The character sketch which I did was that of Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Ramsay is the sketch that I have drawn, to the best of my capability, is a somewhat handsome man. He possesses strong and attractive features (to society's standard of attractive) within his countenance. Yet, other then this from looking at my sketch he as an entity is not physically pleasing because of the other aspects of his physicality vastly over shadow his beauty. His entire physicality besides the handsomeness of his countenance is grim and solum. He is: skinny, possesses many grey spots in his hair(alluding to stress), his facial hair is rugged and un-kept, he is crying, he is tightly holding his hand in a fist in one hand and using the other to keep his head up, and finally the expression on his face only shows aggravation and sorrow. And a passage that helped inspire my perception of what Mr. Ramsay, and which furthermore, illustrates the sketch give a vivid picture of who Mr. Ramsay truly is. In the text it states,

“He was a failure, he said. Mrs. Ramsay flashes her needles. Mr. Ramsay repeated, never taking his eyes from her face, that he was a failure. She blew the words back at him. “Charles Tansley…” she said. But he must have more than that. It was sympathy he wanted, to be assured of his genius, first of all and then to be taken within the circle of life, warmed and soothed, to have his senses restored to him, his barrenness made fertile, and all the rooms of the house made full of life-- the drawing room; behind the drawing-room the kitchen: above the kitchen the bedrooms; and beyond them the nurseries; they must be furnished, they must be filled with life.”(To The LightHouse: 37)

This passage very much encapsulates everything that went into the creation of my illustration of who Mr. Ramsay is. I chose to make Mr. Ramsey skinner in his build because in many cultures a slimmer frame can mean a lack of nourishment-- which can stem from many things, but particularly: sadness, stress and, depression. And which the other features and his depression are very much seen within the text; there are many ques that alluded to it. For instance Mr. Ramsay was constantly sulking and having self pity, stating that he was failure in the beginning of the excerpt. And while he is repeatedly saying this he never once, “takes his eyes off her face”. He is completely defeated which illustrates my sketch very well because he very much looks defeated from how his countenance looks and also from the looks of his body language. This also indicates, from the look of his countenance, the looks of his body language and words that he is uttering, that he is yearning for something from his wife Mrs. Ramsay. And without reading into the next line the reader most likely will come to the conclusion that was he yearns for is pity or sympathy. And they would very be right because the following lines states that, “It was sympathy that he wanted/”. Before even reading this line I already had a preconceived notion that Mr. Ramsay wanted to be pitied and to be given sympathy which is made clear in the illustration. Mr. Ramsay being a failed philosopher and writer and whose family was not well off in comparison to others needs constant reassurance from others that he was not a failure. In the next lines it speaks on how he needs to be first of all assured of his genius and to then be taken into the circle of life, which again shows how depressed and saddened he is because he does not feel anything exceptional about himself for he lacks confidence in himself and his genius. Which is why he sees himself as a failure for he feels he lacks the qualities of a person who is a genius. It is also stated that he wants to be essentially coddled-- specifically stated that he wants to be warmed and soothed and that also he wants his senses restored to him. From him stated consecutivley that he was afailure and staring at his wife it felt exacly how it is stated that he wanted to be warmed and soother-- to be coddled like a child and reausred. I drew him crying and pouting in my sketch because I wanted to capture that wimsicle aspect about him. And he wants also to be feel again because he feels that he lacks substance worth giving to others-- which is why he states that he wants his senses restored to him. This idicates also his sorrow because he feels empty-- which again is also why my sketch of Mr. Ramsay is so skinny and lifeless because thats how it seems he feels. He wanted his barreness to be filled and all the aspects aboout his life to be filled-- even the house he lives in because nothing he seems to have seems to suffice for him. It it all empty, sorrowful and depressing.

