ELA class review

Ever since I was little I've always enjoyed a good story. I was pleased to find that this year, every book that has been assigned was exciting, thoughtful, or unique from any book I have ever read. I have yet to find one that's interested me so much that I would call any of them my favorite, but, they were very entertaining. The books were indeed, very enjoyable, but I found it quite hard to question the story or annotate things that particularly stood out. I found myself taking quite a long time to come up with a good question to write in the book. Perhaps, we wouldn't have to annotate, but go back to the methods we used last year, which was to simply write a question on the board for seminar. I do agree that it would take a while to get through everyone's question, but we could still save them for another time. The students who didn't read the book would still be noticeable because they wouldn't have very intricate things to say about the chapters. Aside from this, I think that the ELA class should stay the same in every aspect except for the annotations. I have always enjoyed my time in this class, and I am excited for the next reading. 

Odysseus' nostos

Analyze the purpose of all of the violence in books 22-24. Do you think that this is necessary for Odysseus' successful nostos? Why or why not?

I had mixed emotions about Odysseus' nostos. He did go through 10 years of monsters, witches, sirens, storms and other various forms of mayhem, only to come home to several men harassing his wife and plotting to murder his son. He definitely has a right to be angry, and gathering that he is a great and mighty hero who is favored by one of the most powerful goddesses on Mount Olympus, his reputation exemplifies his possible bloodlust during situations like these. Also, this book was based back in Ancient Greece, which means the majority of female characters in Greek mythology were described as either obedient housewives or magical sex-symbols (minus most of the goddesses on Mount Olympus). Odysseus fell victim to the charm of many of these women. Calypso, Circe and the sirens all thwarted Odysseus on his journey back to Ithaca. Keeping in mind that it was a man who wrote this book in Ancient Greece, Homer probably wanted to keep the male characters stronger than the women. This is why I think it may have been necessary for Odysseus to claim his nostos by slaughtering everyone and ending strong, instead of coming home, tired and weak after his ordeals. Although this is only one side of the argument, I also felt that Odysseus could have fulfilled his nostos without the blood and gore.

On the anti-violence side of things, I think it would have made more sense if Odysseus simply murdered the suitors, and spared all of the innocents. The maids received the worst of it all. If Odysseus was supposed to be the protagonist, I would think of him as kind and compassionate. By executing the maids, my image of this character shattered like glass. I understand that Odysseus might feel betrayed by the maids since they chose to serve the men who came into his home and harassed his wife, but in the end, what were the maids to do? They were maids, not queens. The maids may have been the lowest of the low in terms of the palace-dwellers. They aren't really maids at all, they are slaves. They live to serve. They would have (most likely) been killed anyway, if they denied service to the suitors. Things may have been different if the suitors were women. People seemed to be a bit more lenient towards women bickering with other women in literature of this time. Yet, if a woman talked back to a man during this time period, especially a slave like they were, it simply wasn't heard of, and probably wasn't taken lightly either. In other words, I'm not quite sure if Odysseus' actions should be labeled as correct or not. There are so many things that justify both sides of the argument.    

Xenia in the Odyssey

Xenia, or, simple hospitality is shown in every single home that's been described in the Odyssey (except for the cyclops). Telemachus visits both Menelaus, and Nestor's households. On page 45 (book 4), Menelaus has Telemachus and Mentor (Athena in disguise) to join a massive feast complete with maids that lathered them down in various oils, dressed them in furs, and then served them a silver tray, filled with water that had been poured from a golden pitcher so they could wash their hands before eating. On page 42 (book 3), Telemachus was bathed in oils by Nestor's youngest daughter. She then dressed him in lavish robes, and he was then sent forth to take a seat by Nestor himself. 

