Miss Brill/A Rose For Emily

Compare and contrast how Miss. Brill and Miss. Emily avoid reality.  What is the eventual outcome for each woman?

Miss Brill avoids reality through her weekly Sunday trips to the park. She dresses all pretty and makes sure she looks absolutely beautiful in her eyes. She immerses herself in the actions of others in the park trying to find happiness in other peoples’ lives. Miss. Brill sees the whole think as a play. She is just merely an actress and everyone else is an actor and actress. She uses this to escape her harsh realities that she faces everyday. Like Miss. Brill, Emily tries to avoid her reality in a more morbid way. After Emily’s father died, I think she is afraid of being hurt and left again. So as she gets a husband, she kills him so they can be together forever and she will never have to experience living without him. She sleeps with his dead corpse every night and stays inside her house to avoid the pressures of every day society. Both of the outcomes for each of these women are completely negative. Two teenagers talking about how ugly her fur was and how old she was bring down Miss. Brill back to her Earth from her illusion. Also Emily’s outcome comes as she dies. Some people of the town she lived in were able to enter her “save haven” and go upstairs into her secret room, which housed her dead husband and many mementos from her marriage. 

Discuss the endings of both stories.  What type of ending is it? Justify your answer.  Do the plot elements lead up the ending?  Explain how so.  Is each story literary or commercial, based on plot and ending?  Use the Plot handout information to help you. 

In “Miss Brill” it describes Miss. Brill’s typical Sunday evening routine of her going by the bakery. But this Sunday, Miss. Brill hurt by the children’s comments skips the bakery goes immediately to her room and sits, takes off her necklace and then hears a cry. I think the ending of “Miss Brill” is an indeterminate ending. No definite conclusion is solved from the main conflict. The reader has to form their own conclusions about whether Miss. Brill found happiness or found another way to escape reality.  I believe that “Miss Brill” is a literary fiction piece. It shows insight onto Miss. Brill’s character and the conflict between her internal self.  Like “Miss Brill,” “A Rose for Emily” is literary fiction. I think it is literary fiction because it gives insight into Emily’s character and it does focus on the conflict between Emily and herself. Also I think the ending is a surprise ending. Although we know, that Emily was acting kind of sketchy we didn’t know she was sleeping in the same bed as her dead husband so the ending is definitely a surprise one. This is more proof that this is literary fiction because the surprise is legitimate. 

Pick one story.  What are some examples of irony?  What type is it?  What do the ironies reveal? 

There are many examples of situational irony throughout “A Rose for Emily.” One example is the smell that her house had. Members of the town just thought it was a dirty kitchen saying, “Just as if a man – any man – could keep a kitchen properly,” or a dead animal. So even after it was cleaned the smell was still there. The town never caught on but the smell was in fact her husband’s rotting corpse. Also an example of dramatic irony is her husband’s disappearance. The townspeople also thought that Emily had grown sad and decided to stay inside because of her husband abandoning her. In reality, Emily killed her husband so she could be with him forever and stayed in the house so she didn’t have to face society. I think the ironies reveal that the townspeople didn’t really care. They just used their pity as an excuse to not have to investigate her problems.

A Lady and a Dog

Is Anna and Gurov's relationship simply a case of bad timing? What does "The Lady with the Dog" say about relationships?


I think that Anna and Gurov's relationship is just a case of bad timing. If Anna and Gurov would have met just a few short years earlier before they were married, they probably would been together under different circumstances. I think it's evident that both Anna and Gurov both care and love each other much more than they do their significant others. When Gurov went to St. Petersburg to find her and then found her at the theatre she said that she never stopped thinking about her, even though when parting she said that this was goodbye forever. Gurov also couldn't stop thinking about Anna and that was the reason he travels to St. Petersburg, and then he realizes that as an older, graying gentleman he finally fell in love the right way and knew she was the one (1533). I think they both realized they had found the one, but the predicament they were in would make them tear their families a part in order to be together without sneaking around. If they would have met a few years before and wouldn't have rushed into marriage, I think fate would have made them find each other and they would be in love and happy just as they were in the story. This story reveals through Anna and Gurov's relationship that relationships and love are more problematic and harder than what is shown in romance novels and Disney movies. People have to truly fight for who they love and sometimes the situations can be difficult such as the one in "The Lady and a Dog." I think their relationship shows that timing is everything. If someone rushes into something like Anna and Gurov, they are potentially missing finding their soulmate. Every decision that a person makes affects their future and potential relationships.  Also, you'll find someone that could be perfect for you, but because you didn't wait you can't have your soul mate.


