Polonius is this. Polonius is the father of Ophelia and Leartes. There is no mention of the mother. The crisis that affects this family is the death of Polonius himself. He is murdered by the unknowing Hamlet. Ophelia takes her father’s very harshly. It drives her to insanity and eventually to suicide. Leartes reacts with anger. He swears revenge against Hamlet and promises his downfall.
The roles of stereotypical family are fulfilled in this play using the family of Hamlet before old Hamlet's death. It had Hamlet (sr) as the father and Gertrude as the mother, with Hamlet (jr) as the son. This continues until the death of Hamlet (sr) and Gertrude remarries Claudius. This then becomes an extended family.
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Prolepsis
Definition:
Foreseeing and forestalling objections in various ways. (Nordquist)
Explanation:
This rhetorical device is used in anticipation of an argument. It is where an argument is answered before it is brought forth. This is a little bit risky however because if the subject did not have such an objection than the person using prolepsis looks silly. It is similar to foreshadowing but also on the opposite side of the spectrum. This is because both deal with future but prolepsis makes a conclusion before an actual even happens and blatantly describes the result, whereas foreshadowing give hints of what could happen in the future.
Using prolepsis can be effective during debates because it could dispel an opponent’s argument before he/she is able to bring it forth. A person might want to use prolepsis because it prevents concerns from growing and festering with their target audience. It could prevent interruption and time loss as well as make certain points clear to the audience.
Examples
Example #1
Little Jimmy goes to Little Bobby, hits him and takes his ice cream. The Little Jimmy says to Little Bobby, “And if you tell on me then I’m gonna beat you up.”
àThis is an example of prolepsis because Little Jimmy is anticipating Little Bobby saying I’ll tell on you. He then brings forth his answer to the question without the question actually having been asked
Example #2
See the tiger’s grace how he pounces.
Media Example
Drugs found in Ont. Halloween candy
Canwest News Service
Published: Saturday, November 08, 2008
TORONTO - Police in southern Ontario are warning parents to check their kids' Halloween candy after cold medication was discovered in sealed boxes of Halloween candy.
On Wednesday, a Grade 5 student in Pickering, Ont., opened a box of Smarties collected while trick-or-treating Oct. 31 and found a DayQuil cold medication tablet among the candy, Durham Regional police said.
Since then four more cases have been confirmed, all involving the cold and flu medication in boxes of Smarties.
"The small Halloween-sized Smarties box appears to have been sealed and looked normal," police said in a news release. They urge parents to open and inspect all the candy their children collected on Halloween night.
Children could experience harmful side effects if they were to swallow the adult cold medication, police said.
Nestle, the makers of Smarties, said in a statement that it was co-operating with police.
"At Nestle, safety is our highest priority so we take these matters very seriously," the statement said. "To this end, we are actively working with the police who are leading this investigation."(http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=6d2c8e8d-5938-4f57-9382-c14e851e9632)
The final Statement made by Nestle is an example of prolepsis. This is an example because after saying that they take matters very seriously the question one could ask is “what is nestle doing about it though?” Nestle foresaw the possibility of this question and therefore made the statement “To this end, we are actively working with the police who are leading this investigation.” It foresaw and took necessary measure to insure that they were not questioned in the future.
Bibliography
Nordquist, Richard. "prolepsis- definition and examples of prolepsis." About.com. 8 Nov 2008.
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=6d2c8e8d-5938-4f57-9382-c14e851e9632
Foreseeing and forestalling objections in various ways. (Nordquist)
Explanation:
This rhetorical device is used in anticipation of an argument. It is where an argument is answered before it is brought forth. This is a little bit risky however because if the subject did not have such an objection than the person using prolepsis looks silly. It is similar to foreshadowing but also on the opposite side of the spectrum. This is because both deal with future but prolepsis makes a conclusion before an actual even happens and blatantly describes the result, whereas foreshadowing give hints of what could happen in the future.
Using prolepsis can be effective during debates because it could dispel an opponent’s argument before he/she is able to bring it forth. A person might want to use prolepsis because it prevents concerns from growing and festering with their target audience. It could prevent interruption and time loss as well as make certain points clear to the audience.
Examples
Example #1
Little Jimmy goes to Little Bobby, hits him and takes his ice cream. The Little Jimmy says to Little Bobby, “And if you tell on me then I’m gonna beat you up.”
àThis is an example of prolepsis because Little Jimmy is anticipating Little Bobby saying I’ll tell on you. He then brings forth his answer to the question without the question actually having been asked
Example #2
See the tiger’s grace how he pounces.
Media Example
Drugs found in Ont. Halloween candy
Canwest News Service
Published: Saturday, November 08, 2008
TORONTO - Police in southern Ontario are warning parents to check their kids' Halloween candy after cold medication was discovered in sealed boxes of Halloween candy.
On Wednesday, a Grade 5 student in Pickering, Ont., opened a box of Smarties collected while trick-or-treating Oct. 31 and found a DayQuil cold medication tablet among the candy, Durham Regional police said.
Since then four more cases have been confirmed, all involving the cold and flu medication in boxes of Smarties.
"The small Halloween-sized Smarties box appears to have been sealed and looked normal," police said in a news release. They urge parents to open and inspect all the candy their children collected on Halloween night.
Children could experience harmful side effects if they were to swallow the adult cold medication, police said.
Nestle, the makers of Smarties, said in a statement that it was co-operating with police.