                                       Analysis on "The Fish" by Marianne Moore

  The poem, “The Fish”, was written by Marianne Moore in 1918, but then published in public by 1921. This poem has a very ironic title since it is not about a fish, but about the ocean life. Moore has created this poem to give an explicit visual description to the readers. It is an Imagist poem that gives us a visualization about the ocean’s creatures, the ocean, but overall the cycle of life. According to Lowell’s rules on Imagist, a poem has to present an imagine, and that is what Moore wanted to do when creating this poem. The poem has very unique form of lines, making the lines in the shape of tides. This will be a syllabic verse she uses in her poem, so it can mimic the shape of the tides. The tides the ocean makes when touching the sand. The form of lines has a connection with the poem, since that is what it will be about, but also it wants the readers to visualize the ocean and the tides along when reading it. The rhyme schemes of the poem are very natural, but her rhymes are a little forced. The sentence rhythm is short and a little choppy, because you can read some of the ending rhymes with force.
    Marianne Moore ends the poem with a very fascinating finish. “ Repeated evidence has proved that it can only live what can not revive its youth. The sea grows old with it.” In the beginning it starts with the word (“repeated”). Repeated is an important word in the sentence, because it represents the cliffs cycle of life that it has along with the ocean. It’s life recurs again and again everyday, repeating the same lifestyle, which is the ocean colliding with the side of the cliff. Then it starts off by saying, “It can live what can not revive its youth,” this means that after the ocean’s destruction it makes, when colliding with the cliff, the cliff is still living, but being torn apart with the many times the ocean has collided with the cliff. It can still live, but it can not go back to the same form it had in the very beginning. Lastly, it ends with ( “the sea grows old with it”), this sentence means exactly what it says, the ocean is growing old along with the cliff. The cliff will last forever until its parts are fully torn apart and have fallen, but until now it is living and growing old with the ocean.
   The poem itself has many different meanings, but the word that may have various of meanings is the word “it”. I know it can be a very simple word that may appear to only have one meaning to it, but in reality it has a lot of meanings. At the end of the poem it says, “ it can live on what can not revive its youth,” but also, “ the sea grows old in it.” So, what exactly is this it? Some may believe it can be the ocean’s creatures, the ecosystem, and other ideas, but looking back to the whole poem, it seems like this it can be a cliff. The cliff living besides the ocean, and experiencing the abuses from the ocean when it collides with it.
   The author appears to have avoided giving out what the poem really is about. It seems like she wanted her readers to think and visualize the different scenarios that is happening within the poem. It is clear that it is not about a fish because of the title, but about the ocean. The poem is targeting one main key idea that the author hasn’t really clearly brought out, but gave out ideas. She leaves her readers thinking on what can possibly the author is talking about. It can either be the ocean’s ecosystem, the human interaction with the ocean, or a cliff. In my defense, it is a cliff that she is talking about. In the rest of her poem, Moore gives out ideas on how it can be a cliff. With barnacles living on the side, the abuse the ocean gives it, but lastly the sea growing old with it. It couldn’t be that it can be the ecosystem because after the creatures die they are completely gone. The plants can die as well, but the cliff can last for a very long time until it has been abused for various of years, and all the parts of the cliff has fallen off

Blog Post One: "Before the Law"

My group’s reading of Franz Kafka’s “Before the Law” was analyzed from a Marxist approach due to the fact that is appears that the man and the gatekeeper exhibit a difference in social class. Each member concurred that the man embodies those of the lower class with the desire to achieve higher status, while the gatekeeper embodies those of the upper class who are not allowing those of a lower status to have equal opportunities or attempting to assist them in their endeavors to discover how they can also succeed in a society that exhibits qualities of a class system. This conclusion was made because the man is “from the country,” indicating that he is of a lower social status, and the gatekeeper possesses the power to grant or deny entry to what is past the gate (Kafka 1). We determined that the poor man from the country’s desire is a desire for wealth, power, and high status, and the gatekeeper possesses all of these given that he has all of the authority to allow or not allow the man access. Overall, it was concluded that the entirety of the short story exemplifies not only the differences between social classes, but also the division between them.

Another feasible approach to analyze this piece is the reader response theory due to the the evidence that the piece provides the freedom to interpret this in a number of ways depending on the individual’s own thoughts and opinions. For example, the ending of the story, specifically, is extremely opaque and very open for interpretation due to its vagueness given that there are many different manners in which one could interpret as the gate being specifically reserved for the man. While the man approaches death, the gatekeeper exclaims that “no one else can gain entry, since this entrance was assigned only to [the man and he is] going now to close it” (Kafka 1). This conclusion to the story proves to be unclear given that it leaves the story almost unresolved. With this type of an ending, it raises questions and can lead to a multitude of interpretations because it is so vague. Analyzing the piece while employing the reader response theory permits a number of interpretations that have the potential to be valid due to the whole story’s lack of specificity and development in the character descriptions and the openness for interpretation that the ending leaves.

Despite how the reader response theory has the ability to address how the story’s non-transparent qualities allow for many interpretations to be employed, a Marxist approach proves to be more applicable. Because of the opaqueness of the short piece, it can be difficult to utilize or apply the reader response theory to seek its meaning because the theory itself is unspecific to what any piece has the potential to mean. While it does narrow the overall analysis, what the Marxist approach accomplishes that the reader response theory does not, is that it better addresses the aspects of the story that the reader response theory alone cannot. A Marxist approach serves to be a more practical manner of addressing what the work expresses with the detail it does have. Throughout the story, it is clear that the gatekeeper and the man are symbols of differences in class given that the man is from the country and the gatekeeper has the power to deny him passage. For example, toward the beginning of the piece, the man expresses that “the law should be accessible for everyone, he thinks, but as he now looks more closely at the gatekeeper in his fur coat, at his large pointed nose and his long, thin, black Tartar’s beard, he decides that it would be better to wait until he gets permission to go inside” (Kafka 1). Here, it is evident that the man intended to attempt to pass the gatekeeper in order to pass, but once he notices the gatekeeper’s posh wardrobe, he decides that it would be better to seek permission. Evidently, this demonstrates that the gatekeeper’s wardrobe is an indicator of his power as an upper class member because clothing often has the ability to distinguish people from the different classes within society. The work possesses minimal detail, yet the details that Kafka does include are ones that describe status and power. In other words, because these are details that Kafka does include with the story’s lack of transparency, it is logical to conclude that the story is reflective of the differences in class, more specifically how those in the upper class have the ability to control the lives of those in the lower classes.

