Monday, October 27, 2014
Thursday, October 9, 2014
Envy Quickly Fades Into Admiration
When a person admires someone or something it is usually because that object of affection is what we are not. Animals have many abilities that humans lack like the ability to run as fast as a cheetah or even the capability of flight like a bird. These talents that animals have often make humans jealous. This envy leads to humans thinking of how lucky these animals are and how unique they are. This minuscule piece of jealousy vanishes and leads to us admiring that particular animal. An animal I was at first envious of was an owl. I was jealous of their ability of flight and their superior eyesight. Their beautiful and chilling vocal cries also made me jealous. Their vast beauty and their capability to travel anywhere captivated me. It was not fair that an animal was capable of being so in charge of their lives and they had the ability of freedom. At first I didn't think it was fair that such an astonishing animal was gifted with all these astounding abilities but then I realized that humans are gifted with talents that owls are not. This made me less envious of owls and I started to admire them. I then perceived that owls are very similar to myself. While I cannot fly like an owl I can run while an owl can barely walk. I also came to the conclusion that owls aren't really free. They too are controlled by humanity. An owl cannot simply go to a place like New York City and live because it will not survive. It would not be capable to live in large cities and needs the forest to survive, limiting its freedom.
This theme of admiring animals is continued in the two essays, "The Death of the Moth" by Virginia Woolf and "The Courage of Turtles" by Edward Hougland. Both these authors admire their respective animals for similar reasons. In the end of both stories the author tries to help a dying animal while the animal struggles to adapt to its new surroundings. Edward tries to help save the turtles by throwing it into the water but he realizes too late that the turtle cannot survive in the deep water. Virginia tried to save a moth that was dying to escape the house. She tried to pick it up on a pencil but realized too late that it was dead. Both these animals fought to survive and tried to escape death. The animal's struggle to live and their refusal of death made that authors admire them. The authors were baffled by the animals’ tries to escape the inedibility of death even though they will ultimately die.
(10/9/14 at 09:52pm)
This theme of admiring animals is continued in the two essays, "The Death of the Moth" by Virginia Woolf and "The Courage of Turtles" by Edward Hougland. Both these authors admire their respective animals for similar reasons. In the end of both stories the author tries to help a dying animal while the animal struggles to adapt to its new surroundings. Edward tries to help save the turtles by throwing it into the water but he realizes too late that the turtle cannot survive in the deep water. Virginia tried to save a moth that was dying to escape the house. She tried to pick it up on a pencil but realized too late that it was dead. Both these animals fought to survive and tried to escape death. The animal's struggle to live and their refusal of death made that authors admire them. The authors were baffled by the animals’ tries to escape the inedibility of death even though they will ultimately die.
(10/9/14 at 09:52pm)
Sunday, October 5, 2014
Complexity
"Early the next morning we checked out. It was February 26, 1979, a Monday morning. We would drive out of town, find a hilltop, watch the eclipse, and then drive back over the mountains and home to the coast. How familiar things are here; how adept we are; how smoothly and professionally we check out! I had forgotten the clown's smiling head and the hotel lobby as if they had never existed. Gary put the car in gear and off we went, as off we have gone to a hundred other adventures."-Annie Dillard, Total Eclipse
This passage in the story stands out to me due to its complexity in meaning. When I first read this passage I thought it was just another simple part of the story but when I reread it I realized that the passage's simplicity hides its sophisticated meaning. At first I thought it was just a passage that was stating when this event took place and a brief explanation of what happened prior to the main event. However I was wrong. Dillard briefly described the rising actions to the story for a reason. Her lack of detail was intentional because she wanted this passage to stick out against the rest of her story. She's trying to say that no matter how important we think the small things, like the creepy clown and checking out of a hotel, are they don't matter, it is all a part of a routine. I kind of like this idea that the small things don't really impact the main event but at the same time I don't like this idea of forgetting a face, the clown's face. The clown picture is like a person and Dillard is basically saying that in life we meet people and they affect us for a short time and when we move onto a new journey we forget these faces. I don't like this idea of continually forgetting people just because they are not currently apart of my life and that they don't matter because they were a part of my past. She is trying to justify forgetting someone from my past as a part of human nature and I don't think that it is acceptable to forget someone just because they are not currently apart of my life. I also do not like how this passage fits into the story.
The use of this passage in Dillard's story is contradicting to the story as a whole. By referring the loose of memory of the clown's image and the hotel lobby he 'forgets' part of the rising action. She acts as if this part of the story's rising action is irrelevant. This contradicts her whole story because in the beginning she describes brief parts of her journey like the avalanche and the "clumps of bundled people on the hillside". Why would she describe the rising action but then brush it off and basically say that its not important. If she truly thought it wasn't important she should have started her story off at the climax where she is on top of the mountain and watching the eclipse.
(10/05/14 3:02pm)
This passage in the story stands out to me due to its complexity in meaning. When I first read this passage I thought it was just another simple part of the story but when I reread it I realized that the passage's simplicity hides its sophisticated meaning. At first I thought it was just a passage that was stating when this event took place and a brief explanation of what happened prior to the main event. However I was wrong. Dillard briefly described the rising actions to the story for a reason. Her lack of detail was intentional because she wanted this passage to stick out against the rest of her story. She's trying to say that no matter how important we think the small things, like the creepy clown and checking out of a hotel, are they don't matter, it is all a part of a routine. I kind of like this idea that the small things don't really impact the main event but at the same time I don't like this idea of forgetting a face, the clown's face. The clown picture is like a person and Dillard is basically saying that in life we meet people and they affect us for a short time and when we move onto a new journey we forget these faces. I don't like this idea of continually forgetting people just because they are not currently apart of my life and that they don't matter because they were a part of my past. She is trying to justify forgetting someone from my past as a part of human nature and I don't think that it is acceptable to forget someone just because they are not currently apart of my life. I also do not like how this passage fits into the story.
The use of this passage in Dillard's story is contradicting to the story as a whole. By referring the loose of memory of the clown's image and the hotel lobby he 'forgets' part of the rising action. She acts as if this part of the story's rising action is irrelevant. This contradicts her whole story because in the beginning she describes brief parts of her journey like the avalanche and the "clumps of bundled people on the hillside". Why would she describe the rising action but then brush it off and basically say that its not important. If she truly thought it wasn't important she should have started her story off at the climax where she is on top of the mountain and watching the eclipse.
(10/05/14 3:02pm)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)