150 words English 205 week 6B I believe these early authors became successful with folk tales because Americans were eager to shape their culture. The country was just starting out and didn’t have too much in terms of a unified, shared history or culture between the former colonies and following the Revolutionary War there was a surge of patriotism throughout the united states. From previous classes and other historical lectures I’m already familiar with how people became almost obsessed with Americana ranging from the face of George Washington on dinner plates to triumphant paintings and, naturally, stories of the country’s heroes. Since folklore is at the heart of a country’s culture and traditions and these early Americans were so eager to develop their own culture then it’s only natural that folklore played a major part in that. That being said, going by the readings we had I didn’t see any major reason to claim any of the characters are folk heroes. Maybe I have an idealized concept of what that is, but no one in particular stood out as having qualities such as bravery, determination, and rugged individualism that characterizes other persons I do consider folk heroes. Finally though, these folk stories are significant for American literature in general because as the name suggests American
English 205 week 6A
You can really tell the different views of each of the authors. It seamed as though Philip Freneau’s views came from a free white male, where as Phillis Wheatley’s point of view came from an African slave. In each of Philip Freneau’s poems it seams as though he had a different message of what he experienced but with each poem he writes what he observes and how he interprets each situation. In To Sir Toby, he talks about the Black slaves in Jamaica and how poorly they were treated. He goes on to tell us how they had to be watched so they wouldn’t run away or steal food, which was plentiful but were not allowed to touch. In On the Emigration to America, He talks about the European settlers coming over and how much better they had it than on the slave boats. In The Wild Honey Suckle, I found interesting that he basically compared the life cycle of flowers with the life cycle of man. I thought The Wild Honey Suckle to be a little confusing. I understand he was talking about the Native Americans and how their culture is. How they hunt and have a queen and not as sophisticated as the immigrants. All of his views seemed as if he was above, looking down at the subjects as opposed to Phillis Wheatley’s poems all seemed as though she was beneath her subjects looking up at them. It seamed as though her perspective was a lot smaller than Freneau’s. I would say it’s probably because he was free and could travel around and experience more than she ever could.
150 words
English 205 week 6B
I believe these early authors became successful with folk tales because Americans were eager to shape their culture. The country was just starting out and didn’t have too much in terms of a unified, shared history or culture between the former colonies and following the Revolutionary War there was a surge of patriotism throughout the united states. From previous classes and other historical lectures I’m already familiar with how people became almost obsessed with Americana ranging from the face of George Washington on dinner plates to triumphant paintings and, naturally, stories of the country’s heroes. Since folklore is at the heart of a country’s culture and traditions and these early Americans were so eager to develop their own culture then it’s only natural that folklore played a major part in that.
That being said, going by the readings we had I didn’t see any major reason to claim any of the characters are folk heroes. Maybe I have an idealized concept of what that is, but no one in particular stood out as having qualities such as bravery, determination, and rugged individualism that characterizes other persons I do consider folk heroes.
Finally though, these folk stories are significant for American literature in general because as the name suggests American literature focuses on the United States of America. Because these stories are the building blocks for our country’s culture and American literature consists of that culture then these stories naturally have a degree of influence over the later ones.
150 words
English 325 6A
After reading the letters of Madame de Sevigne I found them to be very informal and personally written, especially towards her daughter. One of the parts that most stood out at me was in the March 16th letter where she says, “You ask me, my dear child, if I am as much in love with life as ever. I confess it has many troubles; but I am still more disinclined to die. Indeed, I am so unhappy because everything must end in death, that I should ask nothing better than to turn back if it were possible”. I think this message was probably the closest similarity to the Montaigne’s essays because she tries to go through a form of methododical reasoning in her reflection on life and death. In Montaigne’s, Of Friendship, he tries to go through a similar type of questioning into why friendships can only last under certain conditions, especially basing everything off his personal experience. Even Montaigne’s On Repentance is relatable a bit to this letter because it shows that we are who we are and should not fight human nature, and I think she surely expresses herself in that letter more so than the rest.
I think there was a big amount of contrast here however, where Mme de Sevigne is not so much structuring any arguments in these letters as much as just re-telling events that she experience or heard about. When reading them, you almost feel like she is right in front of you just having a casual conversation. I think they would surely disagree on the belief that Montaigne only saw the child to parent relationship a matter of respect, and not frienship. We get the glimpse of how close their relationship must be just from hearing the mother speak, “But what I shall do far better than all of these, is to think of you, my child. I have not ceased to do so since I arrived”, showing that she has this very close bond with her daughter and it certainly expresses love as well as friendship, in needing to speak with her after being apart. She also says in another letter from October 5ht, “I am seeking for you everywhere, and I find that all things are wanting since I have not you”.