Aina- Reader Response Thoery

Before The Law

    

     Based on my group’s reading of Before The Law we determined we could read this thru a Psychological Theories approach because of the man acting like a stubborn child. The perspective suggest that the man was viewed in the same way that Freud suggest we see a child, as helpless and how there are outside influences affecting his behaviour. The man attempting to bypass the gatekeeper would be a symbol or metaphor for life, a man’s life and it’s frugal attempts at succeeding in life without any success because in the end he is helpless in the same way a child is helpless according to Freud, already predestined, or uncapable of affecting his destiny.  In the story Before The Law we can wonder what was the subconscious motivation behind the man trying to enter The Law. This idea is considered Freudian thinking, because “Freud popularized the notion that the mind can be divided into conscious and unconscious components and that we are often motivated most strongly by the unconscious” according Psychological Theories definition. From a Psychological Theory standpoint we would examine the desires for the literary characters and motivation for his actions. For example in this story why is the man trying to gain access into The Law, what are is underlying motivators and why is he wasting his entire life in pursuit of this, and what is so important that he waits there trying to accomplish this dream to gain entry even at the cost of his life. There has to be an unconscious motivation to push him forward in sustaining his position in staying there trying to convince the gatekeeper.  We get a notion of his beliefs when the man states in the story: “The man from the country has not expected such difficulties: the law should always be accessible for everyone, he thinks... he decides that it would be better to wait until he gets permission to go inside.” There seems to be an internal motivator a sense of justice that the law should always be accessible for everyone and this could explain his reasons for not abandoning his position. But there has to be a reason beyond the characters knowledge in his unconscious according to this theory for his insistence to try to gain access to the law.
     In my opinion this story would be better looked at from a Reader’s Response Theory because it is up for interpretation based on the reader. The gatekeeper is a metaphor for some obstacle in life which can take on many different meanings based on the reader’s state of mind. For example, a young person could see the gatekeeper as a barrier between their career goals and accomplishing them like earning a degree, or passing a difficult class. A younger person could see it as a girlfriends impossible needs and constant unhappiness and how to please them, and an immigrant could see the gatekeeper as the border keeping them from entering a new country and how impenetrable it is to gain entry. The reader would make the gatekeeper their own assumption based on their frame of thought. The same thing goes for the man in the story most readers could identify with the man and think it is them, or assign it a label like an immigrant or a boyfriend or husband or student. The man can also be who ever the reader decides it to be because according to reader response “a text … is not a container filled with meaning by its author but rather an interaction between an author and a reader” and the interpretation of the text is going to be based on “unique insight” and the “reader’s life experiences”. 
     The text, the story is full of ambiguity and there are a lot of gaps in the text and it’s meaning for this reason I believe a readers response approach would be more effective than a psychological theory, I feel there is not enough information to support the reasons behind the characters actions, his motivators or even is unconscious desires to gain entry in the law because the cost are too high, losing his life. There is not a clear explanation, in the story it says there is a man trying to gain entry into the law “But the gatekeeper says that he cannot grant him entry at the moment.” There is not a clear definition of what “the law” is and the reason behind the gatekeeper not allowing entry into this abstract law ever even after the man is literally dying. By definition into a readers response it states key associations for this critical approach are gaps which this story has many and process. The process means that the meaning is not fixed. Based on this as time passes our ideas can change and in 20 years we can read the gatekeeper and the man as something else based on what we are going thru at the time, therefore I feel that a readers response is a better critical approach to this story than a psychological theory. There is more evidence that the gatekeeper is a metaphor for something other than an literal gatekeeper and that the man could represent whatever the reader chooses. There is evidence in the text like: “Here no one else can gain entry, since this entrance was assigned only to you. I’m going now to close it.” There is no meaning behind a gatekeeper for only one person, and he does not even allow him inside the gate ever and only closes it when he is dying. How can so many years pass by and how does the man survive, does he eat, there is no logical reasons behind it. It seems more logical that they are all symbols for people to assign and interpret at their own discretion like an interaction between reader and literature as a reader response theory would suggest that is why this theory seems more true.

Word Count: 992

Kafka's Marxist Approach

My partner and I read Kafka’s “Before the Law” as having a formalist critical approach. We chose this approach because we were a bit confused on what the text was about or who the man and gatekeeper were, making it difficult to choose a critical approach. We thought of the reading and the whole interaction between the man and the gatekeeper as being something related to sin or a higher power vs man. Sin came to mind because it appeared as though the man was being punished throughout the whole story. He was not being allowed through the gate, but it was unclear why or what was needed to get through. The gatekeeper reminded me of a God, and my partner and I agreed that word choice such as “gatekeeper,” “illumination,” and “diminishing” offered a fairy tale-like reading and could also be read as a children’s story based on its structure. However, if thought of as punishment, the gatekeeper would read more as a devil/dark figure and not a God or figure of light. If read as a children’s story, the story could then appear to have a lesson behind it, possibly with religious ties to it as well. It reminds me of a story one would hear at a Catholic Elementary School, or a story read to children during Sunday church. Regardless, it is clear the gatekeeper is superior and holds all power.

