Eat, Pray, Love: Is Julia Roberts Grendel?

So I just finished watching the movie Eat, Pray, Love for the first time (no literally......like five minutes ago) and I'm happy to say that I believe I've found a new favorite movie, or really a new favorite story that clearly highlights a person's transition from innocence to experience. If I was to watch the movie as a basic viewer, I would've gawked at the beautiful scenery, array of languages, and overall world experience Julia Robert's character engaged into. However, being the AP Lit student that I am *hair flip* I couldn't help but watch the movie through a lens that connected the numerous transition periods that occur throughout the movie to a much deeper meaning, or a novel that goes by the name of Grendel. At the beginning of this movie, Julia Robert's appears as if she is stuck in a stage that is caught in between innocence and experience; she's experienced numerous downfalls in her life that have led to her becoming dreary and lost in her own world, while at the same time is so vulnerable to her emotions that she acts frantically and decides to embark on a year long journey the hopes of finding herself. To me this was all too similar to Grendel; sure, when the novel starts off Grendel isn't as experienced as Julia Robert's character is, however, once he gains experience and knowledge of the truth of the reality of the world that’s around him, it's as if he becomes vulnerable to everything that could possibly influence his decisions, actions, and emotions. That's exactly what goes on in this movie: experience drives the main character into a state of innocence. She's lost, vulnerable, and unable to make decisions for herself in order to find what's best in the end all due to the fact that the knowledge she has gained about the world around her has led to her crashing all together. All of this leads to the question of why? Is too much experience actually the problem? Should people hold onto their state of innocence for as long as they can? Or were the downfalls these characters experienced as a result to the over abundance of experience they gained throughout their lifetimes just a coincidence? Think about it, before Grendel became experienced he was happy and hopeful, which is similar to how Julia Robert's character was after she took herself out of her overly experienced situation in an attempt to empty her mind and start all over, almost as if she was trying to revert back to a period in her life where the knowledge of the harsh realities of the world wasn't something she was burdened with. Is experience a bad thing? According to the stories of these two characters the answer would appear to be yes; experience broke them down to a point of no return, to a point where they craved for the days or feelings they once had when they were naïve and blind. The stories of these two characters makes me wonder, is the shift from innocence to experience simply a cycle? Are we supposed to blossom from an innocent state to an experienced state only to empty our minds of heavy amounts of knowledge to become innocent again? Is that balance needed? Who knows. What’s seen in these stories makes one believe that experience isn’t the best thing for one in life, and that living in a state where one is filled with young hope and untainted realities is what’s best for everyone. But then again, little experience could lead to problems in the end. So which is better: being innocent or being experienced? Maybe one day the universe will figure it out. Ya feel me?

I, Too.

So, when I first found out "blogging" was a part of AP lit one could say I was.........mortified. Yep, that's right. MORTIFIED. What would I blog about? Would I ever be creative enough to come up with anything insightful to say? Most importantly, would I ever be able to focus on one of these for more than around five minutes (focusing on the computer is not something I'd say I'm the best at.....once night fall hits my attention falls entirely on Netflix/Pinterest)? At first I was completely defeated (kind of dramatic, I know) but after the days went on, and the blogs continued I realized these are actually kind of entertaining once you sit down and just start typing (I actually feel like a crazy person doing these because I'm basically having a well thought out conversation with myself......it is what it is). Anyways, it's safe to say that blogging turned out to actually be ok, and one thing I didn't realize I'd actually enjoy about blogging was blogging about poems. Before this, I barely knew anything about poetry, let alone could I name anyone besides Robert Frost or Dr. Seuss. But as the months have gone by, and the poem blogs have continued, I've realized that I've actually found a particular interest in poetry; I can even now say that I might actually have a favorite poet (Langston Hughes, probably). Poetry isn't as bland as I thought it was going to be, and once one finds a certain genre of poetry that they particularly like, it's almost as if one is simply reading a relatable/interesting/song like story. On that note, one thing I believe I really tend to enjoy about Langston Hughe's poetry is the fact that the way his words are layed out truly allows one to create a perfect scenario of the story he's telling in their heads. The language may not be extremely deep or profound, however, his simple placement of common words really gets the job done and evokes emotions from readers (that's just my opinion). So, while roaming the internet for another poem to blog about, I happened to come across one titled "I, Too" by none other than Langston Hughes; the poem goes like this:

I, too, sing America.

