Wednesday, May 6, 2009
meta for filler page
I chose to rewrite/rearrange this page because I think that the author throughout the book lacks displaying her feelings. Erin holds a lot of her feeling in. She has never actual said what she has ever thought and in this situation I think that she should have been more appalled at Noelene’s actions and decisions. Also I personally think that it’s very despicable that someone would deny some one an object with so much sentimental value because they decorated their living space around it. It seems that the people that seemed so close to Erin’s parents have become so materialistic and their character seemed to drop to the lowest levels.
madame bovary
Gustave Flaubert, uses the country setting establish values within his novel, Madame Bovary. In Madame Bovary, the country is a place of balance and chastity as to the city setting which is squalor and immodesty. This is shown through the changes in Emma’s character. The country setting affects the whole novel by
“Emma would, on the contrary, have preferred to have a midnight wedding with torches, but old Rouault could not understand such an idea. So there was a wedding at which forty-three persons were present, at which they remained sixteen hours at table, began again the next day, and to some extent on the days following” (pp.27).” “the brick front was just in a line with the street, or rather the road…on the right was the one apartment, that was both dining and sitting room…On the other side of the passage was Charles’ consulting-room, a little room about six paces wide, with a table, three chairs, and an office-chair…then, opening on the yard, where the stable was, came a large dilapidated room with a stove, now used as a wood-house, cellar, and pantry…the garden, longer that wide, ran between two mud walls with espaliered apricots, to a hawthorn hedge that separated it from the field…the first room was not furnished, but in the second…was a mahogany bedstead in an alcove with red drapery.” (pp.33-34) “before marriage she thought herself in love; but the happiness that should have followed this love not having come, she must, she thought, have been mistaken. And Emma tried to find out what one meant exactly in life by the words felicity, passion, rapture, that had seemed to her so beautiful in books.”(pp.35) “it was a substantial-looking farm. In the stables, over the top of the open doors, one could see great cart-horses quietly feeding from the new racks. The sheepfold was long, the barn was high, with walls smooth as your hand…the courtyard sloped upwards, planted with trees set out symmetrically, and the chattering noise of the flock of geese was heard near the pond.” (pp. 17) “the flat country stretched as far as the eye could see, and the tufts of trees round the farms at long intervals seemed like dark violets stains on the vast grey surface, that on the horizon faded into the gloom of the sky.” (pp.17) “far from being bored at first a the convent, she took pleasure in the society of the good sisters, who, to amuse her, took her to the chapel, which one entered from the refectory by a long corridor.” (pp. 36)
“Emma would, on the contrary, have preferred to have a midnight wedding with torches, but old Rouault could not understand such an idea. So there was a wedding at which forty-three persons were present, at which they remained sixteen hours at table, began again the next day, and to some extent on the days following” (pp.27).” “the brick front was just in a line with the street, or rather the road…on the right was the one apartment, that was both dining and sitting room…On the other side of the passage was Charles’ consulting-room, a little room about six paces wide, with a table, three chairs, and an office-chair…then, opening on the yard, where the stable was, came a large dilapidated room with a stove, now used as a wood-house, cellar, and pantry…the garden, longer that wide, ran between two mud walls with espaliered apricots, to a hawthorn hedge that separated it from the field…the first room was not furnished, but in the second…was a mahogany bedstead in an alcove with red drapery.” (pp.33-34) “before marriage she thought herself in love; but the happiness that should have followed this love not having come, she must, she thought, have been mistaken. And Emma tried to find out what one meant exactly in life by the words felicity, passion, rapture, that had seemed to her so beautiful in books.”(pp.35) “it was a substantial-looking farm. In the stables, over the top of the open doors, one could see great cart-horses quietly feeding from the new racks. The sheepfold was long, the barn was high, with walls smooth as your hand…the courtyard sloped upwards, planted with trees set out symmetrically, and the chattering noise of the flock of geese was heard near the pond.” (pp. 17) “the flat country stretched as far as the eye could see, and the tufts of trees round the farms at long intervals seemed like dark violets stains on the vast grey surface, that on the horizon faded into the gloom of the sky.” (pp.17) “far from being bored at first a the convent, she took pleasure in the society of the good sisters, who, to amuse her, took her to the chapel, which one entered from the refectory by a long corridor.” (pp. 36)
filler page
{Now that we have a new house, we decide its time to get some of Mum and Dad’s furniture back. But when Tracy calls Noelene, who’s been storing Mum’s prized dining room set, she actually refuses to part with it. I can’t believe it, so when Tracy, Chris and Trent are out, I call Noelene myself.
