Blog Assignment #4 - Due Tuesday, May 25th

Select a meaningful (and blog appropriate) quote from A Prayer for Owen Meany. Explain why this quote is important to the story, theme, characters, etc. (10 points)

Guest Blogger - Melissa D.

Today in class we did a discussion about one of the many themes of Frankenstein by Mary Shelly. The theme we began discussing was about the power of knowledge and how when put in the wrong hands it can be abused. We discussed how Victor’s power-hungry attitude for seeing how much he could accomplish actually ended up hurting him and driving him to become physically ill and have extreme feelings of guilt and sorrow as his creation began murdering those who he loved. One of the things I noticed in the book was how Victor seemed to have all these “book smarts” but didn’t have enough knowledge to realize that what he was doing wasn’t moral. “When I found so astonishing a power placed within my hands, I hesitated a long time concerning the manner in which I should employ it” (Shelly 54). This quote shows that his power of him succeeding in the creation of life over powered his consciousness and common sense. This very observation led our class discussion to a modern controversy that was sparked by this book which is the question of whether man should be able to gain the knowledge and power in order to actually create another human being. After reading Frankenstein, I realize that it may not be as good of an idea to put that kind of power into the hands of such a flawed creature. We see in this story how Victor’s success actually scares him and causes him to abandon this new being causing it to be alone and eventually seek vengeance. Victor’s actions are somewhat of how I would imagine real life scientist to react. If man was to create a man, just to see if they could do it, what would then happen to this new person? Would it be killed to be used for parts? We would have created a HUMAN BEING, not a car or a lawn mower. Even if the human was simply created in a test tube, it was still born with feelings, a brain and a conscious, right? An argument that could be put forth disputing my comment could be something like what a mother would say to a misbehaving child, “I brought you into this world, and I can take you out!” The only difference is, a child has an actual family, who is there to raise it for the good and to love and care for it, where as a clone lacks that part of his/her life. But does that make it right to abandon or kill it? That is basically what happened to the creature. It lacked a family, someone to care and nurture him for the good of the community. He was abandoned and therefore acted out because he didn’t exactly know better, at first. Like a real human, he learned and developed exactly how a clone created today would eventually do. Frankenstein defiantly sparked a whole new train of thought for me, in class and even after the bell rang. New opinions where defiantly formed, much like a lot of readers experience after reading such an intense story.

Guest Blogger - Katie H.

Well, I have to say, now that we have finished As I Lay Dying, I really like the book. It wasn’t very much fun to read, but the more we talk about it in class the more I like it. One of the characters that I find particularly interesting is Cash Bundren. Cash does not have very many chapters and he is often just a background character, but now that I look back, there is a lot more to Cash than I first realized.

First of all, Cash is very logical making him different from the rest of the family. While the other family members talk about their feelings and emotions, Cash is straightforward and he simply tells us what is happening. Cash’s first chapter in the book is a numbered list about the coffin. The way Cash builds the coffin also shows us that Cash likes things to be neat and in order. This is very different from the other children who tend to ramble in their chapters and stray far from the topic. Cash’s logic is most obviously seen when the family is crossing the river. Cash suggests that part of the family crosses ahead of the wagon. He says, “Dewey Dell and Vardaman and pa better walk across on the bridge” (pg. 126). This proves to be a very good idea because the wagon does not make it across the river very easily. Cash is also the one to point out that the coffin is not balanced on the wagon. However, the family does not pay attention to him and the coffin ends up falling into the river.

Another think about Cash is that he bears a lot and he does not complain. Throughout the family’s journey to Jefferson, Cash is the one that suffers the most. He breaks his leg while crossing the river, but he never complains. He always puts the family’s needs ahead of his own. Even after they have reached Jefferson Cash tells the family to bury Addie before taking him to the doctor. Cash also quietly bears the problems within the family. When he finds out about Jewel’s horse, he does not tell anyone and he seems to understand Jewel. Darl notices Cash looking at Jewel and he says, “…it was not a worried look; it was the kind of look I would see on him when I would find him doing some of Jewel’s work around the house” (pg. 133). Then when Addie becomes upset, Cash shows love for his mother instead of jealousy because of her love for Jewel.

One thing, though, that surprised me about Cash was the he let Darl be taken away at the end of the story. Cash seemed to be the one who cared the most about the family and I did not expect him to let Darl go so easily.

Overall, I have found Cash to be a very interesting character even though he has a small role in the book.

Guest Blogger - Katie H.

After writing the in class essay, and finally reading volume one of Mary Shelley’s Frankestein, I realized what really made the novel a horror story. Its not just the fact that Victor Frankenstein stole pieces of dead bodies, put them together, and used electricity to make a “person” its also the way that Shelley uses vivid imagery to paint a picture for the reader. I expected the book to be a monster that was running around killing people and nothing could stop it. I was wrong. I had the Hollywood version of this novel in my head, but I surprisingly like Mary Shelley’s novel better. I always thought that the movies were cheesy. Anyways, back to the book. “Sometimes my pulse beat so quickly and hardly that I felt the palpitation of every artery” (Shelley 59). The imagery of Victor Frankenstein’s heart reacting to the adrenaline conveys to the reader his fear of his own creation. The reader can also relate, because we have all been in a frightening situation where there is nothing we can do. Victor also experiences the opposite of fear, “at others, I nearly sank to the ground through languor and extreme weakness” (Shelley 59). Instead of being afraid, Victor chooses not to deal with his troubles, instead he tries to ignore them by giving in to his exhaustion and sleeping. Shelly portrays an image of Victor collapsing and staying there for hours. At least thats how I pictured what happened to him. I saw it as Victor being as tired as if he stayed awake for three days straight and his body could not go on any longer, and finally forced him to sleep. “...a cold shivering came over me. I threw the door forcibly open, as children are accustomed to do when they expect a spectre to stand in waiting for them on the other side; but nothing appeared I stepped fearfully in: the apartment was empty; and my bedroom was also freed from its hideous guest” (Shelley 62). When Henry Clerval, Victor’s friend, comes to visit him, Victor realizes that he has not addressed the problem of his creation. His panic is not only shown through his thoughts but his actions this time. He compares himself to a child, like when you hear your first ghost-story as a kid and for the next week or so you freak out at every little noise.
So far, I’m really enjoying Frankenstein, it is slightly confusing but after we discuss a few of the things I start to understand it more.

Blog Assignment #3 - Due Tuesday, May 4th

Practice for the AP Lit Exam! Follow the link below and take the 20 question practice AP Lit Exam. DO NOT post your score on the blog. E-mail Ms. Arko your score (miarko@rochester.k12.mn.us) or print off your score and turn it in. Credit will not be based on the score you receive on the practice exam, just that you completed it.
Good Luck! (10 points)

http://www.shmoop.com/ap-english-literature/

Guest Blogger - Zack J.

We've just finished reading As I Lay Dying. We've really been looking in depth at perspective, which this book has a whole lot of. I thought that the story was really difficult to keep together while reading through all the different character's chapters. The character's feelings about their mother's death vary dramatically throughout all the children. As I Lay Dying is about the death of Addie. However, we only see the story from her perspective during only one chapter. During this chapter we learn a lot about the background of the family and the feelings of Addie and her reasoning for being buried in Jefferson. Addie really doesn't like her life which is kind of sad because she has all those kids, whom most of them hate her, with the exception of a couple. Addie believed that we live to get ready for death. This story was boring to me because there was no action. I thought the plot was plain and had very little interesting aspects of it. It seemed to me as if Addie was the only thing holding the family together. None of the kids liked their father Anse, who brought a new wife to Addie's funeral which is not very classy. I think that this story is about a family that did not get along with each other; they were a family because they had to be. Addie believed that words were just words, and actions said everything. I thought it was funny how Addie got revenge on her family by making them bury her in Jefferson which would cause the family conflicts. This followed her belief of actions say everything, because she knew that making her family take her to Jefferson would be a major struggle for the family.

Guest Blogger - Sophie H.

So what the heck is with all these dead people? William Faulkner seems to be obsessed. I mean seriously, from As I Lay Dying to A Rose for Emily? It is quite creepy. But if you look closely the stories are very similar. Obviously they both have dead people who are around for much longer then they needed to be. Addie, who was carted around in a coffin for a week and Emily’s lover, who laid in her bed and she slept next to for years? Also they both have odd smells coming from Addie’s coffin and the smell from the dead person in Ms. Emily’s house. Both stories play with point of view, but if you look deeper into the stories, there is more. Both stories have to do with a deeply misunderstood woman. Ms. Emily we finally realize is psycho. But obviously something happened along the line that made her snap. We realize something is wrong when she won’t let her father’s dead body leave the house for three days. By the end Ms. Emily has killed her lover and has slept with his dead body for years. Addie is less obviously misunderstood. We only see what she thinks through her chapter. Addie hates her life and only loves Jewel. And she believes that we live our life to die. Although Addie didn’t kill anyone, do you believe there is a reason they both act strangely? What could have happened to Ms. Emily to cause her to kill?

Guest Blogger - Melanie J.