I am the darker brother.

They send me to eat in the kitchen

When company comes,

But I laugh,

And eat well,

And grow strong.

Tomorrow,

I'll be at the table,

When company comes.

Nobody'll dare

Say to me,

"Eat in the kitchen",

Then.

Besides,

They'll see how beautiful I am,

And be ashamed-

I, too, am America.

The first stanza in this poem represents the reality of what's going on during this time period. The speaker states that "I, too, sing America/ I am the darker brother" as a way of making it clear to those around him that he is also an American; America is his home, his place where he can prosper, where is pride is, and the speaker feels that just because he's the "darker brother" doesn’t mean that he's so much different from anyone other American. The first stanza finishes off with the speaker stating that "They send me to eat in the kitchen/When company comes/But I laugh/And eat well/ And grow strong" as a way that allows the reader to know that the narrator is highly aware of his position in society; the speaker knows that he cannot be seen "when company comes" due to him more than likely being some form of house help, yet, he finds it to be unfair because he "eats well and grows strong" just like others around him. He is no different than his fellow peers as a whole, yet, cannot participate in events equally simply due to the color of his skin. The second stanza of this poem appears to represent the fantasy the speaker hopes will come true; the first line simply saying "tomorrow" goes far beyond the day after the current day, seeing how tomorrow can mean "at some future time". At some future time, the speaker imagines he'll finally be able to "be at the table/ When company comes" as if it's completely normal while he is no longer looked down upon and forced to eat in the kitchen alone. As the lines go on, the narrator expresses that those around him will become ashamed of themselves once they "see how beautiful [he is]"; the narrator simply wants his companions to realize his beauty on the inside for who he is instead of on the outside which simply dictates his skin tone. He is aware that he doesn’t deserve such treatment and hopes for a better day when everyone becomes ashamed for how they've looked down upon him when he knows that he "too, am America". Ya feel me?



Hamlet: First Impression

We've finally arrived at the time during the year in which we must engage into the readings of ole ancient Shakespeare. Yawn.....or at least that's what I thought the story of Hamlet was going to be before we actually started getting into what was going on (along with deciphering every line of every paragraph.....help us out Shakespeare). Like other pieces of Shakespeare’s work that I've read (Romeo and Juliet, A Mid Summer's Night's Dream, Macbeth), the language of the text makes one feel as if there is absolutely nothing interesting going on within these classic tales, however, once one takes the time to break down what is said and interpret the stories for themselves, the enjoyment that comes along with these tales finally can finally arrive. I was completely surprised when I not only realized how interesting Hamlet really was but also when I was able to personally draw similarities from Hamlet to other stories that I've read in the past. In a way, the story of Prince Hamlet reminds me of that of Harry Potter; sure, Hamlet isn't a British orphan who has recently discovered that he's this almighty sorcerer, however, the themes and situations that have occurred within the first act have led to me believing that subtle hints have already been placed to allow readers to know what exactly might occur as the story goes on. During Hamlet's encounter with his father's ghost, I couldn't help but feel as if the ghost of King Hamlet was speaking to his son in what sounded similar to that of "parseltongue"(as seen in the video). His father's words were very serpent-like, seeing how they left a certain taste in the air after they were spoken. The tone of the man's voice was similar to that of Lord Voldemort's whenever he would attempt to incept Harry Potter's thoughts like the snake he was, which left me wondering if this ghost was here for good reasons or for bad ones. Hamlet's past belief that his father was "so excellent a king, that was to this Hyperion...."(act one, lines 141-142) is leading him to completely feed into what this questionable ghost is saying to him instead of recognizing the facts that though this being may appear to be his father, its intentions may be far different than what his father's would have been. The text states that the ghost "speaks from underneath", and "died unaneiled" which means that it not only was uncleansed of its sins before it left the earth but also is rising from some hell like state rather than one from heaven; Hamlet prides himself in being a moral judge, almost as if it's his duty, yet is failing to truly analyze what is happening right before him just for the sake of the ghost appearing to be his father. The "parseltongue" like conversation the ghost has with Hamlet also relates to Harry Potter in such a way that it's almost used as a form of manipulation, or mind control. When Voldemort would use his serpent like voice to penetrate Harry Potter's mind he would plant seeds of thought that would occasionally leave Harry feeling as if he needed to prove something or forget his moral judgment all together. In my opinion, that is exactly what is happening between Hamlet and this ghost. The ghost says "list, list, o list! If thoudidst ever love thy dear father"(page 31) as a way of guilt tripping Hamlet into instantly feeling like his emotions towards his father weren’t pure if he doesn’t agree to do what the ghost is saying, while also stating "I find thee apt; and duller shouldst thou be than the fat weed" (page 31) as a way of making him feel unworthy of his father's past approval if he fails the with the task at hand. The manipulation, serepent-esque way of thinking, and rising from underneath all related to Harry Potter, in my opinion, which leads to me believing that this ghost is simply something that will lead to Hamlet's doom; however, the things that were said could've been some true form of motivation so that Hamlet could finally feel as if he had his father's approval to make things right. Which is it? Is the ghost good or bad? Will the “parseltongue” continue? Who knows. As Hamlet's adventure goes on, only time will tell. Ya feel me?

