All the World's a Stage

For my poem blog this month, I decided to take a break from the ever cheerful Edgar Allan Poe and take up a different sort of poet, William Shakespeare and “All the World’s a Stage”. I felt that this was a great poem and analogy right now as we all enter into the time not only of the week of final exams but also into Christmas and other holiday celebrations to remember that we are all only here for a short time, and that we all ought to make the most of our time on the stage. That idea is powerfully expressed by Shakespeare’s beginning lines, “They have their exits and their entrances/And one man in his time plays many parts”. He then goes on to describe how each and every one of us plays seven different roles over the course of our lifetime, the first being that of an infant. While everyone does start out in a literal sense as an infant, it can better be interpreted how all people start off in a state of innocence and ignorance, and like a young child cannot interpret the world around us on our own, but must rely on the guiding wisdom of our parents. The state of infancy is one of naiveté, where there seems to be comfort in not knowing the true nature of the world. Yet ignorance is always ended by the same driving force: curiosity, found in the second and third stage with the “whining schoolboy” and “the lover/sighing like furnace with a woeful ballad made to his mistresses eyebrow”. Respectively, curiosity appears not only with the increased desire to learn with the schoolboy, but also with the growing desire to be with a woman as the boy grows into a man. The time of innocence is over as he is exposed to the wonders of adulthood, and reveling in his newfound knowledge and experience. He then finds himself in the fourth stage as a soldier, “Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard/Jealous in honor, sudden and quick in quarrel”. In this stage, the true test of adulthood is discovered, as the fantasies and aspirations of the young child are harshly swept aside in the brutal working world, one where the young man is forced to fight for his keep in his workplace and do everything he can do to survive and rise among the others, no matter the cost or consequence. The beauty of life slowly withers away as the man moves into the fifth stage, that of the justice, “Full of wise saws and modern instances/And so he plays his part”. The hard work that the man has put into his budding career has paid off, as he now finds himself at the top of the ladder as one who is both respected and carrier authority with his word. But just like every climax, once one has reached the top, there is only one place left to go: the sixth stage. Age begins to take its toll on the once great man, and he finds himself losing all the abilities that he has developed over his life. He begins to see how life is starting to repeat itself, as “his big manly voice/Turning again toward childish treble, pipes/And whistles in his sound”. With every passing day, the old man can only look at his reflection and see but a shadow of the person he once was, in a different time, in a different role. There is only one stage left, “Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything”. Death comes not as a grand finale, but as a slow painful closing of the curtain, and as the old man looks out into the darkened audience to get one last glimpse of the people watching his performance, he sees but a few pale faces, as most of them left a long time ago.

All the World's a Stage

All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first, the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse's arms.
Then the whining schoolboy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress' eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honor, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon's mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slippered pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side;
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank, and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.

William Shakespeare

Ellen and Nora

For the past few weeks, we have essentially been studying gender roles and social customs throughout the late 19^th century in literature, first through Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence, and more recently through Henrik Ibsen’s A Doll’s House. Now after having read both works, it has become increasingly clear just how much the two literary works have in common with each other, not only through their not-so-subtle criticism of the roles of men and women and the overall setup of a hierarchical and rather brutal society, but in some of the themes as well, the greatest of which I believe to be the struggle for individualism and freedom. The theme of course involves the overly explained gender and social norms of the time, but it transcends past the times in which they are set in, and is as real and applicable to this very day as when they were first written. In Wharton’s work, the struggle for individuality is most clearly epitomized by Countess Ellen Olenska, a concept I have also touched on in a previous blog. Throughout the course of the novel, Ellen is forced to fight off not only the scorn of society for having left her husband as a married women, but worse must face an equally condescending and malicious family, who see her solely as a woman of scandal. Early on the text when she is fighting for legal freedom from a man she does not love, she is struck down by the family’s pressuring to have her maintain her marital status for the sake of their integrity. To this, Ellen can only speculate, “But my freedom-is that nothing?” (Wharton 93). It is for her desire to lead a life of individual freedom that Ellen is discredited by her family, who increasingly act more and more like primitive people than the sophisticated upper classmen they claim to be. Indeed, the family functions no better than, “a tribal rally around a kinswoman about to be eliminated from the tribe” (Wharton 278). For the sake of integrity, they would rather Ellen remain in misery than express her individual right for freedom. In A Doll’s House, the idea of freedom is a concept again taken on by a lead female protagonist, this time Nora Helmer. For her the idea of freedom is heavily contrasted with the early emphasis on her husband Torvald’s ownership of her, treating her more like a dog than a wife. Torvald comments, “It’s incredible how expensive it is for a man to keep such a pet” (Ibsen 4). Nora accepts this until she starts working toward her own struggle for personal freedom, which is working toward her own “miracle” (Ibsen 84) to happen, her having saved Torvald’s life through a borrowed sum of money and him now realizing how grateful he should be toward her. But that would mean the destruction of Torvald’s reputation, and as Nora harshly found out after Torvald read Krogstad’s letter, “Nobody sacrifices his honor for the one he loves” (Ibsen 84). To this, Nora realizes that she must put herself as an individual over her social obligations as a wife and a mother, in this case meaning that she must leave her husband to go out and discover who she really is and find the freedom that has been denied to her all her life by her father and Torvald. Both Ellen and Nora leave their marital obligations for a chance to discover something about themselves, something that neither could have done without having felt the need to discover their individuality. They were both tired of having men constantly believing that they were the ones pulling the puppet strings of their lives. Nora put it best describing how her “house has never been anything but a play-room. I have been your doll wife, just as at home I was Daddy’s doll child” (Ibsen 80). For Ellen and Nora, this was the chance to reject what everyone else believes to be right in exchange for what they know to be right, an idea that transcends past the world of 19^th century literature into our own lives today.

