There are so many vivid descriptions of nature in this poem, one might imagine that Dorothy Wordsworth was a Neo-Pagan!! "Harmonious Powers with Nature work /On sky, earth, river, lake, and sea:/ Sunshine and storm, whirlwind and breeze/ All in one duteous task agree" (ll. 1-4). Wordsworth has personified the elements of nature, claiming that the various powers of nature are able to come together and agree on a duteous task. This opening stanza seems to allude to a worship of nature, which is later apparent throughout the rest of the poem. Another example of this is "But Nature, though we mark her not, Will take away -- may cease to give" (ll. 23-24). So much respect, awe, and wonderment is given to nature as a living being, it is clear that nature is worshipped.
The other theme that cannot be ignored is the author/narrator's devotion to beauty. This is also characteristic of Romanticism, and the colorful language and rich undertones leave the reader feeling comfortable and pleasant (At least I was- I'm pretty sure I sighed at the end. . .). Example: "Might see it, from the mossy shore Dissevered float upon the Lake, Float, with its crest of trees adorned On which the warbling birds their pastime take. Food, shelter, safety there they find There berries ripen, flowerets bloom; There insects live their lives -- and die: A peopled world it is; in size a tiny room" (ll. 9-16). To put it simply, Wordsworth is able to see and appreciate the beauty in nature all around her.
Though the narrator conveys a sense of loss at the end because the island has disappeared, I felt that the mood of the poem was not influenced by this development. "Buried beneath the glittering Lake! Its place no longer to be found, Yet the lost fragments shall remain, To fertilize some other ground" (ll.21-24). The tone and word choice suggest that this occurrence is understood, or at least accepted. The narrator is not angry, does not question it, and does is not afraid of the consequences. This of course links back to the worship of nature, where the people simply accept Nature's choice in removing the island from sight.
Overall, very beautiful poem. I'd be curious to see what would happen if Jurassic Park and the Floating Island were to combine themselves into one massive storyline. . . . That would have taken care of the world's regenerated dinosaur problem. . .
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Saturday, January 23, 2010
Help! I Need A Nightlight!
As Julie has prompted us to delve deeper into the meanings behind nature within this text, I found several instances that evoked a sort of fear/anxiety/terror that actually didn't include a lot of physical description. We discussed in class the possible meaning behind these feelings and the symbolic nature of these settings, and I believe Charles Brockden Brown did an excellent job portraying the current American condition (upheaval, uncertainty, entrapment) through the settings in his novel. Keeping this idea in mind, let's jump into the text.
So, the scene I have decided to discuss is the part where Edgar is about to "re-examine [the] cave" (93). It struck me as an amusing point in the story because he had chosen to come back to this unknown place in the dark, and didn't even notice his lack of proficient lighting until he actually reached the mouth of the cave (94). Edgar is so completely enveloped by his obsession to find out what Clithero is doing whilst he sleepwalks that his common sense has clearly taken the back seat. At the beginning of his venture into the cave, Edgar's mind begins to race: "I began to fear that I should be involved in a maze, and should be disabled from returning" (95). Ok, so Edgar can't see, he senses danger, he fears getting lost, and he recognizes the possibility he won't be able to find his way out- yet he still walks on, unable to save his curiosity for another time. STOP FOOL!
Even though this was pretty stupid to begin with, the quote I'd like to draw your attention to comes after he's decided to sally forth- "Intense dark is always the parent of fears" (95). This is it, my friends. This is the point where we should realize (with Edgar) that while his surroundings are indeed creepy and terrifying and stupidly played with by our hero, we are told that it is the darkness itself that FEEDS the anxiety of his situation. What does this mean? Why is this significant? Get ready. . .
AMERICA IS IN THE DARK AT THIS TIME!!! Wow. But seriously. Charles Brockden Brown fails to include more physical details about Edgar's surroundings on purpose!! He wants his readers to be able to draw connections and recognize his political statements. If he had indeed been more descriptive and focused on evoking fear using more detailed illustrations, then we would have just accepted nature to be seen for what it is instead of what is represents!