The reading, in structure, is one large text rather than being broken up into paragraphs, making for a much less formal structure. It reads as a story meant to entertain rather than having a deeper meaning and meant to make the audience think about hierarchies within society because it is so open-ended. The heavy use of dialogue throughout the text also offers a fiction short story-feel to it, emphasizing the fairy tale reading created by the narrator’s diction. However, when analyzing the dialogue and tone of the story, one could read it as also having a Marxist approach. This would take into consideration the unequal economic and power divisions created by higher authority with the gatekeeper being the one in charge, and the man pleading to be let past the gate. The entire time, the gatekeeper has a dominating tone and is clearly aware of his power within his role.

Depending on how we were interpreting it, the gatekeeper could also be read as representing any figures of authority such as police officers and government officials working against marginalized groups of color. When reading this from a Marxist approach, one could think of the gatekeeper as representing those who dominate our own society: rich white men. The man, then, becomes those belonging to marginalized groups of color, or simply even anyone who doesn’t identify as a wealthy white man. At some point in the story, the gatekeeper states that the only one truly in the way of the man was the man himself, as the entry was created solely for him. This can read as lower-class groups being told they will remain poor because that is the way it was meant to be. This could also read as people of color being told they are not trying hard enough or using their resources wisely to get out of the poor living conditions they are under. Being judged for continuing to live under poor conditions or barely making enough to get by and then being told it is your own fault, is the same tone the gatekeeper was using towards the man. It is evident that the gatekeeper feels superior to the man and views the man as foolish for being unable to get through, telling him: “Here no one else can gain entry, since this entrance was assigned only to you. I’m going now to close it” (Kafka). The gatekeeper acknowledges how simple it was for him to tell the man this information yet continues to make him feel inferior by so carelessly closing the gate.

I believe the Marxist approach is the most useful because it focuses on the injustices of the story and can be used to tell a story of dominant cultures. Even if viewed as a children’s story, it is clear that the man was being treated unfairly and should have been let past the gate since the beginning. The Marxist approach allows for critique of dominant society in all aspects of culture and works to dismantle the hierarchies created by ruling classes. Many may argue that readers cannot make such bold assumptions based solely off an ambiguous story; however, not knowing what living under oppressive societies and figures of power is like means it is unfair to dismiss the Marxist approach as less useful/convincing.

Analyzing Kafka’s “Before the Law” With Psychology and Marxism

Word Count: 943

Analyzing Kafka’s “Before the Law” With Psychology and Marxism

Kafka’s “Before the Law” describes a man’s attempts to join the law, only to encounter trouble in the forms of a gate and its gatekeeper. Ultimately, he fails to reach his goal, and many details of the story are left as a mystery. Just as there are many critical reading approaches, this story has an equal amount of possible interpretations. In my opinion, it is best to interpret the story as a psychological criticism with the man’s futile actions indicating his weakening mental stability. However, another valid interpretation of the story is using the Marxist approach and seeing the man’s struggles as proof of the difficulties of class mobility.

My group interpreted the story through a psychological viewpoint. As examined throughout the story, readers can observe the man’s changing mental states during his challenge to join the law. Although the visible obstacles to the law are the gate and the gatekeeper, the less obvious issue is the man’s own mental fortitude. While the gatekeeper claims that there are more “gatekeepers, each more powerful than the other,” the man never investigates for himself whether this is the truth or not. Since the man is not courageous enough to venture past the gate, he is forced to wait for an immeasurable amount of time. Rather, his mind convinces him to “spend everything, no matter how valuable, to win over the gatekeeper.” Despite his strong attachment to the law, he refuses to take the risk of passing the gate in fears of the possible future threats. Instead, he tries to take the seemingly easier path of bribing entry into the law. He is fearless in losing physical possessions, but his frail mental strength prevents him from progressing further.

Another element supporting this approach is the special emphasis on the symbols of the gate and the gatekeeper. As stated before, the gate represents an obvious physical barrier to the law. Strangely, the gate has no special visible traits except for being in the path of the man. On the other hand, the other physical obstacle, the gatekeeper, intimidates the man even more than the gate. His “large pointed nose and his long, thin, black Tartar’s beard” are some reasons that convince the man to not pass the gate. From the man’s point of view, these features intimidate him as the gatekeeper appears cold and hard to talk to. In addition, giving the gatekeeper a clear and professional-looking physical appearance causes him to become the target of the man’s attention. In contrast to the lacklustre description of the gate, the more easily imaginable gatekeeper is an easier object to pay attention to. However, the biggest impact that the gatekeeper has is mentally as he is the cause of the man’s mental breakdown during the waiting process; “This one seems to him the only obstacle for entry into the law.” By only obsessing over the gatekeeper, he loses all other sense of reasoning. In addition, the lack of personal connection throughout the wait also causes the man to spiral into madness. Another element to support the psychological approach is the unstated motive behind the man’s desire to join the law. The man’s strong attachment to law is clearly expressed, but it is unclear why he wants entry in the first place. However, as he puts it, “Everyone strives after the law.” Regardless of a person’s personal background or history, the law is seen as the ultimate goal. However, it is never explained on what exactly is the law. In addition, the gatekeeper remains an enigma since his thinking process throughout the man’s waiting process is unclear.