“Our mother loved that dining set and glass cabinet,” I tell my mother’s old friend. “We really can’t give them up now,” she says. I can’t believe her nerve.
A couple days later I work up the courage to drive to Noelene’s. I hate to do it, but it seems like my only option. I feel pretty certain that if Noelene sees me in person, she won’t be able to say no.
I’m standing in her dining room staring at our table and chairs.}*
“Look, Erin, I’m sorry, but we’ve designed our whole living room around these pieces,” “But you promised,” I blurt out. I am so angry. “I’m sorry. No.” “What do you mean no?” I say fuming. “Mum would be crushed, you used to laugh with her, and we used to come here for family barbecues. Mum’s friendship with you meant a lot. They hold so many memories for us.” “Again, I’m sorry, but no” Noelene explains with a shrug. “How can you do this, Noelene?” “How can you stand there denying Tracy, Trent and me some thing so precious, because you designed your living space around it?” Noelene shakes her head and walks toward the door. I can’t believe her.
{I’m seventeen and powerless to do anything else.
And that’s that.}*
{….}* Previous information for reader to understand passage
I chose to rewrite this page because I think that she should have been more appalled at Noelene and her actions. I completely find it despicable that a person would deny someone an object with so much sentimental value. I find that the people that were so close to Erin’s parents when they were alive now seem so materialistic. They seem to care less and less about Erin and her family, then before when her parents were alive.
“Our mother loved that dining set and glass cabinet,” I tell my mother’s old friend. “We really can’t give them up now,” she says. I can’t believe her nerve.
A couple days later I work up the courage to drive to Noelene’s. I hate to do it, but it seems like my only option. I feel pretty certain that if Noelene sees me in person, she won’t be able to say no.
I’m standing in her dining room staring at our table and chairs.}*
“Look, Erin, I’m sorry, but we’ve designed our whole living room around these pieces,” “But you promised,” I blurt out. I am so angry. “I’m sorry. No.” “What do you mean no?” I say fuming. “Mum would be crushed, you used to laugh with her, and we used to come here for family barbecues. Mum’s friendship with you meant a lot. They hold so many memories for us.” “Again, I’m sorry, but no” Noelene explains with a shrug. “How can you do this, Noelene?” “How can you stand there denying Tracy, Trent and me some thing so precious, because you designed your living space around it?” Noelene shakes her head and walks toward the door. I can’t believe her.
{I’m seventeen and powerless to do anything else.
And that’s that.}*
{….}* Previous information for reader to understand passage
I chose to rewrite this page because I think that she should have been more appalled at Noelene and her actions. I completely find it despicable that a person would deny someone an object with so much sentimental value. I find that the people that were so close to Erin’s parents when they were alive now seem so materialistic. They seem to care less and less about Erin and her family, then before when her parents were alive.
A Doll's House Act 1
My opinion of the clip of act 1 from “A Doll’s House” by Henrik Ibsen is that the director has made their house seem rich; he/she has played it up to more than what it seems like in the play. “A room furnished comfortably and tastefully, but not extravagantly.” In the play the house seems very plain. The way that the actors dressed was accurate to the time setting, which is in the 1800s. Helmer is wearing a three piece suit, and Nora has on a dress from that time. Even though the play was written in Norway, I almost expected the set would be like a house in Norway, but it looks more like a house in England.
I think that Nora didn’t seems so needy like in the play, yes, it shows her “affection” for money, but I don’t think that its up to par. “You might give me money, Torvald. Only as much as you can afford; and then one of these days I will buy something with it….Oh do! dear Torvald; please, please do! Then I will wrap it up in beautiful gilt paper and hang it on the Christmas tree. Wouldn’t that be fun?” in the clip Nora doesn’t seem so desperate and needy for the money. I think that the movie director/producer who ever did portray Nora’s childish aspect very well. She acts like she really is this little thing, “…my little lark…,…my little squirrel….,…my dear little Nora…”
In the clip, Helmer seems more teasing rather than putting her down. It didn’t seem like he worried at all. Helmer portrayed in the movie seemed like nothing compared to how he was portrayed in the play. In the play Helmer is very much in love with Nora and cares deeply about what would happen if he died. He worries much about what her situation would be. “…Suppose, now, that I borrowed fifty pounds to-day, and you spent it all in the Christmas week, and then new year’s Eve a slate fell on my head and killed me, and--” With him being worried he wants no debts and then economic worries, so he tries to tell Nora that “But, seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt.”