"At Nestle, safety is our highest priority so we take these matters very seriously," the statement said. "To this end, we are actively working with the police who are leading this investigation."(http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=6d2c8e8d-5938-4f57-9382-c14e851e9632)
The final Statement made by Nestle is an example of prolepsis. This is an example because after saying that they take matters very seriously the question one could ask is “what is nestle doing about it though?” Nestle foresaw the possibility of this question and therefore made the statement “To this end, we are actively working with the police who are leading this investigation.” It foresaw and took necessary measure to insure that they were not questioned in the future.
Bibliography
Nordquist, Richard. "prolepsis- definition and examples of prolepsis." About.com. 8 Nov 2008
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=6d2c8e8d-5938-4f57-9382-c14e851e9632
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Final Argument
Unnecessarily Difficult by Tom Spears http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/editorials/story.html?id=2a465a78-c40b-47e9-b014-f43cbcd46752
1. No matter how easy the task, the instructions are the deciding factor as to whether or not a task gets done
2. Two psychologists devised a test and tried it on some students
3. Neat, clear, legible writing makes a task seem less difficult
4. Messy, garbled writing makes a task seem harder
Therefore
5. If you want to accomplish any task you have by following the instructions, make sure they are clear and easy to understand
1. No matter how easy the task, the instructions are the deciding factor as to whether or not a task gets done
2. Two psychologists devised a test and tried it on some students
3. Neat, clear, legible writing makes a task seem less difficult
4. Messy, garbled writing makes a task seem harder
Therefore
5. If you want to accomplish any task you have by following the instructions, make sure they are clear and easy to understand
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Whoops
ok so the title to the post immediately below this one is
STANDARDIZED ARGUMENT #2
thank you for your cooperation and patience
STANDARDIZED ARGUMENT #2
thank you for your cooperation and patience
FISHERIES
Salmon and whales
November 4, 2008
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081104.EWHALES04/TPStory/Opinion/editorials
1. Killer whale population example of impact of West Coast Salmon Industry
2. The diet of killer whales is mostly salmon
3. Pink salmon affect other salmon and grizzly bears as well
Therefore
4. The department of Fisheries and Oceans should make a move to help the killer whales and the grizzlies by allocating the salmon nearby them
Salmon and whales
November 4, 2008
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081104.EWHALES04/TPStory/Opinion/editorials
1. Killer whale population example of impact of West Coast Salmon Industry
2. The diet of killer whales is mostly salmon
3. Pink salmon affect other salmon and grizzly bears as well
Therefore
4. The department of Fisheries and Oceans should make a move to help the killer whales and the grizzlies by allocating the salmon nearby them
Standardized argument #1
Unnecessarily Difficult by Tom Spears
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/editorials/story.html?id=2a465a78-c40b-47e9-b014-f43cbcd46752
1. No matter how easy the task, the instructions are the deciding factor as to whether or not a task gets done
Thus
2. Neat, clear, legible writing makes a task seem less difficult
3. Messy, garbled writing makes a task seem harder
Therefore
4. If you want to accomplish a task by following the instructions, make sure they are clear and easy to understand
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/editorials/story.html?id=2a465a78-c40b-47e9-b014-f43cbcd46752
1. No matter how easy the task, the instructions are the deciding factor as to whether or not a task gets done
Thus
2. Neat, clear, legible writing makes a task seem less difficult
3. Messy, garbled writing makes a task seem harder
Therefore
4. If you want to accomplish a task by following the instructions, make sure they are clear and easy to understand
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Author's Note
I am aware that my essay is unformatted and is not at all what it should look like. Which is why i will be handing in a hard copy so that no marks are lost a a result of the stupidity of the blog site. Many thanks
Take home test- Essay
The Wizard of Oz
By: Tyler Keith
ENG 4UE
October 18, 2008
In Warner Brother’s The Wizard of Oz, a girl named Dorothy Gale gets caught in a tornado and swept away to a magical place called Oz. While there she meets up with people she can consider friends, and they point her towards a man known as the Wizard who will help her find her way home to Kansas. As she begins her quest, she comes across a character by the name of the Scarecrow. As time and the journey progress, the two meet their other two compatriots, the Cowardly Lion and the Tin Man. This journey is stereotypical because, as is typical to most fantasy setting journeys, there is a villain intent on stopping the hero and the road is long and full of hardships. Due to the unique nature of the characters the movie can be analyzed a number of different ways. One of the ways that this movie can be criticized is by using Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalysis theory because it has characters that exemplify the concepts of Id, Ego, and Super Ego.
According to Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis there are three components that all humans are born with. Those components are Id, Ego, and Super Ego. They begin to grow and develop within the first five years of a person’s life. The factors that influence how these fractions of the human mind mature are the people that the individual looks up to as role models, as well as who they were raised by and how they were raised. For example, one who was raised thinking it’s ok to take what you want whenever you want will more than likely have a more dominant Id, while someone who’s taught to watch out for other people and their needs are will be more lenient on the area of Super Ego. These three work together to form a person’s psyche. This will affect a person’s behaviour towards other people. Ultimately it influences a person’s entire life, their entire state of being. The existence and the individuality of the human race in based on, and revolves around the individuality of the Id, the Super Ego, and the Ego.
The Id portion of the mind primarily deals with the want of an individual that controls a persons wants. If the Id were the primary controller of the brain than a person would do whatever is needed to get what they want with no regard to the feelings others or how it would affect them. Although the Id is typically portrayed as bad, it is not. It is typical, however for the villains in most movies to have the Id being the dominant fraction of their brain. The Wicked Witch of the West is one such example. She is the villain and is willing to do anything to get the red slippers of her later sister, The Wicked Witch of the East. Those slippers are on the protagonist of the movie, Dorothy. In her attempt to get the slippers from Dorothy she causes much fear among the main character and her friends.