Another possible critical approach to read the story with is Marxist criticism. To simplify the concept of Marxism, it focuses on the socioeconomic struggles for the individual. It is possible to examine the story by seeing the gate as a barrier against the progress of the peasants into an upper class. By thinking of the man as a lower class trying to achieve a higher status, it reflects the difficulty of changing the social structure of the populace. This also explains why the man kept waiting until “he no longer has much time to live.” People naturally have unlimited desires and wants, and having a higher status would lead to more wealth and an easier lifestyle. By having the law embody the luxurious life, people would naturally gather to try their luck on gaining entry, even if it meant waiting forever. Although “the law should always be accessible for everyone,” there are obviously obstacles preventing the common man from succeeding. The inequality in power prevents the man from continuing on the path to the law. Despite his belongings and wealth, he is intimidated by the supposed power of the gatekeeper and the future gatekeepers. The reason for why the man is prevented entry is never stated; similarly, people face discrimination outside of their control.

“Before the Law” fits the criteria for a variety of critical approaches. Depending on how a person views the law, the gate, and the gatekeeper, their interpretation will differ from another person’s. Personally, I feel that the psychological critical approach works better for this story than the Marxist approach. Reading the story as a psychological criticism explains the reasoning to focus on the man’s fluctuating thinking process. On the other hand, the Marxist theory is based on assumptions with no clear evidence from the text. The author purposely left the interpretation of the story up to the reader because there is no right answer on what critical approach is the best to read the story with. Similarly, there is no surefire way to gain entry into the elusive law.

Pursuit of Life & Equality: Kafka's "Before the Law"

Word Count: 901

Pursuit of Life & Equality: Kafka's "Before the Law"

My group adopted my psychoanalytical approach toward Kafka’s “Before the Law” which emphasizes humanity’s helplessness in uncovering the meaning of life. The countryman’s childish behavior during his long wait, his lifelong attempt to access the law, and the limited accessibility of the law acts as supporting evidence for such a perspective.

The man’s behavior shows how humanity is flustered and impatiently eager to uncover what life really means. After the gatekeeper gives him a stool to sit on during his years of waiting to see the law, the countryman “makes many attempts to be let in, and he wears the gatekeeper out with his requests.” Because humanity is currently unable to make sense of life’s underlying mechanics, it is left helpless to time’s – aka the gatekeeper’s – prohibitions.  The gatekeeper, by telling the man “’It is possible’ [to gain access to the law] … ‘but not now,’’” gives the man a false sense of hope that he might one day be able to see it. This false sense of hope only adds fuel to the fire of helplessness and is the main influence of the humanity’s impatience and fervent hunt to uncovering the unknown.

The man’s lifelong attempt to access “the law” and failure at doing so represents how mankind’s endless search for the core of life even surpasses a single lifetime. During his later years of waiting and hoping to access the law, the countryman’s “eyes grow weak… [and] he can no longer lift his stiffening body.” Humanity wishes to understand the complexities that govern our universe and become omniscient; however, it is impossible to derive the true meaning of life in a single lifetime. Again, humanity is left helpless and cannot satisfy its single, most pure desire. The grand concept of life’s hidden meaning is unattainable by a person while they experience life (perhaps because experiencing life is the true meaning of life – but that is simply speculation). Furthermore, the limited accessibility of the law to the man reflects how humans are tempted to uncover the true meaning of life at whatever means possible. At the beginning of the passage “the gate to the law stands open, as always, and the gatekeeper walks to the side, so the man bends over in order to see through the gate into the inside… [but] he decides that it would be better to wait until he gets permission to go inside.” By getting a glimpse of what lies beyond our limited experience with life, this feeds into our desires to find some deeper secret within the grand scheme of life but shows how humanity will not uncover the whole meaning of life while they are living; we are only allowed a sneak peek.

However, one of my group members interpreted the text from a historical approach, which is most evident by the gatekeeper saying he is powerful and the man thinking the law should be accessible by everyone. They considered it to be a criticism of the growing social tensions in Austria-Hungary at the beginning of World War I.

The gatekeeper’s precaution of his own strength and the mention of stronger gatekeepers ahead represents the different tiers of power and influence within the anti-Serbian movement during World War I. As the man peers over, the gatekeeper says:

“’I am powerful. And I am only the most lowly gatekeeper. But from room to room stand gatekeepers, each more powerful than the other. I can’t endure even one glimpse of the third.’”

The first gatekeeper symbolizes the common folk: the Christian and Muslim citizens of Austria who supported the scapegoating of Serbs, while the stronger gatekeepers that lie ahead symbolize the politicians and other government figures that encouraged the Anti-Serb riots. This highlights how the discrimination at the core of this sentiment was not just among ordinary civilians, but it was deeply rooted within the national government.

