Weekly Response Thirteen

I've decided to use Lisa Zunshine's Theory of Mind and Experimental Representations of Fictional Consciousness as the theory text for my final paper. The discussion about theory of mind really and its relation to those with learning disabilities really intrigues me. Actually deciding on a thesis becomes the real problem. Zunshine says, "our ability to explain behavior in terms of the underlying states of mind-or our mind-reading ability-can furnish us with a series of surprising insights into our interaction with literary texts." I may incorporate this quote into my thesis, getting at the fact that Mark Haddon's The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time intrigues readers because of the difficulty Christopher displays in interpreting these states of mind. Zunshine also says, "theory of mind underlies our interaction with literary texts in such profound and complex ways that any endeavor to isolate one particular aspect of such an interaction feels like carving the text at joints that are fundamentally, paradigmatically absent." But looking at Christopher, that's exactly how his mind works. The base of mind-reading, this theory of mind, is absent for him, so the interaction is fundamentally different, bringing readers' interest in. I just have to decide a quote from the novel and form this into a coherent thought, and bam. Thesis.

Weekly Response Twelve

There is no doubt that, throughout this course, Mark Haddon’s The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time has been my favorite read. I’m on the track to becoming a teacher, and although it’s not for special education, I feel that any educator should be well versed on how to cooperate with different children – different thinking, speaking, learning styles, etc. – and learn to embrace their differences. Therefore, I have decided to use this for the final paper of the semester. As for the theoretical texts, I haven’t quite decided. Woloch’s The One vs. The Many can be seen as relevant in the character development of Christopher, as well as the literary text regarding estranging the familiar, as seeing things through Christopher’s eyes can very well be considered taking a different view on things many people merely glance over. Furthermore, Lisa Zunshine’s Theory of Mind and Experimental Representations of Fictional Consciousness relates directly to the learning form Christopher takes on through the book.

I think I’ll stick to discussing only one literary theory in relation to the text, as I’m not sure if I would be able to adequately bring in multiple theories and do them each justice through one six to eight page paper. Once I decide which theory I would best be able to dig through, I’m confident I can knock this paper out pretty well.

Weekly Response Eleven

“Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be. This unique existence of the work of art determined the history to which it was subject throughout the time of its existence…changes of ownership are subject to a tradition which must be traced from the situation of the original.”

            – Literary Theory page 1235

Question: Does having Marjane Satrapi’s The Complete Persepolis as a graphic novel accomplish a sort of reproduction?

Walter Benjamin, in The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, talks about the way reproductions alter a work of art by making it visible to those not experiencing its uniqueness in its original position in space and time. The story of the Iranian Revolution and Marji’s life as a whole are both told through The Complete Persepolis in the form of a graphic novel. It can be argued that this form of storytelling changes these two events into works of art. However, readers aren’t experiencing them firsthand; they’re experiencing the reproductions Satrapi has put out for the public to see.

This method may just be the best way for her to explain these occurrences, though. It brings events that happened years earlier to the comic book form and therefore maybe more relative to those in today’s time. The pictures are Satrapi’s way of reproducing the events she recalls from her childhood. Readers aren’t getting the unique experience Satrapi had, but are in fact given the opportunity to make it their own. The ownership is being changed by this reproduction and therefore becoming relatable to readers by not only words, but pictures.

Weekly Response Ten

“According to McCloud, there are two important effects of cartooning: the first enables a focus on specific details; the second is ‘the universality of cartoon imagery. The more cartoony a face is, for instance, the more people it could be said to describe’ (31). Cartooning, her argues, is a way of seeing, not just a way of drawing, so the simplification of characters and images toward a purpose can be an effective tool: ‘[W]hen you look at a photo or realistic drawing of a face – you see it as the face of another but when you enter the world of the cartoon – you see yourself’ (36).”

            – Estranging the Familiar: "East" and "West" in Satrapi’s Persepolis1 Page 228

Marjane Satrapi strongly utilizes the graphic novel style. Although the cartoon faces are simple, it is still possible to see the way each event affects Marji as she goes through them – the worry and trying times. Furthermore though, and I had never thought of this until reading Naghibi, the simplistic illustrations do allow readers to place themselves in the position of characters and consider how they would be acting. Although Western readers may have never had to deal with the processes that Marji goes through, the practice of becoming the character develops more in a graphic novel than it may in a normal novel. Readers who never had to really deal with cultural differences, like the Western vs Iranian in Persepolis, are able to relate to the cultural differences with other differences – not fitting in, not feeling like you belong, etc.