While reading, As I Lay Dying, I have to admit that I wasn’t a big fan. However, now that we’ve gone over symbolism and dug into character analysis, I feel that there is much more to this “southern fiction” that Faulkner envisioned. Though the book is about ordinary people, I think the meaning behind each action of the characters represents something much deeper. When looking back on Faulkner’s Nobel Prize Speech, an important line that sticks with me says, “The universal truths lacking which any story is ephemeral and doomed—love and honor and pity and pride and compassion and sacrifice.” When reflecting on As I Lay Dying, he writes using all of these “truths.” Of all of these, I feel that sacrifice is most prevalent throughout the book. Though the journey to Jefferson represents Addie’s own resentment, Anse chooses to pursue her wishes and follow through with it. During each step of the voyage, every one of the characters loses a little bit of themselves. Whether it is Jewel’s horse, or Cash’s leg, each family member gives up more and more of themselves until the river scene, where sacrifices reach an ultimate height. “I felt the current take us and I knew we were on the ford by that reason, since it was only by means of that slipping contact that we could tell that we were in motion at all. What had once been a flat surface was now a succession of troughs and hillocks lifting and falling about us, shoving at us, teasing at us with light lazy touches in the vain instants of solidity underfoot. Cash looked back at me, and then I knew that we were gone” (147). This is a climatic moment, and could have many meanings behind it. Honor, pride, compassion, and sacrifice are all used in this scene, and it makes someone question, why? Though the whole situation seems completely out of hand, I feel like almost anyone can relate to these moments in life. Someone’s life doesn’t change overnight, and small decisions can escalade to unrecognizable people. I think Faulkner thought really deeply about anything he wrote (evident when he said writing was agony), and that he not only wanted to make people apply the story to their own lives, but to seek a deeper meaning of life.

Blog Assignment #2 - Due Tuesday, April 27th

Find an example of a literary device or technique in Frankenstein. Explain the context from which it is taken. (5 points)

Example: "...William and Justine, the first hapless victims to my unhallowed arts" (Shelley, 90). In this sentence the words "first hapless victims" lead the reader to believe there will be more victims and functions as an example of foreshadowing.

Guest Blogger - Jessica S.

Over spring break we were assigned to read As I lay Dying by William Faulkner. I was pretty excited to read it as I had enjoyed the last novel we read in class dealing with point of view and stream of consciousness, The turn of the Screw. AILD however turned out to be completely different from what I had expected; in fact it was downright confusing! One thing that really threw me for a loop was Vardaman’s recurring quote “My mother is a fish” (Faulkner 84), it seems that in almost every chapter after the death of his mother he manages to include this quote in his narration of what is happening around him. I don’t know if it was Vardaman’s childish way of thinking or if I just did not quite comprehend the significance of the fish, but I could not seem to understand why Faulkner found it so important to include this quote in the book so many times. Throughout the novel my views on Anse changes dramatically. At the beginning of the novel it seemed that he was head-over-heals in love with Addie and that all he wanted to do in life was to please her, right down to her dying wish, while she seemed rather annoyed with him. This perception made him seem more of Addie’s personal puppet rather than her husband. By the end of the novel however I was very unpleasantly surprised when I came to find out that the reason he was so set on getting Addie’s body to Jefferson was not to simply grant her her dying wish but to get himself the new set of teeth that he had wanted for some time. Another thing that surprised me since I had the impression that Addie meant everything to Anse was that mere hours passed between when Anse buried her and when he greeted his children and introduced them to the new Mrs. Bundren.
One question I had about the book is in regards to Jewel. The readers know that he was fathered by Witfield rather than by Anse, but does Anse know this? and if he does, does it have anything to do with the amount of respect he shows Addie by marrying another woman mere hours after laying her in her grave?
All in all I was not as intrigued by this book as a have been with other books we have read this year. This one was honestly a struggle to read but I hope that by discussing it in class some light will be shed on parts that were harder to understand and that the class will be able to appreciate the book more.

Guest Blogger - Ihab M.

As I Lay Dying was easily the least enjoyable reading experience I have ever had with a novel. And I read The Jungle all the way through. After going back and looking at the sparknotes, I can agree that it has a worthwhile plot. However, the method of getting that plot across, which seemed to be “never actually talk about it clearly,” was a real drag. Never before have I tried so hard to understand a book and still not “get it” by the ending.
For example: Until around halfway through the book, I thought that Dewey Dell was a black servant girl. I cannot defend or explain where I got this idea. It made as much sense as anything else happening. When I finally realized that she was Darl’s brother and not, in fact, a black servant girl, it made it impossible for me to visualize her properly for the rest of the novel.
Another example: Early on, one of Darl’s chapters has him narrating events at the farm while he is not even there. Darl tells us that Anse tells some visitors that Darl and Jewel are not there. Unless there’s some really awesome psychic storyline that I missed, I don’t understand it.
I do understand that the book was perhaps making an important point upon the distinction between what is said to happen and what actually happens. And I appreciate that an author was brave enough to try to say so.
But when, as a result of making this point, a book becomes so confusing that the point is nigh-impossible to extract, can we really consider it a masterpiece? Where should the line be drawn between artistic license and inconsistencies, between dialect and typos? Was this book so successful at being distracting and dodging the point that it itself became distracting and dodged the point? And if so, should we even call it a success?

Guest Blogger - Taylor K.

In the beginning of As I Lay Dying I was extremely confused, but that is normal for me when we read books for classes.
The one part that really caught me was Jewel's chapter in the very beginning. This chapter caught me because it seems so cruel to have to watch someone make your coffin. I get that their mom is going to die anyways, but having to watch that takes away any hope or happiness in the last moments of their life. Also during this passage I was wondering what Faulkner meant by "one lick less." I kept trying figure it out, does it mean like one less time? I suppose in the context of the story that sort of makes sense, but I would also really like to know what Faulkner meant by that. Also, what is "adze?"
Later, during Cora’s chapter (pages 21-25) I was really hooked on when she made a distinction between Jewel’s affection for Addie and Darl’s affection for her. Even though Addie favors Jewel, Darl still shows affection for Addie that Cora does not see with Jewel. I’m really not taking to Jewel; he seems kind to himself and not concerned with what is going on around him. In the beginning I thought that he would be cool, you know, doing his own thing, walking the unbeaten path, but now I’m put off by him. Anyways, this portion of the story really captured me; that the son, who was over looked by his mother, is still greatly affected by this impending death. The way that Cora describes it as, “He just looked at her, and I felt the bounteous love of the Lord again and His mercy.” This look of love and endearment is so moving. Cora continues, “I saw that with Jewel she had just been pretending but that it was between her and Darl that the understanding and the love was.” Not to be a Debby Downer, but when I go to the great beyond I’d like to have someone to share that connection with. I’m looking forward to seeing how Darl and Jewel each react and handle the death of their mother.

Blog Assignment #1 (4th quarter) - Due Tuesday, April 20th

Choose a quote from Frankenstein and explain the significance of the quote. It can be related to characterization, theme, or literary techniques. Explanation must be at least 4 sentences in length. 10 points

Guest Blogger - Lauren W.

Since we have just finished reading Ethan Frome and we are not very far into As I lay dying I am going to write about some of the important aspects of Ethan Frome. These major aspects include Ethan’s representation of the setting of Starkfield, isolation, and Zeena’s favorite broken pickle dish.
Starkfield is described as a dull, bleak town that is separated from the surrounding towns (mainly because of the train). It has vast fields of boring, white snow that also happens to shut the town and its few residents down. Even the name Starkfield is descriptive of the town, it is a stark, old town surrounded and filled with fields. Ethan is boring, repetitive, not one of the smart ones who get away. Ethan goes through the same routine everyday on his rundown, broken farm and is just as boring and bleak as Starkfield. Ethan is the human embodiment of Starkfield.
Along with the setting comes the isolation, because Ethan is the human embodiment of Starkfield, and because Starkfield is isolated in their old fashioned home, Ethan is isolated also. Not only is Ethan isolated physically by the remote location of his farm and because of Starkfield, but he is also emotionally isolated because of his feelings for Mattie and Zeena. Ethan isolates himself from the two women because he feels an obligation to stay with Zeena and since Zeena rules Ethan will never tell Mattie his true feelings because Zeena is always with them (even when she is gone). Ethan finally tells his true feelings to Mattie but it turns out to be a bit late.
While Zeena is away seeking medical attention Mattie puts out Zeena’s favorite dish, which she has been instructed not to use, and the cat breaks it. The pickle dish represents Ethan and Zeena’s marriage, which wasn’t being used (it was kept up in the closet). When the dish breaks, their relationship breaks, Zeena comes home and suspects something and hires a new girl to come work and Mattie must leave. Ethan excessively searches for glue, like a chore, to put the dish back together, which represents the amount of work it takes to try to put something back together that you don’t want to e put back together.

Guest Blogger - Mitch N.

WOW! What an ending to Ethan Frome, what I thought was going to be a very very boring book turned suddenly into an extremely, well semi-exciting book. Ms. Arko had always mentioned that the book was not going to end all happy, so I just figured that Mattie would leave and Ethan would get the “smash up” doing something farm related. But I did not expect anything like that to happen. The first thing I noticed while I was finishing the book was that Ethan seems to have actual feelings for Mattie, and he does indeed love her, that became very apparent when he first thought about running away with her and started writing a note to Zeena. I always thought that maybe his feelings were a little fake, like she was a sort of substitute for his otherwise boring wife and his life. But the note, along with his continued rebellion against Zeena really proved that Mattie meant a lot to him, enough for him to basically become a new person.
But the second thing I noticed, right after Mattie confessed her love for Ethan, and suggested that they no longer go on living, was that throughout the whole book, it seems that every character gives their opinion. We are somewhat in Ethan’s head, or at least getting the story from him, we get some of the narrator’s feelings through his changing the story to make it sound more exciting, and we even get Mrs. Hale’s opinion about the whole thing after we come back to present time. But we never get anywhere near Zeena’s opinion/feelings on anything that has happened. Mrs. Hale even says it “nobody knows Zeena’s thoughts.” I wondered why that is? I mean we get a very good description of her personality, at least from Ethan’s point of view. But she never really says anything that she thinks. She wants to get rid of Mattie, but never gives a specific reason, just that she needs to go. And then at the end she suddenly has compassion and the 3 of them somehow live together, but still Zeena does not give any indication of what she is thinking. Anyone have any ideas as to why that is?
The final thing I noticed was that during the sled scene, it reminded me very much of Romeo and Juliet, and the typical love story. Ms. Arko says that this storyline could be told anywhere, and it has been. But Ethan Frome turned into much more than a storyline, it turned into a book full of symbols and hidden meanings and about a small town named Starkfield and how that affects everyone’s lives, constantly being imprisoned by the town and by each other, it all comes out in Ethan’s personality, or lack there of.