So that is why nature is depicted the way it is within the novel. Even if we read it for fun at first, we are easily able to critically analyze it later because of the way that Charles Brockden Brown sets it up for us.
So, the scene I have decided to discuss is the part where Edgar is about to "re-examine [the] cave" (93). It struck me as an amusing point in the story because he had chosen to come back to this unknown place in the dark, and didn't even notice his lack of proficient lighting until he actually reached the mouth of the cave (94). Edgar is so completely enveloped by his obsession to find out what Clithero is doing whilst he sleepwalks that his common sense has clearly taken the back seat. At the beginning of his venture into the cave, Edgar's mind begins to race: "I began to fear that I should be involved in a maze, and should be disabled from returning" (95). Ok, so Edgar can't see, he senses danger, he fears getting lost, and he recognizes the possibility he won't be able to find his way out- yet he still walks on, unable to save his curiosity for another time. STOP FOOL!
Even though this was pretty stupid to begin with, the quote I'd like to draw your attention to comes after he's decided to sally forth- "Intense dark is always the parent of fears" (95). This is it, my friends. This is the point where we should realize (with Edgar) that while his surroundings are indeed creepy and terrifying and stupidly played with by our hero, we are told that it is the darkness itself that FEEDS the anxiety of his situation. What does this mean? Why is this significant? Get ready. . .
AMERICA IS IN THE DARK AT THIS TIME!!! Wow. But seriously. Charles Brockden Brown fails to include more physical details about Edgar's surroundings on purpose!! He wants his readers to be able to draw connections and recognize his political statements. If he had indeed been more descriptive and focused on evoking fear using more detailed illustrations, then we would have just accepted nature to be seen for what it is instead of what is represents!
So that is why nature is depicted the way it is within the novel. Even if we read it for fun at first, we are easily able to critically analyze it later because of the way that Charles Brockden Brown sets it up for us.
Thursday, January 14, 2010
A Baker's Extravaganza
"I'm looking over, my dead dog Rover who's been hit by a power mower!
One leg is missing, the other is gone
One leg is scattered all over the lawn!
No need explaining, the leg remaining
It just sits there on the floor!
I'm looking over, my dead dog Rover
Who I'd never hit before!!!"
Ok, so maybe this song doesn't really encompass TERROR or HORROR. . . it's just kinda morbid. And it was stuck in my head today. But still, the gore illustrated by the carefully chosen words above lead into the first topic of discussion: HORROR!!
So I've never really been a horror movie fan. Actually, when it comes to scary movies in general I tend to avoid all contact. When I first met my husband, he tried to expand my thriller cinematic experience and discovered it was best to leave this one alone. The turning point: his introduction to the THRILLER TORNADO!!! The Thriller Tornado is my go-to move when I watch scary movies, and I do it whether or not we are in public. Nevertheless, my husband decided his pride in calling me his wife was more valuable than his pleasure in watching me freak out.
Back to the point. Horror. I hate to do this, but I think I'm going to. Three simple words: TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE. Ugh. If I am remembering this correctly, it took us a few tries to get through this one. Let us imagine that creating a horror film is like decorating a cake, and since this film is based off of a true story, lets start with a red velevet base. Add a women pulling a gun out of her crotch and shooting her brains out, and there we have our rich icing. But that's not all we get. On top of the red deliciousness, we have a random leg sawed off here, people being hung on meat hooks there, victims being falayed: SPRINKLES!!!!! TCM is a truly horrifying film that reaches down your throat and rips your stomach out. It's just gross for people to watch. . . and yet they LOVE IT!!! Sick bastards.