Weekly Response Nine

“This situation would present no problem if no generational shift from deep to hyper attention were taking place. But with the shift, serious incompatibilities arise between the expectations of educators, who are trained in deep attention and saturated with assumptions about its inherent superiority, and the preferred cognitive mode of young people, who squirm in the procrustean beds outfitted for them by their elders. We would expect a crisis, which would necessitate a reevaluation of the relative merits of hyper versus deep attention, serious reflection about how a constructive synthesis of the two might be achieved, and a thoroughgoing revision of educational methods.”

            – Hyper and Deep Attention: The Generational Divide in Cognitive Modes – N. Katherine Hayles Page 188

Question: Does transforming something from a work of literature to a movie or video form, going from deep to hyper attention, ultimately enhance the learning that a student may do when studying that specific work?

When doing the digital media treasure hunt, I found an online series called The Lizzie Bennet Diaries (http://www.lizziebennet.com). It’s an online adaptation of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, narrated by Lizzie. It takes the characters and plotline of Pride and Prejudice and brings it to a more modern-day setting.

Lizzie does video blogs every couple of days, and in between those videos the audience gets to see social network updates from the different characters in order to further the story. Like twitter conversations between characters, or even something as simple as Bingley and Jane beginning to follow each other on twitter.

I think people who have read Pride and Prejudice would appreciate video blogs like this much more than those who haven’t. Being able to see and understand the transformation from Austen’s work to Lizzie’s videos allows readers to see more of the humor in the way everything in the video blogs is portrayed. It’s much like Pride and Prejudice and Zombies by Seth Grahame-Smith; an audience unaccustomed to Austen’s original work would be able to understand the plot of the story, but someone with knowledge of the work being parodied would better see the wit being revealed.

Weekly Response Eight

“But that appreciation, no matter how intense, was always combined with an intellectual distance connected to the manner in which I had acquired this new competence, that is, in school classrooms and under the sway of authoritative experts. As a consequence, my new tastes somehow failed to duplicate precisely the passion of my response to those other, suspect, supposedly transparent, popular books. Those books prompted physical sensations, a forgetting of the self and complete absorption in another world. The books that came to me as high culture never seemed to prompt the particular shudder, the frisson I associated with the books of my childhood, because they carried with them not mere promise alone but also a threat, the threat that somehow I might fail to understand, might fail to recognize their reputed meaning and inherent worth. I developed, as a consequence, an aloof, somewhat puzzled relationship to ‘Literature’ and to the ways of reading required and rewarded in my graduate seminar.”

            - Radway, A Feeling for Books, “Introduction” Page 3-4

"Oh! certainly," cried his faithful assistant, "no one can be really esteemed accomplished, who does not greatly surpass what is usually met with. A woman must have a thorough knowledge of music, singing, drawing, dancing, and the modern languages, to deserve the word; and besides all this, she must possess a certain something in her air and manner of walking, the tone of her voice, her address and expressions, or the word will be but half deserved."

"All this she must possess," added Darcy, "and to all this she must yet add something more substantial, in the improvement of her mind by extensive reading."

"I am no longer surprised at your knowing only six accomplished women. I rather wonder now at your knowing any."

            - Pride and Prejudice Page 76

Question: Did Jane Austen purposefully create Lizzy as an avid reader, although more middle-class, in comparison to Miss Caroline Bingley, who comes from a higher ranking family, yet has no interest in any kind of reading?

I can feel a strong relation to Radway’s statement about canonized, “real” literature in opposition to the “popular” books of our time. What is considered “classical literature” has interested me; I have been intrigued by the stories being told, the way they’re being told, and what exactly marks them as worthy of the praise that they have been given, but at the same time, it doesn’t hit me as hard as some of the popular books of today.

I think it’s important the Miss Bingley has no real affiliation with literature at all, especially because of the importance Darcy places upon reading. This further shows that Lizzy’s intellect ranks higher than that of Miss Bingley. Miss Bingley’s personality proves to be one of a more shallow substance than that of Lizzy’s, and I’m forced to wonder how strongly Austen believes that the interest in literature connects to this. It could almost be inferred that Miss Bingley would be more interested in the “supposedly transparent” popular books, although I’m not sure how books like that appeared in this time period. Regardless, the way the two women’s intellect is portrayed, it seems like Miss Bingley would be more inclined to take no interest in the more “complex” literature.

Weekly Response Seven

“So much suggests that for Austen there is nothing divine about royalty, and not much that is special about peers. In fact characters with titles – or ‘handles to their names,’ as the Victorians used to say – are seldom admirable in the novels…A title, it seems, is sometimes almost a guarantee of fatuousness in Austen’s fiction.”