The Age of Innocence: A Final Insight

After having just finished reading Edith Wharton’s, The Age of Innocence, I felt it only appropriate to wrote a blog regarding my final insight toward the novel, which I can safely say I appreciate a lot more from the time that I wrote my first blog about it. I was stunned by how much more the book had to offer than I initially thought it would, going beyond the simple gender and social criticisms I have come to expect in novels read in AP Lit, but that it really had something to say about the struggle of finding meaning and purpose in life alongside the quest to determine and understand the reality all around us. I want to focus on the final chapter of the book and two interesting ideas found within it, the first being how the attitudes of Newland Archer toward the younger generation seem to mirror those that Edith Wharton herself could have possibly had, and also on the idea of the narrative ellipse between chapters 33 and 34 and the implications that this literary device has on the interpretation of the story. First off, the ‘epilogue-esqe’ final chapter was what I thought to personally be a stunning conclusion that I did not expect at all. I found it fascinating to see how Archer, now 57 years old, looks at the world so much differently because the world has changed so much. He notes just how lucky his eldest son Dallas is, saying “The difference is that these young people take it for granted that they’re going to get whatever they want, and that we almost always took it for granted that we shouldn’t” (Wharton 294). Here Archer is making reference to his son’s natural assumption that he will say yes to his marriage to Fanny Beaufort. In the time long past when Archer was young, doing this would have led to the indiscreet scorn and hatred of all the other members of the upper class since Mr. Beaufort had suffered from severe financial fallout and he and wife were essentially exiled from society as a result. Archer looks at this moment with bitter remembrance as he also sees how his love for Ellen Olenska was in fact no different from his son Dallas and Fanny Beaufort, as his son so blatantly pointed out for him. In his older age, Archer feels, “shy, old-fashioned, inadequate: a mere grey speck of a man compared with the ruthless fellow he had dreamed of being” (Wharton 294). Archer remains the product of an age long gone, with most of its members dead, and from which society has clearly moved on from. It can be argued that both Wharton and Archer suffer from the same problem, which is seeing how much the world has changed and not being able to fit in with it anymore. Wharton wrote her novel in 1920, two years after the end of the Great War and a time in which disillusionment plagued the nation, as people aimlessly wondered what point and purpose to life there was after witnessing so much wanton violence. Wharton seems to be reflecting on the great tragedy of her time through Newland, who struggles to find meaning amidst a world so different from the world that he gradually fell away from. Finally, I want to discuss the meaning of the narrative ellipse between chapters 33 and 34, in which 26 years have gone by and Archer is the father of three children and May ends up dead from pneumonia. While some details are given, there are not nearly enough to encompass a quarter century of time that is left to be a mystery to the reader who can essentially believe whatever they want when it comes to what happened. The reason for the blatant narrative gap is found on the final page of the novel, where Newland is about to go see Ellen, but sits at the bottom of the stairs and imagining the situation instead, saying, “It’s more real for me here than if I went up” (Wharton 300). Like Archer, who will never actually know what Ellen looks like being older or how she would react, the reader is forced to think of something to fill the void in the story. No one will ever know if it is true, and no one will ever be able to prove or disprove it, but it is something that gives the reader a sense of personal satisfaction. The reason that the reader is drawn to fill in the gap with what could have happened is the same exact reason Archer fills in his own gaps with his views of Ellen, to satisfy his mind without ever knowing the truth. And for that both the reader and Newland Archer will forever remain in a moment of ignorance, an age of innocence.

FREEDOM!!!

Over the Thanksgiving break, I’ve had the struggle of balancing my time between both reading The Age of Innocence, and spending time with my family, however, today I realized that I did not need to keep these two ideas completely separate from each other. As me and all my cousins gathered together to watch Braveheart, I knew exactly what my next blog would be on: the parallels between Mel Gibson’s epic film and Edith Wharton’s dynamic criticism of 1870s New York upper class social hierarchy and the gender standards of the time. While watching the movie, two major plot points stood out to me as being pertinent to the events of The Age of Innocence, the first being the struggle for freedom against the oppressive nature of established order, and the usurpation of pre-established gender normality. In Braveheart, the idea of freedom is very well established as being the pinnacle focus of Sir William Wallace, the Scotsman who urges his brethren on to fight against the tyranny of English King Longshanks and his incompetent son Prince Edward. Wallace tells his men how, “It’s all for nothing if you don’t have freedom”, as motivation to fight against the dreaded Englishmen who rule their Scottish lands. Wallace is willing to sacrifice everything, even his own life, for the sake of having a free Scotland, and is able to both inspire the hearts of his fellow Scotsmen and drive a burning stake of fear into every Englishman who dares dwell on the pastures of the liberated country. It is rather fitting that Wallace rallies his men to fight against the English with the call, “they may take our lives, but they may never take our freedom!” While this is only one side of the parallel, Wharton’s world of 1870s upper class exuberance is not all that different from the 13^th century world of Sir William Wallace. The best point of evidence for this is from Countess Ellen Olenska, a woman with a tainted and scrutinized past who comes to New York and forces the creation of a complicated love triangle between male protagonist Newland Archer and his fiancée May Welland. But aside from the realm of her love life, both the mesmerizing Countess and the fierce medieval Scottish warrior have one aspiration in common: freedom. While the Countess doesn’t explicitly state it, Newland Archer speaks her thoughts as he declares, “Women ought to be free-as free as we are” (Wharton. 35). With the progression of the novel, Ellen fights for her freedom (in a much less literal way than William Wallace) as she battles to free herself from the oppressive bonds of both other men and society itself. But she learns the struggle is much more difficult than she presumed, and as she vies with Archer to plead for her divorce from the Count, she entails the lawman, “But my freedom-is that nothing?” (Wharton 93). Like Wallace, Ellen learns that freedom does not come without a heavy price, and most certainly not without affecting those who she cares for most. The key element to Countess Olenska’s fight for freedom deals especially with the second aspect of the parallel, which is going against the gender standards of the time. In Braveheart, Princess Isabella embodied this idea, as King Longshanks appointed her as being a more competent ruler than his weak son Prince Edward to negotiate with William Wallace. Moreover, she knows that most effective path toward good leadership is not brutality like the ailed King or through weak passiveness like his son, but through mercy to allow the people to trust their leader and give them hope. Going back to New York, the concept of going against gender standards is clearly a quality of Ellen Olenska, but it is best seen by contrasting her to May Welland. Ellen is noted as a woman of strength and character, something that May, the ideal woman, does not embody at all. Archer notes how May, “seemed to have descended…to helpless and timorous girlhood…as a too-adventurous child takes refuge in its mother’s arms” (Wharton 126). May revels in the world of childhood simplicity and is perfectly content to eternally submit herself to the will of a wonderful husband and remain in her separate sphere of influence. For Ellen, she sees herself as beyond all the normal gender conventions of the time, and feels compelled to wear, say, and do whatever she feels like doing. Just like William Wallace, Ellen knows that she must do whatever is in her power to achieve the ultimate goal: FREEDOM!!!