Invisible Man: First Impression

Ok, so Invisible Man is......weird. The novel itself is quite interesting, however, the dialogue makes the comprehension of some parts of the novel almost unbearable. When I first started reading this, I expected the book to be similar to the Warmth of Other Suns; a nicely written novel that evoked emotions of empathy towards the main character of the novel due to the unfortunate time period he was born into. The novel has similar themes, and the actual story itself makes one feel empathy for the characters in this novel after seeing the situations they've been forced into (the fight scene in chapter one reminded me on the Mandingo fighting from Django Unchained.....just the thought of it was making my skin itch. SO VIOLENT), however, the set up of the novel is, well, driving me crazy. A main problem with this book is the rambling stories the characters seem to engage in; similar to A Catcher in the Rye, the characters, in my opinion, go off into rants that actually take away from the meaning of what they're saying. It's ridiculous. I find myself actually becoming interested in the stories, yet, after around a page or so of reading I'm confused to the point where my head actually starts hurting (someone save me). For instance, Jim Trueblood’s long (and at times off topic) explanation of his life story/ current situation started off really interesting; when he tells Mr. Norton that "it was cold so all of us had to sleep together; me, the ole lady, and the gal" (page 53) I was suddenly hooked! The story seemed as if it was going to be scandalous or none the less leave some sort of an emotional impact, which it did in a way, however, when he starts mentioning waking up from dreams and his daughter reaching for him as if she is comforted by him in a fathering way after he previously stating that she "wants to tease and please a man" (page 56), I couldn't help but find myself suddenly lost and full of questions. Was his situation actually a dream? Why would his wife attempt to shoot him with a gun if the vivid situation he was describing was actually a figment of his imagination? Is Jim Trueblood a child molester or no? So many questions, so little answers!! At times, I've began to wonder if the ramble like dialogue was something that was done on purpose; Ralph Ellison more than likely knew what he was doing when he created pages filled with the dialogue of one person, right? Maybe Jim Trueblood's rant was something needed to help highlight just how "invisible" the main character truly is? Mr. Norton does "wave his hand in annoyance" (page 61) when the narrator attempts to even interrupt the very "visible" Jim Trueblood while he’s speaking....was that just by coincidence? Or is there a deeper meaning? Who knows. As the novel continues, I’m excited to see just how the narrator being invisible affects him in life, while at the same time hopefully discovering some sort of secret message in all of the ramble-esuqe rants these characters just love. Ya feel me?