While she is the dominant expresser of the Id fraction, she is not the only one with the Id in the forefront of her mind. Dorothy and her friends, the Tin Man, the Cowardly Lion, and the Scarecrow, also exhibit the qualities of the Id. Throughout their entire quest, their goal is to get something for themselves. Dorothy begins her quest because she wants to go home. She gives no thought to how it would affect others, she just wants to get home. Her friends join her quest to “…see the wizard,” (Dorothy, Wizard of Oz) for very selfish reasons. The Scarecrow wants a brain, the Tin Man wants a heart, and the Cowardly Lion wants courage. In the beginning all join the journey for personal glorification. Although these characters do not have their Id being dominant throughout the entire movie, they do, just as all humans do, have moments of weakness, in which they succumb to their desires.
The Super Ego is a person’s conscience. The sense of what is right and what is wrong comes from the Super Ego. People who exhibit a dominant Super Ego will tend to be more shy/timid. It is also responsible for the feeling of guilt. It is also the desire to please those that the person/character considers important. While it is dominant in certain characters all people, possess the Super Ego.
The character who’s Super Ego is very visible in this movie is the guard at the Wizard’s Emerald Palace in Oz. In a moment of weakness he denies Dorothy and her friends access to the palace. As Dorothy sits down, and begins to cry because she thinks that her quest has failed, the guard opens his peephole and sees her. He is overcome with grief and for that reason alone, that couldn’t bear to see her cry or quest fail, he opens the door and allows them access to the wizards palace.
Another character who has a somewhat dominant Super Ego is the Good Witch Glinda. She is only seen at the beginning, the end and for a brief part during the middle of the movie. It was this Good Witch who pointed Dorothy on her way in the first place and told her where to go and what to do to find her way home. This can be seen as shy because otherwise she would have gone on the quest with Dorothy to help her find her way home. As a result of her timid behaviour and her eagerness to please, the Good Witch can be classified as having a dominant Super Ego.
The third and final characteristic is the Ego. The Ego is the side of a person’s mind that is shown to the world. It makes decisions and therefore action based on what is wanted by the Id and Super Ego. It tries to appease one party’s desire while keeping the other party content. It could be said that the Ego acts as a moderator between its two counterparts.
Dorothy is the character, in the movie, whose Ego faction is most visible. She knows that her friends have needs, and that she need has to get home too. Thus the Ego shows itself by finding a way to placate the Id with her desires of getting home, and at the same time it is able to satisfy the Super Ego. An example of this is when the group confronts the Wizard in his palace. Dorothy tells him that “[He] promised Mr. Scarecrow a brain”(Dorothy, Wizard of Oz). Her Ego side does this action for two reasons. One of the reasons is to suit the Super Ego with the pleasing of someone else. It does this because it can pacify the Id with the knowledge that her turn is coming to have her wish granted.
Another person who shows a dominant Ego is the Wizard himself. After he has given the wishes to Dorothy’s companions he finds a solution to her wish in which he leaves the magical Land of Oz with her. He agrees to bring her with him in his contraption, which will take them both back to Kansas, he being a “…native to Kansas [himself]…”(the Wizard, Wizard of Oz). This action pleases both his Super Ego, because he’s helping someone else, and his Id because he is fulfilling his desire to leave the Land of Oz.
As can be seen, the combination of the Id, Super Ego and the Ego form how a person thinks and acts. Since all three of these are formed at an early age, and draw on the person’s life experiences to change and grow everyone’s lives are different. Everyone will have a different Ego, Super Ego and Id. As is obvious, Dorothy must have had a good mentor or parent figure when she was a child to have the strong Ego that she does. The Wicked Witch of the West on the other hand clearly did not have any role model from which to learn from. That or she had an example that was also deficient in the areas of Ego and Super Ego. This is why Sigmund Freud’s theory of psychoanalytic criticism is applicable to the movie the Wizard of Oz. It has characters that exemplify the portions of the mind know as the Id, the Super Ego and the Ego.
Bibliography
http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/Wizard-of-Oz,-The.htmlThe Wizard of Oz, Unknown,
By: Tyler Keith
ENG 4UE
October 18, 2008
In Warner Brother’s The Wizard of Oz, a girl named Dorothy Gale gets caught in a tornado and swept away to a magical place called Oz. While there she meets up with people she can consider friends, and they point her towards a man known as the Wizard who will help her find her way home to Kansas. As she begins her quest, she comes across a character by the name of the Scarecrow. As time and the journey progress, the two meet their other two compatriots, the Cowardly Lion and the Tin Man. This journey is stereotypical because, as is typical to most fantasy setting journeys, there is a villain intent on stopping the hero and the road is long and full of hardships. Due to the unique nature of the characters the movie can be analyzed a number of different ways. One of the ways that this movie can be criticized is by using Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalysis theory because it has characters that exemplify the concepts of Id, Ego, and Super Ego.
According to Freud’s theory of psychoanalysis there are three components that all humans are born with. Those components are Id, Ego, and Super Ego. They begin to grow and develop within the first five years of a person’s life. The factors that influence how these fractions of the human mind mature are the people that the individual looks up to as role models, as well as who they were raised by and how they were raised. For example, one who was raised thinking it’s ok to take what you want whenever you want will more than likely have a more dominant Id, while someone who’s taught to watch out for other people and their needs are will be more lenient on the area of Super Ego. These three work together to form a person’s psyche. This will affect a person’s behaviour towards other people. Ultimately it influences a person’s entire life, their entire state of being. The existence and the individuality of the human race in based on, and revolves around the individuality of the Id, the Super Ego, and the Ego.