Blake and Grendel

Last week in class we were introduced to the great Romantic writer, poet, and artist William Blake and also to one of his most acclaimed works, Songs of Innocence and of Experience. The collection of poems reflects many of Blake’s own views, as he divided the collection into two parts, the first set of “Innocence” including poems about the state of being before knowledge and “the Fall” of humanity in many times an ethereal state of childhood ignorance, and the second set of “Experience” having poetic works based around a world full of painful knowledge and experiencing the torments of everyday life. Blake uses the positive and negative aspects of both perspectives to remain in a paradox of his own, where both are right. As we explored more and more poetic works from Blake’s collection, it became increasingly evident of how many of the thematic and philosophical ideas of John Gardner’s Grendel can also be traced back to the 18^th century figure. Many of Blake’s ideas concerning the folly of both the path of the innocent and experienced are exactly like Grendel observing the folly of the ways of the Shaper and the Dragon, with the Shaper being the way of innocence and ignorance and the Dragon being that of knowledge and the embracement of a cold and bitter reality. Blake seems to delve into the paradoxical opinion of these two opposing sides by writing poems in the two separate parts that seem to fit with each other, starting with “Introduction (Song of Innocence)” and “Introduction (Song of Experience)”. The opening poem for the first part merrily starts by saying, “Piping down the valleys wild,/Piping songs of pleasant glee,/on a cloud I saw a child,/And he laughing said to me”. From these first few lines, much can be said about the true nature of innocence and tie it back into Grendel.  For starters, Gardner also among the first few chapters explores the childhood years of the infamous monster of the English language, a time when he and his mother were “one thing, like the wall and the rock growing out from it” (Gardner 17). But like the little child in the poem, he has no idea of the true nature of the world because of him being stuck in the realm of childhood fantasy. And to make things worse, neither Grendel nor the child seem to have any true thought the real nature of the person they are looking up to. For Grendel, his mother is revealed to a brutish and rather stupid creature who cannot even speak properly, and for the child, the Piper referenced may very well be an allusion to the Pied Piper himself, the man who led all the children of Hamelin away after not having been paid for curing the city of rats, never to be seen again. On the other end of the spectrum is the idea of Experience, having all the knowledge that allowed for naiveté to thrive in the days of youth, but also serves as an overbearing yoke of sorrow and woe and the true nature of the world. The time of Experience is recalled in Blake’s poem with, “Hear the voice of the Bard!/Who Present, Past & Future sees;/Whose ears have heard/The Holy Word/That walk’d among the ancient trees” . Blake’s poem almost carries a tone of prophecy, and sounds eerily like the all-knowing dragon that Grendel encounters in Chapter 5, who tells the confused monster, “I know everything…the beginning, the present, the end” (Gardner 62). Both the Bard in Blake’s poem and the Dragon of Grendel bring forth the opinion of experience, showing the truth after one has taken from the “ancient tree” of knowledge. While the truth is illuminated in both perspectives, the idea that absolute knowledge is truly good remains in question. Ultimately, each should strive toward Blake’s own personal paradox, where both Innocence and Experience can come together and work to create a perfect balance of naiveté and knowledge, blindness and sight, and life and death.

 

The Age of Innocence: An Initial Insight

In class on Friday we split up into Lit Circle groups to start reading Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence on our own and meet in our groups to fulfill various roles regarding several different aspects of the book’s social and gender criticisms. While I have only read the first two chapters of the book, I thought now would be the perfect time to write a blog that can sincerely reflect my first initial reflections on what I have read so far and a lot of the different criticisms that Edith Wharton is making. After reading the first few paragraphs of the book, I immediately realized who Wharton’s target of the rest of the book would be: the opulent and rather prideful upper class New York hierarchy in the 1870s. Newland Archer is portrayed as being a man completely absorbed in what society has pre-determined his role to be, which is a member of the ostentatious upper class and is something he finds to be quite natural. While at the opera listening to Christine Nillson sing in French, “this seemed as natural to Newland Archer as all the other conventions on which his life was moulded: such as the duty of using two silver-backed brushes…and of never appearing in society without a flower in his buttonhole” (4). To Archer, the stratified world that he finds himself at the top of is full of a plethora of nuances that are upheld to the highest extent. It becomes increasingly clear that he is part of a culture that values the superficial and materialistic over anything else that someone or something may have to offer. On top of the elegant lifestyle constantly pervading his life, Archer seems to also have a very dominating attitude over others, particularly women. Here the gender criticism comes into play, as Archer describes the relationship with his fiancée May Welland to be one of ownership over mutual love. He toys with the idea, “with a thrill of possessorship in which pride in his own masculine initiation was mingled with a tender reverence for her abysmal purity” (6). Archer, while having a small amount of respect for the purity of the woman he is soon to be wed to, feels overall more compelled to dote upon his ownership of her than any other personal feelings he may have for her. It seems as if the entire idea of being in a relationship with a woman is not so much about developing an unbreakable personal bond with another human being, but rather, it is more of a competition between the men of this stature to see who can acquire the best “piece of property”. While Archer does in fact have some personal romantic fantasies about how his life with his future wife will be, these are overshadowed by the next paragraph, where he describes how he wants May to turn out. Again this ties back in to the already dominating criticism on male-dominated society and the runaway egos that seem to fuel it. Wharton’s other key point of criticism shows up in Chapter 2, best summarized by Archer saying, “No indeed; no one would have thought the Mingotts would have tried it on!” (10). Archer is referring to Mr. Sillerton Jackson’s comment about the box on the other side of the opera house, where he sees May’s cousin Ellen Olenska, who brings attention to herself by her rather showy dress and is even referred to as one of the “few black sheep that their blameless stock had produced” (10). Here Archer embodies Wharton’s criticism of how quick the stratified and prideful upper class men are to judge not only a woman but someone who is of lower social stature than they are. Archer seems to know very little real knowledge about who Ellen is yet he still calls her an outcast among the others in her family, giving the presumption that he knows what is best. Perhaps the greatest criticism being made in these first to chapters is that of how quick people seem to be to judge that which is different or less than what they believe to be the “norm”. It is the inability to truly understand that makes the opulence of the upper class seems all the less human.

