11/20 Response to Material

I am kind of excited to talk about Ceremony because it's our first novel! The American Dream was difficult enough to even get at, and Death of a Salesmen was better because we had a much more accessible plot and characters, but now that we've got an author to directly interact with I think we're gonna find some cool stuff. Granted, the narrative is nonlinear, but I don't think we'll struggle too much with that once we're familiar with the work. Holmes has held true to her forest simile in that we're really out on our own with these works, and yet I don't feel lost; as a class we are finding some legitimate  literary things. Oh, and Prezi. That's some crazy stuff. I'm gonna use that more in the future, outside of this class, for sure. Some used it better than others, but it's more engaging than Powerpoint for sure. This class is pretty unique in its structure; it's a lot more informal, but also gives us students a lot more credit and independence and it's proven to not be in vain because I'm picking up the material just as well as if it was handed to me, and since it's much more exploratory and exciting to find myself I'm sure I'll retain it better and take it to heart. Overall, I'm pretty happy with AP Lit lately.

11/20 Close Reading

Study proves that bigots, morons, not entitled to their opinions after all

This piece may seem like a silly humor column designed for a few shallow laughs, but if one looks closely and applies DIDLS, one will find that there's actually a lot going on here. The diction is what gets a lot of the humor through, particularly when it's played with. The article has a reasonably scientific tone, with words like "triggered," "turnaround," and "breakthrough" to describe the supposed discovery, but whenever the creators of the idiotic content are mentioned they are described as "fuckwits" and "idiots", starkly contrasting the more formal diction to create humor. They also, though, symbolize the unsophistication and primitiveness of the uninformed internet posters on contrast to the modern and enlightened world we live in.
The author also compares the imbecilic  population to a group of monkeys flinging feces, creating a ridiculous, deprecating image. He then uses this image to further denigrate them by going so far as to suggest that this primal picture is more mature and sophisticated than the content that some people share on the internet. This idea of contrast is then turned upside-down when he then compares the bloggers and commenters to Socrates, calling in details of his philosophy make a joke about how uninformed they are.
While one can read it and laugh, if one uses DIDLS one can really see that the author is using literary techniques to make put down those who post unthoughtful, inane, and inaccurate material on the internet and make readers consider whether they fall into this group from time to time. I'm sure it was entirely his intention to do so, and his goals will have been accomplished if a few hasty posters think twice before sharing their thoughts with the world.

Open Prompt 11/13

2007, Form B. Works of literature often depict acts of betrayal. Friends and even family may betray a protagonist; main characters may likewise be guilty of treachery or may betray their own values. Select a novel or play that includes such acts of betrayal. Then, in a well-written essay, analyze the nature of the betrayal and show how it contributes to the meaning of the work as a whole.

Trust is a very important part of any relationship; be it professional, romantic, or colloquial. People rely on one another frequently, to the point where if this trust is broken, it is considered a serious breach which can drastically affect not only the relationship but the greater lives of everyone involved. To betray someone says words about the individual who breaks the trust and in literature can even say something about the world in which the story takes place. In Treasure Island, Long John Silver’s betrayal of the crew’s trust serves not only to highlight his own greed but also explores the inherent evils of piracy itself.

                Long John Silver’s betrayal displays a blatant lack of regard for the fate of anyone beside himself, showing him in an incredibly negative light. Jim’s voyage to seek the treasure begins on an optimistic note, with no clear antagonist in sight and gold on the horizon. However, when Jim overhears Silver speak of betrayal we immediately realize that there is now a clear enemy to the protagonists of the story, and blood will be shed. The fact that Silver plans to slaughter all those who won’t join him in a mutiny causes us to hate him all the more; a man who puts the lives of others below not his own life but merely his wealth is not a man to love.

                Long John Silver is in fact a representative for all pirates, and serves to subvert admiration for the selfish nature of piracy. A common tactic that pirates use at sea is to disguise their ship as a merchant to get close to their targets before raising the Jolly Roger and opening fire. Silver’s introduction in the novel mimics this technique. When first mentioned, he is merely a deckhand seeking work, innocently pursuing labor on a ship whose purpose he seems not to know. However, as soon as the voyage is underway, he hoists his true colors and leads a bloody mutiny, seeking the treasure for himself.  By creating this parallel between Silver and pirates in general, Stevenson allows Silver to represent all pirates and reveal that their adventure and enthusiasm is no excuse for their bloody, selfish nature.

                Pirates, while on the surface entertaining and adventurous, are violent and cruel, and Silver’s betrayal in Treasure Island illustrates this vividly. His breach in trust is inexcusable, and causes misery for many a man. Betrayal is one of the few acts which is nearly universally negative; there is often a time for anger or misery in the face of tragedy, but betrayal is never excused.