The topics that Mme de Sevigne is talking about are also somewhat trivial and leisurely in most cases, and not trying to figure out the complexities of life. There is gossiping and drama about marriages and a guy stabbing himself because “the fish had not arrived”, which is quite crazy. You can almost see like that modern day obsession with the royal family and nobility coming from Mme de Sevigne. I think Montaigne was looking more towards writing things that he might not have known about or had the answer to, at least until he went through a thought process, where Mme de Sevigne is just talking about everyday things and life in general. I thought the most fascinating thing about the letters was hearing the voice of someone embedded in society at that time and the things she liked to talk about, along with the fashions and what mattered most to people. I think it was a great perspective into what it would be like living back then without all the technology today, so you would have these delayed letters in which by the time they got there any number of things could have changed for better or worse.
150 words
English 325 6B
In Gustave Flaubert’s letters, lines like “Your letter which I have just received gives added value to your article and goes on still further, and I do not know what to say to you unless it be that I QUITE FRANKLY LIKE YOU” are very realist and not romantic. The phrasing is so bland and straight to the point and his lead up to it shows no sort of emotion other than a calculated reasoning of his thoughts. He even goes to say in another letter “My little stories of the heart or of the senses are not displayed on the counter”, showing that he even acknowledges he is not the romantic type. I find that even his sign-offs on the letters are a bit cheesy or not very artistic.
I think even his invitations and basically hints to them to meet up are all very awkward and it would almost be comical is said out loud, especially if judged by today’s standards. One example of that is “Here is the program that I propose to you. My house will be full and uncomfortable for a month. But towards the end of October or the beginning of November nothing will prevent you, I hope, from returning here with me, not for a day, as you say, but for a week at least”. Flaubert knows that he thinks differently from Sands, and he states, “I don’t experience, as you do, this feeling of a life which is beginning, the stupefaction of a newly commenced existence”. He is very realistic in his thinking and takes everything literally and not metaphorically.
On the other hand George Sands shows her romanticism in her letters where she says “You were so good and so sympathetic to me at the first performance of Villemer that I no longer admire only your admirable talent, I love you with all my heart”. Her language is quite different from the very formal and scientific language that Flaubert uses. You see her getting into very aesthetic writing, even when she is angry with Flaubert for using her pen name and sending it to another woman. I like her use of imagery when she talks about finding her brother’s body; it definitely extends into the awe and beautiful descriptions that naturalism was about.
Another very romantic part of her letters was “You are an exceedingly kind brother to promise to be at Don Juan. For that I kiss you twice more”. I think that she really gets into the beauty of culture and finds lasting appreciation in the natural world. She mixes that beauty of nature into their relationship saying, “Dear good friend, the friend of my heart, the old troubadour is as well as ten thousand men – who are well, and he is gay as a finch, because the sun shines again and copy is processing”.
150 words
You can really tell the different views of each of the authors. It seamed as though Philip Freneau’s views came from a free white male, where as Phillis Wheatley’s point of view came from an African slave. In each of Philip Freneau’s poems it seams as though he had a different message of what he experienced but with each poem he writes what he observes and how he interprets each situation. In To Sir Toby, he talks about the Black slaves in Jamaica and how poorly they were treated. He goes on to tell us how they had to be watched so they wouldn’t run away or steal food, which was plentiful but were not allowed to touch. In On the Emigration to America, He talks about the European settlers coming over and how much better they had it than on the slave boats. In The Wild Honey Suckle, I found interesting that he basically compared the life cycle of flowers with the life cycle of man. I thought The Wild Honey Suckle to be a little confusing. I understand he was talking about the Native Americans and how their culture is. How they hunt and have a queen and not as sophisticated as the immigrants. All of his views seemed as if he was above, looking down at the subjects as opposed to Phillis Wheatley’s poems all seemed as though she was beneath her subjects looking up at them. It seamed as though her perspective was a lot smaller than Freneau’s. I would say it’s probably because he was free and could travel around and experience more than she ever could.
150 words
English 205 week 6B
I believe these early authors became successful with folk tales because Americans were eager to shape their culture. The country was just starting out and didn’t have too much in terms of a unified, shared history or culture between the former colonies and following the Revolutionary War there was a surge of patriotism throughout the united states. From previous classes and other historical lectures I’m already familiar with how people became almost obsessed with Americana ranging from the face of George Washington on dinner plates to triumphant paintings and, naturally, stories of the country’s heroes. Since folklore is at the heart of a country’s culture and traditions and these early Americans were so eager to develop their own culture then it’s only natural that folklore played a major part in that.
That being said, going by the readings we had I didn’t see any major reason to claim any of the characters are folk heroes. Maybe I have an idealized concept of what that is, but no one in particular stood out as having qualities such as bravery, determination, and rugged individualism that characterizes other persons I do consider folk heroes.