Revenge of the Sith

In class we have been studying John Gardner’s Grendel and analyzing a lot of the different existential and philosophical aspects of the novel, looking at how the brutal monster from the Old English classic, Beowulf, is actually an intelligent, insightful, and angst-filled creature who has a lot to say about criticizing both society and the universe itself. As part of a chapter project we were assigned a specific chapter of the book, in my case Chapter 6, where Grendel has just accepted his role that the dragon has given to him as a terror to Hrothgar’s people and also torments the want-to-be hero Unferth, leaving him embittered and angry. The other night, while watching Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith for the first time in years, I immediately saw and realized I could make a connection between Anakin’s turn to the dark side and what he does following his fall to Grendel’s own transformation and what the creatures turns into as well. The film chronicles the birth of the most iconic villain in film history, Darth Vader, but explores how a good man like Anakin could fall from grace into the world of brutality, lies, and deceit. Like Grendel and the Shaper, Anakin has his own belief of what his role in life is and what gives him purpose, which is to be a Jedi Knight who guards and protects others for the better good of the galaxy. This is the role that he has had his whole life, just like Grendel, but he longs for the discovery of more truth and knowledge which could help him to assure the safety of his wife Padme. To find the answer, Anakin seeks out his own “dragon”, which is Chancellor/Emperor Palpatine for answers, who forces him to question all that he thought to be true. In a slithery tone he tells him, “All who gain power are afraid to lose it. Even the Jedi…good is a point of view Anakin, the Sith and the Jedi are similar in almost every way, including their quest for greater power”. Both Grendel and Anakin go to the character who is representative of the devil and are offered a Faustian-deal with them. For Grendel, it was to accept his role that the dragon gave him as a vicious mead-hall wrecker without a conscious because of the lack of meaning that the world really has to offer compared to what the people think. For Anakin, the Emperor makes him a deal that if he accepts his teachings he can help save his wife. He entices him, saying, “You have much wisdom, Anakin. But if I were to die, all the knowledge you seek about the true nature of the Force will be lost with me. Learn the power of the Dark Side, Anakin. The power to save Padmé”. To this, Anakin and Grendel both sign their deals with the Devil and selfishly consume their new power. For Grendel it was to pointlessly decapitate a soldier. For Anakin, it means storming through the Temple and killing every Jedi knight and child all to satisfy his ferocious desire to prevent Padme’s death. As democracy collapses with the rise of the Galactic Empire, along with the violent death of the Jedi order, Obi Wan finally confronts Anakin, but finds that he is not the same boy that he once trained. As Yoda noted, “Twisted by the Dark Side, young Skywalker has become. The boy you trained, gone he is... Consumed by Darth Vader”. Grendel also found himself to be transformed, or “born again” as he so ironically put it, by his deal with the Devil. Anakin is “born again” as well, with the new name of Darth Vader as evidence of it. Each of their pacts seemed to have led to a transformation that superficially satisfied their quests, as Grendel found himself to be existentially enlightened and Anakin felt himself to be advancing in his knowledge to work to save Padme. When confronted by Obi-Wan, he boldly declares, “I see through the lies of the Jedi. I do not fear the dark side as you do. I have brought peace, freedom, justice, and security to my new Empire”.  But it is ultimately the nature of Faustian deals to never turn out as they initially planned. For Grendel, that meant him immediately realizing just how alone in the world he really was. For Anakin, it meant inadvertently destroying the love that he was trying so hard to keep intact. When Padme finally sees what Anakin has become, so says, “You're going down a path I cannot follow… because of what you've done... what you plan to do” With this, Anakin chokes his wife to the point of death, and following this ultimately loses in his confrontation with his old master, Obi Wan. While by this point it has already become clear that both Grendel and Anakin have been born again as a result of their selfish quests, for Anakin the idea is not solidified until the very end of the movie, as Anakin is literally reconstructed from what remains of his burnt body. And as the mask is slowly placed on top his charred face, the audience gets chills as the terrorizing villain slowly breathes through his mask for the very first time.

"A Dream"

While searching for a poem to write about for this week’s blog I could not help but think about our class discussion we had on Friday on Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, which philosophically explored the question of whether it is better to be enlightened with the knowledge of truth and light, or live out in blissful ignorance, never fully aware of the truth that lies beyond our own minds. This led me to try to find a poem that involves discussing the satisfaction of life in both our waking reality and the illusions of our dreams in Edgar Allan Poe’s “A Dream”. Poe drenches his short poem with a plethora of meaning, found first in the opening lines that state, “In vision of the dark night/I have dreamed of joy departed-/But a waking dream of life and light/Hath left me broken-hearted”. Poe details to the reader how his heart can find no place of happiness or joy in subconscious thought, the final possibility for him to find it. All other places that surround him throughout his waking moments only serve to remind him of the wretchedness of how his life has played out. If looking at this with respect to Plato, Poe is twisting the philosopher’s perspective to show that ultimately there is no escape to discover some enlightening truth of lives that can hope to change us into better people, but in fact both the disillusioned world of our lives and our dreams are both equally filled with pain and misery that no power can serve to alleviate. Poe’s commiserations of the bitter truth of the world continues as he says, “What is not a dream by day…turned back upon the past?” Again, Poe explores his own internal disillusionment and embracing of the bitter truth of the world by reflecting on his dreams. Dreams, by their own nature, are reflections of our own lives that play out into our subconscious thought. Thus, the reason that Poe’s dreams are full of misery and woe is because his dreams are simply a reflection of the world lodged in reality. There is no escape from the pain of our world, as the dream world we try so hard to create can only reflect the sad truth of our own lives. Anyone who deems otherwise that there is some glimmer of goodness left to find in the world is only ignoring the harsh truth of what each and every one of our lives has become. Poe makes his final point very clear, lamenting, “That holy dream-that holy dream…What could there be more purely bright/In Truth’s day-star”. The final lines of the poem reflect just how obvious the point that Poe is trying to make. The truth of how the world really is, full of only pain and sorrow, is something that so many people adamantly do not wish to accept and base their lives around avoiding it. Ironically, Poe portrays the dark and foreboding nature of the world to be like a light that shines brightly; one that encompasses all that it sees and spares no one. Such is the nature of the world, and not even the illusions and fantasies of dreams can spare a person from the truth.

