THE LAST BLOG

My AP Literature exam experience was like a roller coaster. I set my alarm to wake me up at 7:00 but I accidentally turned it off and went back to sleep. When I woke up again, it was already 7:40! I quickly got ready and ran out my house with a banana in my hand. Needless to say, I sped like crazy to the testing center and arrived around 8:05. It turned out that I had turned into the wrong entrance so it took even more time to get to the testing center. When I finally got there, I told the teachers standing out the center what teacher and what period I had AP Lit. They gave me the room number to go to but when I got there it turned out that was the wrong room. They had told me the wrong room number! So Ms. Iton was there and she had to direct me to the correct room which was literally on the other side of the testing center. Nonetheless, I arrived at my correct room around 8:12 and the class was waiting on me to start the exam. I felt kind of bad. So I wasn’t in the best condition or mood when I took the exam but it turned out to be a lot easier than I had expected it to be. The multiple choice section was what surprised me the most actually. All the practice ones we’ve been doing in class were really hard compared to the kind of questions that were on the actual exam. Even the poems were relatively easy to understand. I actually thought about this after the exam, but maybe it wasn’t that much easier but I was just that much more prepared after taking AP Lit. Either way, I felt really confident about my performance on the multiple choice section. The essay section was next and I was feeling pretty good about that before I got to write. When I saw the essay prompt for the open question, I got a giddy feeling. The prompt fit perfectly with the novel Frankenstein. I talked about how the monster was exiled from its birth and how that sets off the entire storyline of revenge between the creator and creation. The other two essays with the poetry and passage ones were relatively easy too. I really like the Centry Quilt poem as I talked about how the quilt was more than a bedsheet, but a powerful object that the author uses to satisfy her nostalgic desires. The passage one with Henry Clarevence was the hardest essay in my opinion. I got a perfect picture of what kind of person he was and I felt like I did a nice job in relaying how the author accomplished this. Overall, I felt like I got a 4 or 5!

Ros and guil

Ironic—the perfect way to describe Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead. It’s interesting to read a novel that I already know the penultimate ending to. The scene where Rosencrantz and Guildenstern discover the contents of the letter they are ordered to deliver to the British King is interesting to say the least. Until that point, both Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are mere pawns in the grander scheme of things. However, it’s like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern lose their innocence when they find out the content of the letter. The situation reminded me of the loss of innocence in All The Kings Men through the acquirement of knowledge. The idea of free will vs. fate is predominant in this play. After discovering the letter, Guildenstern convinces Rosencrantz not to disclose the content of the letter to anyone, including Hamlet himself. Guildenstern’s reason for doing this is that he believes in fate. He claims that everyone will eventually die so they must not interfere with things. This is highly ironic because it reflects what happens earlier in the scene where Rosencrantz thinks about jumping off the ship to go against fate. Just as he prepares to jump off, Rosencrantz begins to think that it could also be fate for him to jump off this ship. Similarly, Guildenstern believes that he is going with fate, and he is—to his own death. It’s important to note that there is a significant change in mood in the play. In the initial stages of the play, the question of fate and free will were presented in a purely comic way. There was no tension. However, towards the end of the play tension begins to emerge. The audience already knows that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are going to die—the source of the tension. I want to talk about Guildenstern’s death speech. His speech is eerily similar to the To Be or Not to Be speech by Hamlet. Both talk about how miserable life is and that death derives its power not from the nature of death itself, but the uncertainty of the afterlife. I really loved analyzing the to be or not to be speech for a past assignment and I think that really helped me understand this play even more.

I want to talk about the upcoming AP Lit exam which is only a week away! I have my first AP exam tomorrow and it still feels like it’s not real or something. The only AP exams I feel prepared are for the stat, lit, and macro econ. I think that for bio and physics I’m going to fail. Well AP exams this year are so much different than how they were last year because these don’t really count for anything. Nonetheless, I’m going to just take the test to the best of my abilities and see what I get!

rosencrantz and guildenstern

So we are reading Rosencrantz and Guildenstern in class and it is a very um different kind of literary work than those which I’m accustomed to. In class I learned that this play is classified as an absurdist play. It really needs no explanation of why it’s classified as that. Nothing makes sense in the play!!! Everything seems so random and it takes a great deal of effort to understand what is going on. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern seem to be very similar characters and both are essentially lost. They are often without much direction in the play. Consequently, the two characters appear to be lacking a driving purpose—the central theme in an absurdist work. Even though the play is a bit difficult to understand at times, I still really like the play because it makes me laugh. There is a lot of double entendre use in the play, which is very similar to Hamlet. There are a lot of very subtle references to Hamlet. An example is the use of the line “what is the matter”. Many readers would be unable to pick up on this Hamlet reference but matter is a motif that is repeated countless times in Hamlet. I really like the idea of this play as it reveals what happens when Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are off stage in Hamlet. This idea of telling the readers what happens off stage reminded me of Grendel. Just as it gave a different perspective on the story, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern does the exact same thing. I want to compare Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. As of now, Guildenstern seems to be the more philosophically and intelligently superior character. Rosencrantz seems to be kind of slow on things like when they were playing that game of responding question with question.