Telemachus' father, Odysseus received similar treatments. Calypso, the nymph daughter of Poseidon, obsesses over Odysseus and sort of holds him captive on her island paradise. On page 74 (book 5), when Calypso goes to give Odysseus to Hermes, e book mentions that Odysseus had been reluctantly having intercourse with the nymph. Even if it was unwanted, she still treated him with the greater fineries that the world outside of the island had to offer. Before this, Calypso seats Hermes in her cave, which is fragrant with different nature-based perfumes. After escaping Calypso, Odysseus comes across the lotus eaters (book 9, page 127). These people give Odysseus and his men some lotus flowers to eat, which may not seem like much, but, it is really an intoxicating drug that puts the consumer in a state of ecstasy. Circe, the witch/goddess ( book 10, page 154) has her unsuspecting male guests bathed in oils and clothed in fleecy garments. 

Why does The Odyssey start out with Telemachus' journeys instead of his father's?

The first four books of The Odyssey are known as the "Telemachy," as they introduce us to the voyage of Odysseus' adolescent son, Telemachus. Why do you think that The Odyssey begins with this story, and what are the most important things that we learn about Telemachus?

I believe the book starts off this way because Telemachus has to find his father, Odysseus, for whom this book is written for. Odysseus has to come back some how, and since he seems to be caught under some sort of love enchantment/spell with the nymph, Calypso, I don't think he will be completely available to continue the rest of his Kleos and then his Nostos without being given a small bit of assistance. Aside from this, we learn more about Telemachus and his personality. He is a young adult, who has yet to recognize it. He is constantly degrading himself and throwing mini- tantrums when he is in any sort of dilemma or something doesn't go his way. Now, these actions aren't very surprising coming from the spoiled, rich, and slightly bratty child of the Queen and King figure of an entire city in Ancient Greece. Having read this much about Telemachus and his few encounters with people outside of his palace back home  makes me wonder about how long he may last during his  journey to rescue his father.  

Living in a video game.

I don't play video games very often. I have never been very good at finding my way through cyber space land where my main goal is to shoot people, grab coins, or win a car race. Yet, I have always marveled at these different cyber-worlds that you (the gamer) would explore. Since I have never been very good at playing them, I usually watch others do it, giving me plenty of time to think about the setting, characters, and effort that was put into making the entire thing. I do remember one day, my friends were talking about "how cool it would be to live in a video game!" I, however, hold a completely different opinion.

 Life would be completely awful if one lived in a video game. If I was a video game character and my game is opening up for the first time on someone's screen, I would begin by begging the player to actually do a good job. If he or she is a total failure at video games, I would be the one character in the game that glitches all of the time, telling them to just hand the game over to someone that will win. The majority of video games made today involves death in a horribly slow and painful way. It seems like the only way to actually fail a level is to fall of a cliff, get shot, get eaten, set on fire, etc. Take a character like Mario for example. It is a pretty harmless game, but, you have to pass through 12 or so worlds that range from awkwardly happy and dangerous to extremely dark, shady, and dangerous. All to rescue a ditzy princess who will just get kidnapped again in the next game. If you pass through these worlds, great, that means you gotten passed the singing turtles, enraged mushrooms, murderous venus flytraps, and all of the cliffs and pitfalls. You wouldn't even have to be a main character to have a completely horrible life. 

 Even if I was an unimportant character in the game. One that could quietly slip in and out of my cyber-space realm without being noticed, I would still have a horrible time. Simply because I would have to travel into another land, pass through all of those levels without dying, just to get to my location. Every place you go, you are in some form of danger. Buying a house in a video game land would be completely out of the question. Considering that the majority of the time would be spent running away or hiding from dragons, aliens, natural disasters, assassins/ hit men, and various mythical creatures, simply to walk across the street or travel somewhere. So, to sum this post up in a few words is to say that if someone feels like a video game would be in any way a normal living condition, they wouldn't last an hour without gunpowder, magical swords, or a force field. 

