Literature

Having majored in literary studies (world literature) as an undergraduate, I would now like to concentrate on English and American literature. I am especially interested in nineteenth-century literature, women’s literature, Anglo-Saxon poetry, and folklore and folk literature. My personal literary projects have involved some combination of these subjects. For the oral section of my comprehensive exams, I specialized in nineteenth century novels by and about women.

The relation ship between “high” and folk literature became the subject for my honors essay, which examined Toni Morrison’s use of classical, biblical, African, and Afro-American folk tradition in her novel. I plan to work further on this essay, treating Morrison’s other novels and perhaps preparing a paper suitable for publication. In my studies toward a doctoral degree, I hope to examine more closely the relationship between high and folk literature.

My junior year and private studies of Anglo-Saxon language and literature have caused me to consider the question of where the divisions between folklore, folk literature, and high literature lie. Should I attend your school, I would like to resume my studies of Anglo-Saxon poetry, with special attention to its folk elements. Writing poetry also figures prominently in my academic and professional goals. I have just begun submitting to the smaller journals with some success and am gradually building a working manuscript for a collection.

The dominant theme of this collection relies on poems that draw from classical, biblical, and folk traditions, as well as everyday experience, in order to celebrate the process of giving and taking life, whether literal or figurative. My poetry draws from and influences my academic studies. Much of what I read and study finds a place in my creative work as subject. At the same time, I study the art of literature by taking part in the creative process, experimenting with the tools used by other authors in the past. In terms of a career, I see myself teaching literature, writing criticism, and going into editing or publishing poetry.

Doctoral studies would be valuable to me in several ways. First, your teaching assistant ship program would provide me with the practical teaching experience I am eager to acquire. Further, earning a Ph. D. in English and American literature would advance my other two career goals by adding to my skills, both critical and creative, in working with language. Ultimately, however, I see the Ph. D. as an end in itself, as well as a professional stepping stone; I enjoy studying literature for its own sake and would like to continue my studies on the level demanded by the Ph. D. program.

It is clearly evident that many fairy tales of childhood tend to shape the reader. Certain moral codes and ideals are tightly woven into the text of many fairy tales, promoting or denoting a characters actions. In the Grimms fairy tales Cinderella, Brier Rose, and Rapunzel, the heroines of these tales exhibit strong behavioral codes, thus providing opportunity for the young female reader to relate to the damsel, or to model herself to behave in a similar fashion.

In accordance with Marcia R. Liebermans essay, Some Day My Prince Will Come: Female Acculturation Through the Fairy Tale, I agree ith the assertion that positive traits in fairy tale indicate reward, while the negative characteristics bring misfortune. A heroine in a fairy tale is to be seen as a mentor, a model to easily portray what is right, and what is inherently wrong. For instance, a passive heroine proves to bring eventual reward through pain and suffering, while a female who is assertive, either mentally or physically, is shunned.

Suggestions integrated throughout the text of the three tales provide strong evidence as to the desired morals and values of the society in which the tales were written. Through the examination of ales, their inherent messages surface. Childrens perceptions of fairytales can go a long way towards shaping social interactions among said children. Passivity is a major player in the personalities of Rapunzel, Cinderella, and Sleeping Beauty. Rapunzel relies completely on a determined prince to escape her imprisonment; Cinderella uses a fairy godmother to help her cause and Sleeping Beauty waits until Prince Charming wakes her.

Children could see these characterizations of women and begin to intertwine them with their own budding personalities. Boys begin to see women as weak and Girls may interpret these ehavior traits as indicative of their being the lesser part of relationships with men. Sexual roles, although not overtly discussed within the pages of fairytales, becomes the focus for these young people. Marcia Lieberman reiterates the idea of inherent roles stating, a picture of sexual roles, behavior psychology, and a way of predicting outcome or fate according to sex(Lieberman, 384).

As they grow older, the children may begin to fall into the roles they discovered in the fairytales; boys begin to act out the hero role and girls become passive, receptive to the males ideas before their own. Throughout Cinderella, the jealous sisters are constantly oppressing the heroine of the tale. The sisters, who enslave Cinderella to complete chores around the palace, portray strong, ill natured, and above all, jealous characters. In contrast, Cinderella represents a relatively passive, young, and beautiful woman.

However, in contrast with Lieberman (389), Cinderella is not passive in completing her tasks about the house. Stating, the system for rewards in fairy tales [] equates these three factors: being beautiful, being chosen, and getting rich, Lieberman acknowledges the relationship between eauty and eventual success (386). Beauty, however, hides within Cinderellas actions. The words, After leaving her slipper at the ball she has nothing more to do but stay home and wait, expressions of description, Lieberman suggests that Cinderella exhibits at the core of her emotions, meekness (389).

Cinderellas submissiveness is rewarded with the introduction of the prince and her eventual happily ever after status. Rewards only pertain to those who have struggled, and therefore prove worthy. In Brier Rose, the heroine of the tale suffers through a great sleep to be eventually rejuvenated and rewarded for er passivity by the prince. Upon her birth, the heroine receives four gifts from fairies: virtue, beauty, wealth, and the curse of a seemingly endless sleep. Three of the four gifts bring lifelong success and happiness, while the latter handicaps her maturation process.

Proclaiming, the prettiest is invariably singled out and designated for reward, Lieberman identifies the tendency for fairy tales to equate beauty with success (384). Once again, the beauty of the heroine arrives as a result of her state of passivity, her intense sleep. The statement, she does not have to show pluck, resourcefulness, or it; she is chosen because she is beautiful, Lieberman explains the heroines ability to attract the eye of others (386). For it is merely the heroines immense beauty that persuades the prince to ride through the forest of thorns in order to reach the heroine and to rejuvenate her from her sleep.

Once again, as a direct result of her beauty, the heroine is rewarded for her beauty and all of the obstacles it brings. Throughout the tale Rapunzel, the heroine is portrayed as the classic fairy tale character, a damsel in distress. In this case, Rapunzel depends upon others to bring her happiness and in that, freedom. Awaiting the assistance of others, Rapunzel helplessly serves to further institute the notion that success only comes with being passive, specifically, being imprisoned by a cruel witch.

Revealing, so many heroines [] are locked up in towers, imprisoned by giants, or otherwise enslaved, Lieberman asserts the prominence of an imprisoned maiden in fairy tales (389). As previously stated, Rapunzel depends on her rescuer in order to escape the tower and the wrath of the witch keeping her in custody. Declaring, The sexes of the rescuer and the person in danger are almost as constantly predictable; men ome along to rescue woman who are in danger of death, Lieberman concludes that in most cases, the damsel in distress is in fact distressed as a result of her imprisonment (391).

Whether mentally or physically imprisoned, the heroine of Rapunzel strongly relies on others, specifically and initially; she relies on a handsome prince driven by beauty. In fairy tales marriage is not without its great rewards. Proclaiming, good, poor and pretty girls always win rich and handsome princes, Lieberman presents marriage as a reward (386). This not without its drawbacks in the development of young childrens perceptions of arriage; Lieberman points out that Since girls are chosen for their beauty, it is easy for a child to infer that beauty leads to wealth (386).

Children see the opportunity to profit and run with the concept that the only way to be happy is to live a life that equates these three factors: being beautiful, being chosen, and getting rich(Lieberman, 387). Woe to the little girl raised on stories of women only able to marry or be loved if they are pretty. The girls can develop a trait of caring much more for their appearance and if ever they are spurned from marriage it may not be taken on its merits, instead seen as a ign that the girl is ugly, not chosen, not rich and consequently not happy.

Boys also see this and become obsessed with money; not willing to conclude the accumulation of wealth is so they can get a pretty girl. Without a doubt children can internalize many of the actions, roles, behaviors and psychology presented to them in fairy tales. Passive heroines are beautiful. In return for such beauty, the maiden is chosen, married, and loved by the hero. This process leads not only to beauty by means of passivity, but also to security and happiness. Assertion equates not only with beauty, but ugliness and misfortune s well.

Boys in turn develop a sense of responsibility and see themselves in the dominant role. In other words, they must save the day by getting the girl and then of course spreading wealth. For the young girls of the fairy tale audience to acknowledge that they must act out roles similar to the behavior of the heroines in the three tales under examination, thus guaranteeing eternal wealth and happiness. Boys will see the same roles played out and revert to the breadwinning hero role. Lessons portrayed throughout the story are epitomized by Marcia Lieberman to support the notion of love, success, and failure.

If you go back to the Old House, it’s in ruins and the Clock Tower is gone. But remember this place to come back later when you have some items that you don’t have at the moment… At Father’s House, the baby bird is spreading its wings. Unfortunately, it doesn’t say anything with a Relay. One of the books you may be able to read now is here too: Level 15 (Shield Pack). Don’t worry if you’re not up this high yet; if you keep fighting monsters you’ll either get there, or you’ll spend so much on curing damage that you’ll eventually figure out you need to kill easier monsters for a while to get levels so you can add points to the Robots.

It helps too if you raise the levels of the Robots’ weapons, or build and give them better Boots or Shields. If you did manage to get to Level 19 already, read the book for Weather and follow the instructions in the Scraps section to get ScrapB. You can do this later though, with no ill effects. OK, let’s go on a trip to South Isle! Go to the Harbor area, which is monster-free. Talk to the man in the grass skirt, then walk onto the boat. Wait while it toils across the seas of Quintenix. You’ll arrive at the Pier area on South Isle. When you leave the area, the path to the Village area is revealed.