Now that I talked about Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, I want to talk about the AP Lit exam. I was pretty surprised at my practice score, considering that I was dozing in and out of the multiple choice section. I felt like I did pretty well on my essay part. I got a 7 and 7 on the prose and poetry passage but only a 5 on the open question one :/ I guess it’s true that everyone does bad on the open question. But, we are doing lots and lots of practice in class so hopefully, I will do well when it’s game time! But other than that, I feel pretty confident going in to the exam. I’m choosing Frankenstein, Invisible Man, and one other work that I haven’t decided yet to be the three works that I’m really familiar with. I think I should use Invisible Man if possible because I think that we did a really close reading of the novel in class with all those seminars and stuff. But yeah I think I will do fine when the AP Lit test date arrives!

IM seminar

The Invisible Man seminars are hands down the best assignments we’ve done all year. I really enjoy listening to how others perceived the novel and discussing it. Granted, some of the class mates’ opinions will obviously differ. However, listening to how others interpreted the novel allows me to get a better understanding of the book. Having said that, I want to talk about the section of the novel my group was responsible for leading the class in. I want to talk about Dr. Norton first. As we discussed in the seminar, Dr. Norton is really not a character, but a representation of the historical ideology of the White Man’s Burden. This term refers to the mindset of the affluent white men who believed that they had a “burden” to help the inferior race, the blacks. This kind of ideology is also rooted in the Manifest Destiny ideology that defined America during the 19^th century. Yes it’s true that Dr. Norton donates money to the all black institute which the narrator attends. But, what’s Norton’s true motives for donating the money? Is he really a nice guy that just wants to help some random people out? The answer is a resounding no. He is not genuinely concerned for the well being of others. He helps others out to help himself. The feeling of importance Norton feels when he donates money to the institution is the impetus behind Norton’s desire to help the school out. Oblivious to this fact, the naïve narrator blindly follows and basically worships Norton. To the narrator, Norton represents the Great White Father figure. Norton is not considered a man by the narrator, instead he is considered as a almost God like figure. Thus, the narrator tries his best to impress and look good in front of Norton. However, all of his intentions go down the drain when the narrator accidentally takes him to the bad places of the campus. At the Golden Day tavern, the veteran appears. I personally think that the veteran is one of the most significant characters in the novel. He is the only person in the novel that can see through the façade of Norton. He tells the narrator he is blind because he doesn’t see the real reason why Norton is helping him out. And he continues by saying that it is this ignorance and blindness which will be the narrator’s main tool to advancing in society. This refers to Booker T Washington’s philosophy of accomadationalism. In essence, Washington’s philosophy preaches blindness. As long as there is an equality in economics, social equality should be forsaken. And the blindness the veteran talks about is clearly evident in Washington. He thought that one would follow the other. But, this was clearly not the case. In this sense, the novel can be seen as a social commentary because Ellison was really against Washington’s philosophies. Well our last seminar is tomorrow and I’m excited to attend!

Invisbile Man

For my seminar, I was grouped with Charlie and Kurt to discuss a close reading of the section where the narrator enrolls into the college to his expulsion in the Invisible Man. This section consisted of chapters 2-9. When the narrator first enters the campus, his descriptions had an uncanny resemblance to the picaraseque novel Candide. Starting from the “lushes vines” to the everlasting sun, the college closely resembled the Garden of Eden from the Bible. Since the Garden of Eden represents innocence, the narrator in the state within the college can then also be represented as his innocent stage. Regarding this, I also found a critical article that talked about this. The article basically stated that the narrator has two fundamentally different methods of solidifying his malleable identity. The first part is before his expulsion, and the second part consists of the sections in the novel after the expulsion. Thus, the expulsion of the narrator can be seen as a fall of innocence. In essence, this situation can be equated to the banishment of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden. Another interesting aspect I realized about this book after a close reading, is that Dr. Norton is a representation of the historical concept White Man’s Burden. This is the White Man’s imperialistic desires to help the “inferior race”, predominatly the blacks. However, because the narrator is so innocent and naïve at this point in the novel, he is blind to Dr. Norton’s true intentions. He is basically helping others so that he can help himself—fulfil his desires of helping the inferior race. It’s interesting to note that the only character that sees through Dr. Norton’s façade is the veteran the narrator encounters at the Golden Day Tavern. He claims that the narrator is not even looked as a person by Norton. Instead, he is a “score mark” on Norton’s achievement card. This is also where invisibility comes into play. He lacks identity, the narrator is transformed into whatever Norton sees him as, predominatly his imperialistic desires.