On the other hand, we have red velevet's worst enemy: Mom's favorite TERROR BROWNIES!!! (The box kind). The thing about brownies is: They are SIMPLE! Terror is too. Terror doesn't need all the blood and guts and brains and injured people to get the point across. Terror just subtly slips itself into situations and you as the viewer just can't help the character find their way out of the creepy house where people are trying to kill them for no reason. That's right. This movie sucks, but I think some people liked it: THE STRANGERS. This film is suspenseful, it keeps you on edge (well, not me, but I think some people), and you NEVER SEE THEIR FREAKING FACES!! Ugh. What a sucky end. But the point is, there is no escape, no one comes to rescue them, there is no reasoning behind the attack, and there is no later explanation except: "YOU WERE HOME." Boo. My 2 year old nephew could come up with that one. But some people really feel that it's creepy!! This film plays off the fear of the unknown, which is what Julie discussed in class today. The couple is in an unfamiliar house in the middle of nowhere, alone, and totally unable to defend themselves against the other. One of the biggest aspects about this movie that keeps viewers on the edge of their seats (or whirling like a tornado) is that WE see the strangers in the house, in the background, and Liv and her boyfriend miss it most of the time. They can feel the danger, but they don't see it. . . while we do. So there you have it. Terror is a simple box of brownie mix that just needs oil, eggs, and a pan to complete its deliciousness.
So after this enlightening metaphoric example of Terror and Horror, I just have to ask: Which dessert would you buy at a charity bake sale?
One leg is missing, the other is gone
One leg is scattered all over the lawn!
No need explaining, the leg remaining
It just sits there on the floor!
I'm looking over, my dead dog Rover
Who I'd never hit before!!!"
Ok, so maybe this song doesn't really encompass TERROR or HORROR. . . it's just kinda morbid. And it was stuck in my head today. But still, the gore illustrated by the carefully chosen words above lead into the first topic of discussion: HORROR!!
So I've never really been a horror movie fan. Actually, when it comes to scary movies in general I tend to avoid all contact. When I first met my husband, he tried to expand my thriller cinematic experience and discovered it was best to leave this one alone. The turning point: his introduction to the THRILLER TORNADO!!! The Thriller Tornado is my go-to move when I watch scary movies, and I do it whether or not we are in public. Nevertheless, my husband decided his pride in calling me his wife was more valuable than his pleasure in watching me freak out.
Back to the point. Horror. I hate to do this, but I think I'm going to. Three simple words: TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE. Ugh. If I am remembering this correctly, it took us a few tries to get through this one. Let us imagine that creating a horror film is like decorating a cake, and since this film is based off of a true story, lets start with a red velevet base. Add a women pulling a gun out of her crotch and shooting her brains out, and there we have our rich icing. But that's not all we get. On top of the red deliciousness, we have a random leg sawed off here, people being hung on meat hooks there, victims being falayed: SPRINKLES!!!!! TCM is a truly horrifying film that reaches down your throat and rips your stomach out. It's just gross for people to watch. . . and yet they LOVE IT!!! Sick bastards.
On the other hand, we have red velevet's worst enemy: Mom's favorite TERROR BROWNIES!!! (The box kind). The thing about brownies is: They are SIMPLE! Terror is too. Terror doesn't need all the blood and guts and brains and injured people to get the point across. Terror just subtly slips itself into situations and you as the viewer just can't help the character find their way out of the creepy house where people are trying to kill them for no reason. That's right. This movie sucks, but I think some people liked it: THE STRANGERS. This film is suspenseful, it keeps you on edge (well, not me, but I think some people), and you NEVER SEE THEIR FREAKING FACES!! Ugh. What a sucky end. But the point is, there is no escape, no one comes to rescue them, there is no reasoning behind the attack, and there is no later explanation except: "YOU WERE HOME." Boo. My 2 year old nephew could come up with that one. But some people really feel that it's creepy!! This film plays off the fear of the unknown, which is what Julie discussed in class today. The couple is in an unfamiliar house in the middle of nowhere, alone, and totally unable to defend themselves against the other. One of the biggest aspects about this movie that keeps viewers on the edge of their seats (or whirling like a tornado) is that WE see the strangers in the house, in the background, and Liv and her boyfriend miss it most of the time. They can feel the danger, but they don't see it. . . while we do. So there you have it. Terror is a simple box of brownie mix that just needs oil, eggs, and a pan to complete its deliciousness.
So after this enlightening metaphoric example of Terror and Horror, I just have to ask: Which dessert would you buy at a charity bake sale?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)