Mint and more natives are in there, and the screen shakes along with a sound effect like a helicopter (on my emulator, at least); that’s the Volcano. There’s a Tool Shop in the Village, but it has the same stock as the one in Rococo and the prices are 50% higher. Find the Shaman’s house in the northwest, and then enter the Elder’s house in the northeast. Now visit the Shaman’s house, and note that blocked door in the first room for later. Or you can skip all the background information, including talking to the Mayor, and just talk to the native in the Inn and then moving into the left bed.

There will be a dream sequence with a gold robot at the Volcano. Talk to the native standing near the exit, and the path to the Volcano area will be revealed when you leave. The Volcano area is monster-free (for now). Explore it and get the Celtis 1 and $300 treasures before you talk to the native blocking the stairs to the hole. Now climb the rope, or fall in, and you’re in the Volcano Cave. This has monsters in it, but you can always climb out and get back to Rococo, at least until you walk a bit west of the rope and you get a strange message from the guide and the rope disappears.

I think it’s trying to say that you’re now a sacrifice to the Deity/Volcano. Anyway, clear out the monsters here and get the $500 treasure, then go north to the next room. The treasure in the northeast corner here is a Repair. Leave through the northwest corner, and you’re now in what’s obviously a man-made (or at least Hacker-made) area! Welcome to the Factory Experience! Stella and Pops from Rococo are here, but you can leave either through the south door, or by pressing the button on the north wall and then riding a conveyor belt (red is north, white is south in this room).

I suggest exploring south first, as the conveyor belt area is tricky to navigate (return from it by letting a patrolling guard see you). I can understand why Stella and Pops don’t leave, but the Hackers are beyond dumb for not taking everything from you including the 3 Robots. But if they did, it wouldn’t be much of a game. OK, from Stella and Pops go south, west (get Cure treasure), east, south to the Bio Lab Ent. There’s a strange thing on the north wall, and the Hacker guard won’t let you go further. So let’s go back and do the conveyor belts instead.

As said above, you get sent back if a guard spots you. But they don’t “see” very far or off to the sides. So do a lot of hiding in corners and just out of their range, and follow them around. There’s several things to do here: 1. Get to the northeast corner with the locked door and mouse, talk to the mouse via the Relay. You’ll be doing quite a bit of mouse hole movement later. Remember this locked door for later. 2. Dodge the guard again, go southwest and notice the other mouse hole near the doorway to the Hacker executive washroom.

Go in, and the talkative Hacker will let slip some useful info, and put a Stamp on your hand (which doesn’t actually show up anywhere, and it doesn’t stop the patrolling guards from sending you back to Stella). He won’t move out of the way either, so go on to… 3. It’s not easy to tell from the graphics, but you can go west from the washroom door area “under” to get the Cure treasure. 4. This part is a little tricky: while dodging the guards, make your way to the southwest portion of the big conveyor room and press the button near that corner. That will reverse the conveyors, and allow you to go north.

Now you’re in another bathroom. The conveyor reverse button is on the north wall. You can talk to the guard blocking the west doorway here, and because you have that Stamp, he’ll let you through! You’re now in still another bathroom, but this one has monsters in it! Also has mouse holes on the north end, and $600 treasure too. Go through the exit in the southwest, and walk up to the “Boss” door. You’ll overhear some talking between Dr. Einst and a Hacker, then they notice an eavesdropper! Luckily, it’s another Hacker, not you. Also, notice the mouse holes here too.

Now make your way back through this bathroom to the Executive one where a Hacker was blocking your way. After doing all that other stuff, the Hacker blocking the way now turns into Kotetsu. Talk to him and he wants you to follow him to the north. In there, he’ll show you a garbage chute. But to be ornery, check out the toilet with yet another mouse hole next to it, and the door to the Chief Exec. toilet. Open the door behind Kotetsu, then go in to fall back into somewhere under the Volcano. That annoying “earthquake” effect is back… The treasure in a southwest corner of your entry room is a Cure.

Take the west-most of the 2 exits on the south side; the eastern one just leads to one monster in a dead end. Keep going, and leave through the stairs in the southeast, but if you’re willing to get through a few more fights you can notice an altar-like structure on the northeast side of this room before you leave. Now there are two small rooms with invisible monsters. These things are rather nasty, and can easily cause you to lose the game (bet you didn’t know that you lose when all of your robots are junk! ). A Masker is worth 2. 6, and a Beret is 2. 5! Most of the time they run away if you inflict damage, and you get 0. ut of it.

Best strategy is to Escape, then run away from them while they are visible and shaking their heads. There are two in each room. If you’re lucky, you’ll make it through both rooms without meeting any of them. To be fair to those of you playing without cheating, I didn’t hang out here and get even more levels. But after these 2 rooms, you return to the outside world in the Shaman’s House! This is now your opportunity to take a break and go back to Rococo or your Father’s House to read more books, do other R&D stuff, or just build up your supplies (Clean, Cure, Repair).

You won’t get another chance, until you get to the R&D in the Volcano, to do this stuff. So ignore all the villagers thinking you’re a ghost, and just go back to Rococo to rest up from your “vacation”. The Volcano area now has Powermole monsters, and the rope is back so you can climb into and out of the Volcano Cave. The guard that wouldn’t let you out of the “Bio Lab Ent. ” room is also gone, so you can freely walk into and out of this Hacker base under the Volcano. So if you want to go scouting and build up levels, go ahead! I strongly suggest you be at least level 16 before starting up with following the story again.

It makes combat easier, and you can avoid retracing your steps to find books. When you talk to the Elder of the village, you begin a long sequence back in the Bio Lab. Basically, you’re forced to walk into a wooden box decorated with a green scarab, and be carried to the Shrine, then the Director’s Office. And Mint is in there with you! Dr. Einst shows up and tries to mack on Mint before mutual recognition occurs.

Search the room: read the level 16 book (Quick Pack), notice yet another mouse hole, take the Key treasure, try talking to the skull device on the wall (it’s DeityCom! One strange thing but pointless thing about that scarab box is that while it appears wider than one “square”, you can walk through the “half squares” on the sides. Hopefully you were level 16 already, and can now leave this room behind. If not, you’ll either have to come back to read the book, or go to Kirara later, if you really must get them all. Walk out of the “Chief’s Room” and find yourself on the far side of the Hacker bathrooms. The Hacker guard that looked at your Stamp earlier now can tell you that the Chief was chased to the Toilet.

So, dodge patrolling guards, ride conveyors and press buttons as necessary to get to the big toilet where you got your hand stamped and met Kotetsu. Mint will be in there, and asks you to follow Einst further into the mens’ room (some reporter! ). The Hacker inside will tell you Kotetsu is the cleaning person, mention the Lunchroom, and tell you to check the Exec. facilities; you won’t be allowed to go in the garbage chute again. Go in, and walk a step towards the toilet, and this small room (which has a mouse hole of its very own) does something strange, like move in an elevator fashion.

Don’t worry, you can walk out, into another bathroom and one other exit, and back in to get back where you started. By the way, the last place you could save the game was just outside the toilet where Mint is now. Those flashing lights on the side of the walkway are alarms; trip one and 4 groups of Cmdrs will show up! Go to the northeast exit to find the Earthquake Device door (which won’t open with your Key), a hole, and a $400 treasure. Brave the alarms and go through the southeast exit to find a Secret Lab room with a hole and “Boss” design, but no door! t least that you can see at the moment… ) So return back to Mint and tell her it was a dead end.

She’ll run off, and you can go try out your Key on the only other locked door you can now get to: northeast of the big bathroom, where there’s a mouse out in plain sight (told you to remember that! ). You’ll have to travel through this room with 2 Turbo monsters several more times, but for now head north. This is the Lunchroom. Kotetsu is all the way on the right, and will tell you to go get Chameleon Glasses from R&D. Go in the opening to the left of Kotetsu, and you’ll find the Hacker Cook.

If you like, go to the southeast opening and listen to Hackers order food. But talk to the Cook, and he’ll tell you what to say to get into R&D by delivering food. So now head south (2 Turbo room), east (several monsters), north (the “Gunrobot” monster first shows up here, a hole and a $800 treasure), north (alarm on walkway for 4 groups of Cmdrs), north again (the “Biolion” and “CannonX” monsters first show up here, alarm on walkway for 3 groups of Cmdrs, another treasure), west (ignore the stairs down and the southwest exit, just head all the way to the left and press A at the door).

Addie Bundren conjures up the central darkness derived from her death and directly or indirectly causes actions in which each Bundren character takes advantage of Addie. With the character’s actions revolving around her death, William Faulkner’s As I Lay Dying reveals the truth about the people who surround a person may take advantage of him or her. The death of Addie Bundren shapes all of the character’s actions in life including Addie’s final request before her death.

Addie takes advantage of her death by using it for revenge and inflicting final pains upon some characters, while the other characters use er to get what they want for their personal needs. Addie causes all the painful actions around her family either directly or indirectly. Addie is foremost the prominent abuser of her upcoming death in As I Lay Dying. She predetermines her time to die, and she makes sure that the people in her family whom she dislikes must experience her wrath before she moves on to the next life. Addie is the one who is dying, but she makes revenges run throughout the family and extend beyond” (Wadlington 35).