As I Lay Dying - Spring Break Reading

Hi everyone! This is NOT required, but I did want to give you a place to go if you have questions while reading As I Lay Dying. Feel free to post questions and/or comments related to the novel at any time over break. I (Ms. Arko) will check the blog sporadically over break and help clarify and guide your reading. Enjoy the break (and the book)! :)

Guest Blogger - Christian C.

Since we have just finished reading Ethan Frome, I have decided to address a few topics that we were meant to base our reading notes on.

One topic that we discussed thoroughly in class was the importance of setting and its relation to the characters of the book. These conversations were directed towards the correlation between the out-dated, isolated town of Starkfield and Ethan. Another place related to Ethan that we didn’t touch on is the “small room behind the untenanted ‘best parlour’” where he often takes refuge from his dissatisfying life. This place is described in the first paragraph of chapter eight:
“Here he had nailed up shelves for his books, built himself a box-sofa out of boards and a mattress, laid out his papers on a kitchen-table, hung on the rough plaster wall an engraving of Abraham Lincoln and a calendar with ‘Thoughts from the Poets,’ and tried, with these meagre properties, to produce some likeness to the study of a ‘minister’ who had been kind to him and lent him books when he was at Worcester.”
The isolation and bareness of the room is representative of Ethan. However, Zeena is also affected by her setting in the novel. She reflects the run-down, invaluable home which she is usually contained to. In the prologue the Frome residence is described
“…in all its plaintive ugliness. The black wraith of deciduous creeper flapped from the porch, and the thin wooden walls, under their worn coat of paint, seemed to shiver in the wind…”

We also talked about the significance of the color red in class, but I’d like to mention a couple references that were not brought up. One of these is the fact that the pickle dish which Mattie (or “the cat”) breaks while Zeena is away. Mattie embraces the use of said dish while Zeena tucks it away on a high, safe shelf. Mattie’s use of the red plate magnifies the contrast between her and Zeena thus making her more appealing to Ethan. Another noteworthy inclusion of the color red can be found in chapter nine when Ethan is supposed to be taking Mattie to the Flats (when in reality they’re on the tour of fond memories building up to their attempted tag-team suicide):
“As they drove away the sun sank behind the hill and the pine-boles turned from red to grey. By a devious track between the fields they wound back to the Starkfield road. Under the open sky they light was still clear, with a reflection of cold red on the eastern hills.”
The color is being drained from Starkfield with Mattie’s departure. Throughout the novel, Edith Wharton uses imagery and symbolism to convey thoughts, feelings, personalities, and meanings that cannot be revealed through the unique, retelling-of-a-story point of view.

Guest Blogger - Martin C.

Recently, we finished reading Ethan Frome. While this story may have seemed slightly unexciting, the ending sure added an interesting twist. Ethan and Mattie's crippling injuries were debatably worse than death. As the narrator put it, "I don’t see’s there’s much difference between the Fromes up at the farm and the Fromes down in the graveyard." Instead of finally freeing himself from Zeena and from the responsibilities of life, Ethan was forced to spend the rest of his life with her, and with Mattie who had turned into almost a clone of Zeena. But you already know all this. I was wondering what people's opinions were when it came to this debate. Would it have been better for Ethan if he died? Or did he get lucky by surviving?Forgetting for a second, the seemingly obvious point that there are probably better ways to kill yourself than sledding into a tree, I think both answers were slightly correct. While actually dying would've been the easy way out, and he wouldn't have to live the rest of his life against his dreams, surviving it may have done one thing for him. It forced him to live up to his responsibilities and realize that one cannot run away from their problems. Whether or not this was easy, hopefully it did something for his character.Thoughts?

Guest Blogger - Steph O.

This week in class we are finishing Ethan Frome and i gotta say i feel really bad for Zeena because she loves Ethan however after seeing Mattie he no longer feels quite the same towards her. What i admire about Zeena is that she knew her husband and cousin were flirting behind her back, but after the accident she still took both of them in and cared for them until she was no longer able to. However i can't even imagine how hard it must be for Ethan to be married to the wrong woman? So in that way i feel bad for him too. A few things I wonder though, how come Ethan, and Mattie didn't try to commit suicide some other way? Why crash the sled? I also can't imagine how hard it had to be for Zeena to watch her husband slowly slip away to a person whom she evnied so deeply. What i was wondering about her is that why she let Ethan drive Mattie to the station? I mean i know it's because he argued for her to let him but she still could have put her foot down on the matter. I also wonder why she didn't demand that if he be the one to drive Mattie to the station than she must go with as well?

Guest Blogger - Karissa B.

Today in class we analyzed different topics in Ethan Frome. My group discussed the idea of power in relationships. It’s pretty obvious that Zeena is the dominant one in the relationship between her and Ethan. It’s strange because, although she has health complications and comes off as weak, she has a control over Ethan and Mattie, too. It seems as though she uses her poor health as a way to make Ethan feel bad for her and do whatever she wants him to. She tries to make him feel guilty about her situation on page 97 when Zeena says that she lost her health nursing Ethan’s mother. She then goes on to say “Yes, and my folks all told me at the time you couldn’t do no less than marry me after-“. (Wharton 98). This line reflects the circumstances under which Zeena and Ethan were married. Zeena’s character reminded me of the scene “A Poor Helpless Creature” in the play the Good Doctor. The character in the play is much more dramatic than Zeena, but both characters have the same pretense of seeming helpless. Zeena’s power over Ethan can also be seen on page 107 when Ethan is conversing with Mattie. “You can’t go, Matt! I won’t let you! She’s always had her way, but I mean to have mine.” Ethan tells Mattie that he’s going to take a stand against Zeena and forbid her from letting Mattie go. Prior to this conversation with Mattie, Ethan revealed that he does not have loving feelings for Zeena anymore. This is most obvious when he says, “Now she mastered him and he abhorred her.” (Wharton 103). It seems like in his relationship with Mattie, Ethan is more dominant. Ethan and Mattie are both fairly passive, quiet people though, so maybe it only seems that Ethan is more dominant because the reader can see what he is thinking and we don’t exactly know what is going on in Mattie’s head. Who do you think is more dominant in Mattie and Ethan’s relationship?

Guest Blogger - Megan S.

We just wrapped up Turn of the Screw, and I have one thing that I am still contemplating. That question is whether the children see the ghosts that the governess does or not. The governess makes it seem like they do, but as we all know, she’s not the most credible person at this point. At the end of the story, Miles and the governess are talking and he starts freaking out. “Is she here?...Miss Jessel, Miss Jessel!” (pg. 402). He then has the same reaction about Peter Quint, and proceeds to die. The story just ends there, and leaves you to contemplate. She seems to have created a lot of things in her mind as some sort of twisted fantasy that included becoming a governess for a man and believing she’d fall in love with him, even though he doesn’t live with or have anything to do with Miles or Flora, so frankly, I am not sure which way to go on this one. Part of me thinks that both Miles and Flora do see the ghosts because Miles runs out onto the lawn in the middle of the night and stares up at the tower, the same tower that the ghost of Quint “happens” to be standing on. He then comes up with a story that he wanted to be “bad” by breaking the rules, but I am not quite buying it. Also, the governess sees Flora staring out a window, one where Miss Jessel just “happens” to be looking in. The other part of me doesn’t because the governess just seems like a crazy lady who just made this all up in her head to create a ghost story to be told. Writing this has made me think a lot more about the issue, and I am starting to learn more towards the children actually do see the ghosts, just because there is a lot more evidence to back that up. What do you think? Turn of the screw has so many things that are left to be interpreted by the reader, some of which include whether or not the children see the ghosts, why the governess jumps to the conclusion that the woman she sees is Miss Jessel even though Mrs. Groves doesn’t say it like she did with the man, how Mrs. Groves knows right away that the man is Quint, if Mrs. Groves really believes the governess, and how Miles actually died.

Guest Blogger - Lacey B.

Hello all. Since we’ve now finished Turn of the Screw, let’s talk about the ghosts.

First of all, I still totally believe that the kids saw the ghosts. The things that happen, such as Miles and Flora seeming to be mesmerized by something outside (and then Miles all too quickly saying it was a “plan to be bad”) just feel like they’re all a little too coincidental. The governess claims to see Peter Quint’s ghost on the tower, and wouldn’t you know it – Miles just happens to be gazing at the top of the tower in the middle of the night. Now either these kids are somehow reading the governess’s mind, which would be a whole other creepy story in itself, or they’re seeing these ghosts. I understand that Miles says he’s just trying to be bad, but it really seems like he just doesn’t want the governess to find out what’s really going on… or the ghost inside him doesn’t. I might be thinking too deep into it, but I feel like if Miles and/or Flora are in fact possessed by a spirit, this spirit does not want to blow its cover to the governess, because let’s face it she’s a little bit on the “mentally unstable” side at this point. She even knows that if she confronts the kids, they’re going to lie about seeing them anyway, so it makes sense that it’s never clearly written out that they do or do not see them.