  

A Dream

In visions of the dark night
I have dreamed of joy departed-
But a waking dream of life and light
Hath left me broken-hearted.

Ah! what is not a dream by day
To him whose eyes are cast
On things around him with a ray
Turned back upon the past?

That holy dream- that holy dream,
While all the world were chiding,
Hath cheered me as a lovely beam
A lonely spirit guiding.

What though that light, thro' storm and night,
So trembled from afar-
What could there be more purely bright
In Truth's day-star?

Edgar Allan Poe

 

Willard and Prufrock

The other day in class we analyzed T. S. Eliot’s poem, “The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock”, essentially reading through the poem and trying to figure what we thought to be the “so what” idea of both the seven separate sections that we split the poem up into and as a whole. At the same time, we have also been extensively studying Sherwood Anderson’s Winesburg, Ohio and delving deep into so many of Anderson’s underlying themes in his “novel” of sorts. By now, it’s almost impossible not to see how many similar motifs, themes, and ideas that are present in Eliot’s poem appear also in Anderson’s work. One of the most introspective themes that is present between the two writings is that of the reflection of the passage of time. In Eliot’s poem, it is toward the end with the speaker reflecting back of his life and saying “And would it have been worth it, after all/would it have been worthwhile/after the sunsets and dooryard and the sprinkled streets/after the novels, after the teacups, after the skirts that trail along the floor-/and this, and so much more?” (lines 99-103). Here the aging speaker looks back on all the various aspects of his life, from the awe-inspiring sunsets to noticing what a girl was wearing, and wondering whether or not his life has had any true meaning to it. He ponders whether he spent all his long years to the fullest extent, or would it have been worth it to have done so much more instead. Likewise, a similar thought process pains George Willard, the young protagonist of Anderson’s work, who in “Sophistication” starts asking many of the same questions as J. Alfred Prufrock. Still recovering from the death of his mother, George traverses the street of the eponymous town of Ohio and ponders about his place in the world with the passing of time and, “for the first time he looks out upon the world, seeing…countless figures of men who…disappeared into nothingness…with a little gasp he sees himself as merely a leaf blown by the wind through the streets of his village” (239). In this moment George breaks free of the mold of childhood that he has been for the whole book and must finally face up to one of the harshest truths of adulthood.  He looks at everyone else that has born, lived, and died, and realizes he is no different than any of them and destined to suffer the same fate.  Like Prufrock in Eliot’s work, George must look at the progression of time, though not in retrospect and hindsight like the old man of the poem, but in fear in apprehension of how he is going to spend the rest of his life and what the future may have in store for him. He knows that unless he makes the right decisions throughout his life, then he will suffer the same fate of becoming a “grotesque”, one who is but a haunting shadow of who they once were as a result of discovering some inner truth about themselves that they embrace all too easily and quickly. Both George and Prufrock suffer from the same ailment of the progression of time, with J. Alfred Prufrock weary of how he has spent up his entire life and whether or not it has all been worth doing, and George Willard who is apprehensive about what the progression of time could possibly have in store for him.  

Subdivisions

Well, after having worked on my Winesburg, Ohio essay outline and explored several different themes of the book, such as coming-of-age, lust, and the idea of truth, one theme really stood out me, which was loneliness. Obviously Sherwood Anderson knew that it was something worth mentioning considering he centered an entire story around Enoch Robinson and his struggle with isolation and being understood and accepted by everyone else around him. Thinking about Enoch’s struggle with loneliness even when surrounded by so many people made me realize that these struggles are the same exact ones high school kids like myself face every single day in suburbanized society, a topic which is the center of “Subdivisions” by Rush. The song, in brief summary, describes the natural way of conformity that kids must face in high school, how the identical houses that line the streets of the suburbs that they live in leave no room for individuality or uniqueness, and those who cannot live up to this formatted expectation are ostracized from society. The song opens with detailing how identical all the suburban houses look, “In geometric order/an insulated border/in between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown”. Already, the song is delving into the suburban culture that is spread out across the country, one where people have lost a sense of identity and individuality and mold their living based on a standard set by someone else. There is no room to explore different paths in life since the suburbs have eradicated all other paths beside the one in which they want people to follow. In this place, “opinions [are] all provided/the future pre-decided”, everyone is blinded to the fact that they are destined to suffer the same fate, regardless of how different or better they may feel their lives our from others. Those who dare to step outside the pre-determined mold of society, whether they want to go beyond what has been placed before them or simply want to fit the mold, can find no peace, since “nowhere is the dreamer or the misfit so alone”. With the song’s progression into the chorus, we get a glimpse of the true demographic that lyricist Neil Peart is talking about, the “uncool” kids of high school. It is easy to fit ourselves into the shoes of the kid who sees all the popular kids go by as they are left alone. Suburban high school is a vicious world, one must “conform or be cast out…any escape might help to smooth the unattractive truth/but the suburbs have no charms to soothe the restless dream of youth”. Outcast kids are displaced from the world of social acceptance, forced to withdraw from the world of social gathering and instead take comfort in the few things in life that help them forget about the harsh terms that their peers have set for them. Whether it is reading books, playing video games, or anything else, these are the kids who haven’t let the suburbs compromise who they are as people, and for that they are forced to suffer. On the other side, even if they may not realize it, the “popular” kids are destined to suffer too, as in life they will be the ones who, “sell their dreams for small desires or lose their rose to rats/get caught in ticking traps/and start to dream of somewhere to relax their restless flight”. Ultimately isolation plagues both the popular and the outcast; it’s just that those who aren’t accepted already know that they are alone while those who are accepted hide amongst people to their escape their own internal loneliness.