The Id portion of the mind primarily deals with the want of an individual that controls a persons wants. If the Id were the primary controller of the brain than a person would do whatever is needed to get what they want with no regard to the feelings others or how it would affect them. Although the Id is typically portrayed as bad, it is not. It is typical, however for the villains in most movies to have the Id being the dominant fraction of their brain. The Wicked Witch of the West is one such example. She is the villain and is willing to do anything to get the red slippers of her later sister, The Wicked Witch of the East. Those slippers are on the protagonist of the movie, Dorothy. In her attempt to get the slippers from Dorothy she causes much fear among the main character and her friends.
While she is the dominant expresser of the Id fraction, she is not the only one with the Id in the forefront of her mind. Dorothy and her friends, the Tin Man, the Cowardly Lion, and the Scarecrow, also exhibit the qualities of the Id. Throughout their entire quest, their goal is to get something for themselves. Dorothy begins her quest because she wants to go home. She gives no thought to how it would affect others, she just wants to get home. Her friends join her quest to “…see the wizard,” (Dorothy, Wizard of Oz) for very selfish reasons. The Scarecrow wants a brain, the Tin Man wants a heart, and the Cowardly Lion wants courage. In the beginning all join the journey for personal glorification. Although these characters do not have their Id being dominant throughout the entire movie, they do, just as all humans do, have moments of weakness, in which they succumb to their desires.
The Super Ego is a person’s conscience. The sense of what is right and what is wrong comes from the Super Ego. People who exhibit a dominant Super Ego will tend to be more shy/timid. It is also responsible for the feeling of guilt. It is also the desire to please those that the person/character considers important. While it is dominant in certain characters all people, possess the Super Ego.
The character who’s Super Ego is very visible in this movie is the guard at the Wizard’s Emerald Palace in Oz. In a moment of weakness he denies Dorothy and her friends access to the palace. As Dorothy sits down, and begins to cry because she thinks that her quest has failed, the guard opens his peephole and sees her. He is overcome with grief and for that reason alone, that couldn’t bear to see her cry or quest fail, he opens the door and allows them access to the wizards palace.
Another character who has a somewhat dominant Super Ego is the Good Witch Glinda. She is only seen at the beginning, the end and for a brief part during the middle of the movie. It was this Good Witch who pointed Dorothy on her way in the first place and told her where to go and what to do to find her way home. This can be seen as shy because otherwise she would have gone on the quest with Dorothy to help her find her way home. As a result of her timid behaviour and her eagerness to please, the Good Witch can be classified as having a dominant Super Ego.
The third and final characteristic is the Ego. The Ego is the side of a person’s mind that is shown to the world. It makes decisions and therefore action based on what is wanted by the Id and Super Ego. It tries to appease one party’s desire while keeping the other party content. It could be said that the Ego acts as a moderator between its two counterparts.
Dorothy is the character, in the movie, whose Ego faction is most visible. She knows that her friends have needs, and that she need has to get home too. Thus the Ego shows itself by finding a way to placate the Id with her desires of getting home, and at the same time it is able to satisfy the Super Ego. An example of this is when the group confronts the Wizard in his palace. Dorothy tells him that “[He] promised Mr. Scarecrow a brain”(Dorothy, Wizard of Oz). Her Ego side does this action for two reasons. One of the reasons is to suit the Super Ego with the pleasing of someone else. It does this because it can pacify the Id with the knowledge that her turn is coming to have her wish granted.
Another person who shows a dominant Ego is the Wizard himself. After he has given the wishes to Dorothy’s companions he finds a solution to her wish in which he leaves the magical Land of Oz with her. He agrees to bring her with him in his contraption, which will take them both back to Kansas, he being a “…native to Kansas [himself]…”(the Wizard, Wizard of Oz). This action pleases both his Super Ego, because he’s helping someone else, and his Id because he is fulfilling his desire to leave the Land of Oz.
As can be seen, the combination of the Id, Super Ego and the Ego form how a person thinks and acts. Since all three of these are formed at an early age, and draw on the person’s life experiences to change and grow everyone’s lives are different. Everyone will have a different Ego, Super Ego and Id. As is obvious, Dorothy must have had a good mentor or parent figure when she was a child to have the strong Ego that she does. The Wicked Witch of the West on the other hand clearly did not have any role model from which to learn from. That or she had an example that was also deficient in the areas of Ego and Super Ego. This is why Sigmund Freud’s theory of psychoanalytic criticism is applicable to the movie the Wizard of Oz. It has characters that exemplify the portions of the mind know as the Id, the Super Ego and the Ego.
Bibliography
http://www.imsdb.com/scripts/Wizard-of-Oz,-The.htmlThe Wizard of Oz, Unknown,
Saturday, October 18, 2008
Brighton Rock
After Pinkie Brown murders a man, in retribution for the killing of his friend, he must cover his trail so that he is not caught. He has all points covered except for two. One of them is a woman by the name of Ida Arnold, a woman intent on proving Pinkie’s guilt. The other, a girl called Rose, witnessed something she was not supposed to. Rose shares Pinkie’s view of Catholicism, salvation, and damnation. Ida Arnold does not. She believes in right and wrong and justice. She believes that what Pinkie did was wrong and that he should be brought to justice. Gary Greene's Brighton Rock revolves around the opposition between the concepts of spirituality and mortality. It does so by continually mentioning how certain characters views an act, the main character's expected judgment, and his changing moral values.