What quest is Gurov on?  Is he successful? 


Gurov was "talked into marrying in his second year at college, and his wife now looked nearly twice as old as he did" (1524). I think his quest is to find happiness. He's so unhappy and unsatisfied with his marriage that he tries to find happiness with little one night stands with other women. The narrator says that, "every time he encountered an attractive woman...the desire for life surged up in him, and everything suddenly seemed simple and amusing" (1524). I think that this showed every time he saw a woman that got his heart racing he became happy and forgot about his wife at home and his unhappiness. He tried to achieve happiness through numerous encounters with random women. The women would satisfy him for only a short period of time, but then he just reverted back to unhappiness. I do not think his goal was to find love, I believe his goal was to find happiness. So I think Gurov was halfway successful at fulfilling his quest. He couldn't get Anna out of his mind and realized on page 1535 that "only now, when he was gray-haired, had he fallen in love properly, thoroughly, for the first time in his life." While he was with Anna he was extremely happy and never wanted to leave her side, but when he was away from her for 2-3 months at a time Anna was all he had thought about. So I think if the story was to continue and Gurov actually left his wife and married Anna then he would have fulfilled his quest and become happy, but at the ending I can say that he almost but didn't achieve his quest because for a large amount of time Gurov is still unhappy because he can't see his love.

Diary of A Madman

Throughout "Diary of A Madman", the "madman" always thought the excuses for people were "Just because its always been that way" (1926) and that the kids' parents had taught them that, do you think these are legitimate excuses to accept?


In "Diary of A Madman,' he thought the children who were "talking about him" were only doing that because they're parents had taught them that. I know at a young age that children basically only know what their parents teach them, like if a parent teaches their child that the color green is yellow and that the color yellow is green. The child is going to be in a world of hurt in kindergarten because they were taught the wrong thing for so long. I think this excuse kind of refers to the overall meaning about the attempt to conformity by the new Chinese government. Since Chinese children only grow up in China, and China censors what news, websites, TV shows, etc. that citizens see, Chinese children may think that no other society is different and just always do what they are taught. So, I do believe that this excuse is a legitimate excuse for the madman to make for the children. As for the "just because its always been that way" excuse, I think people try and make this excuse all the time. Like when you see on the news and you see fighting African tribes, most of the American people don't really care because a) its not in America/directly involving Americans and b) its always been that way. If something has always been that way people don't really try and change anything With that said, if something is terrible I believe something should be done and excuses shouldn't be made. In the madman's case he seriously thought people were cannibals and tried to convince people that they needed to do something about it such as on page 1926. When the madman mentioned the recent cannibalistic event that happened in the Wolf Cub Village and the man said,  "Maybe they are, but it's always been that way, it's --." I think the madman really wanted to make people see that cannibalism was wrong, but then when people blew him off and saw him as crazy he disillusioend them to being a cannibal.

What is the point or importance of the last line "save the children" (1929)?


The author of the diary thoroughly believed that children will usually always believe and follow what their parents have taught and told them, which is generally true because its their parents. I think the last line is meant to mean that in order to get away from the negative actions happening now, the children need to be shown the beliefs that will give a positive influence so they can be sure to make the "right" decisions. Also, the future of any country/community starts with the children. That's why people such as Hitler preached early to children so they would believe and grow up and carry on his legacy of the Nazi society. So in order to save the children from the oppressive, Chinese society, you need to start talking with the children about what is right/wrong in order to help save their futures and adult lives and their children's. In summary, I think what is truly supposed to come from this line is instead of pushing your views and beliefs on children, teach them right from wrong, and then let them form their own opinions on issues/dilemmas that way they become their own person and can make effective decisions.