"Respectability"

For homework this weekend, we were assigned to read “Respectability” from Winesburg, Ohio and to read and annotate the story in preparation for an in-class assessment tomorrow in class. The story itself was very intriguing and felt like this would be a good way to informally talk about the story. In short summary, “Respectability” is about Wash Williams, a man infamously known for being a rather dirty and ugly person. As the best telegraph writer in town, everyone sets aside their thoughts about how dirty and smelly he is and can’t help to respect him. George Willard sees him while with Belle Carpenter one night and he then tells about how much he hates all women. He then tells the story of how he was once in love with a beautiful young blonde girl whom he married. After being married a few years he learns that he has been cheating on him and sends her off, but goes to her house after some time hoping to get her back. But when he goes to see her, the woman’s mother sends her in naked, to which he responds by attacking her mother and since then has hated women. There are certainly a lot of analytical points that can be taken from this story, the first of which is Anderson physically showing what it means to become a grotesque being, which Wash has become. Not only that, but he overtly shows it in describing monkey being similar to Wash, with the monkey being “a creature with ugly, sagging, hairless skin below his eyes…a true monster” (Anderson…113). It is very clear from the start that Wash, just like most all other characters in the novel, have lost their beauty and exchanged it for a new grotesque form. But also like the others, Wash also wishes to tell others about what his life has become, and this desire plays out perfectly with his occupation: a man who uses his hands to write telegraphs. “There was something sensitive and shapely in the hand that lay on the table by the instrument in the telegraph office” (Anderson. 114). Of course, hands are a critical element of this section, in that Anderson again emphasizes the hands as being the method in which characters can convey their truths to others, in this case with Wash being able to send messages to people. Not long after this it is revealed what Wash’s truth is: his hatred for women. He abhors them as “a living-dead thing, walking in the sight of men and making the earth foul by her presence” (Anderson. 116).  In Wash’s eyes, he sees women as those who bring out the grotesque nature of life, taking that which is good and wholesome and transforming it into an abomination. Wash seems to be both a physical and internal victim to having become grotesque with his interaction with women, as it was his marriage to the woman who cheated on him that allowed him to discovery his essential truth of the nature of women, and ultimately that truth which transformed him into a grotesque. Finally, I feel it very important to note one of the lines that Wash says to George: “Already you may be having dreams in your head. I want you to destroy them” (Anderson. 117).  Hear Wash seems to echoes Tom Willard in “Mother” who said something very similar to George by telling him to wake up out of his dreams. Clearly, Anderson is using these two mirroring ideas to get a key point across, which is that people like George Willard who seem to have so many aspiring dreams and goals for how their life ought to be and how perfect others are need to wake up and get a real taste of what the world is like. Anderson gives a harsh reminder that not all women are the perfect angels that they are constantly described as and how most dream of them being, but in fact simply play an equal role with man in leaving all whom they encounter as horrible grotesque shadows of who they once were.

"Alone"

After having read Sherwood Anderson’s Winesburg, Ohio and spent a few days discussing some of the individual stories in class, I realized that one of the major thematic elements of the “novel” was that of loneliness and isolation. At the same time, I also decided to write another blog dealing with a poem and felt that Edgar Allan Poe’s “Alone” would be perfect to discuss as Poe relates the same feeling that each and every one of the characters of Winesburg struggles with. “Alone” essentially describes Poe’s inability to fit in as a child and ultimately the culminating loneliness he must face over the course of his life as a result of who he is. He opens the poem by describing just how different he is, saying, “From childhood’s hour I have not been/As others were-I have not seen/As others saw-I could not bring” (lines 1-4). It should be noted, that Poe’s upbringing not the smoothest of childhoods, as his mother died at an early age and his father abandoned him when he was only a year old, leaving the orphan to be taken in by Allan family to be foster parents to him. In the opening lines, Poe is reflecting on the turmoil of his early youth, citing the absence of his parents during his childhood as being the start of his loneliness, a feeling that even with him being taken in by the Allan family was ever subsided. He continues to describe his isolation from others around him, alluding to his difference from others by saying “My passions from a common spring-/From the same source I have not taken” (lines 4-5). Here Poe is able to note that the misery that is constantly engulfing his isolation is not the same as what everyone else around him is experiencing, as they are drawing from the spring source of jubilation and delight, while he draws from the spring of desolation in his loneliness. As both the poem and Poe’s life progress, he is still searching for the purpose that his wretched life must have, “The mystery which binds me still” (line 12). His spirit’s thirst for what his lonely life must mean is not quenched, and in response, he continues over the course of his life to find the hidden treasure that must be the point to his existence. There is heavy imagery describing the passing years, as “In its autumn tint of gold/From the lightning in the sky/As it pass’d me flying by” (lines 17-19). Poe restless searches for his purpose and in the midst of a great and furious storm, looks up to the sky for what he hopes could be the answer to the driving question of his life. And when he looks up to find rest for his disillusioned mind, he is answered with an image “When the rest of Heaven was blue/Of a demon in my view” (lines 22-23). In this moment Poe’s journey has finally ended after years of searching, though not with the results that he would have liked to receive. Instead of acquiring knowledge in his gaze up to Heaven, where all other people find beauty and the empowerment of God’s glory, he finds the opposite, a hideous demon, blocking his view of wondrous blue sky. Poe is aware that everyone else in his life has been able to gaze up at the wondrous blue sky to find their purpose among the stars of Heaven, but he now realizes that his purpose lies with the demon that shall forever deny him of any satisfaction or relieve him of his eternal solitude.


“Alone”
By Edgar Allan Poe 
 

From childhood’s hour I have not been

As others were—I have not seen

As others saw—I could not bring

My passions from a common spring—

From the same source I have not taken

My sorrow—I could not awaken

My heart to joy at the same tone—

And all I lov’d—I lov’d alone—

Then—in my childhood—in the dawn

Of a most stormy life—was drawn

From ev’ry depth of good and ill

The mystery which binds me still—

From the torrent, or the fountain—

From the red cliff of the mountain—

From the sun that ’round me roll’d

In its autumn tint of gold—

From the lightning in the sky

As it pass’d me flying by—

From the thunder, and the storm—

And the cloud that took the form

(When the rest of Heaven was blue)

Of a demon in my view—

  