Final blog post for Maus

Functionalist:

The functionalists believe that everything that happens in society needs to be in a certain order for society to thrive and function properly. Thinking this way in relation to The Holocaust probably means they would lean more towards the nazi's point of view. Functionalists during this time (that were not Jewish) would believe that Jewish people were lesser and they had to be wiped out for Germany to function properly, and return to its former glory. I feel that the amount of Jewish functionalists would be quite rare considering they were the ones effected by this type of thinking. For example, a functionalist could say men should have a job, and women should cook and clean. The functionalist here would most likely be the man, since the negatively effected group would be the women. 

P.S.

Just to clear up any misconception, I am not saying all functionalists hold bigoted views on society, but, during this time period, and especially in this country, they probably would have if they weren't Jewish. 

Conflict:

Conflict theorists believe that society is constantly changing due to people's constant want to do more than the last thing. In other words, we are in eternal conflict. Similar to the functionalist's possible views during this time, conflict theorists might say that the nazi's tried to assassinate the Jewish population because they were trying to "improve" Germany. Conflict theorists who were Jewish, or Germans that were against the nazis may think in a conflict perspective and say that the holocaust happened to make Jewish people stronger as a people, and to make other Germans realize how truly horrible Hitler was, so that this may never happen again.     

Symbolic Interactionist: 

Believing that people progress through interaction with one another, symbolic interactionist may believe in something that could cross paths with the conflict theorists. When I said that some conflict theorists could argue on the side of the Jewish people and say that the holocaust may have made Jewish people stronger, I think this is what symbolic interactionists could argue as well. The interactions between the Jewish people and the nazis were less than pleasant. This being the case, a few years from then it would become a public matter. When people finally found out what was happening, society has become a bit stricter when intolerance- related problems come up.  

Postmodernist:

Postmodernism is quite difficult to actually define since it usually refers to the arts. In relation to the people of Germany, the Jewish population would probably be the overwhelming majority to agree with is perspective. Postmodernist contradict modern theories and thoughts. Postmodernist would typically be more content with the perspective Maus was written in, since it depicts the tale of a Jewish man and his fight for freedom through the holocaust. Postmodernists believe in the freedom and equality for anyone and everyone. 

Jewish stereotyping and Spiegelman's father

1. On a few occasions in the book, Spiegelman writes about his concern about representing his father as a Jewish stereotype. What characteristics does his father have that seem to match up with these stereotypes, and what events in his life might have caused him to behave in this way?

I remember there being a few examples of Jewish stereotyping in Maus. The one that comes to mind though is the stereotype of Jews being very greedy. Yet, I found that Speigelman did a good job of not applying these stereotypes to his dad or any of the other characters. If he did, I think most people would find it to be a stereotype, but, in reality, everyone, no matter what ethnicity they may be would be greedy if they had to go through something like the holocaust. When people are out to get you, and eventually, everything comes down to the situation where it is either your life, or the other persons. Most people would try to save themselves before they decide to take the bullet for another person. In the holocaust, everyone would fear death, because death wasn't a quick and painless sort of thing, it was slow and painful. They were either tortured in concentration camps, starved, or just shot for no reason. 

The challenges in drawing another person's story.

The challenges one could face while drawing out someone's story are mainly linked to the satisfaction of the person or people who are being drawn. I am an artist, and I can honestly say that there is no worse a feeling than delivering a portrait to someone that has asked for one, and they are embarrassed, disgusted, or ashamed of it. That is, after all, only an example of a portrait, not a full book/story. When you are drawing a graphic novel, you begin with the design of the characters. After the character sketches have been complete, you then need to make sure that the character is recognizable in each comic block or square. Facial expression and clothing is also crucial. If you are drawing someone you know or someone you have been in contact with, you need to express their personality through their appearance. A kind and good  person may wear white and have upward-slanted eyebrows to show their meek personality. A mean or cruel person usually is seen in black or a dark shade of any other color. If they aren't wearing elaborate black robes and capes, their eyebrows will go downward showing their anger and wickedness. In the book Maus, Art Spiegelman's drawings are not very realistic, they are more cartoonish because it is easier to visualize personification through a cartoon than any other medium. People visualize themselves as something they are not, that is why it is difficult to draw self portraits because they usually end up not looking like the artist who drew it. Because of this, I have always thought of art as a form of show business. Art is constantly critiqued and reviewed by the public. Graphic novels have become quite popular now, and if someone has their own visual of a character in a book or a real person, they would expect the images in the graphic to fully visualize that person. If they don't get the same emotion or visual while reading the graphic novel, they won't like it as much.  