I think that Nora didn’t seems so needy like in the play, yes, it shows her “affection” for money, but I don’t think that its up to par. “You might give me money, Torvald. Only as much as you can afford; and then one of these days I will buy something with it….Oh do! dear Torvald; please, please do! Then I will wrap it up in beautiful gilt paper and hang it on the Christmas tree. Wouldn’t that be fun?” in the clip Nora doesn’t seem so desperate and needy for the money. I think that the movie director/producer who ever did portray Nora’s childish aspect very well. She acts like she really is this little thing, “…my little lark…,…my little squirrel….,…my dear little Nora…”
In the clip, Helmer seems more teasing rather than putting her down. It didn’t seem like he worried at all. Helmer portrayed in the movie seemed like nothing compared to how he was portrayed in the play. In the play Helmer is very much in love with Nora and cares deeply about what would happen if he died. He worries much about what her situation would be. “…Suppose, now, that I borrowed fifty pounds to-day, and you spent it all in the Christmas week, and then new year’s Eve a slate fell on my head and killed me, and--” With him being worried he wants no debts and then economic worries, so he tries to tell Nora that “But, seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt.”
marcel duchamp
marcel duchamp
I have chosen marcel duchamp. I like the humor that he brought to "The Mona Lisa", he change the title to "She Has A Hot Ass". He also added a mustache and goatee
I have chosen marcel duchamp. I like the humor that he brought to "The Mona Lisa", he change the title to "She Has A Hot Ass". He also added a mustache and goatee
Act 1.2 Hamlet
Act 1:2 Hamlet is alone in the throne room and is upset at his mother for marrying his Uncle Claudius and also being told by both his mother and uncle that he should not grieve after his father anymore. In Hamlet’s soliloquy, we discovered that it has only been two months since his father King Hamlet has died. “But two months dead--nay, not so much, not two” (line 142). “…ere those shoes were old with which she followed my poor father‘s body, like Niobe, all tears…But break. My heart, for I must hold my tongue” (lines 151-164). In these lines, Hamlet is in complete distress over his mother marrying her uncle only a month after his father died. In lines 151-152, Hamlet describes his mother like Niobe; daughter of Tantalus, whose children were killed and was turned to stone where she wept for their loss; as she walked behind her late husband’s body. Hamlet also compares his mother to a beast, saying that a beast would have mourned longer than she has, in lines 154 and 155. He is bewildered by how she could marry her late husband’s brother, who is nothing like King Hamlet. “…My father‘s brother, but no more like my father than I to Hercules” (lines 157-158). “So excellent a king, that was to this Hyperion to a satyr…” (lines 143-144). Here Hamlet juxtaposes King Hamlet and Claudius, King Hamlet as a sun god and Claudius as a creature who is part human, part horse and part goat. Since Claudius is now king, what is a another crack to Hamlet’s already shattered heart, is that Hamlet cannot say anything against King Claudius and his mother, Queen Gertrude.
Kenneth Branagh as Hamlet
Kenneth Branagh’s portrayal of Hamlet, captures Hamlet’s anger and distress that is brought on by King Claudius and Queen Gertrude. The anger is shown when he screams “and yet, within a month (let me not think on ‘t; frailty, thy name is woman!)” (lines 154-155). In my opinion, Branagh’s portrayal was too sane. Hamlet is initially alone and he’s talking to himself, he’s expressing how he feels and he is searching through his mind; trying to figure out how his mother could marry his uncle. There was definitely emotion in the portrayal, but the essence of someone who bewildered out of his mind was not there. I liked how Branagh was wearing black, it showed that he was still in mourning of his father King Hamlet. Hamlet wearing black not only showed mourning but it made Hamlet stand out in the set, which was mostly white.
Laurence Olivier as Hamlet
I liked how the soliloquy was voiced over to show that Hamlet was thinking, instead of saying it out loud like Branagh. I think doing that showed how delusional hamlet was. The voice over exaggerated Hamlet’s distress and bewilderedness. Oliver’s use of facial expressions and body languge also showed the amount of emotion in the scene. I did not like how it was in black and white. I think that it had no great effect on the scene, and just showed that when this was made it was in the period when there was no color and that technology was not established yet.
In my opinion, the best interpretation of Hamlet’s soliloquy was by Laurence Olivier. The direction in which the scene was led, emphasized the duress and mental suffering that Hamlet was going through. The voice over by Olivier made it so that, Hamlet was saying everything in his mind, he was talking to himself. Also that, he only said about five words out loud really emphasized that duress that Hamlet was going through.