Inflicting pain mostly on Anse, Addie enjoys herself. Anse, a azy man, is forced by his wife to take her to Jefferson to be buried as her final request. Addie’s revenge on Anse was payback for all the times when he just sat around while Addie, her children, and sometimes neighbors do all the hard work for him. Also “Addie reacts to Anse’s arid conventionality by having a clandestine affair with minister Whitfield” (Wadlington 31). Addie also indirectly hurts one of her favorite sons, Cash.

Cash is hurt indirectly when he helps ! his kinfolk carry his mother’s coffin to Jefferson, where along the path, he breaks his leg while crossing a looded river. Although Cash is one of Addie’s favorites besides Jewel, Addie’s cruel revenge carries over to Cash’s broken leg, which later becomes infected. Besides her indirect action on Cash’s leg, Cash is the most favorite of Addie. As Wadlington states, “He is very much his mother’s son in expressing his feelings through physical action rather than through words by building a coffin for the mother he loves” (Wadlington 41).

Jewel, Addie’s second favorite next to Cash, seems to be cursed by his callous mother. Jewel can only express himself through physical actions by being cruel. Yelling and screaming is the only way Jewel shows his love for his mother, but Jewel’s ferocity begins to wear him down physically. Saving his mother’s coffin from going downstream and rescuing the coffin from the burning barn were some ways Jewel showed his love, although those actions are quite extreme because Jewel could have been killed. Addie’s revenge could have killed Jewel, but luckily it did not happen.

Addie’s revenge also affects her little son Vardaman. Teaching of the world is usually the mother’s job in the family especially on Addie’s case since Anse is a lazy bum. As “for Vardaman, his “unknowingness” comes from his mother’s death compounded by his family’s failure to communicate reassurance and explanation to him” (Wadlington 56). Addie did not teach him what was in the world and manners; so as a result, when his mother dies, Vardaman confused his mother’s death with a dead fish he caught that day.

Vardaman’s manners are reckless against Dr. Peabody when he came to nurse Addie. Vardaman action was quite extreme when he tried to chase the doctor away because Vardaman is quite irrational in not understanding that Dr. Peabody did not kill his mother. Dewey Dell, Addie’s daughter, is deprived of a central motherly figure. Addie’s action in not caring enough for her daughter leads her to become irresponsible with Lafe where Lafe impregnates Dewey Dell.

Darl, one of Addie’s least favorites, is rejected by his mother which “injured him psychologically” and led him to burn the barn where Addie’s coffin lay resting in peace (Wadlington 30). Darl is sent to an asylum for that demented deed, but could have been prevented if Addie showed more affection toward Darl. Darl s gradually revealed as a rejected son who feels that his mother is not even alive because he calls her “Addie Bundren” instead of calling her “Mother” (Wadlington 41).

If Addie had cared more for her children and spent more time with her children before her death, then possibly none of painful actions that resulted from Addie’s presence would have happened. As a result her selfishness towards her children in not giving enough tender love and care, her children become deprived in her life which leads to all the characters taking advantage of Addie. Addie’s death also reflects upon the attitudes between Cash, Darl, and Jewel. Between the three, jealousy is prevalent.

Jewel and Darl envy the love that Addie gives Cash, while Darl is Jealous of Jewel; therefore, Darl teases him by always asking him “Who was your father? ” (Faulkner 213). Cash, Darl, and Jewel do not get along because of their bitter jealousy of each other. Jewel can never please his mother enough, so he gets mad at Cash while Darl continues to pick on his origin of birth which causes a bitter rivalry between the three (Wadlington 32). Away from her family, Addie’s cruelty leads into her former teaching career where she hates her children and wishes they where vanquished.

Addie resents her children similarly in the way she resents her students when she expressed, “When school was out and the last one had left with his dirty snuffling nose, instead of going home, I would go down a hill to the spring where I could be quiet and hate them” (Faulkner 169). Addie seems to portray her hatred for her schoolchildren the same way she hated her own children. Addie’s death results in more character actions in which all characters except Jewel take advantage f her death in order to obtain what they want. The characters use Addie’s death as an incentive to look forward to her death and quickly take her to Jefferson.

Anse, the prime tributary, grasps Addie’s death so he can go to Jefferson to get his long and awaited false teeth. At the end of the journey to Jefferson, he meets his new wife whose name is only presented as Mrs. Bundren to replace his old wife, Addie. Vardaman seems to forget about his mother’s death and begins to think only about the cars in the toy store at Jefferson where he tries to get a toy train. Dewey Dell uses Addie’s death to have a chance to go to the pharmacies at the end of the journey to get an abortion with Lafe’s ten dollars.

Cash seems to want new tools, while Darl just wants to get the burial over with, but his task is not finished because he is sent to an asylum. Overall, Addie uses her deat! h to her advantage, by making her family pay and make them take her to be buried in Jefferson, while the other characters use Addie’s death to attain what they want. Addie is the central monstrosity against all people who surround her, which leads to the day when he dies where her surrounding community would eventually begin to take advantage of her.

All the characters take advantage of Addie’s death even Addie herself as she gets her revenge on her whole family. The curse of Addie enchanted over her family resembles similarly to a type of hex. If Addie is more sincere and more of a motherly figure to her children, then possibly she would enjoy life, and her family would enjoy her and no pain would be inflicted. If Addie expressed her love, then many people would not dare imagine taking advantage of her, but instead, eminently respect her.

They all return to the house. The fully paid for house. The sight of it brings back a slight sob to Linda’s throat, when she reaches the cement stoop her sobbing once again becomes full. Charley looks to her but is at a loss for words. Happy puts his arms around his mother and holds her. Biff only looks on at it all. For a brief second he sees the Willy’s fate in Happy’s eyes as he holds Linda. Willy’s death has brought Biff to know what he is more than ever. He’s not a salesman and neither is Happy but Happy is just like is father and Biff fears nothing can be done to change the course of life Happy has chosen upon Willy’s death.

The small grieving party enters the house and each takes a seat in the living room. Linda has gained control over herself again. No one dares to say a word they each sit by themselves accompanied by their own thoughts. Biff’s mind is racing now. Thoughts of how his life will not end like Willy’s. Biff has no master plan for his life he just wishes to begin his life. His real life. “Construction” Biff accidentally says allowed. Everyone looks at him. What about construction. Happy says to Biff. Tomorrow I’ll look for a job in construction is Biff’s reply.

I’ll start at the bottom and I’ll gradually raise my position. Someday maybe architecture or engineering. By god I’m gonna do something with my life weather it’s to my families approval or not. Charley looks at Biff and says. Biff I don’t know if this is the right time for this. It’s sounds like a good idea to me but I honestly don’t think this is the time to talk about it. I’m sorry Charley you’re right I’m going to bed now I’ll see you all tomorrow. Biff stands up stretches his arms and back and goes off to bed. Biff wakes up early the next morning.

No one else has woken yet and Charley had gone home the night before. Despite the death of his father hanging over him like a dark, dreary cloud Biff is in an unexplainably great mood. He felt as if his life was just beginning on this day. He is wearing his blue suit, makes himself some eggs and toast, and has a cup of coffee. Then he was off to find an honest job. Biff wanted to make a sort of amends with the old construction company him and Happy used to steal from. This was Biff’s first choice. He arrived at the company building straitened himself out and went in.

As he entered the lobby a young receptionist met him. Biff stated his business and asked if any job were open. The receptionist handed him an application to fill out. Biff took a seat by a window and started on the application. the first question he encountered was that of experience. Biff began to make up false places of employment for himself. When he noticed this was exactly what his father and happy would be doing he threw out the application and asked for another. If he didn’t get the job honestly he didn’t want the job at all.

Biff put applications out for a few hours most places followed the basic routine as the first. Then he returned home. Happy and Linda were in the kitchen eating lunch when he came in. Linda and happy ignored him so he made himself some lunch and sat down at the table with them. What’s with the “cold shoulder” you guys are giving me. Biff asked. We aren’t giving you a “cold shoulder” we simply don’t have anything to say to you was Linda’s reply. Well would you like to hear about my day? The phone rang just as he finished his question. Linda got up to answer it.

It’s for you Biff. It’s the Altec construction agency. Biff took the phone and said thanks mom. Linda reproached Biff’s thanks with an uh-huh and she sat down to her meal again. Biff hung the phone and told Linda and Biff that they wanted him to come in for an interview right away. I just put the application in this morning and they want to interview me already. Isn’t that great guys! That’s good was Linda’s only reply. You know what Mom, Happy I really don’t care how you feel about me but I’m not going to let you two financially fade away just because you dislike me.

If I get this job you are getting a portion of my paycheck whatever you need to keep yourselves afloat. I’ll move out if that’s what you want. The only thing you’ll ever see from me is my money! With all that said Biff left the house not waiting for a reply he didn’t expect. Biff arrived at the Altec company building still in his blue suit before he entered he looked at the suit and wished he hadn’t worn it. the suit went along with his father’s belief of image being foremost important. Biff no longer wanted a job simply for his image.