On the other hand, the countryman believing “the law should always be accessible for everyone” represents the Serbians who were being restricted from fair treatment and respect. The Serbians were denied equal protection and being persecuted by the its fellow countrymen and government, hoping to one day be equal members of society and not be blamed for something that they had no influence on. However, as time went on and their discrimination continued, Serbian citizens became restless and watch their hopes die under the Austrian government, eventually causing a war between Austria-Hungary and Serbia. The gatekeeper’s final words "No one else could ever be admitted here, since this gate was made only for you. I am now going to shut it" further illuminates how the Anti-Serbian members specifically targeted Serbians to be their scapegoat. It acts as the final nail in the coffin to Serbians since it is saying that specifically Serbians cannot be fully equal according to anti-Serb sentiment, and therefore the notion of an egalitarian society is impossible.

In my opinion, I think both approaches are equally truthful and have different uses that can be beneficial in a variety of ways. A psychoanalytical approach helps a person understand the mindset of another human being and appeals to logos. A historical approach gives social, political, and cultural context and can appeal to pathos and ethos. I don’t think any one approach is better or more useful than the others. Instead, I would encourage the use of multiple approaches in order to get a complicated yet holistic perspective.

Recognizing the Triviality of Youth in the Structure of "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" and "Call Me By Your Name"

Refreshingly, Eliot's work "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" and Luca Guadagnino's film "Call Me By Your Name" maintain the same traces of insignificant young musings, seen through the way that time is represented through the works. The elements in both works are able to slow time through different methods in order to remark on the superficiality of young infatuation. By manipulating the way that time is viewed in the two pieces, the works are able to demonstrate the trivial pursuit of young love in comparison to time's power over all earthly desires.  

Eliot manipulates time in "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" through the use of structure in order to reflect on the power of time to overtake any minor musings found important in youth. One example of the influence that structure has on the piece can be seen in the separated couplets for the statement "In the room the women come and go / Talking of Michelangelo" (14). This phase is repeated twice in the beginning stanzas of the piece. The creation of a separate stanza for this phrase, as well as its disconnection to the piece as a whole, slows down the speed of the work as the two line break varies in comparison to the twelve line stanzas that precede it. This shifts the way the beginning of the poem is read, as the innate beat is slowed down. Rather than maintain a steady structure for the stanzas, Eliot makes the reader digest the poem slower by focusing on two lines of text at a time in order to slow down the pace of the work as a whole. By doing this, the couplets seem to be an older or external voice commenting on the tumultuous desires of a younger self. In addition, they lack the same questioning tone that the longer stanzas maintain through their constant doubt, stating "[d]o I dare [d]isturb the universe" and "[s]o how should I presume" (15). By alleviating the same tone within the couplets, they seem to be from a different period in time. This same structure is repeated later in the work, as the voice of the poem states " I grow old...I grow old... I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled" (18). This reoccurrence of the two line structure seen in the earlier parts of the poem remarks on the same use of these stanzas in order to manipulate time to the reader by integrating an older voice into the series of younger musings.

Luca Guadagnino similarly reveals the foolishness of youth throughout his film "Call Me By Name" by combining the turbulent and youthful character of Elio with tedious scenes of daily life in Italy. The way Guadagnino created the film is through a series of long scenes, all involving different mundane acts that Elio partakes in during the summer. Clips of the young boy swimming, biking, or laying in the sun dominate the entirety of the movie, making the watcher feel as if his summer will continue into eternity. The time in the film seems to move slower, as the simple plot lends itself to long scenes in which the director can express the never ending influence that a hot summer can have on a young boy. This aspect of the film is combine with Elio's constant impatience, as his infatuation with a new love, Oliver, becomes his main worry. By combining the normal leisurely activities of summer with Elio's constant worry over Oliver, his musings become seem secondary as the long scenes of him swimming and laying in the sun seem to overtake any true desire he may have for Oliver. In addition, these activities epitomize Elio's young age, making it difficult for the viewer to visualize depth in his actions. Eventually, Elio and Oliver's love affair comes to an end, and Elio comes to the reality that Oliver must go home for the winter. As the seasons change, the long scenes during the summer shift quickly to a winter scene of Elio in front of a fire, crying over Oliver. This shift in season represents an end to the summer, proving time's ability to end the musings of the young. By contrasting the inner turmoil of Elio with the long scenes of mundane summer activities, Elio's infatuation seems to be another pastime rather than a love of substance, similar to the way that the structure of "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" reflects the triviality of youth. 

“The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock” in conversation with Marvel’s Runaways

While Eliot’s poetry and the Marvel Comics graphic novel/television series originate from drastically different time periods and address different topics, both can be seen as an artistic expression of self-identity and ennui surrounding social and personal relationships as time goes by. Through examining the metaphors and dramatic language of both medias, readers can identify the youthful angst present surrounding each central characters’ experiences. Each example explicates a different, often ambiguous meaning, yet all return to the ideals of discomfort and in one’s own life. 