Kenneth Branagh as Hamlet
Kenneth Branagh’s portrayal of Hamlet, captures Hamlet’s anger and distress that is brought on by King Claudius and Queen Gertrude. The anger is shown when he screams “and yet, within a month (let me not think on ‘t; frailty, thy name is woman!)” (lines 154-155). In my opinion, Branagh’s portrayal was too sane. Hamlet is initially alone and he’s talking to himself, he’s expressing how he feels and he is searching through his mind; trying to figure out how his mother could marry his uncle. There was definitely emotion in the portrayal, but the essence of someone who bewildered out of his mind was not there. I liked how Branagh was wearing black, it showed that he was still in mourning of his father King Hamlet. Hamlet wearing black not only showed mourning but it made Hamlet stand out in the set, which was mostly white.
Laurence Olivier as Hamlet
I liked how the soliloquy was voiced over to show that Hamlet was thinking, instead of saying it out loud like Branagh. I think doing that showed how delusional hamlet was. The voice over exaggerated Hamlet’s distress and bewilderedness. Oliver’s use of facial expressions and body languge also showed the amount of emotion in the scene. I did not like how it was in black and white. I think that it had no great effect on the scene, and just showed that when this was made it was in the period when there was no color and that technology was not established yet.
In my opinion, the best interpretation of Hamlet’s soliloquy was by Laurence Olivier. The direction in which the scene was led, emphasized the duress and mental suffering that Hamlet was going through. The voice over by Olivier made it so that, Hamlet was saying everything in his mind, he was talking to himself. Also that, he only said about five words out loud really emphasized that duress that Hamlet was going through.
Friday, September 19, 2008
"A Doll's House" Clip Critique
My opinion of the clip of act 1 from “A Doll’s House” by Henrik Ibsen is that the director has made their house seem rich; he/she has played it up to more than what it seems like in the play. “A room furnished comfortably and tastefully, but not extravagantly.” In the play the house seems very plain. The way that the actors dressed was accurate to the time setting, which is in the 1800s. Helmer is wearing a three piece suit, and Nora has on a dress from that time. Even though the play was written in Norway, I almost expected the set would be like a house in Norway, but it looks more like a house in England.
I think that Nora didn’t seems so needy like in the play, yes, it shows her “affection” for money, but I don’t think that its up to par. “You might give me money, Torvald. Only as much as you can afford; and then one of these days I will buy something with it….Oh do! dear Torvald; please, please do! Then I will wrap it up in beautiful gilt paper and hang it on the Christmas tree. Wouldn’t that be fun?” in the clip Nora doesn’t seem so desperate and needy for the money. I think that the movie director/producer who ever did portray Nora’s childish aspect very well. She acts like she really is this little thing, “…my little lark…,…my little squirrel….,…my dear little Nora…”
In the clip, Helmer seems more teasing rather than putting her down. It didn’t seem like he worried at all. Helmer portrayed in the movie seemed like nothing compared to how he was portrayed in the play. In the play Helmer is very much in love with Nora and cares deeply about what would happen if he died. He worries much about what her situation would be. “…Suppose, now, that I borrowed fifty pounds to-day, and you spent it all in the Christmas week, and then new year’s Eve a slate fell on my head and killed me, and--” With him being worried he wants no debts and then economic worries, so he tries to tell Nora that “But, seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt.”
I think that Nora didn’t seems so needy like in the play, yes, it shows her “affection” for money, but I don’t think that its up to par. “You might give me money, Torvald. Only as much as you can afford; and then one of these days I will buy something with it….Oh do! dear Torvald; please, please do! Then I will wrap it up in beautiful gilt paper and hang it on the Christmas tree. Wouldn’t that be fun?” in the clip Nora doesn’t seem so desperate and needy for the money. I think that the movie director/producer who ever did portray Nora’s childish aspect very well. She acts like she really is this little thing, “…my little lark…,…my little squirrel….,…my dear little Nora…”
In the clip, Helmer seems more teasing rather than putting her down. It didn’t seem like he worried at all. Helmer portrayed in the movie seemed like nothing compared to how he was portrayed in the play. In the play Helmer is very much in love with Nora and cares deeply about what would happen if he died. He worries much about what her situation would be. “…Suppose, now, that I borrowed fifty pounds to-day, and you spent it all in the Christmas week, and then new year’s Eve a slate fell on my head and killed me, and--” With him being worried he wants no debts and then economic worries, so he tries to tell Nora that “But, seriously, Nora, you know what I think about that. No debt, no borrowing. There can be no freedom or beauty about a home life that depends on borrowing and debt.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)