I also feel like that maybe Mrs. Grose has been through the same situation that the governess is currently going through. The impression that I get from Mrs. Grose is that she’s a little timid, almost like something had previously happened to make her that way. Encounters with entities, perhaps? Although, whenever the governess brings it up, Mrs. Grose basically just shrugs it off as no big deal, she doesn’t really seem to be afraid of talking about it or anything. But I think she refers to the children as such “angels” because she’s scared of them. Maybe because they made her seem crazy, just like they’re doing to the governess. I realize that may be a little bit broad for this story but it could happen!

Now, I do understand that a lot of people believe the kids are just nasty brats, but they ARE just little kids. I have 3 younger sisters, so I’d like to think I know a little bit about evil children – but as far as Miles and Flora go, I sincerely believe that there is something interfering with the way they are.

This particular aspect of the story obviously would be easier to elaborate on if the point of view wasn’t so limited, but it also then works in advantage of both whether the kids see the ghosts or not.

Guest Blogger - Conner G.

Well, i have chosen to not write about Turn of the Screw, because it is not too interesting to me. Instead, i will be extending on the topic of poetry. A lot of you might be sick of poetry because it's sooo hard to understand. personally, i choose to believe the opposite. i LOVE poetry because of it's abstract nature. And also you can't really be wrong (unless you're just making something up that makes absolutely no sense at all). The essay we had to write last Friday was on the poem, Icarus. I looked online, and couldn't find the poem we read in class, although there were many about Icarus. If Ms. Arko would be so kind as to post a link to the poem along with my blog that would be quite helpful :)

When i was first reading this poem, i had to read it many times to think about what the main point of my essay would be. After i thought about it for a while, i began to focus on the rhetorical question embedded within the poem: What was he doing aging in a suburban community" (or something along those lines). This made me parallel the question to another: What was he doing flying so close to the sun? i mean, he made wings out of feathers and wax and told specifically told to NOT fly close to the sun by his father. I believe this question satirizes the earlier question within the poem. when i was writing my analysis, the words flowed together so nicely, and it was almost as if i wasn't even writing an analysis; it was more like i was writing a story of my own. I realize that's somewhat of a confusing concept, and i didn't know how to word it, but that's the best I've got. After turning in my paper and the bell rang, i talked to some people, and i said, "Man that seemed really easy to understand..." and others would say they had no clue what they wrote down. so maybe it's just me. i have no clue. maybe "abstract thinking" is just my niche. What did others focus their essays on? i'd be interested in knowing if you remember!

Guest Blogger - Meghann K.

So, I think Turn of the Screw wasn't as bad as I thought it would be. At first, the narrative really kept screwing me up because of the ridiculously long sentences and quick shifts to different subjects. I had to keep going back over and over to understand what the Governess was even talking about. Also, I hated that the governess overused her pronouns, so then I would get confused about whom she was talking about. It took a long time to get used to the way Henry James was writing the story.

But after I got used to it, I got into the story. I really liked the overall plot and how everyone in our class wondered if Bruce Willis would show up at the very end. To be honest, the plot would make a really good horror movie (I apologize if there is one already. I'm not a big scary movie person.) and the Governess would probably die at the end instead of just holding Miles as he died. She'd be perfect: she's book smart but not street smart, much too trusting, naive, and loves her charges to much to believe they're evil. Add in some bad visual effects and some screaming, and you've got yourself a blockbuster hit!

So, I suppose I have to trust Ms. Arko from now on when she promises the book isn't that bad. I thought I was going to despise it, but once I got used to the narrative and dialogue, the story became pretty entertaining, especially when the Governess shrugs off obvious danger signals that she should pack up and leave that creepy manor, like when Miles is kicked out of school or when she sees Quint and doesn't tell anyone about it. If you see it as a horror movie, it's much better to read.

Blog Assignment #6 - Due Tuesday, March 23rd

Choose one of the titles listed below and identify the point of view used and how that point of view affects the telling of the story. 10 points

Beowulf
Grendel
The Canterbury Tales
Things Fall Apart
Candide
The Grapes of Wrath
The Catcher in the Rye
The Great Gatsby
To Kill a Mockingbird

Guest Blogger - Caitlin A.

Hello fellow students and readers of Turning of the screw. I am here to discuss the matter of the evil children in the book. I personally dislike children very much and for them to betrayed as angels in a somewhat horrific book gives me discomfort. First of all I do believe the children are evil and conspiring with the spirits. Yes it might seem that our dear governess has lost her mind do to all the pish posh that she has experienced, but that doesn’t take away the fact the children can see them (aka ghosts). Miles stands out in the middle of the yard looking up to where the governess had seen the ghost and Flora stands there all creepy like while this goes down. You can’t tell me that you don’t get a total creeper vibe from them. I personally think that the whole house and the children are haunted. The children being perfect, the perfect man, the perfect job…. There just isn’t something right about that. It could possibly all be plan to make the governess seem mad and be some sick and twisted game for the children and the demonic spirits that inhabit their bodies. But then again that is all just a theory. Now sure there could be someone who fights with me about how they aren’t demons because they are nice to the governess and Miles wants more friends’ blah blah blah.
But all I ask of you is to add up the facts before you read any further. Mrs. Grosse knows too much and tells way too little to the poor governess. The children are little creepers even though they have their sweet moments; the young man who hired the governess doesn’t want any contact with them. It is all a evil plan concocted by the children and their master! However this is just a theory of mine, feel free to voice your own.

Guest Blogger - Kelsey G.

When reading the Turn of the Screw I cannot help but notice the calmness of Mrs. Grose and the governess. The governess is constantly asking the housekeeper about the figures she is seeing but doesn’t run away or freak out in horror. “There was an alien object in view—a figure whose right of presence I instantly and passionately questioned” (35). The governess then proceeded to start staring at Flora and watch her reaction. Why? Most people when they see a ghost or mysterious object don’t study someone else but try to figure out what it is or run screaming elsewhere for help. Then to make matters stranger she tells Mrs. Grose about it and she also acts as if it is normal. She questions the governess but never really doubts that she saw anything because unknowing to the governess, Mrs. Grose saw it too. And not only does she see and know about the figures, but she knows who they are. If I were the governess I would be getting suspicious about Mrs. Grose’s knowledge and the fact that the two figures had previously worked at the house. It is hard to decide which of the two is acting stranger. Mrs. Grose doesn’t seem like a regular person because she knows so much. She too isn’t scared of the ghosts but doesn’t question their appearance like the governess does, but only questions the governess about her seeing them. It makes it seem like she knows more than she is leading on to which the governess has already started to question.
The other strange aspect of this story is the governess’s need to watch the children. I understand it is her job, but it seems more like she is stalking them. She starts but exclaiming how beautiful they are, “But it was a comfort that there could be no uneasiness in a connexion with anything so beatific as the radiant image of my little girl” (10). In the following chapters she just goes on about their actions and even calls them naïve and not smart enough to figure things out. When she is on the beach with Flora, Flora doesn’t see the ghost or she too isn’t scared by it. My guess is that she doesn’t see it, but hopefully the story will play out to make this clearer as to why no one is afraid of the ghosts. The last thing that really troubled me was the employer’s need to emphasize that the governess is to ask him nothing and figure everything out by herself. If I were to take up this offer I would be suspicious right away but the governess acted as if it meant nothing and took the job. Hopefully this too will be better explained later or it already has with the employer not wanting questions about the ghosts.

Guest Blogger - Eura C.

So first off, Turn of the Screw has proved itself to be a very interesting read. Going into the book, I wasn't entirely sure what the plot line was about; I think vaguely, in the back of my mind, I was mixing it up with Rape of the Lock. Anyways, finishing the first four chapters was pretty easy for me as they contained plenty of suspense and mystery. However, there were a few things that I couldn't help but wonder about. For starters, I think it's a little suspicious that both Flora and her brother, and Miles seem so perfect. In fact, whenever the main character, the governess, mentions them, she only uses words such as, "charming," "most beautiful," "divine." There's also the matter of Miles getting kicked out of boarding school because of a crime so heinous, the headmaster does not even mention it in his letter. Instead of investigating this further, the governess simply shrugs it off claiming that maybe the school was too harsh for the boy.

Also there are two other characters in the story that I'll definitely be paying close attention to: the housekeeper, Mrs. Grose, and that man that the governess first saw on one of her usual walks. Mrs. Grose's character is definitely a bit dubious; when the governess first reaches Bly, it is noticed that the servant is, "so glad ... as to be positively on her guard against showing it too much," (299). When the governess questions about the former woman who held her position, Mrs. Grose dodges the subject and does not elaborate on the death (which by the way, did anyone ever see this death mentioned earlier in the story? It seemed to come out of nowhere). Then of course is the anonymous man in the tower. At first I thought it was maybe just the Master returning to visit his niece and nephew but then as the man was walking away, "He stopped at the other corner, but less long, and even as he turned away still markedly fixed me" (312). I don't know about everybody else, but when I read this I pictured an owl turning his head all the way because I can't imagine any other way that a person can "turn away" yet still hold their gaze on somebody.