J. Alfred Prufrock’s tale regards a lone man’s anxieties about his life and relations to others, lamenting the days gone by and wondering about his future. Meanwhile, Runaways involves an ensemble cast of characters, each grappling with questions of their personal identities whilst pondering their relationships with not only each other, but with their parents as well (who are quickly revealed to be involved with an alien supervillain). Although the fundamental structure of these stories are quite different, where Prufrock prepares “a face to meet the faces that you meet” (Eliot), the teens of Runaways also must learn who they are around their community--each creating tensions between their identities and those surrounding them. 

Of course, Runaways addresses teens whose identities as accidental superheroes are far from the typical, especially when compared to Prufrock’s presumably stereotypical middle-aged male “hero.” These differences may be embedded in cultural context of the time period of each respective media; however, the topics of sexual frustrations and mortality don’t immediately extend to the runaway teens central to the comic series. Instead, the purposeful utilization of ambiguity around Prufrock’s anxieties allow interpretation of his angst to be left up to the reader, whereas Runaways clearly addresses the ideals of coming of age in a turbulent world to ground the characters in reality. 

More importantly, the uses of metaphors and allusion are central to the themes of angst found in each tale. Eliot’s poetry starts with an epigraph from Dante’s Inferno, which infers that the tale is open to readers’ interpretation. In addition, the narrator refers to a multitude of historical texts-- involving authors like Shakespeare, Chaucer, and even texts like The Bible to describe Prufrock’s apparent sense of ennui. He describes himself in reference to a multitude of character archetypes, such as calling himself “almost, at times, the Fool” (Eliot) to demonstrate the tension between his identity and the world around him.

While Runaways certainly does not distinctly reference any historical or religious texts, the series also relies upon many metaphors and allusions to pop culture to express the personal tension each teen must endure. Many of the characters are given code names embedded in cultural meanings, such as Sister Grimm (based off the Grimm brothers) and Lucy in the Sky (referencing the Beatles song). These allusions to popular culture not only differentiate each character, but gives them an alternate identity that they grapple with in regards to their own powers and the discourse they endure with their parents. These further the tension between self and other, mirroring the ennui Eliot writes about.

In addition to the allusions to popular culture, different metaphors further enforce the notions of discomfort prominent in each respective story. For Prufrock, he describes a “yellow smoke that rubs its muzzle on the window-panes” (Eliot), utilizing the color and toxic feeling of smoke to indicate the decay and inner tension the narrator feels about arriving at the event he describes. The smoke makes its appearance several times throughout the poem, creating a metaphor that compares the physical state of the smoke to the mental state of the narrator. 

Runaways is a much longer-running series, so the metaphors found are much more complex and lengthy, yet they also work to link tangible items to the feelings of youthful angst each character feels. Each of the teens are given a power that becomes a metaphor for their struggles-- Nico’s “Staff of One” represents the loneliness she feels as she loses those around her, and Karolina’s glowing powers due to being half-alien later represents her personal struggle with her sexuality. While far more outlandish than Prufrock’s references to the Bible, these examples make use of physical items or states of being that shed light on the sense of ennui found threading throughout the series.

Naturally, Eliot’s cultural allusions and metaphors greatly differ due to being nearly a century older than Runaways, but both end up describing the turbulence of personal identity and self-expression through these respective formal element. These elements, though sometimes subtle--especially in the poem--are key to understanding the existentialist and often angsty ideals found in modern media.

Blog Post #1

ENL 10C

Blog Post #1

            In the piece, “Before the Law,” by Franz Kafka, our group discusses a literal perspective on the term: “law,” comparing the gatekeeper to a judge of sorts, determining the fate of those who stand before him. My fellow group members discussed the literary approach as relating to psychological theories. They came to this conclusion by highlighting the motivations held by each of the characters. For example, the man’s desires to enter the guarded gate and the gatekeepers wishes to keep him out. Since the theory determines society as being driven by their deepest aspirations, this approach seemed fitting for a potential approach used by Kafka. The connected between actual law and the psychological theory was based on the man’s futile attempts such as, “[spending] everything” he possess to exit the lawless land. Also, the idea of imprisonment was developed due to the man becoming “childish” over the many years “studying the gatekeeper.” Because of the seclusion from the outside world, prisoners can potentially become mentally unstable, relating to the man’s deteriorating mental state. However, I considered the religious aspect involved in socety’s definition of ultimate law. Kafka’s presentation of the relationship between the unnamed man and the reluctant gatekeeper demonstrates the power dynamic held by each of the characters, one visibly more powerful than the other. This different viewpoint contributes to my idea of Structuralism as the literary theory presented in “Before the Law.”

            Structuralism focuses on the nature and understandings of the social world and on how those beliefs are used for association. The conclusion of the man longing to enter the gates of heaven was determined by the influence embedded by my upbringing. The gatekeeper describes himself as “powerful,” guarding the law that “should always be accessible for everyone.” The image displayed of a mighty being protecting a place that “should” be guaranteed to, also reminds one of a holy figure measuring one’s faith and moral standing upon entering Heaven. Initially, all possess the ability to enter, but after a brief “[interrogation]” of the individual, a different outcome can be expected. Society lives the entirely of their lives wishing to experience Heaven in the afterlife, but when questioned of their ways and intentions they may not satisfy the requirements. The questions presented seem “indifferent” to the man bu the “kind that great men put.” Since the inquiry consists of general information of one’s life, they appear to possess little to no meaning, but it is the underlining qualities of a person that paves the way to their overall characteristics. The universal qualities revolving religion, Heaven, Hell, and a significant figure create a connection between the author and the audience. Though various elements of religion differ, society is connected solely based on a general faith.