Biff entered the building walked straight to the receptionist and stated his name. The receptionist told him that Mr. Lansing, the personnel manager was expecting him and she pointed towards the office door Labeled Personell Manager, Mr. Lansing. Biff thanked the receptionist and he walked over to the door. Before Biff knocked however he took the suit coat off and set it on a chair then he knocked on Mr. Lansing’s office door.

A man dressed in a suit very similar to Biff’s opened the door and said hello my name is Mr. Lansing please come in and take a seat. Biff followed Mr. Lansings instruction and sat down in a comfortable leather chair in front of Mr. lansing’s fine Cherry desk. By the look of the personnel manager’s office Biff thought to himself that this company must be quite successful and he was assured that he wasn’t making a mistake with this business venture. Okay Mr. Loman lets get started. Mr. lansing asked Biff a few simple questions. Then he asked Biff when the soonest he could start. I could start today if you want me to Biff told him.

Great Biff you see a few of our workers have recently left the company to begin their own and we are in desperate need right now. I don’t want to rush you into it. So we won’t start you today but how’s tomorrow sound around 12:00am at the Westmore Voice recording construction site on Philips street. That would be great Mr. Lansing. The sooner I can make some money the better. Please call me Charles I try and keep good relations with our employees and I want you to know that if you ever have any problems or comments to come to me with them. Okay.

A lot has been made of the suggested subtexts present in High Noon and On the Waterfront, that they reflect the experiences of Carl Foreman (the writer of High Noon) and Elia Kazan with the House Committee on Un-American Activities. Foreman has openly assented to this, and Kazan has admitted that there are parallels. However, while this can give us insight of the personal opinions of these men, I do not think that the significance of these subtexts can be played down enough.

My reasons are that they are in no way attached to the films-that is, not evident without knowledge other than that of the films themselves; that they add nothing to the films, as a work of art; and that the assumption of the subtexts is very ambiguous. By this last point, I mean that we cannot give authorial intention any more power over our understanding of the film than that of any other interpretation.

We would be just as well to say that High Noon is really about the Nazi persecution of the Jews, or even about the Allied attack on the Nazis, because, as I have said, this kind of meaning is not produced by the film but is superimposed over it. The films are interchangeable in this aspect, because they are both about people doing what they believe is right-it just happens that the idea of what is right differed between Foreman and Kazan.

A better way of commenting on the socio-political climate of the fifties in Hollywood, as reflected in these films, is to take meaning from the films, rather than receive a meaning from someone who claims authority over them and depreciates the role of the viewer. We must look at what the films really say about America rather than what someone tells us they are meant to say, because these can be quite different things. The communist scare was at fever pitch in the early 1950s, when HUAC reopened investigations.

Opinion was divided in Hollywood. There were those, like Kazan and the American Committee for Cultural Freedom, who believed that the communist threat was real, and that, in Kazans words, communists were in a lot of organizations-unseen, unrecognised, unbeknownst to anybody. While Kazan has made it clear that he was not happy about testifying at HUAC, he seems firm in his belief that there was a lot of communist indoctrination and brainwashing going on that posed a danger to American society.

Opinion amongst others was that HUAC was an angry god who must be sated, and that those who testified were forced into playing up the threat of communism, just to satisfy (and justify) the committee and keep working. Brian Neve has made the point that no matter what Kazans feelings were about communism, he might have exposed the threat in ways other than testifying to an organisation that ruined many careers and lives.

Arthur Miller said of it that Kazan in his human weakness had been forced to humiliate himself. The consequence of blacklisting and the fear generated by HUAC was that there was a shift in Hollywood from the social conscience films of the post-war period, as any criticism of American society was suspected as un-American. I suggest that there is a significant distinction between previous films (like those of the race cycle) and those of the early fifties.

Where the earlier films were critical of American society, its prejudices, and aimed to teach liberal ideas of equality, in some later films the emphasis is shifted from society in general to oppressive (and un-American) organisations-be it an unfair medical committee in People Will Talk, the Ku Klux Klan in Storm Warning, or a corrupt union in On the Waterfront. The distinction is significant because (although, in the last two films, people share the responsibility for allowing wrong to happen) the problem is not America-it is un-American individuals, who must be rooted out of society.

As said of the Hoboken docks, in On the Waterfront, its like it aint even part of America. This considered, High Noon could be regarded as a continuation of the concern in On the Waterfront. Hadleyville has been cleaned of the un-American oppressors: Will Kane and the townspeople fought against Frank Miller and the corrupt villains who controlled the town, turning it into a place where it is safe for a decent woman to walk the streets. But the film is hardly an affirmation of people-power: when justice fails, Miller returns to kill Kane and the people desert him, as it no longer seems their problem.

The film concludes, as does On the Waterfront, with a lack of faith in humanity, showing that the will to self-preservation dominates over the other drives. They suggest that humans are like electricity, in that they follow the path of least resistance. Though done in slightly different ways, they both lament the sheer lack of solidarity in communities against those who exploit or tyrannize over them. Opposition is hard to organise, and people know from experience that if you stick out your neck, theyll cut it off.

The consequence of this in the films can be seen in two ways: either that in life there are great men and lesser men (slightly fascist view), or that it is every individuals duty to liberate themselves from mind forgd manacles. I think that, perhaps simply because Gary Cooper looks so much better than the rest of the snivelling, cowardly townsfolk, High Noon is more in line with the first view. (Perhaps surprisingly, given Foremans supposed communism.

The film is played out in such a way that we are disgusted by the actions of the people, and feel very little sympathy for their awkward positions. On the Waterfront is more in line with the later view, because Kazan shows the potential for power in the workers (although unexercised). They are all physically strong, unlike the people of Hadleyville, but have been beaten into submission. We do not get the overwhelming impression that Terry Malloy is a better man than anyone else, but only that he frees himself.

However, before any harsh judgment of High Noon is made, it could be said that the elements of the film may direct us towards a more allegorical interpretation, being that Kane is the only True Man in the film and the crowds merely serve as a necessary resistance to Kanes moral rightness, a didactic tool to assure us of Kanes moral rightness. By this last point, I mean High Noon, its mise-en-scne, narrative, dialogue, and characterisation (its lack of realism) can direct us away from a literal interpretation of the events in the film. We are presented with a simplistic, black and white tale of good versus bad.

Which is which is implicit throughout, and never called into question. It is a very unambiguous situation that Kane is in: a villain is coming to kill him, who will not give up until one of them is dead. Because the situation is forced upon Kane, meaning is also forced upon the viewer. The film is almost propaganda, since we are given no reasonable option but to sympathise with Kane throughout. Perhaps, also, the film deliberately panders to the idyllic American rural myth in its celebration of guns, honesty, loyalty, pride, temperance, and abstinence from vice-the usual sentiments.

We see that his marriage is conducted in a secular ceremony, performed by a judge in front of the flag, because (although the reason given is that his bride is a Quaker) this shows the innate virtue and natural religion of Kane, and that he has no need for institutionalised religion for moral guidance. Importance is placed only in the lawfulness and safety of Hadleyville. Institutions of authority are dismissed: the church, politics, the judiciary, even Kanes tin star of the law, and true good is shown instead to be in the in the individual character and his actions.

Society is clear-cut, black and white, good and bad. It is a deliberately anti-intellectual film, emphasised by the constant repetition of how smart it is to give in and run. The gratification of traditional ideals is complete when the obvious rightness of siding with Kane is supplanted by the desire to bring big business to town. It just seems so narrow minded and egotistic that not one person actually believes Kane is wrong-they all admit he is right, but, for whatever reason, do not help. We get, in High Noon, none of the complexity and ambiguity of human nature that we get in On the Waterfront.

There is no time given at all to Kazans dilemma-that sometimes there is no obvious right, and doing what you think is right may not always feel good. In this way, the distinctions between the two are distinct. High Noon displays a nave childishness, and, if looked at in the context of HUAC, seems guilty of trying to rewrite history (or boil it down to good and bad). Whatever the final analysis on Kazans dealings with HUAC, he displays a greater sense of awareness of the complexities in life and reflects them in his film. However, in spite of this, the politics of On the Waterfront are quite suspect and questionable.

Ideologically, On the Waterfront is a contradictory, hypocritical, and conservative film. It becomes startlingly clear throughout the film that, although the attack is upon a corrupt union run by mobsters, we are witnessing the workings of three individual rackets: the criminal, the state, and the church. Kazans duplicity is in his siding with the church and state over the criminal, when all three are shown to be of questionable virtue. The union uses the power of the workers to blackmail the merchant companies who use the harbour (for example, by threatening strikes when the goods are perishable, like the bananas).

We see Johnny Friendlys banker, Morgan, who forces the men into loaning money at extortionate rates of interest. It seems that this behaviour is in no way in opposition to the practises of legitimate business and banking. The problem is that this particular racket is not state controlled, and that American government does not profit from it. Its like it aint even America, like the criminals have their own separate state within America. Johnnys sob story is reminiscent of countless others, where businessmen have worked themselves out of poverty to the top of the ladder.

This potential for financial success is the quality of America, land of opportunity. Criminal rackets are the same as business, they are just more physically brutal because they do not have state legislation to protect their interests, and so appear worse. Terrys brother, Charlie, says this girl and the Father, theyve got their hooks in the kid so deep he doesnt know which end is up anymore, but it is everyone, state, church, and mob, who try to get their hooks in to Terry and the rest of the workers. Kazan said I thought [Catholicism] was simplistic, mechanical and slightly hypocritical.