-         Juliet McMaster Class Page 116

“Do not make yourself uneasy, my dear cousin, about your apparel. Lady Catherine is far from requiring that elegance of dress in us, which becomes herself and daughter. I would advise you merely to put on whatever of your clothes is superior to the rest, there is no occasion for any thing more. Lady Catherine will not think the worse of you for being simply dressed. She likes to have the distinction of rank preserved.''

            - Pride and Prejudice page 186 (Mr. Collins to Elizabeth)

Question: What characteristics about Lady Catherine de Bourgh make her seem to be so foolish? Is it because readers do not find her likeable that she appears to be foolish or because she is foolish that she is not liked?

Our original impression about Lady Catherine comes from Mr. Collins, who praises her consistently but then says, “Lady Catherine was reckoned proud by many people he knew, but he had never seen any thing but affability in her” (101). Throughout the novel, Mr. Collins never stops complimenting Lady Catherine and bringing her up in conversation as often as possible. At times he seems to tend to prefer to talk about her rather than himself or any other subject matter.

Lady Catherine’s description and actions strike readers as pretentious and very aware and proud of her class. It seems to come out in every sentence she speaks; she knows she is a higher class than those around her, and she wants to make sure no one forgets it. For example, Mr. Collins telling Elizabeth that “Lady Catherine will not think the worse of you for being simply dressed. She likes to have the distinction of rank preserved,” tells readers quite blatantly that Lady Catherine prefers to look socially superior to all around her, showing her vain personality.

Readers dislike Lady Catherine the most during her argument with Elizabeth regarding the suspicions of an engagement between Elizabeth and Darcy. Lady Catherine says, “Miss Bennet," replied her ladyship, in an angry tone, "you ought to know, that I am not to be trifled with. But however insincere you may choose to be, you shall not find me so. My character has ever been celebrated for its sincerity and frankness, and in a cause of such moment as this, I shall certainly not depart from it. A report of a most alarming nature reached me two days ago. I was told that not only your sister was on the point of being most advantageously married, but that you, that Miss Elizabeth Bennet, would, in all likelihood, be soon afterwards united to my nephew, my own nephew, Mr. Darcy. Though I know it must be a scandalous falsehood, though I would not injure him so much as to suppose the truth of it possible, I instantly resolved on setting off for this place, that I might make my sentiments known to you" (354-355). Her word choice here exemplifies her overall shock at the matter at hand, as if it is completely and utterly incomprehensible for these two to be engaged. This makes her extremely unlikeable, and compliments the foolishness shown throughout the novel as well.

Weekly Response Six

“The dynamic, asymmetrical balance between different characters – and between different modes of characterization – is not simply a thematic concern of Austen’s novels, nor a moral or political question that we impost on the finished text, but rather a narrative process that is intertwined with, and unfurls out of, the novels’ basic internal structure. This is most clear in Pride and Prejudice, because the tension between a protagonist who is interesting in-and-of herself and minor characters who function only in relation to a central protagonist is dramatized through two competing registers of narrative attention: the five Bennet sisters in general, as a family unit faced with the same problem and attracting the same narrative interest, and Elizabeth Bennet in particular, the protagonist of the novel, who transcends the social context in which she has been placed to become the center of the narrative in-and-of herself.”

-         Woloch The One vs. The Many Page 45

“ ‘I desire you will do no such thing. Lizzy is not a bit better than the others; and I am sure she is not half so handsome as Jane, nor half so good humoured as Lydia. But you are always giving her the preference.’

‘They have none of them much to recommend them,’ replied he; ‘they are all silly and ignorant like other girls; but Lizzy has something more of quickness than her sisters.’ "

            - Pride and Prejudice page 44-45 (Mr. and Mrs. Bennet discussing their daughters)

Question: What exactly about Elizabeth causes her to be the protagonist in the novel, while her sisters, each having their own specific and important characteristics, play minor characters?

Elizabeth, throughout Pride and Prejudice stands out as the daughter who is somewhat different from the others. Jane sees the world optimistically, Mary focuses on being studious, and Kitty and Lydia have their eyes set on marriage with a handsome man. Elizabeth, on the other hand, isn’t as concerned with the things her sisters are. As Mr. Bennet said, she has “something more of quickness.” She thinks of things as realistically and isn’t opposed to forming ill opinions of others if she thinks they are justified.