The biggest thing that I think we should all pay attention to, however, is the narrator herself. As I researched more about the author, Henry James, I noticed that many wrote about his common use of unreliable narrators. The governess doesn't reveal very much about herself and it's possible that she could be delusional. She hears footsteps and a baby crying her first night meaning that either the house is haunted, or she's imagining things.

Overall, this has been a very interesting read so far and I'm excited to see what happens next!

Blog Assignment #5 - Due Tuesday, March 16th

Choose a different poem from Sound and Sense and use either DIDLS or the 5 -S strategy (in your green book) to analyze. Post the title of your poem along with your analysis. 15 points

Guest Blogger - Maddy B.

Because this week we have been studying and analyzing poems, I felt I should express my feelings about poetry. Poetry itself is very beautiful. It can be mad, sad, happy, excited, anxious, sarcastic, sympathetic, and almost any other adjective in the book. It doesn’t even necessarily need to rhyme. Anybody could compose an excellent poem if they put their mind to it; Poems can be about almost anything. Usually, though, poems have many different deeper meanings to them, even if it wasn’t meant to be analyzed. Many poets refuse to explain what they meant when composing a poem because of the fact that it is truly up to the reader themselves to understand the true meaning of the poem. That is a large part of the reason I find poetry interesting and beautiful. Up until recently, (ha ha), I enjoyed reading and analyzing poems. The reason for this is that no matter what the poet actually meant by writing the poem, you can interpret the poem any way you would like. You can connect it to something that recently happened in your life, or you can believe that it has absolutely no meaning. The interpreting is up to you, (Besides on the AP Lit exam). Learning to analyze correctly and answer multiple choice questions about poetry has been very confusing to me, yet very helpful and reassuring. It’s been confusing because of the fact that there IS many meanings of a particular poem, and up until recently I believed that it is up to the reader to understand and relate the underlying theme of the poem to their own life. I’ve learned, though, that just taking the time and really trying to understand and connect with the poem helps loads when it comes to analyzing. The SOAPStone and TPCAST has helped me greatly with that, because even though it may sometimes be a hassle, taking the time to actually study the poem and set out the basics of the passage can make a large difference when it comes to analyzing. Answering multiple choice questions, on the other hand, are even more difficult because of the fact that most of the time, there is more than one correct answer. Although analyzing and answering multiple choice questions about a poem can be very difficult to master, I’ve learned that truly studying and understanding the poem prior to analyzing is very helpful, along with simply understanding what the question or prompt is asking, taking the time to contemplate the answer, and THEN beginning the essay or answering the question. I think it would be interesting to hear what types of studying and analyzing techniques help you all to do your best when it comes to reading poetry.

Guest Blogger - Emilie T.

This week in class we have been analyzing poetry to prepare for the AP Literature test. The analysis techniques, TPCASTT and SOAPSTone, are meant to help us dig into the poem so that we have enough to write about in our essay. But once we tear into the poem, what is left? All of the words on the page become examples of literary devices. All of the beauty is destroyed in our quest to analyze the poem. We have been reading poems about poetry in class, so I found one online that agrees with my view that meaning is often forced from a poem. The poem can be found at http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/poetry/apple.html. Poetry is a form of literature that is supposed to be smooth and beautiful, even if the beauty is eerie or dark. We all read “To Paint a Water Lily” from a book by Ted Hughes. The poem talks about a green pond, which is the home to flies and dragonflies that rocket through the air. The poem is beautiful and abundant in imagery and literary devices, but what is left once we analyze it? Lines 22-26 say, “Now paint the long-necked lily-flower which, deep in both worlds, can be still as a painting, trembling hardly at all though the dragonfly alight, whatever horror nudge her root.” These lines personify the lily so that the reader can almost see or touch the lily itself. However, once the label is put on the quote, some of the magic of the imagery is lost. In our quest to label, categorize, and analyze the poetry, the beauty of the poem is set aside. We will be able to write an essay about the author’s use of personification to make the lily seem more real, but can you still see the dew on the lily? Can you see the colors? Can you smell the delicate scent of the lily? Can you feel the dragonfly as it lands? The poem becomes an assignment, the wonder is forgotten, and the poem is set aside because the magic can no longer be felt. Poetry should be read so that we can enjoy it. The poems that I remember are never the ones that we dissect and dismember in class. What do you think? Does the poem preserve its essence after it is analyzed, or have we uprooted the very soul of the poem, which becomes only words on a page?

Blog Assignment #4 - Due Tuesday, March 9th

Choose a poem from Sound and Sense and complete a TPCASTT or SOAPSTone analysis. Post the name of the poem, poet, and the page number along with your analysis. (You do NOT need to post the entire poem). 15 points

Guest Blogger - Tom F.

Swift’s “A Modest Proposal”, is in no way modest. The actual title of Swift’s work is “A Modest Proposal for preventing the children of poor people in Ireland, from being a burden on their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the publick” which right away just seems ridiculous. Swift pretended to be a politician and published his work in the newspaper right next to all the other government articles. Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” can be seen as a satire because he pretended to be a politician but at the same time he was making fun of the other politicians for not seeing the obvious solution that Ireland can just eat their new born babies and everything will be solved. Swift even did the numbers to support his solution to Ireland’s poverty “there may be about two hundred thousand couple whose wives are breeders; from which number I subtract thirty thousand couple, who are able to maintain their own children, but this being granted there will remain an hundred and seventy thousand breeders. I again subtract fifty thousand for those women who miscarry,” (Swift paragraph 6). Swift takes an absolutely disgusting idea and actually does the math for it. It just makes his solution seem that much more credible. These numbers almost seem as if they are facts. Swift took the time to think of all the positives that will come from eating Ireland’s infants, “the skin of which, artificially dressed, will make admirable gloves for ladies, and summer boots for fine gentlemen” (Swift paragraph 16) and “supposing that one thousand families in this city, would be constant customers for infants flesh, besides others who might have it at merry meetings, particularly at weddings and christenings” (Swift paragraph 29). In Swift’s eyes eating babies could become a celebration meal for Baptists which is completely ironic. Celebrating the birth of a child, then an hour later eating a child to celebrate. In my eyes Swift almost over did this whole proposal, it is too well done to seem true.

Guest Blogger - Cadie E.

Since I’ve been taking AP Lit I’ve noticed that I analyze what I read so much more, I think deeply about other possible meanings and what is behind the story. It’s not justwith what I’m reading that I’m analyzing more either, it's even the little things, that probably don’t need to be analyzed, I see so much more in. And now that we’re studying Satire, I notice the parodies that are all over, they’re everywhere. Sometimes, even if I don’t understand the meaning behind it, I can still tell that something is being satirized. I bet even if someone watched a cartoon like SpongeBob or an episode of Fairly Odd Parents, they could find something being satirized. The satire in A Modest Proposal is genius because not only is it hilarious and ironic, it really could make sense and get people to think. Someone who had read this when it first came out may not have realized how satirical it was and could have taken this ‘proposal’ seriously. They hopefully wouldn’t agree with the proposal, but might have thought that Jonathon Swift had lost his senses. I want to know if any of the other students have found more satires now that we’ve gone into depth with it, and what they’ve found. Did you notice satire/parody somewhere unexpected or in something you’ve read/watched over and over again and now just realized the humor in it? And since satire is all about pointing out and learning something from the parody, what have you discovered?

Guest Blogger - Nijhum D.

As I was reading A Modest Proposal for preventing the children of poor people in Ireland, from being a burden on their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the public, by Jonathan Swift, I was wondering how anyone could believe such a thing. He wants people to EAT babies, and skin them into clothes and shoes! What kind of crazy person would even say? I know this is a satire article but how does one even come up with that? Swift tries to sound intelligent by using economic reasoning and has a moral stance however it's utterly ridiculous. He wants to fatten up the children and feed to the rich land owners. The child is to be given away at the age of one, because he/she only drinks the mother's milk thus causing no expense or burden to the family. He is a nationalist and wants to help his country, by getting rid of overpopulation, and underemployment, and with the use of this article he points out a very immoral yet logical way to improve the overall well-being of the nation.

Guest Blogger - Karolyn W.

Hello Everybody! Expanding on the class discussion today, Jonathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal for preventing the children of poor people in Ireland, from being a burden on their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the publick, Swift uses a juvenalian approach, and has low burlesque style.
Taking a low burlesque approach, the satire explores the problem of the many starving children in Ireland. Swift reasons that “… a young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or broiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricasie, or a ragoust” (Swift). The Author’s funny yet awful approach is to sell babies to landlords, who will eat them (gross).
Additionally, Jonathan Swift uses writes with a juvenalian style to satirize society. “I grant this food will be somewhat dear, and therefore very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children”(Swift). Jonathan Swift uses a Juvenalian technique to satirize the landlords’ unfair treatment of their tenants. Swift also uses satire in the title of the work, A Modest proposal for preventing the children of poor people in Ireland, from being a burden on their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the publick. Clearly, this is not a modest proposal. Swift’s conclusion of using children as a food source is far from modest. Also, I found the title harsh. Swift writes that children are a burden to their parents and country. Sad! The poor kids, it’s not their problem they were born into a poor society.
Within Jonathan Swifts’ satire, Swift uses low burlesque style, and a juvenalian approach to point out Ireland’s problem of underfed and poor children.

Guest Blogger - Sarah A.

