Response to Course Material

I really like our discussions of Ceremony, although I'm not sure I like how we split into small groups to do annotations then share with the class. This makes me feel like there are passages of the text I'm just not well informed on even though this method saves time.

When we did the multiple choir practice on Froday, my group did a lot better than when we took that first test individually. That really encouraged me because I did so badly on that first practice.

I understood my first article I had to read for the forums, it was the essays by Silko, but the other article I read, Cultural Bsckground in Ceremony, I just didn't understand. The path of logic just didn't seem to be there, it felt like a bunch of small points that didn't especially work together. I really hope the next part of that assignment helps me understand my second article.

Close Reading

It was Romney's debate to lose, And he did by Todd Graham
http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/11/opinion/graham-debate-romney/index.html?hpt=op_t1

The juxtaposition of the first and second sentences make it clear that the author is going to criticise Mitt Romney, but make it clear that he is not an awful politician, rather the juxtaposition points toward some other failing.

At the end of the third paragraph, the author uses slang to solidify how very obvious Romney's failure was. Although the author uses fairly colloquial diction throughout, his use of slang is still noticeable. In the second to last paragraph the author uses the word heartland, this emphasizes the lack of wealth and makes Romney's bet offer look extremely stupid.

The author includes direct quotes from Romney and Gingrich, but Gingrich's quote compliments his debating skills, where Romney's quote is used as a criticism. The author does not make it clear which politician he would prefer in the presidency but his view of their debating skills is clear.

Open Prompt #6

            1994. In some works of literature, a character who appears briefly, or does not appear at all, is a significant presence. Choose a novel or play of literary merit and write an essay in which you show how such a character functions in the work. You may wish to discuss how the character affects action, theme, or the development of other characters. Avoid plot summary.

            People affect other people: that is a fact of life.  The play, An Inspector Calls, by J.B. Priestley examines how the little things a person does can affect others through his character, Eva Smith.  Although Eva Smith never appears in the play, the way the other characters react to her life defines them, as well as pushes Priestley’s belief that the British values often failed those at the bottom of the food chain.

            When Inspector Goole shows each member of the Birling family how they contributed to Eva Smith’s suicide, their reaction defines them.  The denial and anger that Mr. and Mrs. Birling exhibit how broken the old beliefs they hold are.  These reactions are clear indicators of how Priestley views the fading British social order.  Because Eva Smith was a working girl, Mr. and Mrs. Birling have no sympathy for her plight. Even after they discover she was pregnant with their grandchild, they are more upset that their son gave her money than themselves for the role they played in her death. The horror and guilt that plague Sheila and Eric Birling show the audience that there is still hope for them, the next generation.  How they reacted to Eva Smith’s death put them into categories, those who upheld the strict British social order, and those who dared to care for the less fortunate.

Eva Smith may not be real in the context of the play.  She is given multiple names and she never comes onto the stage.  The doubt of her existence only broadens Priestley’s message: Inspector Goole says, “…there are millions and millions and millions of Eva Smiths” (Priestley).   Eva Smith’s faceless character puts the Birling’s responsibility for her death on everyone who has ever hurt anyone.

Anyone could have been Eva Smith.  Society failed to help her.  Those who could help chose not to, and because of that she died.  The Birling family is defined by how they treated Eva Smith, a character who never appears on stage, yet Eva Smith’s anonymity aids Priestley’s in critiquing the all British values, and not just one family’s values.