"Tintern Abbey" in Frankenstein

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein never ceases to amaze me and surpass all my previous expectations of what her writing has to offer. Whether it’s the compelling and heart-wrenching story, the underlying themes dealing with isolation, morality, and the human condition, or simply the chilling thought of man bestowing life to that which had none, this story should under no circumstances be clichéd or underestimated. Now, after looking back over the book and having spent a few days in class reading William Wordsworth’s “Tintern Abbey” I found that Shelley quotes the poem directly in the novel, seamlessly weaving it into the context of the story and adding yet another layer to the analytical thoughts that can be extracted from her work. The quote is found in Chapter 18, pg 135. Everything else in the chapter leading up to this point is essentially describing Victor and Henry Clerval’s journey across different countries and cities in Europe, with Henry delighting in all the amazing sights and wonders that are befalling his eyes while Victor does his best to hide his internal dread, guilt, and weary anticipation of the pact he made with his creature: to create for him a bride, the very reason that Victor decided to make the journey in the first place to England to further his studies. Now, Victor and Clerval have returned to their native mountains of Switzerland and Victor notes his friend’s “wild and enthusiastic imagination…chastened by the sensibility of his heart. His soul overflowed with ardent affections, and his friendship was of that devoted and wondrous nature that the world-minded teach us to look for only in the imagination” (Shelley. 135). Following this description is the direct quotation of lines 77-84 of “Tintern Abbey” In my opinion, there are multiple reasons that Shelley decided to pull from Wordsworth immortal work of poetry and directly cite it in this particular spot, all of which can be derived from a single word: contrast, an element that is constantly playing itself out over the course of the novel. Shelley takes no shortcuts in describing the wondrous settings throughout the book, whether it’s the icy waters of the Arctic Circle, the beauty of Geneva, and now with Henry and Victor’s travels across Europe. In the Romantic tradition, Shelley puts a heavy emphasis on the beauty that nature has to offer. In doing this, Shelley is making a direct contrast within the novel, describing these magnificent and awe-inspiring scenes of nature in a Gothic horror novel centered around an abhorred creature who is a terror to everyone he encounters, including his own creator. The contrast also expands out to include Victor, using Wordsworth’s pre-transcendental descriptions of nature in all its natural glory to serve as proof that nothing Victor, or any man for that matter, ever creates can ever stand up the handiwork of the ultimate and perfect Creator. Shelley also uses Wordsworth’s words to physically contrast Victor and Henry, in that Victor realizes he is now no longer able to appreciate the physical beauty of the natural world like Henry can because of what he has done. Victor wonders this, asking, “Has this mind perished? Does it now only exist in my memory?” (Shelley. 135). Not now, but Victor will soon realize the truth of his prediction, in that the world surrounding him that God intended for him to enjoy so much in life can never mean anything more to him than a simple memory of what was a beautiful part of his life, but shall be no more.

The Godfather (8-27-13)

For this next blog, I really wanted to focus on theme again since there is just so much that can be gained from the studying of a story’s central insight and controlling idea, a fact that was fully embodied in our reading on theme in Perrine’s chapter. Perhaps one of the most introspective works that deals with revealing the true nature of society and the subtle expansion of a single idea is The Godfather, a true masterpiece of cinematic excellence that has set the standard for what defines an incredible film. Based off Mario Puzo’s novel of the same name, Francis Ford Coppola directs a film that weaves through the intricate nature of the Italian-American mafia in the 1950s, full of violence, love, betrayal, remorse, retribution, and manipulation, all in the quest for power and, more importantly, control. While the cinematography, acting, and intricate plot details are what enamor many viewers of the film, and rightly so, it is the underlying themes strewn across the 3 hour tale that has truly allowed the film to stand the harsh test of time and be put on such a high pedestal. In my opinion one of the most critical elements of the film is the ironic twist given to the central ideas of the film, the first of which being family. To even the most casual viewer, it is made very clear just how important family is to Sicilians. Like the role of an actual godfather, family should be an integral part of one’s life, always there to help them to make the right decisions in life and to share in their company in times both good and bad. Michael Corleone even states at one point in the film, “...and if I ever need any guidance, who's a better consiglieri [counselor] than my father?” Being half-Sicilian myself, it is especially moving to see how close knit the Corleone family is with each other, with Don Vito even stating, “A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man”. With only this in mind, it is easy to forget the ironic twist that Puzo has put on family, in that the function of their family does not revolve around each other but instead is focused on the betterment of the “family business” of running the mafia. If one were to expand this idea a step more, it is clear that Puzo is presenting an idea reflecting the corruptive nature of humans, taking something which should be pure and wholesome, such as family, and weaving into a web of lies and deceit. Even the idea of a godfather has been taken to a twisted level, described as “a very religious, sacred, close relationship” but instead used as a seat of power and manipulation. The ironic twist that was seen in the aspect of family also permeates into the idea of the American Dream. From the opening lines of the film, “I believe in America”, it slowly becomes more and more evident that the ruthless Corleone family functions no differently than any other big business that has found success in this country.  Puzo has again taken a thought pure in origin, the idea of the American Dream that involves working hard and eventually finding success, and skewing it to show its reflection in the hands of a crime lord. But just like the Corleone family, the goal of capitalism is not honesty, but power and control. Don Vito Corleone put it best, reflecting, “I refused to be a fool, dancing on the string held by all those big shots…but I thought that, when it was your time, that you would be the one to hold the string”. The idea of family and the American Dream both largely reflect the point that I think Puzo was driving at in the first: the extent to which we as people will sacrifice what is good and honest in our lives in return for selfish desires such as power, wealth, and control. And just like Michael, we may never see ourselves becoming part of our own “family business” of our lives, but that does not mean it can’t happen. After all, “It’s nothing personal, it’s strictly business”.