Pinkie, or the Boy, as he is referred to for the majority of the novel, murders a man by the name of Franks Hale, a reporter, in revenge for the murder of his friend, one known as Kite. Hale’s job with the newspaper was to place cards in certain locations and provide a prize to anyone who found the winning card. Though Hale was not the one to murder Kite, he was an informer for the rival gang, Colleoni, which was responsible for the murder. After killing Hale, Pinkie has one of his gang members take the cards that Hale was responsible for placing and put them where he would have been, in a restaurant, had he been living. Rose worked as a waitress at that certain restaurant and was the one to witness the member of Pinkie’s gang putting the card there. In order to keep Rose from talking Pinkie begins courting Rose. When he feels he has no other option “Pinkie marries her in a civil ceremony that both know to be an offense against the Holy Ghost”(Greene, viii). Although both know this to be wrong and damning for the both of them, they go through with it anyways. He does it because he is certain that he can either convince her or force to keep quiet. She does it because she loves him and was willing to have herself and her future children damned just to be with him.
The woman Ida Arnold is also frequently trying to persuade Rose to leave Pinkie and that life behind. She feels that it is her duty to save Rose. Rose however thinks that Pinkie loves her and would do nothing to hurt her. She also would not leave Pinkie because she loves him. Ida tries to convince Rose of what’s right and wrong, but the words have no effect because “…their taste was extinguished by stronger foods- Good and Evil. She knew…that Pinkie was evil…”(Greene, 217)
Ida Arnold was with Frank Hale the day he was murdered. Although because of how he acted the day he was going to die, for he knew “that they meant to murder him” (Greene, 3), she came to the conclusion that it was not a death of natural causes as the papers had said. She thought she knew it was Pinkie and was just trying to find a way to get evidence and prove him guilty. While she is looking for evidence, she gets a friend of hers, Phil Corkery, to assist her. After a while, and working hard to find evidence, they one day find themselves in hotel after a hard days work. That night they sleep together, even thought they’re not married. Ida does not feel that this is wrong because “it’s only fun…fun to be human”(Greene, 158). This also shows how she views religion because to some, sex before marriage is considered a sin.
As a result of his lifestyle and the acts he has committed Pinkie believes he is damned even though he is only seventeen. One of the factors is that he married Rose when she was sixteen, and that they didn’t get married in a church. Another thing that causes this belief within his marriage is the fact that he killed two men. One of them being Hale and the other being a member of his own gang who he thought knew too much, and who he thought was “sour and milky”(Greene, 58). First he tried to have the man, Spicer, murdered by some men from another gang but they turn on him and attack him as well. As he was running away, Pinkie began to think briefly of his salvation. He thought of repenting but couldn’t bring himself to “repent for something that made him safe”(Greene, 116). Pinkie does care about his salvation, however it does seem that he’s more concerned about his mortal safety than he is about his eternal salvation. He wanted to make a “confession, when he was safe, to wipe out everything”(Greene, 117). One of the things that somewhat drives Pinkie away from the thought of salvation is, after he has consummated his marriage with Rose, he wakes up and goes for a walk to get some air, and as he is walking he saw
“an old woman…the rotting and discoloured face…like the sight of damnation. Then he heard the whisper, ‘blessed art thou among women,’ saw the grey fingers fumbling as the beads. This was not one of the damned: he watched with horrified fascination: this was one of the saved.” (Greene, 204)
It begins with Pinkie, though he’s a hardened, resolute mob leader, who doesn’t drink, and is horrified of sex, which he refers to as “the game”. He stands by his values until one night, he and his gang members are going out to a bar. There they meet the late Spicer’s now ex-girlfriend. She is overcome with grief and commands Pinkie to have a drink. He does so and then begins dancing with her. It is after that, that he almost breaks his other moral value of staying away from “the game.” He goes with the woman into the parking lot to find a car. Before the act can be completed, or even started for that matter, Pinkie flees, the thought of sex being too much for him to bear. He later breaks that rule when he sleeps with Rose after their marriage. One of the things that does not change within Pinkie is his determination to become safe from the law in his mortality. He is always willing to do whatever it takes, kill whomever he needs to, (“…have I got to have a massacre?” (Greene, 264)) in order to not get caught.
Through these things we see that the opposition between spirituality and mortality is what the novel revolves around. Pinkie and Rose represent the spiritual angle of the novel, with their fear of damnation and salvation. Ida Arnold represents the mortal/physical side with her desire for what she considers right giving no thought to whether she offends God or not in the process. Their views, Pinkie’s expected judgment and his moral values are where the contrast is exemplified the most.
Bibliography
Greene, Gary. Brighton Rock. Vintage. Great Britain: Vintage, 2004
Pinkie, or the Boy, as he is referred to for the majority of the novel, murders a man by the name of Franks Hale, a reporter, in revenge for the murder of his friend, one known as Kite. Hale’s job with the newspaper was to place cards in certain locations and provide a prize to anyone who found the winning card. Though Hale was not the one to murder Kite, he was an informer for the rival gang, Colleoni, which was responsible for the murder. After killing Hale, Pinkie has one of his gang members take the cards that Hale was responsible for placing and put them where he would have been, in a restaurant, had he been living. Rose worked as a waitress at that certain restaurant and was the one to witness the member of Pinkie’s gang putting the card there. In order to keep Rose from talking Pinkie begins courting Rose. When he feels he has no other option “Pinkie marries her in a civil ceremony that both know to be an offense against the Holy Ghost”(Greene, viii). Although both know this to be wrong and damning for the both of them, they go through with it anyways. He does it because he is certain that he can either convince her or force to keep quiet. She does it because she loves him and was willing to have herself and her future children damned just to be with him.