Child's Play

Presentation

Emily Dickinson I

Poem # 449
Likes: I really liked how she portrayed death as a small thing, unlike many people who think its very grim. I also liked the imagery about the two people talking. Just trying to imaging two deceased individuals having a conversation in the tomb is very amusing and takes the mind away from the motif of death. Line 10, "We talked between the Room --" made me think of people talking through the walls or on the phone while sitting in different rooms.
Dislikes: The dashes really got on my nerves. I know they emphasized the words and her consciousness but they were annoying. Was it really necessary to include this many dashes? I didn't really like that the poem was so short. I want to no more about how they died from "beauty" and "truth." It also kind of bothered me that even though the poem seemed to be pleasant at first, she seemed to end it on a harsh note by saying, "We talked between the Room--/Until the Moss had reached our lips--." It reminded me that even though she was having fun with death, death is still a grim issue.
Puzzles: When she says, "Themselves are One" in line 7 referencing beauty and truth. I think she was saying that beauty and truth were one in the same, when really they aren't at all, so I was confused there. Why end the poem on a sour note? I know the subject is about death, but you could at least keep going with the positive images.
Connections and Motifs: One of the obvious motifs is death. She shows death as a conversational, calm event in someones life. Another motif I can see is that of a bond between friends. The way they talked to each other and then  it says in line 8, "We Brethren, are" shows that because they died from the "same things" that they are connected in some way.

Poem # 519
Likes: I like Emily Dickenson's simile in line 3, "A Chill -- like frost upon a Glass--." It's easy to figure out and relate to because almost everyone knows about the condensation on a cup. I also liked how descriptive she ways to describe the other events about how fast the cold spread and the "busy eyes."
Dislikes: I dislike some of this poem because I'm completely confused and have no idea what's truly going on. I mean i have a hunch, but I have no idea it I'm truly interpreting it right. This poem is kind of morbid to, I don't mind death, but this poem seems to take it a little too far by describing the "cold" and the "eyes."
Puzzles: What does the last stanza even mean? I just do not seem to understand how it fits in with the rest from the way I am interpreting this. Is she talking about the body? Its warm at first when alive, and then death comes and the body becomes cold slowly and then the eyes become stiff?
Connections and Motifs: This poem also deals with the motif of death. I believe she uses coldness to physically describe the coldness of a dead body.

Poem #712
Likes: This was my personal favorite poem. Because again of the light hearted way she describes death.The imagery of death picking her up, and her seeing a few stages of her life on the way to complete death kind of reminded me like "life flashing before your eyes" before you die. I also like her imagery, "we slowly drove" I think that this implies that the speaker had a slow death.
Dislikes: There wasn't much I dislike about this poem except the fourth stanza had me lost. I feel like Emily Dickinson went from describing one thing to a whole new subject.
Puzzles: It puzzles me why she goes into describing landscapes, that had me completely confused. Emily Dickinson puzzles me in general why she always writes about death. It leaves me wondering why she was so obsessed with death. Also I don't really understand the last two lines of the poems.
Connections and Motifs: Again, the most common motif in this poem is death. I also see kind of the motif of reflection. I feel like the speaker as she is riding in the carriage with death she is viewing her stages of life as a child while they're, "At Recess -- in the Ring--" and then as she grows older and they "Paused before a House that seemed/A Swelling of the Ground--"

Notes from Underground Part 1

Give three adjectives that can be inferred about the narrator from the reading.