2112 (8-25-13)

For homework we were assigned to do some textbook reading on theme, which talked about what everyday people perceive to be theme, the differences between a “theme” and a “moral”, and how we should go about identifying a theme within a story. It all seems very simple to understand until one tries to apply these ideas within the context of a complex storyline, something I thought that I should try to do. My mind immediately went not to a profound literary work of art nor a grandiose cinematic production, but rather, went instead to thinking of the multiple themes that lay behind “2112”, a Rush song that actually draws inspiration from the ideas of Ayn Rand, author of Anthem and The Fountainhead, both of which have drawn awe and controversy for their underlying meanings. Above this immensely technical and progressive work of music lies a story that heavily criticizes the nature of the mass against the individual, the dangers of government, and the power of individuality. The story surrounds a character, referred to only as Anonymous, who in the year 2112 in Megadon City has been living out his simple existence in the aftermath of a great war and the creation of the Red Solar Federation. He does not realize in his ignorance that this is a full-on totalitarian government constantly controlling every aspect of human life. But in his blind ignorance he relishes in the thought of having his life in the hands of a manipulative political force, referred to as Priests, who dwell in the Temples of Syrinx. He relays his thoughts saying “I believed what I was told. I thought it was a good life, I thought I was happy…I have always been awed by them, to think that every single facet of every life is regulated and directed from within! Our books, our music, our work and play are all looked after by the benevolent wisdom of the priests…”. The priests, who seem to have a god-like status living in their illustrious temples have “taken care of everything, the words you hear, the songs you sing the pictures that give pleasure to your eyes” as they blot out every sense of freedom that a person may have, very much indicative to the nature of an all-controlling “Big Brother” from 1984. While this may lead several people to believe that the underlying theme of the story to be one filled with paranoia and a political lash out against the nature of socialist and communist governments, like George Orwell and his nightmarish fabrication, as the story continues a new controlling idea emerges: the power of the individual and his fight against the mass. Our Anonymous hero is awakened from his propaganda-filled daze when he stumbles in a cave upon an artifact of an ancient time fully symbolic of liberty, freedom, and individuality: a guitar. “I found it. I brushed away the dust of the years, and picked it up, holding it reverently in
my hands. I had no idea what it might be, but it was beautiful”. The character revels in his newfound discovery and the idea that he can produce something that is his own creation, not that which is of an over-reaching group of tyrants. Yet in his ignorance he wishes to present his discovery to the Priests, naively thinking they will share in the find the artifact that has the same power of expression as does written word. In his humble presentation, thinking his music can change how the priests think and control people’s lives, the head priest Father Brown reacts in fury and destroys his beloved treasure, calling it “Another toy that helped destroy
the elder race [those who lived before the creation of the Red Solar Federation] of man. Forget about your silly whim, it doesn't fit the plan”. Disillusioned after his loss to the mentality of the masses, he wanders home and has a vision: a glimpse of how life used to be, full of the expression of individual thought and freedom and where creativity could flourish. He vividly describes his dream, saying, “I see still the incredible beauty of the sculptured cities and the pure spirit of man revealed in the lives and works of this world”. Yet as he joyously revels in his second ancient discovery, a harsh truth hits him: “how meaningless life had become with the loss of all these things”. He awakens with a start, realizes his perfect world was only a dream, and retreats to the cave where the spark of freedom was first ignited. It is here he realizes what his future has in store for him: “I can no longer live under the control of the Federation…My last hope is that with my death I may pass into the world of my dream, and know peace at last”. As he takes his life and his broken form hits the cold cave floor, it may seem that the fire of freedom had been extinguished but wildfires are not easily subdued, and following the Anonymous hero’s the elder race, which had been in hiding the whole time successfully defeated the Red Solar Federation and prepare to return the world to how things once were. So, with the entire story in mind alongside the sub-themes that were broken down with the progression of the tale, the question remains as to what is the overarching insight that should be gained from this piece. In my opinion, the controlling idea revolves around how the Anonymous hero changes, going from ignorance, to excitement, to all-knowing, and finally to mournful. His constant changing reflects the overall human nature, always being shaped by the circumstances of our daily lives. But underneath the constant shifts there is a warning that we should not allow our circumstances to dictate us based on our past, but let us define our circumstances based on who we are now and let us use this strength to guide us into the right future.

Hemispheres (8-19-13)

The past two weeks we have been talking about Frankenstein in class, one aspect in my opinion being about the two different sides of Victor, his colloquial self whenever he is with his family and friends, and the monstrous other side. While many simply think that only the normal side should dominate and the creative more destructive side be pushed completely aside, I see this as a disproportionate balance. The thought of balance then got me to think of “Hemispheres” a Rush song that deals with the very delicate concept of what aspects of life should truly dominate oneself, but instead of dealing with normalcy and the destructive self, the work deals with the battle between logic and emotion, or in other words, of wisdom and love. The opposing mentalities are characterized by the immortal Greek gods Apollo and Dionysus in the great halls of Olympus, the first being the bringer of wisdom and the latter being the bringer of love. Both of the gods wrestle back and forth, manipulating the people of earth to fully embrace but one mentality, one ‘hemisphere’ of the brain that they believe to be the better one. The prelude begins with “They battled through the ages but still neither force would yield/the people were divided every soul a battlefield”. First Apollo comes to the people of earth to convince them how much of a benefit it is to have logic, reason, and structure dominate one’s life. He entices them by saying “I bring wit and wisdom fair, precious gifts beyond compare…you can live in grace and comfort in the world that you transform”. The people are ecstatic to hear about all they can do with Apollo’s knowledge, going on to build great walls and cities. But amidst all the splendor they have built for themselves, the people cannot help to think that something is missing in their lives, something to alleviate the mundane nature of what their lives have become which are only focused on logic. It is then that they turn to the bringer of love, Dionysus, to overcompensate and allow the other hemisphere of life to dominate, which is love, pleasure, and enjoyment. The god’s clever enticements fully convince the people, as he says to them “You need only trust your feelings only love can steer you right…throw off those chains of reason and your prison disappears”. Almost immediately the people abandon their great creations and happily run out to the forest where they can eat and drink as much as they please without a single care in the world. It is only after a cold winter, starvation, and wolves do the people realize the folly of allowing emotion to dictate their lives. This is then followed by a clash between Apollo and Dionysus and the people of the world are forced to choose sides over which is better. The turmoil is described, as “the universe divided the heart and mind collided…in a cloud of doubt and fears their world was turned asunder into hollow hemispheres”. Neither side will accept the other as victor, and it takes the intervention of an unnamed hero to make the great Olympian gods and the people of earth realize that neither side should be the victor, but instead there should be a balance between the two that allows for both the heart and mind to be together in harmony. Furthermore, we ought to conduct our lives in a way that allows for the healthy balance between logic and emotion, allowing time for both and not letting one become greater than the other. To complete the imagery, the song concludes with “the heart and mind united in a single perfect sphere”. While the context of Frankenstein and his self division is very different, I think this helps us to realize on a more personal scale what it is like to have to deal with the divided self.