I think the most important aspect of Elizabeth’s character that qualifies her to be the protagonist, however, is her hesitation towards marriage. Upon Mr. Collins’ proposal, she immediately refuses. Any other girl in this time period would have done the “proper” thing and accepted, especially with Mr. Collins’ good status and entailment to their household. It is clear Elizabeth does not intend to marry for purposes such as money and stability. Her father evidently approves, when, in a conversation with Elizabeth and her parents, Mr. Bennet says, “‘Very well. We now come to the point. Your mother insists upon your accepting it. Is not it so, Mrs. Bennet?’ ‘Yes, or I will never see her again.’‘An unhappy alternative is before you, Elizabeth. From this day you must be a stranger to one of your parents. – Your mother will never see you again if you do not marry Mr. Collins, and I will never see you again if you do’” (142). This almost nonconformist aspect of Elizabeth works in favor of her as protagonist of the novel.

Weekly Response Five

“The arts of pleasing men, in other words, are not only angelic characteristics, in more worldly terms, they are the proper acts of a lady."

-         Literary Theory page 816

“‘It may perhaps be pleasant,’ replied Charlotte, ‘to be able to impose on the public in such a case; but it is sometimes a disadvantage to be so very guarded. If a woman conceals her affection with the same skill from the object of it, she may lose the opportunity of fixing him; and it will then be but poor consolation to believe the world equally in the dark. There is so much of gratitude or vanity in almost every attachment, that it is not safe to leave any to itself. We can all begin freely—a slight preference is natural enough; but there are very few of us who have heart enough to be really in love without encouragement. In nine cases out of ten, a woman had better shew more affection than she feels. Bingley likes your sister undoubtedly; but he may never do more than like her, if she does not help him on.’ "

            - Pride and Prejudice page 59

Question: How does the image of women as angels meant to please men affect the family members and their respective roles in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice?

Austen creates a plethora of characters through this novel, each representing some different personality quirk or goal. For Mrs. Bennet, this stereotype of how women should act sits heavily on her conscious, as “The business of her life was to get her daughters married; its solace was visiting and news” (Austen 45). She wants her daughters to be seen as the best women in the running for the potential suitors. Mr. Bennet, however, admires his daughter Elizabeth precisely because she does not bow at every man because, “they are all silly and ignorant like other girls; but Lizzy has something more of quickness than her sisters” (Austen 45). This quickness in Lizzy is exactly what sets her apart from this “angelic” image of 18^th century women, and because I’ve yet to finish reading, I’m interested to see how it affects her in the long run.

Weekly Response Four

“According to Protestant ideology, the Devil, the Pope, and the Turk all desired to ‘convert’ good Protestant souls to a state of damnation, and their desire to do so was frequently disguised as a sexual/sensual temptation of virtue, accompanied by a wrathful passion for power.”

-         Turning Turk in Othello: The Conversion and Damnation of the Moor – Daniel Vitkus page 145

IAGO: “Faith, he to-night hath boarded a land carack:
If it prove lawful prize, he's made for ever.
CASSIO: “I do not understand.”
IAGO: “He's married.”

-         Othello (1.2.50-53)

OTHELLO: “Come, 
My dear love
The purchase made, the fruits are to ensue: 
The profit's yet to come 'tween me and you. 
Good night.

-         Othello (2.3.8-11)

Question: Does the fact that those of color are stereotyped to be sexual deviants play into this Protestant ideology?

In accordance to many religions, sexual activity is considered sin, especially outside of marriage. In America, those of color have always been seen as sexual beings, more so than Caucasians. In Othello, and this is addressed in last week’s reading of Michael Neill’s Race, Adultery, and the Hideous in Othello, the bed plays an important role and almost becomes its own character. The consummation of Othello’s and Desdemona’s marriage is something seen as sinful, although they are married. This whole thing causes me to wonder whether there is an association between the stereotype of colored people and sex and the way Caucasians have viewed sinful actions.

Weekly Response Three

“As a disabling virus within literary discourse, Africanism has become, in the Eurocentric tradition that American education favors, both a way of talking about and a way of policing matters of class, sexual license, and repression, formations and exercises of power, and meditations on ethics and accountability. Through the simple expedient of demonizing and reifying the range of color on a palette, American Africanism makes it possible to historicize and render timeless.”

-         Literary Theory page 1007

RODERIGO: “What a full fortune does the thick-lips owe

If he can carry’t thus!”

-         Othello (1.1.62-63)

IAGO: “Even now, now, very now, an old black ram

Is tupping your white ewe. Arise, arise;

Awake the snorting citizens with the bell,

Or else the devil will make a grandsire of you.