While reading Alex Pope's Rape of the Lock I found myself laughing at the outrage of such small things. After reading it however, I realized it is not as ridiculous as it sounds. While it is based in the 18th Cenutry the poem has a lot more in common with our world today than one would think. Today many people blow trivial things out of proportion. But one thing that really caught my attention was the last few lines in the poem, “This lock, the Muse shall consecrate to fame, and ‘midst the stars inscribe Belinda’s name.” It is saying that the lock will be set amongst the stars so that everyone can admire them. Belinda put a fight for her lock and was completely violated that someone would take her lock of hair. However, when the hair will be able to be admired by everyone in the world and seems to have a greater value than it did before, then it is okay. I feel people do this a lot today. If something they do not like happens they get very upset and make a scene out of it that it is wrong. But the second they will receive fame or something of greater value then they completely forget they way they felt before, and suddenly everything is fine. Do you feel this is the way people act in our society today? Why? And if you do not think people do this why? It seems that if people were to wait things out they would realize some things happen for a reason. It is in our minds that if something does not go our way, we throw a fit and sometimes give up. If one were to sit and think about the event that happened then maybe they could see the light at the end of the tunnel. Also can you think of examples of something like this happening in our world today?

Blog Assignment #3 - Due March 2nd

Identify and explain an example of an epic characteristic found in "Rape of the Lock." Cite line numbers.

Guest Blogger - Ben A.

To begin, was it just me or did anyone else have a very hard time thinking of anything other than Dante’s Inferno when they saw the word “canto?” Anyways, I thought I would share my thoughts on The Rape of Lock since there really isn’t anything to ask questions on or discuss so far. When I started reading the first canto I thought it seemed pretty enjoyable but as I moved along It got more confusing and I had less and less understanding of what was happening. I don’t know if this was due to my reading comprehension level or, if I was just zoning out while reading, which is a very good possibility. I finally succumbed and read the sparknotes on it (in supplement to the book of course) and then it made much more sense. One of the things I noticed when I was reading the actual book was that this is one of the few poems, albeit epic, that I enjoy. As I thought about this and what made this poem unique and why I liked it I realized it was the end rhyme. For me poetry just isn’t poetry unless it rhymes. Its shocking just how many poets choose not to use any rhyme scheme, I mean is it really that hard to end with a rhyme? All you have to do is stay away from the word “orange.” Another thing that stood out to me was the amount of Sylphs that were assigned to watch Belinda’s petticoat. I don’t know about you, but to me 50 sylphs watching one petticoat is a bit excessive. Was it really that cold?

Guest Blogger - Will H.

Well, its the beginning of another unit, and the most obvious thing to talk about now is the weekend assignment: Rape of the Lock by Alexander Pope, and since the assignment is relatively short, Ill only talk a little bit about the first canto to give room for other people to post. When I first began reading this assignment, I thought to myself I dont understand, what makes this satirical? Its just a description, but after looking it over some more I was able to figure it out. Obviously, the mock epic begins with the invocation of the Muses as we talked about in class for a lengthy five seconds, but moving past that, the first half of the page simply describes the morning rise while dogs stir and sleepless loversawake (Line 17). A bell tolls three times, and Belinda has a dream of a boy named Ariel who warns her to beware of man and that there is an unnamed dreaded event (Line 31-36). Then her dog wakes her up, she gets a love letter, gets dressed, and there is no mention of the dream again in the canto. Although this sounds a lot like oversimplification of the story, that was really all that happened, but within that there are already a few examples of satire that can be picked out. The main example lies in the main character: Belinda. Within the chapter, she has only slept, dressed and put on make-up, all of which are eloquently described with consistent use of rhyming couplets, and it is well summed up with one quote that caught my eye. Now awful Beauty puts on all its arms; the fair each moment rises in her charms, repairs her smiles, awakens every grace, and calls forth all wonders of her face (Line 61-64). Immediately, before realizing that awful also meant awesome, when taken as a negative term, the sentence takes on a slightly different meaning. From a negative perspective, Belinda is someone who puts on an act every day and covers up the awful Beauty, and this can be seen a symbol for the disingenuous state of many people in the world. In this light, it is obvious that Belinda lives through circles of useless frivolous action, flirtation with lords, and lethargy, all leaving her progress as a productive person at a standstill. Of course, this same quote can be taken in a positive light as well with the denotation of awful as awe-inspiring. In this sense, Belinda is a beautiful person at heart that only tries to show that to the world by accentuating it. This idea, is what mainly what makes this description a satire, because it mocks the trivial actions of women through an anecdote by using the double meaning of words and the epic style. Anyway, now that this has all been explained, I would really like to pose a similar question to all who read this: what else makes this a satire and how does it mock certain elements of the world?

Guest Blogger - Steph W.

Before we started reading Candide, we had learned that Voltaire ( the author of Candide) had written a play but was not clear enough for his readers so he wrote Candide with a very dramatic tone so he could get his point across. Throughout Candide's adventure, he makes many decisions and usually they end with complete disaster or mishap. Although Voltaire was optimistic, all of the choices Candide made ended up causing his fate. In someways I believe that Voltaire is contridicting himself in that he was optimistic but then finds himself writing about all the failures that came with Candide all the way from him getting 36 runs through the gauntlet for taking a walk out of free will, to killing the two women's lovers (monkey's) who he believed were attacking them. All of this misfurtune leads me to believe that Voltaire's point was not very clear to me but rather a book written out of sheer entertainment. Any opinions?

Guest Blogger - Maddy F.

One thing that I got out of Candide is that you get the most out of life when you stop trying to philosophize it so much and instead just live. I found this kind of ironic since Voltaire himself was a well known philosopher. Throughout the novel, Voltaire strongly satirizes Leibnitz’s philosophy on optimism (Leibnitz was a popular German philosopher, an optimist, and one who deemed that the world they were living in was “the best of all possible worlds”). Clearly, Leibnitz is portrayed through the character Pangloss and his ridiculous ideas... even after all these terrible things happen –earthquakes, war, rape, death- Pangloss still clings to his theory that everything is for the best. Even when James/Jacques is thrown into the sea and then drowns; Pangloss still declares that it was all supposed to happen like this, and that the sea was made in order for James, the one person that Pangloss owes his survival to, to drown in. We’ve all read the book, hopefully, and we know about all the misfortunes it entails and how Pangloss responds to them. To the end, Pangloss clings to this theory that they live in “the best of all possible worlds”. However, in chapter XXX, the group goes to see a dervish, “the best philosopher in Turkey” (Voltaire 118). When they ask the dervish the reason for good and evil in the world they live in, he tells them to keep quiet saying it is none of their business. To me, this came across as even if you do philosophize about life and have great theories and all…will that change anything? Voltaire ends Candide with, “we must cultivate our garden” (Voltaire 120). This could be taken a number of ways, but my thoughts on these last words were that life is best lived when one uses their own skills and lives life instead of worrying/thinking about it so much. I could be way off on this though, what are your thoughts?

Guest Blogger - Chelsee F.

While reading the book Candide written by Voltaire, a variety of philosophy’s are touched on including Pangloss’. Pangloss’ philosophy of ‘all is for the best’ is what Candide bases his life on. Candide thinks that Pangloss is “the greatest philosopher of the whole province, and consequently of the whole world” and believes that every philosopher that says something different is wrong and Pangloss is always right. This statement is mostly false because throughout the book there is nothing good that happens to any of the characters yet everything is for the best. I really don’t understand why anyone would listen to what Pangloss says because it does not make any sense at all. When the Anabaptist John falls into the harbor, Candide was going to help him back onto the boat but Pangloss stopped him and just said “Pangloss the philosopher stopped him by proving to him the Lisbon harbor was formed expressly for the Anabaptist to drown in”. How can someone justify that a harbor is specifically made for a certain somebody to drown in? Just because Pangloss is a philosopher he gets to make these decisions? The idea of all is for the best also doesn’t fit when we hear the old woman’s story about how she was going back and forth between all those different men. She was constantly raped and no one really cared about her. “Cut off one buttock from each of these ladies’ ‘and you’ll have a delicious mean”. How does Pangloss give good reason for everything she was put through? After many bad things that happened to Candide he starts to doubt the things that Pangloss says, and does not believe that everything happening is good. At the end of the book we find out that Pangloss himself does not even believe in what he says so Candide was following everything this philosopher said for nothing.

Guest Blogger - Patty M.

Candide is dependent upon other characters in Candide by Voltaire by needing them to tell him how to think and how to act and how to look at think of the world. He starts out with Pangloss whose philosophy is that everything is for the best and the world is the best world there is. After Pangloss, Candide finds Cacambo and then after Candide’s separation from Cacambo he enlists Martin to travel with him to France.
For my blogging I’m going to talk about Candide’s dependence upon each of the characters I’ve already mentioned. First is Pangloss: Candide clings to Pangloss’s philosophy throughout the book and depends upon it to help him cope with and explain away all the tragedy and misfortunes around him. Pangloss explains syphilis away by saying that it came back with Christopher Columbus and it was ok because along with syphilis Columbus brought back chocolate and because Pangloss says it Candide believes it.
Next is Cacambo: Candide doesn’t look to Cacambo for philosophical advice he depends on Cacambo to help him through all of the messes he is inexplicably drawn into. Like for example after Candide kills Cunegonde’s brother, the Jesuit Baron Thunder-ten-tronckh Candide looks to Cacambo to help him chose a plan of escape. It was Cacambo who talked their way out of being eaten too when Candide did nothing to save himself.
Lastly is Martin. Martin is the exact opposite of Pangloss. He is a pessimist whereas Pangloss is a optimist. Martin is forever finding the negative and harsh side of life and Candide begins to believe him. The two had many arguments and bets and debates on happiness in life. It says “Candide stopped in Bordeaux only long enough to sell a few Eldorado pebbles and provide himself with a good carriage—a two-seated one, for he could no longer do without his philosopher, Martin” (Voltaire 81) this proves Candide’s dependence upon his new found companion.
So obviously Candide is just a dependent person and isn’t really very picky about who it is he depends on. He went from a optimist philosopher to a experienced companion that helped him out of sticky situations to a philosopher was is so pessimistic it turns the stomach. There is a million different things I could say but I’m not going to, I’m going to depend upon you guys to keeps talking about this blog in the comments.