From Notes from Underground, I can infer that the narrator is probably insecure, crazy, and his reality is skewed.  The narrator is more than likely insecure because in his style of writing he seems to majorly contradict himself, and he tries to justify his actions to others. On page 1307, he says, “I was a nasty official. I was rude and took pleasure in it.” Then on page 1308 to justify his actions he says, “I was lying about myself just now when I said that I was a nasty official. I lied out of spite. I was merely having some fun at the expense of both the petitioners and that officer.” Although, he doesn’t seem to really justify his actions I think he was trying to show others that he wasn’t being nasty to just be nasty he actually enjoyed doing it. I think this shows he’s insecure because throughout Part 1, he’s constantly trying to show others why he did the actions he did in the past.  I think this is similar to Rousseau’s Confessions except the narrator in Notes from Underground actually goes into the detail of his bad actions and then tries to justify them. Also, the narrator seems to me to be crazy. I feel like the whole time he goes on and on with these rants in this piece. I think the writings actually help him hold on to the little sanity that he has.  It says in the first part that he gets pleasure from being rude and inconsiderate to people. Most sane people don’t really get their kicks by treating people with little respect. I think so of this also helps from his reality to be skewed. In Part I, Chapter VI, the narrator talks about wishing he could be lazy and that he would respect himself more. He says, “…at least I’d possess one more or less positive trait of which I could be certain” (1316). People don’t really see being a “sluggard” as being a good thing. He just thinks its good because people would be able to actually identify him with something. He doesn’t realize that in reality if he was a “sluggard” and drank all the time he probably wouldn’t see everything as “beautiful and sublime.” He wouldn’t be a favorable person of society and he probably wouldn’t die happy either.  The narrator in Notes from Underground is portrayed as an insecure and crazy individual whose reality is somewhat skewed from the rest of society.

Is it ironic that in Chapter 6, the narrator would be proud of himself for being lazy?

I think it is very ironic that the speaker wants to be seen as lazy by saying, “Lord, how I’d respect myself then. I’d respect myself precisely because at least I’d be capable of being lazy” (1316).  This chapter stood out to me the most versus the others because I couldn’t imagine ever wanting to be lazy; I’m usually trying to run away from and to stop being lazy. Most people of the time period this was written in all the way up to today, try to do their best through hard work to get the things they want and to be accomplished.  This chapter just shows that the narrator is crazy because he explains that being called lazy is classified as being “positively identified.” He later says that he would be live and die peacefully cause if he was called lazy he would just drink and be fat and see everything as “beautiful and sublime.” Chapter 6 is very ironic because most people wouldn’t see laziness as something to think fondly of and try to be, instead people want to be seen as hard-working and to be accomplished.

Madame Bovary 3/The Episode of Kugelmass 1

Compare the characteristics of Emma from Madame Bovary and Kugelmass in The Kugelmass Episode

Both Emma Bovary and Kugelmass have similar characteristics and ideas about relationships, and their marriages. In the beginning of "The Kugelmass Episode," Kugelmass says "Daphne had promise. Who suspected she'd let herself go and swell up like a beach ball?" He thought this marriage would help him be happy unlike his last marriage did, but in reality, he just because unhappy again. Much like Kugelmass, Emma thought the same way. She thought her marriage with Charles would make her happier and would get her away from her father's residence. After their marriages had gotten past the "honeymoon phase" however, they soon realized they hated their marriage and wanted some spark, and romance in their relationships. On page 1112 in "Madame Bovary", the narrator explains, "But even as they [Charles and Emma Bovary] were brought closer together by the details of daily life, she was separated from him by a growing sense of inward detachment." After their initial wedding and life got routine, Emma began to realize she wasn't happy and didn't like Charles, much like Kugelmass. After his wife began to get fat, and the romance fizzled he wanted something more and wanted an affair. Both of these characters wanted the same ideals in a relationship. Kugelmass says to his analyst, "...I'm a hand who needs romance, i need softness, I need flirtation....and exchange coy glances over red wine and candlelight." Emma similarly wanted something that seemed like a fairytale. They wanted romance and something that wasn't ordinary. Then when they both get the affair that they wanted, their happiness ends up fading soon after it has begun.   After spending the weekend with Emma, their affair turns to an unhappy occasion. "I'm sneaking around town, and Emma and I have had it up to here with each other," is how Kugelmass was describing the situation to Persky. Their relationship seemed fine at first, but when the obstacles start to come they relationship suddenly goes South. This is similar to Emma and her affairs. Emma and Leon had their fling where they enjoyed spending time together, but wouldn't admit to their true feelings until they see each other again in Paris. Both Kugelmass and Emma have the same unrealistic ideals about relationships and remain unsatisfied with their lives.