I also want to talk about to Dr. Bledsoe’s representation of Booker T. Washington in the novel. There is a perfect description of Bledsoe as being monumentally important among the white folks and the leader of race relations. In terms of history, Booker T. Washington was a preacher of what is now termed Accomadationalism. This is the ideology which stated that the blacks should give up their social rights and instead on focusing economic equality. This suited the whites as they could now give blacks the jobs that were unwanted. I think that Ellison criticizes Washington when he portrays Bledsoe as a manipulative and power-hungry savage. He even claims to be willing to hang all the blacks in the country to retain his position, which can certainly be constituted as selfish. And this is exactly what some of the black population perceived Washington to be. They considered him to be selfish and even a traitor to their own race as he had given up dignity of his own race. Was it worth it? I don’t think so.

Fight Club

The book I’m reading for the literature circle is Fight Club. I was glad that I got to read this book because it was my first choice and I really enjoyed the movie. However, Mrs. Clinch stated that the book is radically different from the movie. Well I read the first 8 chapters, and up to that point, the plot of the book is nearly identical to the plot in the movie. I was up at my friend’s cabin this weekend and was reading the novel when my friend pointed out that the book was almost like a movie screen. And because of the similarity in the book and movie, I assumed that the conclusion of the novel would match that of the movie—tyler durden and the narrator are one person. Under this assumption, I noticed many clues within the text that pointed towards my assumption. For instance, in the first chapter, Tyler and the narrator are always mentioned together in tandem. But, I learned today in class that the ending of the movie is not the same as the ending in the novel. I’m glad I realized this so that I can read without trying to figure contextual clues that pointed to Tyler and the narrator being one person. The novel is definitely raw and gritty. In other words, it’s not meant for the weak of heart. I thought that the narrator’s desire to overturn the norm of society was interesting. The novel is essentially about existential nihilism, which refers to the philosophy that suggests life is without an intrinsic purpose or objective. Because of the narrator’s day-to-day lifestyle, he views it as a static picture without any surprises or excitement. This is where the fight club comes in. Both the narrator and tyler start this club to break out of society. The book mentions self destruction, which is basically fighting. The narrator basically wants to test his limits not only in fighting, but the boundaries of society as well. He is finally fed up with being normal and blending into the background. I found that this idea of reaching bottom before you can be saved is prevalent throughout this novel. Besides fighting, the narrator regularaly attends different support group meetings although he is perfectly healthy. He claims that at these meetings he feel better about himself because he can witness the pains and harshness of life. There, he can see what it means to truly reach bottom and therefore be saved. The book alludes to Jesus Christ and him reaching bottom by being crucified. This idea of reaching bottom is flawed in my opinion. You don’t necessarily have to reach the rock bottom to realize and be thankful for your situation. I also realized that Tyler is the more aggressive and alpha male in the relationship he shares with the narrator. If the novel is not like the movie where they are the same person, I wonder who Tyler Durden really is, is he a real person or just a figment of the narrator’s imagination? Im excited to find out!

Invisible Man

I’m glad that I got the chance to read Invisible Man. If I wasn’t forced to read this book, I don’t think I ever would have. The descriptions through the unnamed narrator really allowed me to get a glimpse of what life was like in the shoes of a black man during the 60s. The novel starts with the narrator claiming that he is invisible. The invisibility is not referring to the ability of the narrator to be literally unseen, but instead to the fact that people refuse to see him for who he is. Everyone else tries to force an identity upon the narrator. The narrator essentially sets out on a quest to find and discover his own identity. The narrator begins his story with the narrator graduating. Being the valedictorian of the class, the narrator is excited to give a speech to the wealthy white folks in the town. Before he can, the narrator is basically sucked into a royal battle free for all. The town’s most accomplished white men gather and take great joy in humiliating the young black men. The accomplished men included lawyers, doctors, and even pastors. These men made the young black men to get into a boxing ring and start fighting blindly. At the same time, the white men shout racial terms at the black men. On top of all this, the black men are humiliated even more when they are tricked into being electrified. After all these humiliating events, the narrator is “awarded” with a scholarship. At this point in the novel, the narrator is extremely naïve and is totally submissive to others. His journey in college comes to a screeching halt one day when he has to drive a white trustee named Mr. Norton around the campus. One thing leads to another and the narrator is unjustly expelled by Dr. Bledsoe. The narrator soon finds out that the letters of recommendations he received from Bledsoe were more like letters of doom. Already in his young life, the narrator has been manipulated a multiple of times. This manipulation continues throughout the entire novel until the narrator realizes that he is invisible. The invisibility theme is very interesting to me. I believe that the invisibility theme and the struggle for identity theme are interrelated. The narrator is blind and therefore unable to make his own identity; instead, he has society impose an identity on him. For example, the Brotherhood forces an identity on the narrator by essentially brainwashing him. They don’t see the narrator for who he is, but rather as a mere tool that can be used to communicate with the people. The narrator finally understands the invisibility theme after pretending to be Rinehart. Realizing that people see him for who they want to see him as, the narrator realizes the fluidity of identity. It is this realization that leads him to conclude that he is invisible. I look forward to doing some seminars on this book as it was really interesting to me.