The woman Ida Arnold is also frequently trying to persuade Rose to leave Pinkie and that life behind. She feels that it is her duty to save Rose. Rose however thinks that Pinkie loves her and would do nothing to hurt her. She also would not leave Pinkie because she loves him. Ida tries to convince Rose of what’s right and wrong, but the words have no effect because “…their taste was extinguished by stronger foods- Good and Evil. She knew…that Pinkie was evil…”(Greene, 217)
Ida Arnold was with Frank Hale the day he was murdered. Although because of how he acted the day he was going to die, for he knew “that they meant to murder him” (Greene, 3), she came to the conclusion that it was not a death of natural causes as the papers had said. She thought she knew it was Pinkie and was just trying to find a way to get evidence and prove him guilty. While she is looking for evidence, she gets a friend of hers, Phil Corkery, to assist her. After a while, and working hard to find evidence, they one day find themselves in hotel after a hard days work. That night they sleep together, even thought they’re not married. Ida does not feel that this is wrong because “it’s only fun…fun to be human”(Greene, 158). This also shows how she views religion because to some, sex before marriage is considered a sin.
As a result of his lifestyle and the acts he has committed Pinkie believes he is damned even though he is only seventeen. One of the factors is that he married Rose when she was sixteen, and that they didn’t get married in a church. Another thing that causes this belief within his marriage is the fact that he killed two men. One of them being Hale and the other being a member of his own gang who he thought knew too much, and who he thought was “sour and milky”(Greene, 58). First he tried to have the man, Spicer, murdered by some men from another gang but they turn on him and attack him as well. As he was running away, Pinkie began to think briefly of his salvation. He thought of repenting but couldn’t bring himself to “repent for something that made him safe”(Greene, 116). Pinkie does care about his salvation, however it does seem that he’s more concerned about his mortal safety than he is about his eternal salvation. He wanted to make a “confession, when he was safe, to wipe out everything”(Greene, 117). One of the things that somewhat drives Pinkie away from the thought of salvation is, after he has consummated his marriage with Rose, he wakes up and goes for a walk to get some air, and as he is walking he saw
“an old woman…the rotting and discoloured face…like the sight of damnation. Then he heard the whisper, ‘blessed art thou among women,’ saw the grey fingers fumbling as the beads. This was not one of the damned: he watched with horrified fascination: this was one of the saved.” (Greene, 204)
It begins with Pinkie, though he’s a hardened, resolute mob leader, who doesn’t drink, and is horrified of sex, which he refers to as “the game”. He stands by his values until one night, he and his gang members are going out to a bar. There they meet the late Spicer’s now ex-girlfriend. She is overcome with grief and commands Pinkie to have a drink. He does so and then begins dancing with her. It is after that, that he almost breaks his other moral value of staying away from “the game.” He goes with the woman into the parking lot to find a car. Before the act can be completed, or even started for that matter, Pinkie flees, the thought of sex being too much for him to bear. He later breaks that rule when he sleeps with Rose after their marriage. One of the things that does not change within Pinkie is his determination to become safe from the law in his mortality. He is always willing to do whatever it takes, kill whomever he needs to, (“…have I got to have a massacre?” (Greene, 264)) in order to not get caught.
Through these things we see that the opposition between spirituality and mortality is what the novel revolves around. Pinkie and Rose represent the spiritual angle of the novel, with their fear of damnation and salvation. Ida Arnold represents the mortal/physical side with her desire for what she considers right giving no thought to whether she offends God or not in the process. Their views, Pinkie’s expected judgment and his moral values are where the contrast is exemplified the most.
Bibliography
Greene, Gary. Brighton Rock. Vintage. Great Britain: Vintage, 2004
Friday, October 10, 2008
Essay Outline
Thesis: The themes of good and evil are constantly opposed by the supposed right and wrong.
Reason: Though they appear to be the same they are not.
Example: Pinkie believe in heaven and hell, salvation and damnation, while the woman trying to expose his murderous ways, Ida Arnold believes in right and wrong.
Example: Good and Evil applies more to the spiritual side of mortality, while right and wrong applies to physical side of mortality
Reason: Good and evil applies more towards god and christianity, while right and wrong is more set on pleasing the law
Example: Pinkie and his wife feel they will be damned for not getting married in a church
Example: Ida Arnold believes that Pinkie must be brought to justice for murdering a man and doesn't care a whit whether he's married or not
Reason: What is good is not necessarily what is right and what is evil is not necessarily wrong
Example: Society today doesn't see there being a problem with getting married outside church, making it "right", but the main characters believe it to be an offense in the sight of the Holy Ghost making it evil.
Example: Ida Arnold does not perceive Pinkie's marriage to be right, but with the way Pinkie's wife feels he treats her, she doesn't see their being together as evil.
Reason: Though they appear to be the same they are not.
Example: Pinkie believe in heaven and hell, salvation and damnation, while the woman trying to expose his murderous ways, Ida Arnold believes in right and wrong.
Example: Good and Evil applies more to the spiritual side of mortality, while right and wrong applies to physical side of mortality
Reason: Good and evil applies more towards god and christianity, while right and wrong is more set on pleasing the law
Example: Pinkie and his wife feel they will be damned for not getting married in a church
Example: Ida Arnold believes that Pinkie must be brought to justice for murdering a man and doesn't care a whit whether he's married or not
Reason: What is good is not necessarily what is right and what is evil is not necessarily wrong
Example: Society today doesn't see there being a problem with getting married outside church, making it "right", but the main characters believe it to be an offense in the sight of the Holy Ghost making it evil.