            The man’s patience and sacrifices to something he truly believed was worthwhile resonates with the reader’s own offerings. Despite being denied access, the man “decides that it would be better to wait until he gets permission to go inside” rather than force his entry. It is not so much about entering the gate to the man, but being worthy of the allowance. Experiencing Heaven proves one has become deserving of the luxury, reassuring the audience that one cannot simply sneak their way in. After the man grows impatient and frustrated, he “spends everything, no matter how valuable, to win over the gatekeeper.” The gatekeeper accepts the items not as a means to enter but as reassurance for the man’s failed attempt. This is a lesson to those who possess an impressive amount of belongings. Those successes in one’s lifetime are significant and are worth acknowledgment, but do not translate to earning a place in Heaven. This understanding of the insignificance of wealth after death contributes to how the author potentially interprets riches and how he wishes to convey that message to his audience.

            After many years of waiting, the man reaches the end of his time on Earth and his last attempt to persuade the gatekeeper. He gathers the remainder of his strength the question the gatekeeper about him appearing to be the only one requesting entry despite everyone’s desire to experience the law. He mentions the gate “was assigned only to [him]” and begins to close the gate. The author is displaying a judgement day that is an individual experience rather than a collective. Because there are many factors to consider in one’s life, each person is to be evaluated separately. Structurally this explains why the story features two characters: the decision maker and the subject being decided. Also, this highlights how the author views the determination of others.

Kafka: Marxist critical analysis

      “Before the Law” is a short story by Kafka and is interesting due to Kafka’s background. Kafka’s life is fascinating because it is clear that Kafka was a person with several serious issues including possible mental illness and socioeconomic stress. His work is Kafkaesque, meaning that his work is struck with horror, alienation, and confusion. I did not completely agree with my group’s assessment that a reader-response critique was the most appropriate because I felt that a reader-response analysis was a cop-out. However, I went along with this assessment because they did not seem to buy my Marxist analysis of the story.

            I felt that a reader-response critique was not as useful as a Marxist analysis because one can literally use a reader-response critique to analyze any text and just say that there is meaning coming largely as a result of the style, verbiage, and structure that was used by the author yet is susceptible to the identity and perception of the reader. One must realize that some people analyzing a text can read a story and not take into account particular words and phrases that could stand out to other readers. Perhaps, a reader-response critique could be useful if that was the intention of the author but in this particular case the evidence provided in the story does not necessarily indicate this.  

It is very tempting to say that a psychological critique would be the most potent however this is probably true only if one has a cursory understanding of Kafka’s life which was full of abnormalities that one would not find in most people’s lives. A psychological critique could possibly be the most interesting but there are key words used in the story that indicate the contrary. A psychological critique is a form of analysis that again could work but does not suffice for this story. Possible ways to look at this from a critical psychological perspective could be looking at the story as a kind of stream of consciousness, a natural flow of ideas that were edited by the author after. Another way to look at the story from the psychological realm could be analyzing the use of word choice like looking at the particular descriptions of the antagonist and the way words are used when the antagonist and protagonist are communicating.

Due to my possible inherent bias, a Marxist analysis seems the most useful however I think I can provide enough evidence to support my analysis. My first line of defense is the fact that there is a protagonist and antagonist. One can argue that this is very common in literature and I would probably agree but one must take into account that there is primarily one character fighting or arguing against a superior. This is important to look at from a Marxist viewpoint because Marxists argue that the ownership class or capitalist class dominates the oppressed working class. To make the comparison between the domineering presence of the gatekeeper and the man struggling before the law is not a stretch from my view.

The evidence is present in the diction, tone, mood, and syntax used in the story. The diction tells us a lot about the kind of words that the author thought was important to signify to the reader the point he was trying to make about the power dynamic between the gatekeeper and the “man from the country” who “spends everything” in order to get past the gatekeeper who wears a “fur coat.” The tone the author employs is sullen, morbid, anxious. This can be seen in the text where the protagonist “sits for days and years” who “is already dying” and “curses the unlucky circumstance”. The mood is rejected and depressed. The mood is rejected as the man constantly tries to gain entrance but is not allowed to enter like an adolescent trying to gain access to a nightclub against the will of the domineering bouncer. The depressed mood can be seen as the protagonist “no longer has much time to live.” The syntax is the least obvious but if one looks closely at sentences like: The gatekeeper sees that the man is already dying and, in order to reach his diminishing sense of hearing, he shouts at him, “Here no one else can gain entry, since this entrance was assigned only to you. I’m going now to close it.” in contrast to the sentence before, the final sentence’s structure shows a clear desire to convey the gatekeeper’s explanation to the protagonist even though he is at the verge of death.Word Count: 759