Blog Assignment #2 - Due February 23rd

Choose an item from the list of Symposium Topics in your Candide Study Packet. Answer/address the item using textual support. 5 points

Guest Blogger - Garrett S.

Is it really all for the best? Does syphilis not matter when you have chocolate? Was the ocean’s one and only purpose to drown you at a certain time in your life? If you ask any of these questions today, people (I would hope) would say of course not. However, in the early 1750’s, when optimism played a very key role in people’s religious lives, they would say it all happened for a reason; it really all was for the best. It was this “blind optimism” that inspired Voltaire to write “Candide”. While this wasn’t his first attempt to raise questions about religion in general (Voltaire’s failed “Poem on the Lisbon Disaster”, was one of his earlier attempts”), it certainly was his most affective piece of literature. But did it really change anything? I personally think it did just a little bit. If the people reading can realize that Candide changes from a blind optimism to a more realistic sense of the world around him, maybe they would too, and begin to question more things, and further fuel The Age of Enlightenment. Also, the ridiculous things that happen in this book could have an impact as well. If someone reading were to say “How can Pangloss say it’s for the best when he has syphilis?” they might look at their own lives and realize that they might have said it’s for the best about something ridiculous too, like say an earthquake followed by a tsunami, then fire, and finally the Black Plague. But those are just my thoughts. Just one last thing! A quick question I was thinking of. If something like “Candide” were written in a modern sense, what would it be written about? What would the issue be? What impact would it have on today’s society? Thanks, and if you have any questions, just comment!

Guest Blogger - Quinn J.

About five years ago, my family stopped at the Augustana College in South Dakota on the way back from a wedding in Wyoming. At the college bookstore, I purchased the Barnes & Noble Classics copy of “Candide”. In the back of this book, I found some discussion questions. One discussion question asked:

“What do you understand Candide to mean when he says that from now on he will “tend his garden”? Refrain from public life? Accept things as they are? Try to expand this phrase into a program for living.”

Gardens appear numerous times in “Candide”; the first garden shown is the garden by the castle of Baron Thunder-ten-tronckh, where Cunegonde sees Pangloss and Paquette doing “experiments which were repeated before her eyes” (if you know what I mean); this is what inspired Candide and Cunegonde to kiss, which ultimately leads to Candide being kicked out of the castle. Some critics (including this reviewer on Amazon.com http://bit.ly/bdnWB9) have likened this event to Adam and Eve’s expulsion from the Garden of Eden.

Another proverbial garden is the mysterious hidden utopia of El Dorado, where the dirt is made of gold, riches are bountiful (although they are not considered riches there; the landlord claims that El Dorado is a “poor village”), and, in Candide’s words, “no monks among you to dispute, to govern, to intrigue, and to burn people who are not of the same opinion as themselves.” Some other gardens include the Jesuits’ garden, Pococurante’s garden, Cacambo’s garden, and the garden Candide and his friends create when they live in Turkey. With all of these examples of gardens, it’s clear that Voltaire (an avid gardener himself) intended to have a garden motif.

I think that what Candide means by “tend his garden” is the fact that he wants to establish some sort of solace. By the end of the story, the whole company (Candide, Pangloss, Cacambo, Cunegonde, Martin, the old woman, Brother Giroflee, and Paquette) has survived numerous terrifying events, including rape, flogging, hanging, disease, and natural disasters. Taking care of this garden, recuperating, and exercising their individual talents provides a quiet, safe atmosphere of which they haven’t experienced in a while.

This situation concerning gardening can be phrased into a program for living that Voltaire would approve of: living is better with a purpose, a purpose that can be used to help ourselves and others.

Blog Assignment #1 - Due February 16th

Find an example of satire. Post the link and a genius statement. 5 points.

Guest Blogger - Heaven L.

Hello to everyone that is currently reading this. I have liked poetry since I was little. I liked the pictures and how the rhyming scheme was simple and easy to understand. Like green eggs and hams I would read that over and over again. Now in AP literature the poems are a bit more complicated and hard to understand. I have realized that there are a lot more things in poetry that I never realized before. For example how there can be allusions in some poems like in Dante when in one canto there was a part that symbolize Daedalus and Icarus. I have also learned that some poems have an allegory (I have also learned what an allegory is). Those are only a couple examples that I have learned and most likely I am going to learn a lot more which is perfectly fine with me. What I really like about poetry is that what ever you write a poem about; it will have a deeper meaning then when you just have the facts. Like the example of the eagle Ms. Arko showed us on day on the overhead. Anyone can get the facts about an eagle and be done with it, but the poem gave the eagle its own personal effect and portrayed facts about the eagle in an interesting and more understandable way. Poems can say anything and the reader can get a deeper understanding of that thing rather then looking it up in a dictionary. Personally I think a poem (no matter what it’s about) has true beauty of its own; a simple short poem can say a lot all the reader has to do is look for it. Like the poem Suicide’s Note, it’s very short but if you look deep enough you can tell that the poem has a lot more meaning then just those words. I have learned that true poets look for the perfect word, and the word uses all the meaning of it in the poem like in the poem Cross. The poem Cross could show a religious side, or a cross between races or anything else that has to do with the meaning of cross. Poetry beauty is shown different to each reader depending on there views and what they know. Well that’s all I have to say about poetry. Thank you for reading my blog.

Guest Blogger - Zack J.

In the unit we are doing now, we have picked our own book, I chose The Death of a Salesman because it sounds interesting. The books we chose were some sort of a play. While I carefully read my very interesting book, I realized that there were a lot of inside meanings. These meanings became more revealed as the story continued. Is it just me or is this kind of stuff happening in all the books? This little details seem to be pointless at first but as I continued reading I realized that these little events had huge meanings in the end. For example, in my book when a character named Willy claims he gets into car accidents while driving for work, these accidents happened kind of frequently and in the end of the book, we find out that this character, Willy, was trying to kill himself during these frequent accidents. All these little details really added up in the end and put the story together after I was very confused. Are these details happening in other books and are they bringing the story together and making it easier to understand, or is this just happening in The Death of a Salesman? I think that these little details really help bring the story to a more interesting level instead of just writing about a boring and big concept. I think that these details made the story more likeable and made it into a better book than I thought it would be. As the Death of a Salesman being the first short-play-book I’ve ever read in my life, it actually seemed kind of interesting to me and all the confusing things going on in the beginning all were fixed in the end.

Guest Blogger - Patty M.

As we all know, we are reading dramas for our final essay and I’ve decided to talk about the one I have chosen since so few decided to read it. I am reading The Hairy Ape by Eugene O’Neill. It starts off in a firemen’s forecastle of an ocean liner with the protagonist, Yank, getting drunk with the other workers. They all shovel coal to power the vessel but at the moment most of them are as drunk as a skunk thus incapacitated. While drunk the men are rowdy and all singing and Yank tells them to quiet down because he’s trying to think. The men stop (momentarily) because they all respect him because they fear him and he doesn’t try to assuage their fears either, he prefers it that way. Yank is very cynical about life in general however he is even more so about family and women. He believes that women are all tarts and will betray a man for nickel. And because of that he treats them extremely poorly. He goes so far as to say “treat ‘em rough, dat’s me” (O’Neill Act I Scene I) But what I really want to talk about is the accents in which they speak. As you can see in the quote Yank has an accent but what you can’t see in that quote is that most of the characters have heavy Bostonian accents as well which in my opinion adds a whole new aspect to the story. I think that accents in books add to the character (not character as in the people in the story) of the book by bringing in different lifestyles and cultures. Which is a more interesting piece of literature (if they are the same type of story with the same writing style)? A story without an obvious accent or one with at least a single character with one?

Guest Blogger - Halle O.

In further discussion about Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe, I have noticed one large and ongoing conflict between Okonkwo and his feeling towards his children, Nwoye and Ezinma. Okonkwo is a man who is very prideful and he has a need for greatness. He wants to be different from his father who didn’t have a title, he wasn’t known for anything. Okonkwo is making himself known for his wealth, brave and violent personality and producivness. He wants his children (his son, Nwoye) to have the same qualities and have greatness and a title in his life except that is not what Nwoye wants so that is where the conflict comes in.
Nwoye is the type of boy who struggles with his demanding and powerful father. His interests are more of those of his grandfather, Unoka. He takes many beatings by his father because he is not able to please him. When Ikemefuna arrives (as his older brother in terms), he starts to teach Nwoye about masculinity in a more gentle way. This gets Okonkwo to back away for a little bit and little by little Nwoye gets a little more his father’s approval. When Ikemefuna is killed, Nwoye goes back to being more like his grandfather. When the missionaries come Nwoye finds a little bit of hope and joins the forces with them. That decision only makes Okonkwo so angry and upset that he disownes his son.
Ezinma (Okonkwo’s daughter), on the other hand, has the masculine traits even though she is a female. Okonkwo favors her because she is bold and sometimes contradicting. In fact, may times, Okonkwo wishes that Ezinma would have been a boy. She wins Okonkwo’s full respect and attention. With Okonkwo favoring Ezinma, that only boosts her confidence and makes things worse for Nwoye and Okonkwo.