Example: Ida Arnold does not perceive Pinkie's marriage to be right, but with the way Pinkie's wife feels he treats her, she doesn't see their being together as evil.
Monday, October 6, 2008
Thesis Statement
Gary Greene's Brighton Rock revolves around the contrast between the concepts of good and evil and right and wrong. It does so by continually mentioning catholicism, the main character's expected judgement, and certain character's views of an action as right or wrong, and good or evil.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Lesson Plan
Objectives
-Students will be able to define impressionistic criticism
-Students will be able to criticize a piece of literature or art based on their impression
-Students will be able to name and identify works of famous impressionistic critics.
Resources/Material
-Projector
-Wilde’s Essay “The Artist as Critic”
-Various songs, poems
Methodology
0-10è Talk about impressionistic criticism à Definition, Examples
à Artistic Temperament
11-20è Talk about Walter Pater
21-35è Talk about Wildeà Discussion. Essay
36-45è Impressionstic movement
46-60è Examples from song meanings/poems (weird ones). Have class criticize based on impression. Share?
61-70è Review. Link examples to main idea
Evaluation
The class will be given various pieces of art/literature and be asked to criticize it impressionistically. The focus will be to see if students can come to their own conclusion and not just follow and see what others think.
A kind of criticism that tries to convey what the critic subjectively feels and thinks about a work of art.”
http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/Impressionistic_criticism.html
http://www.enotes.com/nineteenth-century-criticism/walter-horatio-pater
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Pater
http://www.online-literature.com/wilde/1305/
Call on people (3-5, or as many hands) and ask what their definition of criticism is.
Give the class our definition of criticism.
“the act or art of analyzing and evaluating or judging the quality of a literary or artistic work, musical performance, art exhibit, dramatic production, etc
a critical comment, article, or essay; critique” (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/criticism)
Now call on people (3-5 or as many hands) and ask what they think impressionistic criticism
Give class our definition of impressionistic criticism
“A kind of criticism that tries to convey what the critic subjectively feels and thinks about a work of art.”
http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/Impressionistic_criticism.html
We’re going to be talking about two of the more famous literary critics that we’ve come across. The first one is Walter Pater. He was the first one to bring the idea of impressionistic criticism to the world. “Pater was born in Shadwell, East London, the second of four children of Richard Pater and Maria Hill. His father, a surgeon, died when Pater was two years old, and the remaining members of the family moved to Enfield, where Pater attended grammar school. He enrolled in King's School in Canterbury in 1853, the year before the death of his mother, and in 1858 won a scholarship to Queen's College at Oxford, where he studied the classics and was inspired by John Ruskin's Modern Painters. After taking a degree in humane letters in 1862 and working briefly as a tutor of private pupils, he accepted a fellowship at Brasenose College, Oxford, in 1864—a position he would keep until his death. His first published essay, a work on Samuel Taylor Coleridge, appeared in Westminster Review in 1866. Though published anonymously, “Coleridge's Writings,” with its promotion of relativism, made Pater's colleagues question his intellectual heterodoxy. Pater lived the last twenty-five years of his life with his two unmarried sisters in both Oxford and London. Much of what is known or thought to be known concerning Pater's life is gleaned from the autobiographical “The Child in the House” (which first appeared in Macmillan's in 1878, and was published as An Imaginary Portrait in 1894). Indeed, critics have noted that nearly all of Pater's work contains autobiographical elements, and that he often wrote about himself while apparently recounting another's life and career.
Pater’s Work
- Winckelmann (1867)
- Poems by William Morris (1868)
- Notes on Leonardo da Vinci (1869)
- A Fragment of Sandro Botticelli (1870
- The Poetry of Michaelangelo (1871)
In these essays Pater eschewed absolute critical standards in favor of his own personal impressions of the artists' works.” (http://www.enotes.com/nineteenth-century-criticism/walter-horatio-pater) Here is where we see the first evidence of impressionistic criticism.
Objectives
-Students will be able to define impressionistic criticism
-Students will be able to criticize a piece of literature or art based on their impression
-Students will be able to name and identify works of famous impressionistic critics.
Resources/Material
-Projector
-Wilde’s Essay “The Artist as Critic”
-Various songs, poems
Methodology
0-10è Talk about impressionistic criticism à Definition, Examples
à Artistic Temperament
11-20è Talk about Walter Pater
21-35è Talk about Wildeà Discussion. Essay
36-45è Impressionstic movement
46-60è Examples from song meanings/poems (weird ones). Have class criticize based on impression. Share?
61-70è Review. Link examples to main idea
Evaluation
The class will be given various pieces of art/literature and be asked to criticize it impressionistically. The focus will be to see if students can come to their own conclusion and not just follow and see what others think.
A kind of criticism that tries to convey what the critic subjectively feels and thinks about a work of art.”
http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/Impressionistic_criticism.html
http://www.enotes.com/nineteenth-century-criticism/walter-horatio-pater
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Pater
http://www.online-literature.com/wilde/1305/
Call on people (3-5, or as many hands) and ask what their definition of criticism is.
Give the class our definition of criticism.