Final Alchemist post- The mysteries of the "language of life" and the "language of the desert"

The "language of the desert" and "the language of life". These two topics have been constantly addresses in The Alchemist. Santiago learned about these languages through the Alchemist he met. The only people in the book that (seemingly) understood this mysterious language from the beginning aren't people at all. On page 121, Santiago mentions that his "horse knows the language of life". The boys horse and the Alchemist's hawks have been examples of "the language of the world" for the boy and the Alchemist. These animals seem to have been associated with this language, as if that is how animals are communicating with their squeaks, squawks, and growls. When the Alchemist first appeared in the book, he immediately stuck out (to me) as some sort of mystical being. Not just by his title, but by his entire image. The long white cloak, a hawk on his shoulder, and his interaction with the cobra shows the reader that he has been in close contact with animals before. Since he has spent however many years he has with these creatures, he should be well educated on their ways of life. This also raises another question/theory. Since the alchemist has spent such a long time with the animals, he could have learned something from them. Could the animals be the Alchemist's toutor on the "language of life" and the "language of the desert"?

Do I believe that "When you want something, all the universe conspires to help you achieve it."?

1. On page 24, the king of Salem tells Santiago, "When you want something, all the universe conspires to help you achieve it." Do you believe that this is true? Why or why not?

This statement is very optimistic. It shows the earth's good side and not the rest. To me, this statement translates to: when you want something, it will, most likely, come true. What I mean by this is that this statement is both true and false. First of all, when you want something, you need to work for it. Maybe, this is different in a world where magic and reality are intermingled like the one The Alchemist is set in. In the real world, this is not always the case. When you work for something, and you try your absolute hardest to achieve it, there will always be something fighting against you to prevent you from reaching that goal. It's even been taught in books and stories that are completle fantasy. All characters in magical- fiction based books have to fight some sort of opposing force to get what they have been trying to get, the entire time. It isn't always a bad thing though. By having that small delay in receiving what you desperately want, makes you want it all the more. The waiting enhances our want for that thing, it makes us stronger.  Now, sometimes, things may seem like they are simply being handed to you. This is, however, extremely rare for people who live in a non- fictional universe. If work never existed, I think miracles, and wishes always coming true with 100% costomer satisfaction would be quite common on planet earth. In the real world, you would have to have a bit of both self motivation, and help. If you had self motivation, and no help, bigger wishes like Santiago's wish to travel, would have a larger chance of failing than working out. If he hadn't come across the old man who motivated him to continue traveling, he would have given up and have been stuck tending to a flock of sheep. If you had to simply pick between self motivation and help, then, you would have a harder time achieving your goal. If things just worked out immediately, that's great, but that sort of stuff doesn't exist in the real world. The true part of The King of Salem's saying it that, yes, the universe "conspires to help you", but, nothing would be complete without the wisher doing at least half of the work it takes to achieve their wish.  

The Alchemist: What do Santiago's sheep symbolize?

On page 9, reread the passage that begins, "The only things that concerned the sheep were the food and water," and ends with, "They trust me, and they've forgotten how to rely on their own instincts, because I lead them to nourishment." Do you think that the sheep symbolize something? If so, what? 