Compare Emma and Leon’s relationship before he moved to Paris? Why do you think it changed?

Before Leon moved to Paris I would describe Emma and Leon’s relationship kind of awkward. They hit it off as soon as they met each other. Emma and Leon had many common interests like reading, their personalities, and their problems with small town life. I felt like they both wanted to start a relationship, but neither ever made the move to start the relationship. I think Leon was scared about the repercussions of his actions if he would have continued the affair with Emma. As Leon was saying goodbye before he left for Paris, they both awkwardly shook each other’s hand. Then after, Emma realized that she loved him, but it was too late. After seeing Emma again three years later, Leon’s passion for her “revived” (1227).  The book later said that Leon was no longer shy because of the company he had been around while in Paris and was very confident. Although Emma tries to resist at first like in her previous affairs, she still gives in eventually to the affair. Their “relationship” was much like anyone would want in a relationship, except the whole she being married issue. They were very passionate for each other, and seemed to think they belonged together. After visiting each other in a hotel several times a week, they were “completely lost in their possession of each other that they thought of themselves as being in their own home, destined to live there for the rest of their days, eternal young husband and eternal young wife” (1248). It goes on to say that they call the hotel room, “our room,” “our carpet,” and “our chairs” (1248).  They genuinely seemed to be so wrapped up in each other that without the rest of the story they would seem like any other happy couple. The different between the two different encounters is that Leon was less shy. He wasn’t scared of Charles, and Emma continued to do her normal wifely duties while still getting romantic with Leon. Leon and Emma decided to take it farther this time because they were both more experienced than their first time.

Emma had too high of expectations for marriage and was never satisfied with her relationships because of it. Do you think Charles had any expectations for marriage? If not, is that why is kept himself blinded from the true events that were going on in his marriage?

Charles had been taken care of his whole life. His mother took care of him as a child and even as a student trying to get through medical school. She pushed him to go to medical school, and that’s what he did. He did exactly what his mother told him to do, when she wanted him to do it. This is much like how Charles’s first marriage went also. She had enough control over him to say, “…it was his wife who ruled: in front of company he had to say certain things and not others, he had to dress the way she wanted, obey her…” (1094). His first wife acted just like his mother had done. I think after that marriage failed, he needed something different and was tired of being controlled and having to be submissive. He was always told what to do and didn’t really have to do anything. I believe that is one reason he loved Emma so much because she didn’t constantly tell him what to do and control him. I don’t think Charles had any expectations about marriage because of his relationships with his mother and first wife. Charles really had no idea what to do he was told what to do his whole life. Emma wanted a Prince Charming, and a love like a fairytale. I think Charles truly wanted his marriage to work because he didn’t want to get controlled by other people and that he truly loved her. Charles always made excuses for her and always tried to justify her actions. After Rodolphe wrote her the letter saying he didn’t want to be with her, she was physically ill for weeks and he didn’t think anything of it. Also when he ran into the piano teacher, and he didn’t know Emma’s name, Charles brushed it off as, “or else maybe there’s more than one Mademoiselle Lempereur in Rouen who teaches piano” (1251). I feel like Charles constantly made excuses for Emma because he loved her and wanted their relationship to last. Even after Emma’s death, and reading the letters between her and Roldolphe he still initially thought their relationship was only platonic. He eventually realized the number of her affairs and then that led to his death.  I don’t think Charles had any expectations for marriage because anything was better than his last one. So he was blinded because he had never had a truly “good” marriage, so he assumed that his and Emma’s marriage was amazing, when truly it was atrocious.