Anyway, I wanted Father Barry to be a rigidly ethical man who in any circumstance would tell you what is right. However, Father Barrys rightness is highly dubious. Terry Malloys character could be described as being without a superego. The outward appearance of this is that he appears to be lacking in gratitude. If he is working in the hole he gets on with it, if he is working the easy job in the loft he gets on with it. He does not lapse into sycophantism, because of his total ambivalence, and he cannot be bought.

He does the jobs that are expected of him, but he does not behave as he is expected. In this way, he is a little like the protagonist of Camus The Outsider, in that his lack of regard for the conventions of human behaviour makes him suspect by his fellows. Father Barry, in particular, tries to instil Terry with a superego, which is further complemented by his patriarchal stance against Terry. Terry tells him, if I spill, my life aint worth a nickel, and Father Barry replies, and how much is your soul worth if you dont? He follows this up with, Im not asking you to do anything.

Its your own conscience thats got to do the asking. Edie, who has been indoctrinated by the nuns, repeats this: you let your conscience tell you what to do! Perhaps I am biased, but does this not seem like such a cruel trick to play on a nave, but good man? While he may be sexually aggressive, intellectually Terry is a child. I think that the priest plays a rotten trick in trying to encourage guilt, and preaching self-abasement, and passive humility. The Waterfront Crime Commission investigators are the state versions of priests.

To get Terry on-side, they employ similar tactics to Father Barry, in that they feed him a little birdseed and then make him do the running (literally, in Father Barrys case). The difference between the two is that the priest believes in what he says, while the investigators merely say whatever is necessary to coax information out of a witness. What I find so interesting in this is that while Kazan certainly would not agree with what I have said, there seem to be so many startling comparisons and links to be made between the organisations in the film.

When we see Father Barry at the docks sniffing around, right after seeing the mobsters, we immediately see the investigators. We see from the picture in Johnny Friendlys bar that there is some link between the criminals and politicians (and, therefore, the state); the police, enforcers of state legislation, are also linked to crime, as they accept the moral code of the mob: that you dont rat. And the courtroom scene is a union of the state and church (the legitimate rackets) against the criminal.

I think that the overall picture here is that there are elements of truth in the statement in question. The politics of On the Waterfront seem very confused, because while we have the positive character of Terry Malloy, and the other forces that influence him do not seem to be acting in his benefit, only the corrupt union boss is called to question. This would be more acceptable if Kazan portrayed Father Barry and the investigators in a more romantic way, but his realism is stunning. The two were shown as they are, human, self interested, and ruthless.

Yet they are still sided with. It is a very good film, but this just confuses me and seems out of joint with other elements of the film. High Noon is a two-dimensional film, creating an entirely fictional universe in which the hero is always unquestionably right. These two films are far from ambiguous, instead seeming to be a clear statement of an unflinching belief in doing the right thing. There is discrepancy between the two views on what right is, and in what should one place faith, but there is little internal conflict in the films.

World War II marked a wide dividing line between the old and the new in American society and the nations literature (The World Book Encyclopedia 427) . When world War II ended there was a pent up desire that had been postponed due to the war. Post war America brought about a time when it seemed that every young man was doing the same thing, getting a job, settling down and starting a family. America was becoming a nation of consumers. One group that was against conforming to this dull American lifestyle was referred to as Beatniks. The Beats or Beatniks condemned middle class American life as morally bankrupt.

They praised individualism as the highest human goal(The World Book Encyclopedia 428). This perspective was present in poetry and literature through out the beat movement. One of the most important works produced during the beat movement was Jack Kerouacs On The Road. In the novel Jack Kerouacs alter ego Sal Paradise represents the American man who realizes he doesnt want to conform to societies pressures but still hasnt realized what it is exactly he wants to do. He is a man who has very little direction and is very much lost in the world as he knows it. Kerouac seems to be constantly trying to escape.

In examining the novel one might wonder what is Kerouac escaping and by what means does he do so? Kerouac used two means of escape through out the novel and through out his life. His first means of escape was his constant travel. He traveled from east to west, New York to San Francisco and stopped everywhere in between. He made this trip over and over, constantly on the road. The simple title of the novel exemplifies Kerouacs ongoing need to travel. When he and his friends got tried of traveling east to west they traveled north to south, driving all the way down to Mexico City.

His travels gave him the opportunity to be an outsider with no worries. He was able to witness and observe all that there was to offer throughout the country. While journeying across the states, staying in small towns for no more than a few nights, Kerouac was able to obtain a life with no commitment or responsibility. Even if he was to make some sort of commitment to one of his many girls along the way, it wasnt unlike him to just pick up and leave. After all the only thing people around seemed to know about him was that he liked to drink.

This leads to the other form of escape Kerouac used, the alteration of reality. Kerouac would mentally alter his perception of reality through the use of drugs and alcohol. I was getting drunk and didnt care; everything was fine(Kerouac 35). To him everything in life was fine as long as he was drunk. He was beginning to drink heavily, and to drink whiskey and gin instead of just beer (Nicosia 96). That was only the beginning of his disillusionment. Jack began taking benzedrine and smoking marijuana(Nicosia 102). Having the means by which he escapes, the question still remains what is Kerouac trying to escape?

In order to understand this we must explore some of Jacks personal issues. A issue concerning Kerouac that is very often eluded to but never really spoken about in On The Road is his possible homosexuality. While Jack never actually came out about his sexuality, his close friends would often witness Jacks participation in endless rounds of sex with both men and women(Nicosia 102). Kerouacs homosexual tendencies caused an overriding psychological conflict: Kerouac was gay but despised homosexuals. Jack talked incessantly about all the big old fags he knew(Nicosia 493).

Even though Kerouac would have homosexual encounters, he felt a private guilt over his homosexual feelings. In an attempt to ease his guilt Jack would denounce homosexuality, saying that gay sex is not in my line(Nicosia 142). Jack was obviously ashamed of his homosexual experiences and fought all his life against the label queer(Nicosia 154). In 1945, he wrote a letter to Allen Ginsberg trying to resolve the issue of his possible homosexuality. He stated that the physical aspects of gay sex were disgusting; and though the desire for it might exist in his subconscious, there was no way of determining that for sure(Nicosia 142).

His apologetic tone in the letter showed that even though Kerouac wasnt entirely sure of his sexual identity, he still felt guilty that the mere thought of homosexuality had entered his feelings. This persistent guilt for his constant homosexual needs ultimately affected his ability to sustain close relationships. Kerouacs poor ability to maintain relationships is evident through out his life as well as in On The Road. All through the novel, Kerouac along with Cassady, would always be chasing down one girl or trying to make another. This very much mirrored his real life where Kerouac married three times.

Jacks first wife, Frankie Edith Parker, ended the marriage because of jacks relentless adultery. Kerouacs next marriage was to Joan Haverty Kerouac, who eventually ended the marriage saying they had made a commitment to the marriage but not to each other(Charters 357). His third and final wife was Stella Sampas Kerouac, who was told by Jack on his death bed, Stella, I love you for only the second time since they had been married. The fact that Jack couldnt commit himself to one woman at a time shows his insecurity and uncertainty towards his sexuality.

This uncertainty shows that Jack is obviously unsure about himself. It may just be that all of Kerouacs running and bingeing throughout the country was actually an expedition to find himself. All his life he may not have been escaping but rather discovering. Kerouac needed to see the way the rest of America was in an effort to find what he was. The human experience is about self-discovery. It is a universal theme which Kerouac draws upon in his classic beat work On the Road , Kerouac simply recorded this journey at a turning point in America.

Wallace’s fictional narrative Infinite Jest is an epic approach to the solicitous and addictive nature of humanity. The novel’s diverse characters demonstrate both individually and collectively the fixations and obsessions that bind humanity to the pitfalls of reality and provide a fertile groundwork for the semiotic explanation of addictive behavior. Although Wallace may have actualized the concept of the “addicted gaze” to the literal or physical response to the viewing of Incandenza’s coveted film the Entertainment [Infinite Jest], it is manifested symbolically throughout the novel in the distractions of its characters.

Nihilism

It would appear that Wallace has chosen society’s most frequently rejected and denounced individuals as the vehicle for the narrative search for and preservation of the ultimate fix, which is illustrated by the obsession for Incandenza’s film. At the same time and despite their diversity and distinctions, these individuals will ultimately represent the inextricable and covert characteristics of nihilistic behavior.

School-aged malcontents, drug addicts and the physically challenged all attempt to get a hold of a copy of the film and experience its pleasures at any cost. Ironically, it was the film maker James Incadenza’s habit to regularly observe the depravation of Boston’s crowded street milieus, where “everyone goes nuts and mills, either switching or watching” (620). It is not surprising therefore that he should develop a film that would be perceived as the panacea to the entertainment addictions of the masses.

Figurative Transgendering

Wallace devotes a substantial amount of space to the illustration of the contradictions of gender, where the adoption of gender behavior or symbols contrary to the character’s true gender can be analyzed. The occasion of Hugh Steeply in drag as he met with Marathe to discuss the emergence of the Entertainment’s cartridge may have served the literal purpose of the agent arriving incognito however his devotion to applying feminine mannerisms appear to go above and beyond the call of duty (90). In spite of his practice, Marathe nevertheless describes Steely’s appearance as “less like a women than a twisted parody of womanhood” (93).