Guest Blogger - Karolyn W.

Hey everyone! In continuation on the class discussion about The Second Coming by William Butler Yeats, I had several ideas about this fascinating poem. William Butler Yeats skillfully wrote this poem with many interesting concepts. The poem additionally has intriguing poetic structure and witty literary techniques such as allusions and imagery. By referencing Bethlehem and The Second Coming of Christ, the poem has a greater meaning.
1919, the year in which William Butler Yeats wrote The Second Coming, was the end of the horrific World War I. The world was looking for hope and a new beginning however, this poem reflects the depressing atmosphere and downright awful outlook on the world’s future after World War I. “Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere the ceremony of innocence is drowned.” Within these lines of Yeats’ dismal painting, are details about how the world was after WWI. These lines reveal the chaos and terror which manifested within Europe. In William Butler Yeats’ poem The Second Coming, the Yeats expressed his thoughts on the gloomy future for the world, and also his fears about the terrible future. “Surely some revelation is at hand; Surely the Second Coming is at hand” These lines depict that the Second Coming of the savior is near. “Troubles my sight: somewhere in the sands of the desert a shape with lion body and the head of a man, a gaze blank and pitiless as the sun” Unexpectedly, the Second Coming is far from a savior, in its’ place is a evil and devestating Sphinx.William Yeats reveals that he believes the world is coming to an apocalyptic revelation.
Within William Butler Yeats stunning poem, The Second Coming, Yeats paints a dark, depressing future of the world by using dark imagery, biblical allusions, and powerful words. Could William Butler Yeats have been predicting future wars to come such as WWI, The Cold War or Vietnam?

Guest Blogger - Emilie T.

As part of our tragedy unit, we have been discussing the components that make up a tragedy. These parts include conflict, revenge, supernatural, chance, comic relief, and the tragic hero. Almost every tragic hero has a tragic flaw, which leads to the destruction of the hero. In Chinua Achebe’s novel, Things Fall Apart, Okonkwo’s tragic flaw is his pride. Okonkwo achieves his wealth and status through hard work after his father spent all of the family’s money. This difficult climb to status is a huge source of pride for Okonkwo, and his greatest fear is that he will fall from the pedestal he built for himself. Many times throughout the novel, Okonkwo pushes away his family because he fears that showing his true emotions will make him seem less manly. In Chapter 7, Okonkwo kills Ikemefuna, whom Okonkwo had grown to like. Chinua Achebe writes, “Dazed with fear, Okonkwo drew his machete and cut him down. He was afraid of being thought weak” (Achebe 61). Okonkwo’s pride in his strength forced him to kill the only son for whom he ever felt respect and admiration. Later in the novel, Okonkwo’s son, Nwoye, joins the Christians. Okonkwo is angry about Nwoye’s decision because Okonkwo feels pride in his adherence to the Ibo culture, but his own son betrayed him. Okonkwo doesn’t want to be associated with Nwoye any longer because Nwoye’s conversion could hurt Okonkwo’s standing in the community. These are just two of the many examples of Okonkwo’s pride, which destroys his relationships. Chinua Achebe further shows that pride is Okonkwo’s tragic flaw, as well as tying the story in with the Ibo culture, by mentioning African myths about animals. One story is about the bird nza, who challenges his chi. After eating a large meal, nza was so arrogant that he thought he could outwit his own chi. In another fable, the bird eneke-nti-oba is so arrogant about his prowess in wrestling that he “challenged the whole world to a wrestling contest and was finally thrown by the cat” (Achebe 53). Chinua Achebe’s use of Okonkwo’s actions and African fables reveal Okonkwo’s pride to be his tragic flaw.

Guest Blogger - Stephanie O.

So basically my post date has terrible timing because we are currently in between items in class; we just got done reading Oedipus (which is about a guy who has some serious issues) and we have started reading Things Fall Apart (which, from what Ms. Arko has told us so far, is about a guy with major daddy problems) but we haven't read enough to do a post on yet. Also last week we read this poem called A Second Coming. In this poem the author, William Butler Yeats, basically says that everyone thinks that the second coming is the coming of Christ, but he thinks it is more like the end of the earth, because Jesus is really a shpinx like beast. Yeats wrote that because World War one was ending but what I was wondering was why did that lead him to think that the world was soon coming to an end? Maybe it was because it is hard to imagine a world without war once you've been in fighting for so long. Whatever his reason I don't think that world is going to end anytime soon. In the poem Yeats says, "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold" from this line is where Achebe got the name of his book. In what we have read so far of this book (Things Fall Apart) Unoka, who reminds me a lot of my older brother, is a bum and owes a lot of people a lot of money and when Okoye comes for his money Unoka just laughs at him and pretty much says , "yeah right! Do i look like i have the money to pay you back with!" Unoka died a poor man with a lot of debt and his son Okonkwo is now determined not to end up like his father. So far he has lived a better life in the sense of money and wives and titles but in the sense of family he fails almost as much as his father failed at holding on to money.

Guest Blogger - Taylor K.

So, most people don’t really like poetry, but I do. I can’t really stand the long one; solely because I have no patience to read all of it. I like the ones that rhyme, are short, and (as corny as it sounds) paints a picture for people. Particularly, I like Langston Hughes. His poems have a bit of rough and rawness to them that I really like. The same qualities draw me into Slam Poetry. I’m a total Slam junkie. I like more of the poetry that has loud and prevalent emotions in them, than the soft lovey-dovey stuff. One of my favorites is by Taylor Mali, he’s a teacher whose poem is about the impact that teachers make on students that really go unnoticed. It’s called “What Teacher’s Make,” and one passage I really like from his poem is, “You want to know what I make? / I make kids wonder, / I make them question. / I make them criticize. / I make them apologize and mean it. / I make them write, write, write. / And then I make them read. / I make them spell definitely beautiful, definitely beautiful, definitely beautiful / over and over and over again until they will never misspell / either one of those words again.” Another poet I really like is Steve Coleman, who graduated from Macalester College, up in St. Paul, Minnesota. His poem, “I Wanna Hear a Poem,” is more about Slam Poetry and the message you can send with it. But Slam is more than just angry people venting about things that upset them. Slam is beautiful and powerful, and if I do say so myself, earth moving. I owe it all to E-week and Mr. Swegarden for opening me to this wonderful new world of Slam Poetry, which branched into poetry in general.
Taylor Mali
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpog1_NFd2Q
Steve Coleman
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-jXDuqHEEk

Guest Blogger - Mitch N.

Since we are in between books in AP English this week, I had to think for awhile about what to write about for my blog entry. I was looking through my English folder and I saw the questions that we answered before reading Oedipus, and I was curious to see what other people thought on the questions and if any of there opinions have changed on them.
Obviously one of the main ideas of the play is fate, and how it does or does not control everything. Fate is the biggest argument brought up in Oedipus, and there are points in the play that can be presented for both sides of the argument. To support that there is a fate one can say that he got his oracle from Apollo and the oracle came true so there must be fate, very straight forward. For arguments against fate people can say that he controlled everything he did, and that he could have chosen to just not marry or kill anyone, problem solved.
I can see it argued both ways, and I know people can present strong arguments for both, but I think that the paper we read in class one day by a professor presented that answer, at least for Oedipus. The professor said that just because there was a fate chosen for him, it did not mean that he was not free to go about accomplishing that fate however he wanted. I think that the professor is absolutely right, and that Apollo merely gave Oedipus an ending point, but Oedipus also had a little bit of free will involved in his life. That argument kind of meshes both sides together to form a big compromise. It leaves parts of both arguments in the final conclusion.
Personally, outside of Oedipus, I do not believe that there is a fate or divine plan for any one of us, and that where we end up in life is a direct result from the choices we make during our life. It is a very interesting topic to argue about, since there is no exact proof, and I would love to hear someone else’s opinion on it, so let me know.

Guest Blogger - Megan S.

I know we have done quite a bit with the fate vs. free will debate on Oedipus the King, but I will continue the debate here in my blog. I’m on the fence with this one. A very good point was brought up in the fishbowl discussions; Sophocles didn’t write Oedipus the King to prove fate or free will. The whole idea of Oedipus trying to run from his prophecy and ending up fulfilling it unknowingly being classified as fate or free will was an afterthought brought up by readers. When the play was written, there wasn’t even a distinction between the two. Oedipus leaving Corinth in order to out run his prophecy of killing his own parents is kind of like the idea of the saying “I’ve got a bullet with my name on it, and I’m just trying to dodge it” that you here from people fighting long term illnesses, etc. He was told it was coming, and tried to outsmart it. It pretty much proves the saying “you can run, but you can’t hide.” Some view that as fate, others see it as total coincidence. He ran from the prophecy, but it out ran him. Fate can’t take all of the blame for Oedipus’ actions though. He killed a man, and that was his choice. Whether he knew it was the King/his father or not isn’t the point, it’s the fact that he killed 5 men, including King Laius. Murder is murder. Fate doesn’t make you a murderer, no one makes you do it. Oedipus killing the men was his own choice, not fate’s choice. He could have just kept going on down the road, but he chose to kill the men. Yes, maybe there was some fate in running across the King on that road, but it also contained some free will. Oedipus was searching for the murderer, when in fact he was searching for himself. Ask yourself this, fate or free will?