Naturalism Project 2-28-11

I had forgotten that you said blog everyday about what we were doing in class, so here is the basic rundown. I am working on the subject of Naturalism in areas other than literature. I actually found a good number of works to support the claim that Naturalism is not specifically in Literature. For example, Naturalism is also found in music, art, and philosophy. And that is what I've been doing.

Naturalism Challenge 2/16/11

       What I primarily worked on for this first day of the challenge was determining a more concrete definition of Naturalism. I found a very good book on the subject entitled American Literary Naturalism: A Divided Stream by Charles Child Walcutt. I spent a good portion of the period going though this book, and what I got from it (as well as a few other sources that I looked at) was that Naturalism contains a large amount of science in it. The quote that I find most useful is as follows: "It [naturalism] reflects at once our faith in science and our doubts about the modern scientific world." I have to say I was a bit confused when I started delving into this idea. I was thinking that naturalism was more of a philosophical movement not scientific. Anyways, that is where I stand in my research so far.

An Episode of War 2/14/11

        When I first read the book, my first impression was "wow, this is completely pointless. Why are we reading this..." I assumed that there was probably some important element that I was completely missing that would be addressed in class, and, surprise surprise, that is exactly what happened.
        I actually find this story to be very interesting when looking at the structure of it. The whole philosophy of Realism and Naturalism fascinates me. Realism is looking and describing. I was particularly fond of a description that someone used today where they described realism as almost a story in slow-motion. I find this to be an accurate description. It seems as though a story written with realism in mind does slow down. The author notes very small details and the reactions between people, but it does little in the form of dissecting the information that it so thoroughly states. This is where Naturalism enters the scene and the clarity on the matter disintegrates. Naturalism, in essence, describes the description that Realism presents. It is probably not a unfair assessment to say you cannot have naturalism without already having an aspect of realism already present. It's kind of like pancakes. You can eat pancakes on there own (realism), but you can't eat the syrup (naturalism) by itself. However, the syrup makes the pancakes much better when you add it to the pancakes.

Daisy Miller

Here are the two questions that you wanted us to address.
1. Describe daisy Miller- character description.

2. Why is Daisy Miller looked down on by the European family

1. Daisy Miller represents a very interesting idea in this book. She is an atypical woman in the world at the time. Unlike other women, she is not timid and shy to speak to strangers, yet she is not a particularly flirtatious person. She is simply a social person. She enjoys the company of others but doesn't subscribe to their world. She is very much her own person. I see Daisy Miller fitting into our modern world much better than in her own.

2. I find the reaction of Mrs. Costello to Daisy's family to be one of the most interesting parts of this story. Getting straight to it, I think that Winterbourne and his family might represent the typical upper class European family. This is along the same liens of what I said in class. Daisy's family represents the typical American family coming from the gilded age; They are ridiculously rich and in many ways are similar to the European families. However, These two families just do not approve of each other. Mrs. Costello verbally disapproves of the Americans, and Mrs. Miller's lack of acknowledgment of Winterbourne is a good indicator of her disapproval of European families. I think that that  mutual dislike might a symbol by the author of something, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Any ideas?

Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge 2/7/11

        I found this to be a pretty thought-provoking story to say the least. As you touched upon in class, it gives a very interesting perspective to this common event. From day one, humans are trained to think of their "enemies" as simple beasts to be killed. They don't realize that their enemies are people too, and that they each share similar thoughts, emotions, and lives.

       This particular story puts us into the world of a wealthy plantation owner who decides to support the confederacy in his own way. The thing that struck me was that there is no escaping death. While perhaps this wasn't what the author wanting to portray at the time, it is the first thing that comes to my mind. Even the higher ups in society, the aristocracy, plantation owners, nobility, etc. cannot escape death. It is the one thing money cannot fix. With the Unions statement of "we will kill anyone near our bridge no matter who they are," they were basically saying that whether peasantry or gentry, everyone is to be held accountable, and no one is immune to death.

To The Person Sitting In Darkness 2/6/11

        I found this story to be pretty obvious in its intent. It may be satire, but if it is then Twain does not do a very good job with it as far as I am concerned. He is criticizing Imperialism as a whole and condemns America's participation in it. At first I thought that the phrase "A Person Sitting in Darkness" might refer to the blacks that inhabited Africa, the most imperialistically active place in the world. After reading a ways into the story however, I came to realize that he wasn't referring to blacks, but to all "uncivilized beings" be them in China or Africa.

        I think the thing that infuriates Twain the most and is most responsible for his writing this story is not the fact that America was an Imperial power, but that they first claimed to liberate the prospective nation and then openly went against their word and put them back under foreign rule.

       So Twain refers to America as the Master of the game of imperialism (though I'm not sure why with the relatively few colonies they held), and he uses Great Britain (through the voice of Mr. Chamberlain) as the example that the US follows. I understand that Great Britain was the best at the capture of colonies, and everyone else at the time must have too. So why does Twain refer to America as the master of the game?

Emily Dickinson 2/2/11

        So far, Emily Dickinson wins the award for least interesting writer. It seems the majority of her poems are 3 lines long and more obscure than a Japanese haiku. As an isolated old hermit widow lady, she created some pretty strange stuff. I found a lot of her work to be depressing or lonely. Maybe this was specifically due to her situation in life as a hermit? To prove my point, I decided to pick an absolutely random Dickinson poem, guessing it would depress me. I was right. Here it is:

I REASON, earth is short, and anguish absolute. And many hurt; but what of that?  I reason, we could die: the best vitality cannot excel decay; but what of that?  I reason that in heaven somehow, it will be even, Some new equation given; but what of that?

Death, despair, anguish...That is Emily Dickinson.