“the act or art of analyzing and evaluating or judging the quality of a literary or artistic work, musical performance, art exhibit, dramatic production, etc
a critical comment, article, or essay; critique” (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/criticism)
Now call on people (3-5 or as many hands) and ask what they think impressionistic criticism
Give class our definition of impressionistic criticism
“A kind of criticism that tries to convey what the critic subjectively feels and thinks about a work of art.”
http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/Impressionistic_criticism.html
We’re going to be talking about two of the more famous literary critics that we’ve come across. The first one is Walter Pater. He was the first one to bring the idea of impressionistic criticism to the world. “Pater was born in Shadwell, East London, the second of four children of Richard Pater and Maria Hill. His father, a surgeon, died when Pater was two years old, and the remaining members of the family moved to Enfield, where Pater attended grammar school. He enrolled in King's School in Canterbury in 1853, the year before the death of his mother, and in 1858 won a scholarship to Queen's College at Oxford, where he studied the classics and was inspired by John Ruskin's Modern Painters. After taking a degree in humane letters in 1862 and working briefly as a tutor of private pupils, he accepted a fellowship at Brasenose College, Oxford, in 1864—a position he would keep until his death. His first published essay, a work on Samuel Taylor Coleridge, appeared in Westminster Review in 1866. Though published anonymously, “Coleridge's Writings,” with its promotion of relativism, made Pater's colleagues question his intellectual heterodoxy. Pater lived the last twenty-five years of his life with his two unmarried sisters in both Oxford and London. Much of what is known or thought to be known concerning Pater's life is gleaned from the autobiographical “The Child in the House” (which first appeared in Macmillan's in 1878, and was published as An Imaginary Portrait in 1894). Indeed, critics have noted that nearly all of Pater's work contains autobiographical elements, and that he often wrote about himself while apparently recounting another's life and career.
Pater’s Work
- Winckelmann (1867)
- Poems by William Morris (1868)
- Notes on Leonardo da Vinci (1869)
- A Fragment of Sandro Botticelli (1870
- The Poetry of Michaelangelo (1871)
In these essays Pater eschewed absolute critical standards in favor of his own personal impressions of the artists' works.” (http://www.enotes.com/nineteenth-century-criticism/walter-horatio-pater) Here is where we see the first evidence of impressionistic criticism.
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Walter Pater
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Pater
http://www.subir.com/pater/
http://www.nndb.com/people/622/000096334/
http://www.subir.com/pater/
http://www.nndb.com/people/622/000096334/
Sources for Impressionistic Criticism
http://darlingjubella.edublogs.org/2008/09/08/impressionistic-criticism-internet-info/
http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/Impressionistic_criticism.html
http://www.answers.com/topic/impressionism-literature
http://books.google.ca/books?id=zB4n3MVozbUC&pg=PA1637&lpg=PA1637&dq=impressionistic+criticism&source=web&ots=OA_T32Zs-S&sig=qa6IShApsLVBBLa06K9K6tvZwTg&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result
http://books.google.ca/books?id=TlfLGxXN9PoC&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=impressionistic+criticism&source=web&ots=vrGvCxU5w
http://www.enotes.com/nineteenth-century-criticism/walter-horatio-pater
http://www.cmgww.com/historic/wilde/
http://www.library.utoronto.ca/utel/glossary/Impressionistic_criticism.html
http://www.answers.com/topic/impressionism-literature
http://books.google.ca/books?id=zB4n3MVozbUC&pg=PA1637&lpg=PA1637&dq=impressionistic+criticism&source=web&ots=OA_T32Zs-S&sig=qa6IShApsLVBBLa06K9K6tvZwTg&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result
http://books.google.ca/books?id=TlfLGxXN9PoC&pg=PA18&lpg=PA18&dq=impressionistic+criticism&source=web&ots=vrGvCxU5w
http://www.enotes.com/nineteenth-century-criticism/walter-horatio-pater
http://www.cmgww.com/historic/wilde/
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Accountability Agreement
Focus:
1. 85 by the end of the semester.
2. To improve on my essay writing
3. To use my class time efficiently and effectively
Contributions:
1. Help my classmates if I am able to
2. I will be coaching the junior boys volleyball team
3. I will be bringing my ideas and sharing them with others
Accountabilities:
1. I will be responsible for telling my teacher when I will be absent for sports
2. I will be responsible for getting projects and assignments in on time
3. I will be responsible for not being disruptive during class time
Supports:
1. I will require Mr. Murray for feedback on things I am unsure about
2. I will require my parents to ensure that I have quiet working environment
3. I will require my peers to provide support (proofreading) where possible
Measurements:
1. I will know I succeeded when I get tests back that have my desired score (+85)
2. My mark from at the final report card will exceed that of my midterm report
3. I am able to write essays about any topic effectively
Consequences:
1. If I succeed I will buy myself chocolate in bulk
2. If I fail I will lose the ongoing contest I have going on with my brother about who has the better marks
3. If I succeed then I will take myself, and friends, out to a movie
1. 85 by the end of the semester.
2. To improve on my essay writing
3. To use my class time efficiently and effectively
Contributions:
1. Help my classmates if I am able to
2. I will be coaching the junior boys volleyball team
3. I will be bringing my ideas and sharing them with others
Accountabilities:
1. I will be responsible for telling my teacher when I will be absent for sports
2. I will be responsible for getting projects and assignments in on time
3. I will be responsible for not being disruptive during class time
Supports:
1. I will require Mr. Murray for feedback on things I am unsure about
2. I will require my parents to ensure that I have quiet working environment
3. I will require my peers to provide support (proofreading) where possible
Measurements:
1. I will know I succeeded when I get tests back that have my desired score (+85)
2. My mark from at the final report card will exceed that of my midterm report
3. I am able to write essays about any topic effectively
Consequences:
1. If I succeed I will buy myself chocolate in bulk
2. If I fail I will lose the ongoing contest I have going on with my brother about who has the better marks
3. If I succeed then I will take myself, and friends, out to a movie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