Insomniac

Everyday people go through obstacles that help make up the structure of their individual lives, and whether people like it or not, these obstacles may be filled with struggles and disappointment. Sometimes these obstacles may not be obstacles that we particularly planned out for ourselves in the hopes of succeeding; however, certain things must be faced due to them being completely out of one's control. After a long hard day of school, I find myself ready to wind down and forget about the 7 hours of laborious learning I've faced throughout the day. Sure, saying that learning is laborious may seem a little dramatic, but who can blame me? Day in and day out, I come to school and learn about things that I may never end up using again for the rest of my life. Certain subjects I don't mind (anatomy, psych, and stat...........science and math are my thing ya know) while there are others I don’t exactly care for; yet there’s nothing I can do about it. As a student, I come in and learn what I'm told I need to know in order to function for the rest of my life, whether I want to engage in that particular subject or not. With the overabundance of information I take in from day to day, the idea of sleeping always seems to put a smile on my face. Sleeping is where I can rest and take my mind off things. Sleeping is where I can forget the worries and stress that arise due to my day to day activities and simply let my mind wander. Sleeping is where I can simply let my imagination take over and fill my head with vibrant dreams. Sleeping is a necessity for my sanity. If I couldn't sleep, if I couldn't fully unwind and relax after a day of hard work, I'd more than likely lose my mind. It fascinates me when others connect to one another through forms or art or literature, and one piece of poetry, by Maya Angelou, that really seems to connect with me and my deep desire/love towards the act of sleeping is called "Insomniac". The poem goes a little like this:

There are some nights when

Sleep plays coy,

Aloof and disdainful.

And all the wiles

That I employ to win

Its service to my side

Are useless as wounded pride,

And much more painful.

 

When I first read this poem, I felt an instant connection; it was as if all the feelings that were arising from this speaker due their sudden attack of insomnia were the feelings that I’ve once faced before on one of those rough nights where there is constant turning and discomfort within my own bed. Dealing with sleeping is almost as if you really are dealing with something “coy”; some nights, sleep comes instantly, almost too quickly, while others it seems as if sleep while never come about. The idea of sleep almost represents something that has a mind of its own, and there seems to be a never ending battle where you as the sleeper are playing a constant game of cat and mouse. When sleep doesn’t arise, and we’re forced to engage in a night full of insomnia, it seems as if “all the wiles” do arise and we are left to deal with the thoughts that revolve around our daily struggles. When these struggles are all we can think about, they do become “much more painful” seeing how without sleep, without that break in the day, we’d never have the chance to rest and forget about everything that’s going on around us for a couple of hours. As children, when we were given the chance to nap at school yet constantly refused and loathed the idea of going engaging slumber, we failed to realize how important sleep really is for a healthy human mind. Without sleep, people would never be able to brush their worries away and participate in the outer body experience of dreaming. Without sleep, unsettled emotions and actions driven from adrenaline would never have time to settle and hidden conflicts would arise between those all around us. Without sleep, people wouldn’t fully be able to be who they are. We need sleep, more than we’ll ever know. Ya feel me?



Nutcracker vs. Doll's House

Ahh the holiday season, isn't it simply just the best time of year? From the egg nog to the Christmas movies, from the cold air to the holiday lights, and the jolly feelings to the growing excitement towards the new year, the holiday season brings us all together while at the same time allows us to happily reflect on what this year has had to offer. Out of all the things one can love about this beloved time of year (*cough* Oscar movie's come out during this time.....WHAT WHAT), one thing I've always found myself drawn to is the Ballets that are put on downtown at the Fox Theatre. Something about Ballets repeatedly pull me in with a desire for more (along with the desire to suddenly pick up a pair of pointe shoes and become a ballerina) due to the fact that they constantly make everything seem as if it is effortless and beautiful. This previous weekend, I went to a Nutcracker performance that was by my friend's dance company, and everything about it was simply divine. From the music (I've been listening to the song that went with the "Arabian" dance nonstop for the past two days) to the beautiful costumes, everything about The Nutcracker made these dancers appear as if they were dolls that had come to life just for that one night, just for that one show. Aside from the beautiful dancing, one thing that really struck me as interesting was the fact that within this performance all of the characters finally came to life once the lights were off and the family members had gone to sleep; the doll like dancers almost represented secrets that only came about when they were protected by the shadows of the dark. Being the AP Literature student that I am *wink*, I of course began to connect these dancers, and the theme of The Nutcracker, to our most previously read story, A Doll's House. When the toys, mice, and most importantly, the Nutcracker, finally came to life and began to dance, battle, and interact with one another, I suddenly found myself recalling scenes within A Doll's House in which characters true intentions we're brought to life. Krogstad and Nora shadowed the battle of the Nutcracker and the Mouse King; both characters revealed their past doings, along with their present doings, all in an attempt to get the point across that they were fighting for their lives and were willing to battle it out to the death in order to protect the one's they loved, along with their reputation. However, once other members of the household came into room and the duo were no longer in darkness or some form of shadow to protect their secrets, the characters true intentions we're pushed aside and the two began to "put on an act"; this instantly reminded me of the doings of the Nutcracker and the Mouse King while they were in the midst of their battle: while the lights were off and the family was asleep, the characters true intentions were brought to life, yet, once morning came and people began to rise around them, the characters began to "play a role" and soon appeared to be their normal doll like/ mouse like selves again. With all this being said, I've began to wonder exactly why the idea of darkness being a safety zone for one to reveal their secrets plays such a significant role within these two stories. Why is it that these characters seemed to put on a facade in the light, yet, showed everyone their true intentions once the lights were out? Was it because they were afraid of what the light could do to them once others saw what they really were doing behind their backs? Or is the meaning something that can never fully be understood? When people have secrets, they tend to keep them in the dark, due to the fact that some are afraid of the idea of being judged or letting down those who enjoyed them as they previously were, playing the role that they previously played. These two stories significantly connect to one another because they raise the question of why some people tend to be afraid of the light, yet, feel safe in the dark. What is it about the darkness that keeps people feeling safe? Isn’t that kind of ironic? Who knows. As time goes on, maybe someday someone will discover the answer to these questions, but at the moment all one can really do is sit back and enjoy the stories that are The Nutcracker and A Doll's House. Ya feel me?