Finally though, these folk stories are significant for American literature in general because as the name suggests American literature focuses on the United States of America. Because these stories are the building blocks for our country’s culture and American literature consists of that culture then these stories naturally have a degree of influence over the later ones.
150 words
English 325 6A
After reading the letters of Madame de Sevigne I found them to be very informal and personally written, especially towards her daughter. One of the parts that most stood out at me was in the March 16th letter where she says, “You ask me, my dear child, if I am as much in love with life as ever. I confess it has many troubles; but I am still more disinclined to die. Indeed, I am so unhappy because everything must end in death, that I should ask nothing better than to turn back if it were possible”. I think this message was probably the closest similarity to the Montaigne’s essays because she tries to go through a form of methododical reasoning in her reflection on life and death. In Montaigne’s, Of Friendship, he tries to go through a similar type of questioning into why friendships can only last under certain conditions, especially basing everything off his personal experience. Even Montaigne’s On Repentance is relatable a bit to this letter because it shows that we are who we are and should not fight human nature, and I think she surely expresses herself in that letter more so than the rest.
I think there was a big amount of contrast here however, where Mme de Sevigne is not so much structuring any arguments in these letters as much as just re-telling events that she experience or heard about. When reading them, you almost feel like she is right in front of you just having a casual conversation. I think they would surely disagree on the belief that Montaigne only saw the child to parent relationship a matter of respect, and not frienship. We get the glimpse of how close their relationship must be just from hearing the mother speak, “But what I shall do far better than all of these, is to think of you, my child. I have not ceased to do so since I arrived”, showing that she has this very close bond with her daughter and it certainly expresses love as well as friendship, in needing to speak with her after being apart. She also says in another letter from October 5ht, “I am seeking for you everywhere, and I find that all things are wanting since I have not you”.
The topics that Mme de Sevigne is talking about are also somewhat trivial and leisurely in most cases, and not trying to figure out the complexities of life. There is gossiping and drama about marriages and a guy stabbing himself because “the fish had not arrived”, which is quite crazy. You can almost see like that modern day obsession with the royal family and nobility coming from Mme de Sevigne. I think Montaigne was looking more towards writing things that he might not have known about or had the answer to, at least until he went through a thought process, where Mme de Sevigne is just talking about everyday things and life in general. I thought the most fascinating thing about the letters was hearing the voice of someone embedded in society at that time and the things she liked to talk about, along with the fashions and what mattered most to people. I think it was a great perspective into what it would be like living back then without all the technology today, so you would have these delayed letters in which by the time they got there any number of things could have changed for better or worse.
150 words
English 325 6B
In Gustave Flaubert’s letters, lines like “Your letter which I have just received gives added value to your article and goes on still further, and I do not know what to say to you unless it be that I QUITE FRANKLY LIKE YOU” are very realist and not romantic. The phrasing is so bland and straight to the point and his lead up to it shows no sort of emotion other than a calculated reasoning of his thoughts. He even goes to say in another letter “My little stories of the heart or of the senses are not displayed on the counter”, showing that he even acknowledges he is not the romantic type. I find that even his sign-offs on the letters are a bit cheesy or not very artistic.
I think even his invitations and basically hints to them to meet up are all very awkward and it would almost be comical is said out loud, especially if judged by today’s standards. One example of that is “Here is the program that I propose to you. My house will be full and uncomfortable for a month. But towards the end of October or the beginning of November nothing will prevent you, I hope, from returning here with me, not for a day, as you say, but for a week at least”. Flaubert knows that he thinks differently from Sands, and he states, “I don’t experience, as you do, this feeling of a life which is beginning, the stupefaction of a newly commenced existence”. He is very realistic in his thinking and takes everything literally and not metaphorically.
On the other hand George Sands shows her romanticism in her letters where she says “You were so good and so sympathetic to me at the first performance of Villemer that I no longer admire only your admirable talent, I love you with all my heart”. Her language is quite different from the very formal and scientific language that Flaubert uses. You see her getting into very aesthetic writing, even when she is angry with Flaubert for using her pen name and sending it to another woman. I like her use of imagery when she talks about finding her brother’s body; it definitely extends into the awe and beautiful descriptions that naturalism was about.
Another very romantic part of her letters was “You are an exceedingly kind brother to promise to be at Don Juan. For that I kiss you twice more”. I think that she really gets into the beauty of culture and finds lasting appreciation in the natural world. She mixes that beauty of nature into their relationship saying, “Dear good friend, the friend of my heart, the old troubadour is as well as ten thousand men – who are well, and he is gay as a finch, because the sun shines again and copy is processing”.
150 words
Comments
Post a Comment