Wallace also presents the steroid-driven objectives of a number of the female tennis player’s like Ann Kittenplan. “who at twelve-and-a-have looks like a Belorussian shot putter” (330). It may be fair to assume that their desire to acquire a manly physique is not entirely confined to the advantages it offers on the tennis court. In his notes, Wallace suggests that the “gratification of pretty much every physical need is either taken care of or prohibited” by the tennis academy (984). Clearly, the administration of steroids or any other drug of choice is prohibited by the ETA considering the wide scale purchase of “clean” urine for the academy’s drug testing.

An Endless Jest

Perhaps the most significant example of the addicted gaze is demonstrated not so much in the stationary and fixated attention to satisfying one’s obsession but in the demand for the continuous pursuit of it. The halfway house/rehab center, Ennet House, represents the often ineffectual and delusional pursuit of ridding oneself of addiction. A clear example of the deceptive environment of rehab is demonstrated by Lenz’s use of cocaine while at the facility. For many of the residents like Lenz, the limitations at Ennet House are often so unbearable that its residents are driven to the use of drugs in order to preserve their sanity. Ironically, Lenz’s stash of cocaine works as a contrived temptation that undermines any true potential for ridding himself of his addiction.

Conclusion

Wallace’s Infinite Jest is a chaotic amalgam of humanity and the similarly depraved behaviors that they demonstrate in the pursuit of amusement and satisfaction. Although the restrictions to their attainment are clearly represented by the physical entities of the Academy, the Ennet House and the wheelchair, they are also fostered by them.

If Incandenza’s “Accomplice” is any indication of the content of the Entertainment, it only reinforces the contention that human nature includes the inherent desire to not only view the depravity and debauchery of human behavior but even more, to participate in it. There is little to ponder why so many of Wallace’s characters must depend on their mind and body altering drugs of choice, if not to influence how they are viewed by others then at the very least to make more palatable their own perceptions of self.

John L.’s monologue delivered at one of the AA meetings illustrates the destructive implications of either reasoning: “all the masks come off and you all of a sudden see the Disease as it really isand see what owns you, what’s become what you are -” (347).

The Matchmaker has four main characters Mrs. Dolly Levi, Mr. Horace Vandergelder, Cornelius Hackl, and Mrs. Irene Molloy. Each character has his or her own personality, but one thing that each character has in common is that they want some type of adventure or change in their life. How they go about these changes they each do differently. Mrs. Dolly Levi is a lady who likes to get what she wants. She has ambitions and likes to live life to its fullist. These are all positive characteristics about Mrs. Levi. It is how she goes about getting what she wants that makes her a interesting character.

Mrs. Levi enjoys getting into other peoples business and telling them how to conduct their lives. Even though that fits her job description as a matchmaker, she goes about doing it in a very manipulitive way. I, Mrs. Dolly Levi, intend to make the most of my life. I want to spend lots of money and enjoy doing it. I want to marry Mr. Vandergelder and I will lie and cheat in order to do so. Without money I am not happy and I want to be happy, that is why I will marry Mr. Vandergelder. I think that Mr. Vandergelder is a nice old man on the inside once you get past his grumpy facade.

He needs a little excitement in his life and I will give it to him. Mr. Horace Vandergelder is a stingy, cruel and miserable old man. He wants things done his way or no way at all. If things are not the way he wants them they are wrong and foolish. Horace has all this money and has nothing to spend it on. He just wants to control his nieces life. For the first time it seems, in this play, he realizes he may want to take a little risk in his life. I, Mr. Horace Vandergelder, want to get married. I am willing to take the first risk that I have taken in a long time and get married.

I need a little bit of order in my house and that is what a wife will do for me. I like Mrs. Levi, mainly because I am paying her to find a suitible wife for me. I love my niece Ermengarde but she is a fool for wanting to marry Ambrose, a man with no money. I do not understand why she would want to marry a poor artist. Cornelius Hackl is a very spontaneous character who is the most willing to take large risks in his life. He is now thirty-three and realizes that his life is not moving as fast as he would like for it to.

This is why he chose to go to New York and do something about it and it sure paid off for him. Cornelius is a leader and not afraid to take chances. He feels a great need for adventure in his life and takes Barnaby with him. I, Cornelius, am getting too old to have the same position that I have had at work for so long now. I feel that I need a change in my life, an adventure. Even if I need to risk everything I have, which is not much, I am willing to do it to get something more out of my life. I am really fed up with Mr.

Vandergelder always bossing me around and never showing me any gratification for it. He does not appreciate anything that I have ever done for him. Barnaby is one of my best friends and it is my responsibility to show him how to have a good time and make life a little adventerous. Mrs. Molloy is the kind of women that I have always wanted, I dream about marrying her. Mrs. Irene Molloy, is another character who is searching for some kind of adventure in her life. Mrs. Molloy, like Mr. Vandergelder, is looking to get married. She says she wants to marry a husband who will have good fights with her.

Mrs. Molloy despite having strange views on marriage is a very nice lady who was willing to help Barnaby and Cornelius when they were in trouble. I, Mrs. Irene Molloy, want to find a man for marriage. I do not care if I love the man or not. All that I want right now is to get out of the millinery business. I believe that all millineries are seen as wicked women and I do not want to be seen like that anymore. I do not love Mr. Vandergelder, but I would marry him for his money. There is something about Cornelius that I happen to find very charming.

We humans are all storytellers, or story-listeners, or both. That’s a crucial element of our humanity. Passing down the generations, constantly changing under the pressure of altering circumstances, stories link humanity together in chains of narrative. Odysseus sets out on the wine-dark sea, fights ferocious monsters, endures endless hardships, and eventually finds his way home; and so does Tim OBrien in The Things They Carried; and so do many thousands of other heroes conceived in the 2,900 years between Odysseus and OBrien.

Storytelling has been, since the earliest times, the way people have ordered their reality. It is the fundamental use of language, that which creates and defines reality. As James Baldwin said in his essay, If Black Language Isnt a Language, Then Tell Me What Is? , People evolve a language in order to describe and thus control their circumstances, or in order not to be submerged by a reality that they cannot articulate. . . What joins all languages, and all men [sic], is the necessity to confront life, in order, not inconceivably, to outwit death (37).

Baldwins understanding of the use of language can be extended to the purpose of storytelling. By telling a story, not only do we create reality, we defeat death. This concept of stories as constructing reality is not unique to Baldwin. In Narrative Means To Therapeutic Ends, by Michael White and David Epston, the same ideas of storytelling are enumerated, In striving to make sense of life, persons face the task of arranging their experiences of events in sequences across time in such a way as to arrive at a coherent account of themselves and the world around them. . . This account can be referred to as a story (47)

Ours has been the storytelling century: never before have so many of us had the chance to absorb so many stories. Earlier centuries heard stories face-to-face, figured them out from pictures on the walls of caves or cathedrals, read them in manuscripts, and finally (from the 15th century onward) read them in printed books. The 19th century industrialized storytelling through popular novels and magazines. The 20th century made stories pervasive. Now, they are installed as constant elements in our lives, delivered through movies, radio, television and the Internet, all of them machines of narrative.

The 21st century will find new ways of telling the old stories and developing new ones. So far, no one claims excellence for literary experiments on the Internet-but then, the novel at its birth was thought to be frivolous and the movies, when new, were no more than a toy. But there is a danger in this swell of story-telling. There was a time when the story-teller was revered. Story-tellers were considered to be prophets, shamans, visionaries. Today, there are two kinds of storytellers, the money makers, and the outcasts.

The outcasts, like Thomas Builds-the-Fire in Sherman Alexies novel, The Lone Ranger and Tonto fistfight in heaven, are telling the stories of the dispossessed. The stories which do not get told in Hollywood, at least, they rarely get told. We might have expected that humanity would at some point have resisted this swelling ocean of stories, would have been repelled by so much narration, so many ingenious plots, so many satisfying resolutions. But no: it appears we can never get enough. We thirst after stories of all kinds-epics, tragedies, comedies, anecdotes, parables. We are insatiable.

Many of us are so enchanted we go back to the same story again and again, searching for fresh meaning. Some people watch Casablanca every chance they get. I used to read The Chronicles of Narnia until I wore the pages out, and Ive already burned through four copies of Shogun. There are those who believe Christmas incomplete without A Christmas Carol by Charles Dickens. Given a chance, we convert real tragedy into stories and then makes stories into parables, or life-lessons, which we use as the beginnings of wisdom. The Vietnam War was a tragic time in American history.

Boys lost their innocence, lost their lives, and the country was split down the middle because of it. Then, in our stories, it became a metaphor for all wars, for all loss and schisms. It became a profound symbol of greed, violence and the danger accompanying technology. It tells the tale of love, of fear and of isolation. Its not the war that did this, though. It was the memory, the souls of those who fought the war. Mark Turner of the University of Maryland, in his book, The Literary Mind, tells us bluntly: “Narrative imagining-story-is the fundamental instrument of thought.