Nora vs. Newland

So, I think it's safe to say that both The Age of Innocence and A Doll's House aren’t exactly what I expected them to be. First things first, The Age of Innocence is nothing like gossip girl *sigh*! I was expecting this book to be about the scandalous lives of New York's upper East Siders with a side of sassy expeditions and nonstop privileged drama......the reality of the novel is far from that. The book not only centers around a young man who tends to be overly hypocritical of the world he comes from but also around a society in which women couldn’t do much for themselves and were afraid of being judged for going after what they truly wanted in life (Blair Waldorf aka the queen bee of Gossip Girl's Upper East Side would most definitely not approve of the weak minded ways of these women). As if the boring, slow paced plot wasn’t enough, the main character, Newland Archer, acts like a girl more than he should! Sure, he makes it clear what the role of men was supposed to be during this time period, however, he always falls back on what he says, therefore, making him fall less and less into the roll that he describes and more and more into the position of a woman. Newland is whiny, judgmental, and indecisive, yet, he continues to judge women and others around him almost as if he is so much better than them and everyone else around him. Who is he to judge? If he's aware that these are the only life values these people have ever truly known why does he feel the need to be so harsh? It's pretty clear that Newland knows what his place in society is supposed to be/ what is expected of him, however, he doesn’t know how to use his position to the best of his abilities, thus, making him unable to actually go for what he wants in life. On the other end of the novel spectrum, there’s Nora from A Doll's House. Nora is a woman who is fully aware of her place in society, as well her husband's and everyone else around her, that not only utilizes her position to help get what she wants but also attempts to take care of those that she loves, whether her methods be immoral or not. Nora makes it very clear to her audience that she is her very pleased with the basic day to day tasks that she partakes in (hence her repeatedly telling Kristine how happy she is.......we get it) and that she wants to make sure her family is happy as they enjoy the moments of the upcoming holidays, however, Nora seems to relate to Archer in the sense that she doesn't fit into all aspects of the typical gender role. Women during Nora's time period weren’t allowed to handle money in any way, shape, or form, yet Nora borrows money behind her husband’s back in order to save his life and keep her family together. Sure, she embraces her gender role when it comes to squeezing excess money out of her husband or flirting with Dr. Rank, however, her intentions seem to be more selfless seeing how her desire for money is driven by her wanting for her family to stay out of debt and live happy lives. I'm not saying Nora isn’t selfish (she is.....her encounter with Kristine was actually super annoying. Where's your sympathy Nora??) But it seems as if she, the person who more so resembles a child like doll, has more mature wants in life than Newland, the person who is seen as this adult like New York man whose desires really reflect his own selfish wants and needs. These two puzzle me because they help show the way America has always seemed to value someone’s ability based off gender while also making it clear that sometimes not fitting ones typical role can either making them stronger (Nora, in a sense) or weaker (NEWLAND). Ya feel me?