Arise I say!”

-         Othello (1.1.85-89)

IAGO: “I am one, sir, that comes to tell you your daughter

and the Moor are making the beast with two backs.”

-         Othello (1.1.112-113)

Question: How did it come to be that the color black is generally associated with evil and white with purity and all that is good? Do the racial implications affect those associations or was this made with no connection to the different races?

Although through typical Elizabethan literature African Americans or those of color are portrayed as evil, Shakespeare goes against that norm and casts Othello, the man of color, as the hero. Othello is a man of nobility, honesty, and trust.  Therefore, Iago, a white male working for Othello, is able to deceive Othello and drive him mad.

There is no doubt that Iago is portrayed as a man who reaches the peak of evil doings. His manipulation and deceitful ways are constantly working to get him where he wants to be.  In Elizabethan writing, these characteristics would typically be displayed on a man of color. Is Shakespeare trying to be purposelessly ironic or make a political statement?

Weekly Response Two

“The passing from excessive praise to excessive invective is characteristic, and the change from the one to the other is perfectly legitimate.  Praise and abuse are, so to speak, the two sides of the same coin.  If the right side is praise, the wrong side is abuse, and vice versa.”

-         Literary Theory page 690

IAGO: “Even now, now, very now, an old black ram

Is tupping your white ewe. Arise, arise;

Awake the snorting citizens with the bell,

Or else the devil will make a grandsire of you.

Arise I say!”

-         Othello (1.1.85-89)

IAGO: “Nay, but he prated

And spoke such scurvy and provoking terms

Against your honor

That, with the little godliness I have

I did full hard forbear him.”

-         Othello (1.2.7-11)

Question: Is this two sided coin, the continual change between praise and insult, always necessary in order to get where one wants to be? Can it truly be called legitimate to change from one to the other with no qualms?

The first of my quotes from Shakespeare’s Othello are said by the character Iago, the first quote speaking to Brabantio about Othello and the second speaking to Othello himself. Iago switches so easily from speaking poorly about Othello, calling him “an old black ram,” in reference to his race, to speaking to him as if they were best friends.

It’s a known fact that nearly everyone does this. People today are either naturally two-faced or just easily gain this trait through interaction with modern-day society. Either way, I think it’s despicable. Yes, Iago is the “villain” through Othello, but this isn’t a characteristic strictly pertaining to villains. Literary Theory: an Anthology calls this change “perfectly legitimate,” and thinking about it causes me to realize just how “legitimate” it has become in today’s society, and it actually disgusts me.

I see no reason for human beings not to act merely civil with those they do not like; there’s no reason to praise them to their face and then turn around and throw every nasty insult at them the moment they turn their back. 

Weekly Response One

“The manipulation of representational devices may create a semblance of reality and allow one to have the impression of gazing through glass, but it is the devices alone that produce that impression, and they alone are what makes literature literary.”

-         Literary Theory page 3

“While practical speech facilitates access to information by making language as transparent as possible, poetic speech contorts and roughens up ordinary language and submits it to what Roman Jakobson called ‘organized violence,’ and it is this roughening up of ordinary language into tortuous ‘formed speech’ that makes poetry poetry rather than a weather report.”

-         Literary Theory page 4

“Let me not to the marriage of true minds

Admit impediments. Love is not love

Which alters when alteration finds,

Or bends with the remover to remove:

O no! It is an ever-fixed mark

That looks on tempests and is never shaken;”

-      Let Me Not to the Marriage of True Minds

By William Shakespeare

Question: How exactly can one determine the true meaning of a poem, its point and purpose, if the language is so "roughened" up? Intentional and affective fallacies address this, but whose place is it to say that the author's and readers' personal interpretations are any less valid? Yes, I understand that the way literary text works holds significance in making “literature literary,” but I believe that the author and the readers have a part in that as well.

Shakespeare utilizes his ability to roughen up ordinary language when he says “Love is not love which alters when alteration finds, or bends with the removers to remove…” In relation to the Literary Theory quote, a weather report would have read something along the lines of “Love does not change when the situation calls for it or leave.”  The way Shakespeare uses words allows a picture to be painted, but who can say that the picture is the same for every reader, or holds the same amount of power or significance?

Furthermore, I believe that understanding the period of time of a piece of literature or biographical information of the author adds additional significance to a piece.  Each reader feels differently about historical time periods, personality aspects, etc., that are brought to light when consideration is put towards not only the literary features of a piece, but the personal aspects of the person who created it.