Rational capacities depend upon it” (37). He believes that storytelling is our chief means of explaining the world to one another and ourselves, and the principal way we form intelligence. It is essential to human cognition. Stories teach the brain how to work. Turner grounds his theory in the neuroscience of Gerald Edelman, who argues that the mind uses overlapping systems (he calls them “maps”) of neurons to pull together scattered bits of sensation and thought. Stories are the forces that set these neurons firing and connecting, and the connections that result become the architecture of human intelligence.

Those who spend long hours reading stories to their children are clearly on the right track-and so is the child who demands the same story over and over again. A neural path is being carved through the mind; perhaps the child gets it right by instinct. In the sciences of the mind there is something even more compelling to be said about narrative: Sigmund Freud became the most influential thinker of the century because he told effective stories, and retold the stories of others in ways that elaborated on his own patterns of thought.

In one sense, Freud ended the 20th century as a failure: armies of analysts and theorists can now demonstrate that he often exaggerated his results, that he failed to understand what some of his patients were telling him (about sexual abuse, for instance), that his rate of helping patients get better was not high, and that there is no way (nor will there ever be a way) to prove his theories by anything remotely like a scientific method.

As a result, a generation of psychiatrists has scorned or ignored him. Even so, he has conquered. Go the movies, pick up a novel, switch on a TV talk show, and there is no doubt who is in charge, whose concepts provide the underpinning of everyday discourse.

Without honor, life is meaningless. According to the folktale, Green Willow, honor is essential to an individual of Japanese decent. This tale explains what the people of this country value and how they function. As the story unfolds, so do the components that form what Japan is. The background contains the codes and classes in which they live. The plot draws our attention, however it is the elements of the culture that is taken into account. In addition, it presents a conflict that is dealt with by society everyday. That is, being distracted from our tasks. In the act of facing that conflict, good judgment should be used.

The decision of the main character reveals what arises when you do not. Honor was used as evidence or a symbol of distinction in this culture. The people remained the right to preserve their good name. This code that they emphasize in their country is denominated as the bushido. An example of applying this system to their lives is in the manner of how they conform to their classes. Each person received and exalted title or rank. A samurai warrior, for instance, could not surpass the law by marrying “a [mere] peasant girl” without the permission of his daimyo.

In contrast, the samurai would ask the parents for her hand in marriage and they would respond with gratitude. The warrior is “a person of too a degree for [them] to consider refusing the honor of [his] request. ” The hospitality of the Japanese people is also accredited in the folktale. It is not often that a person would be taken in and accommodated. Despite that common belief, the parents of Green Willow shelter and aid the samurai on his journey. This act of kindness shows that this is a nation with pure and humble intentions.

It is evident in the old couples’ appreciation for Tomotada’s “condescending to overlook their daughter’s peasant origins” and offered her as “a gift, a humble handmaid” to him. Furthermore, this tale manifested a true dilemma that our society goes up against daily. Responsibilities are supposed to come before one’s own personal gain. If a person becomes enraptured in their own self-seeking task and overlook their duties, that person will eventually suffer for it. Japan regards honor as something you have to strive for. It must be earned.

The main character broke the rules of his the country had already established and paid for it in innumerable ways. This version of how Japan operates day to day exposes our community to something different. This “something” may be what we want our culture to adapt to. The story voiced an entity that influences our own lives. Moreover, somehow we need to relinquish the ‘distractions’ and do what is required of us before we go ahead do what we desire. There are just far too many issues we need to resolve first considering that we all want to live in a calm and composed world.

Literature that children are exposed to often gives them ideas and provokes them to think and draw their own conclusions about things, it also provides a necessary escape from reality for them. This is why censoring children’s books can be rather destructive to their developing minds. If the tools with which kids are given to sharpen their minds are banned, then a little part of their education is stolen from them. With every theft of knowledge the future is too robbed of possibility, and these days books are being pulled off of school shelves faster than ever.

From 1991 to 1994 the number of formal demands for the removal of books from public and school libraries has increased by more than fifty percent (Staples, 1). ” At this rate America’s libraries will soon have devastatingly small children’s sections without any real literary content. Without people in our society who can think and react for themselves than things cannot change, whether the change is for the best or the worst, life would become very repetitive. Parents are not alone in the battle against questionable reading material.

There are many religious groups who make it their personal mission to rid America’s libraries of books they see as damaging. One such group is the Christian Coalition and Citizens for Excellence in Education, who print lists with intentions of censoring the books on them. What is it in children’s books that adults find so threatening? Parents often object to strong or degrading words and names, or ideas and events that promote satanic, anti-Christian, and witchcraft themes.

Although these words and beliefs are something that nobody would want their child partaking in, it helps them distinguish right from wrong, and shows them the strength that such beliefs and words can hold. Surprisingly many of the books that are being banned, are also considered classic children’s novels. Frequently banned titles include The Catcher in the Rye, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, and Little Red Riding Hood. These stories include most of the traits that parents and other groups find questionable.

The language used and ‘frightening’ events in the story have gotten the aforementioned stories pulled from many libraries across America. While the language in Harry Potter is neither offensive nor harsh, the story about a young wizard and his adventures at Hogwarts is considered satanic and evil by many adults, and school districts. Although the book does in fact deal with wizardry and sorcery of an unearthly nature, it has very clear characterizations of good and evil. Many school districts however do not care about good and evil characterizations.

Their feeling is that if a certain idea is expressed in a book, the school is responsible for teaching it to that child. The reasons for censoring a book range from having satanic content to anti family values. The censors feel that wizardry is a threat to their children, so in fear of a book they probably have not read, they just decide to ban it, and save the hassle of reviewing it in the school board. Profanity is another major reason that schools are pulling books from the shelves at an alarming rate.

Words that are demeaning or considered destructive and the books containing them are a sure target for many of the religious groups who support the censoring of children’s literature. Words such as “good god, crap, hell, and Christ” are examples of the type which might face censorship. In actuality a child in an American society hears words such as these more frequently than they read them. At places like school lunchrooms and playgrounds the dialogue is often very hurtful and directed at one’s peers. Is all of this because of what a child read in English class? That idea is absurd.

The television is a much better place for hearing derogatory comments. Robin Brancato, an author, said about the profanity in her book, these words and what they mean are a true and unavoidable part of life, and that she, as an author, is “interested in portraying life as it really is. ” Children are not fools. They understand what is going on around them and would simply not buy into a plot that had everybody happily holding hands across the world. Its unnatural, every one in the world has seen conflict, on the national scale and at home. Sexual content also tends to get books pulled off the shelves.

Books dealing with homosexuality, and even sexual development are targeted. Daddy’s Roommate by Michael Wilhoite is about a boy living with his gay father. While this would be an uncomfortable situation to live in, it does help children be more accepting towards all people. Classic novels such as Huckleberry Finn are also being pulled from the curriculum at many schools because of the use of the word nigger. In Kenosha, Wisconsin, the local school district was asked by a member of the NAACP to have the book “be removed from the school cirriculum because of the term ‘nigger’ (Miner, 7).

Basically what the review board in Kenosha decided was that if the individual teacher was not comfortable with reading the book in class than they could chose an alternative. Although this is a very derogatory word, the novel is a classic one. Almost everybody has read it at one time or another. Almost A few people that might have missed this timeless classic however might be some devout born again Christians. Groups such as the Christian Coalition, and The Committee for Excellence in Education often recommend that books be banned.

Other groups include Concerned Women for America, the American Family Association, and The Family Research Council (Miner, 4). These groups object to Harry Potter and other books for mainly religious reasons. A spokesperson for another religious group, Focus on the Family, said that Harry Potter was just “pagan material- witches and warlocks and spells and seances and this kind of stuffThis is about what’s right and wrong and pushing religious symbolism (Terwilliger, 2). ” Although no where in Rowling’s novel is there any religious symbolism, parents continue to complain.

If not about pushing Satanism on their children, than about the morals contained in the book. Karen Jo Gounaud, founder and president of Family Friendly Libraries says about Potter “It’s a matter of who has the best magic, not who is overcoming evil with goodby self sacrificing (2). ” The FFL website is full of anti Potter propaganda, saying that kids who read it will become part of the Wicca church. While nothing is impossible, it is doubtful that a child who has read a Harry Potter book will, upon the books completion, begin to sacrifice livestock. Or even start believing in witchcraft for that matter.

One of the main draws to the book for children is that it offers them an escape from reality. “It’s really fun reading books that take you into a different world (Wilgoren, 5). ” The book is a separate world for them and no matter how hard children try, they’re not going to be able to cast any spells on people. The only danger that Harry Potter represents is to video game makers, who are losing profit with every page turned. Between the pages of Rowling’s first novel in the Harry Potter series, Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone, lies a story with brave heroes and evil villains.

Instead of teaching anti-Christian and immoral values, as according to some parents, it teaches that evil sometimes lurks in the least expected places and good can hide much the same. For instance in the end of the novel it is Quirrell who is responsible for letting Voldemort inhabit his body, nobody suspected the quiet, reserved Quirrell to be so hungry for power. Also the suspected villain Professor Snape turns out to be the one who saved Harry’s life in the Quiddich match. Another positive message is that studying helps in real life.

It is Hermoine who often saves the day with her immense knowledge of magical spells, and characteristics of plants. All of her knowledge comes from having enough self-discipline to study hard and remember things she reads. The religious groups against the novel have focused only on the fact that the book deals with magic, and probably have not bothered reading past the cover. If they had, they would begin to see that many of the values and morals that they hold sacred are shared in Rowling’s book. The villainous characters in the book range from the typical school yard bully, Draco Malfoy, to the purely evil Voldemort.

Although certain scenes in The Sorcerers Stone are frightening, they tend to deal with fictitious events, such as Qurriell drinking unicorn blood in the dark forest. This and the final encounter with Voldemort were by far the more frightening scenes, but is a child really going to believe that underneath turbans are evil monster heads? Or that there are such things as centaurs? These ideas are almost as crazy as believing that Harry Potter is Satan’s medium for access into our world, or that Harry Potter is going to cause a nation of children to join the Wiccan church.

With every generation has come some controversial progressions, and this is just one of them. With today’s loud music, violence in films and video games, parents should be relieved that their children are turning to books that stir their imaginations, and at the same time strengthen their minds. While most parents are probably ecstatic that their kids are reading anything, it is the few that feel their values are at stake who force teachers and librarians to remove controversial books from the shelves.

Two men. Two men alike in two different stories, in two different time periods, characterized in ways that fit their culture and the social structure of their audience. Efficient changes in characters tend to help the reader or the viewer better understand and relate to modern day circumstances. Ulysses Everett McGill in O Brother, Where Art Thou? is the most effective adaptation because he retains certain core qualities from the original character of Odysseus at the same time as he is modernized.

Significant, core characteristics in both Odysseus and Everett that are essential in making the adaptation between Odysseus and Everett effective and essential in keeping the story alluring are the ambition, the boldness, the drive, and the leadership qualities they possess. In every story, there are always those characters that have this persona, and most of the time having these qualities is the rudder that steers the plotline. Being bold and ambitious causes Odysseus and Everett to be extremely willful. Ambitious people have a distinct plan they want to stick by, and they want that plan to go their way.

Any story needs this kind of character so that the story line stays strong. Just as it was in Greek times, in more modern times, an audience still has a natural focus on these types of characters because of their potent personalities and hard-driven hearts. Even after hundreds of years, strong, courageous personalities are still, and will probably always be, an inspiration to people. If Everett in O Brother, Where Art Thou? had not had these same qualities, he would not have pulled off the same effect that Odysseus did in The Odyssey.

The story would not have even been the same, since one of the main focuses of The Odyssey is Odysseus iron-willed drive that eventually gets him home. Everetts obsession to get home to his wife and kids as well as Odysseus passion to do the same is what made this story so strong. If either character had been passive or unassertive, both stories would have lost a lot of its power and effect. Being a king calls for the job of being a leader, and since Odysseus ambitious aspirations are what get him home, it becomes quite an inspirational story to anyone who reads it.

Odysseus was quite a leader, and in an authoritative position with his crew members, just as Everett was between him, and his two crew members, Pete and Delmar. It is obvious that the drive and ambition in these two characters make them the decision-makers of their group, which is also a strong, effective feature. Odysseus shows all these qualities and more in trying to lead his army back to Ithaca. He shows great leadership and wisdom when encountering such obstacles as the sirens and the Cyclops, just as Everett also takes control in leading him and his friends through barriers along the way.

The will power in Everett and Odysseus plays a huge part in making them the most effective adaptation. Another important quality that has been adapted and modernized is Odysseus and Everetts susceptibility to temptation. Though their aggression and determination can certainly get them far, it is natural and obvious that not everything will go as planned, especially when tested with difficult situations. Temptation occasionally gets both Odysseus and Everett into trouble, but what kind of story would the audience be interested in if there were not a few things that got them into trouble?

Odysseus is often tempted by other women (Circe, Calypso, etc. ) to satisfy both his and their sexual needs. It may have been more accepted for the men to do that sort of thing in that era than in the time period of O Brother, Where Art Thou? , but it still breaks a trust and loyalty issue. Though Everett is also slightly tempted by the sirens in the movie, just as Odysseus was tempted by Circe and Calypso, he does not commit adultery quite like Odysseus does, which was good for the story in that the main reason for Everetts journey was to get his wife back (p. 212, line 33-37).

And though Odysseus was tempted by these women, his heart is still with Penelope (p. 212, line 37-41). Also, both characters are at some point distracted by food and hunger issues that get them into trouble. Odysseus, in the Cyclops chapter, gets in a dilemma over Polyphemus cheese, and Everett, at the picnic with Big Dan, seems to be more focused on what he is eating to realize that his friend has just been knocked down (pp 218-220, line 253-305). This particular weakness in each character is a very important part to keep because it shows that not all heroes of a story are perfect.

Everyone can fall, and everyone can mess up, and it is not something that was only significant to show in Greek times. Everett retains a weakness factor from Odysseus that portrays a valuable, imperfect quality to show that not all people are faultless. Every audience likes conflict, temptation, sin, and imperfection. That is what makes it so appealing and that is what makes the characters most successful, especially when overcoming that shortcoming in the end.

One other effective adaptation where Everett is modernized from Odysseus in O Brother, Where Art Thou? s the sign of powerlessness Everett showed around his wife. Odysseus remained pretty consistent in staying in that audacious, confident, leadership position, over his wife. The whole twenty years Penelope was without Odysseus she felt that things were not in control. He was not there to place some boundaries on the suitors, though if he had been there, she would not have had suitors to begin with. She depended on him to take care of her and the house, which shows what kind of man Odysseus is. He was the man of the house and he brought home the bread.

Generally, men rule over women, husbands rule over their wives, and this was even more evident in the time period of the Odyssey. For example, when Odysseus has to leave Penelope after Telemachus was born to go to war in Troy, it is implied that Penelope is submissive to him by letting him go and understanding why he has to go, rather than saying or doing anything to try and hold him back from what he needs to do. Everett also carries those same audacious, confident, leadership qualities all throughout the movie, until he sees his wife again.

Penny seems to know what she wants and demands it, and one cannot condone that Everett, though very strong and ambitious, is much a slave to her needs. Everett spends so much of his energy trying to gain his wifes trust back that he would do nearly anything to get her and his daughters back. Before Everett and his band sing up on stage, he tries to get the attention of Penny by saying, I wanna be what you want me to bea perfect example of how Everett just wants to cater to her needs. In no way does Odysseus demonstrate this side to Penelope.

When Penny says that she wont marry Everett unless he gets their old wedding ring back, is another example from the movie that shows Everetts servitude to Penny. This part makes the adaptation of Odysseus to Everett the most effective one in that it shows the change in the role of women over time. Though women are still somewhat portrayed as people that submit to their husbands, the rise of women and their roles in society have greatly changed. Today, most women stand up for themselves, get jobs, and become more than just a housewife.

Penelope, as sweet as she is, is very passive, a follower, a human-doormat so to speak, but that was the role of women at that time. It was not appropriate for women to act much differently back then, when it is very socially acceptable for women to act in such a way today. This change in character, this somewhat surrendering attitude that Everett displays towards Penny also provides more comedy for the film, whereas The Odyssey was not necessarily a typical comedic novel, nor was that what the audience during that time period was exposed to.

A contemporary audience is more often exposed to humor, and that is what this transformation of the strong-willed Odysseus to the strong-willed, weakened-by-Penny, Everett does to a contemporary audience, especially taking it into consideration that Everett probably would not admit to groveling to his wife. The men enjoy laughing at the situation, while women enjoy relating to it, giving off the most effective adjustment to a modern day audience.

Some would say that Odysseus to Everett is not the most effective adaptation of The Odyssey in O Brother, Where Art Thou? They would argue that the change from Penelope to Penny is the best adaptation because neither character retains core qualities of the other, and that perhaps is a more effective adaptation. There is more of a difference in character between Penny and Penelope than in Everett and Odysseus. Penny and Penelope are quite opposite and the extreme change between these characters could be looked at as more effective for this very reason.

The modernization from Penelope to Penny could be looked at as being more effective to the viewer, more of a change in character to fit modern circumstances. From what has been shown though, it seems that Odysseus and Everett still play the stronger role in actually retaining some core qualities of each other. Their characters are more appealing, more captivating, more interesting, simply for the reason that their personality calls for that kind of attention.

Even though it seems like Penny has a little more control over Everett than Penelope does over Odysseus, Everetts qualities in Odysseus, the wit, charm, confidence, and ambition, are still more attractive to the eye. The main character of a story usually has more influence over an audience because they are, in fact, the characters that are shown the most, have the most lines, and carry the most responsibility, thus making the adaptation a more efficient one.

Overall, evidence shows that the adaptation between Odysseus in The Odyssey and Everett in O Brother, Where Art Thou? is the most affective adaptation. Their motivated, striving personalities, their vulnerability to temptation, and their way of reacting to the role of women, all display perfect examples of how an old story can be correspondingly transformed into a more modern one, adjusting certain qualities according to the time and the audience, and keeping core ones.

Everett definitely portrays many of the same qualities that Odysseus does, being in a leadership position, fearless, and confident. This is an important concept to consider in that modernizing a character can help the view better connect with the person and better understand the importance of such an adaptation, perfect for the time. It becomes clearer and more evident that character adjustments and modernizations are the rudder that steers the remake of an original.