Santiago has not spent a significant amount of time with actual people. Since this is the case, he feels like he has no real power or place with civilization. When he said " they've forgotten how to rely on their own instincts..." he was saying they have been living one way for such a long time, that they have forgotten to do things for themselves. This symbolizes Santiago's want to live in a place where there are people like him, to not roam all over and not stay in one place. He has been living by that rule for so long, that his thoughts and actions follow that rule, making him incapable of doing anything he wants to do that is different from sheepherding. Also, he is feeling powerless and contemplates slaughtering the sheep at this time. This would make him feel, and know that he has some sort of control over something.  

What I hope to gain from ELA this year

I hope to improve my grammar when writing. Last year, I found that I tangled all of the things I learned about punctuation into one. This obviously resulted in a paper that took points away from me, due to the constant grammar errors that needed fixing. This year, I wish to memorize most, if not all, of the different types of punctuation that kept me from impressing not only the teacher, but myself as well.

What was my favorite ELA novel

3) What was your favorite text that we read this year in ELA. Why? Please fully explain your answers.

My favorite text of the year was Persepolis. I have rarely taken a graphic novel completly seriously. They have never been able to paint as beautiful a picture as a regular novel could, despite the plethora of amazing artworks on each and every page. Yet, Persepolis has been one of the few series of graphic novels that I could really enjoy on a serious level. It was depressing, educational, and mildly humorous. This blend of traits boosted this book to a higher level in my opinion with graphic novels, and has gotten me thinking about looking in to others like it.

Brothers Grimm conflict

1) Describe the primary conflict in your novel. Who (or what) is the conflict between (think man vs. self, man vs. man, man vs. nature, man vs. machine, etc.)?

A little bit of each example of conflict is used in the Brothers Grimm stories. First example, man vs self, the story of Little Red Riding Hood, a little girl is torn between the decision to stop, talk, and trust the stranger in the forest, or continue her walk over to her grandmother's house. Man vs man is shown in at least two stories. These main two are from Cinderella, in which she is being forced into a type of slavery by her stepfamily, which thwarts her opportunity to marry someone who could rescue her from her "kitchen maid" lifestyle. The other, being Rapunzel. Rapunzel is locked away by an evil enchantress and is forbidden from seeing the world, but, when a prince finds her, she has to either risk falling into a forbidden relationship with the prince, or continue living as a captive. Man vs nature was a main form of conflict in the Grimm tales. At the end of Cinderella, Cinderella's bird companions swoop down and attack the stepsisters when they come to the marriage of Cinderella and the prince. The birds then claw the sisters' eyes from their sockets, leaving them blind. Two stories, Snow White and Sleeping Beauty, involve the main characters, which are both protagonists, involved in some battle with nature. In Snow White, the princess has to brave the dark forests until she finds shelter in the dwarve's house. Simmilar situations happen in Hansel and Gretel, when the siblings travel through the forest after being ditched by their stepmother, and find the witche's gingerbread house. In Sleeping Beauty, the princess pricks her finger on the spinning wheel spindle, and falls into a deep sleep. This somehow causes a multitude of briar branches to wrap around the palace which prevents her hero to come rescue her. The princes try to slash through the briars, but end up getting stuck, and dying an agonizing death. Lastly, there is man vs machine. The machines one may think people refer to in stories are not the ones in this book. This is only because this book was written in a time where electronic anythings did not exist. So, fathering the technology of the time, which mainly consisted of carts, dangled, and cottages, this is what I have come up with. In Rapunzel, the prince has to climb up a tower to get to the beautiful woman that lives inside. The tower old, and dangerously high off of the ground. The story of Sleeping Beauty involves a prince trying to get passed all of the shut parts of the castle to get to his bride as well. 

Pharmacy ad

What rhetorical appeal is the ad using (ethos, pathos, logos)? Explain your answer.

This advertisement is appealing to ethos because it is trying to sell itself to the general female population whom enjoys dying their hair.

What is the argument that this ad is making (premises and conclusion)?

This ad is saying that the dye not only colors, but softens the hair in a cleansing manner, and, it is also permanent! This would obviously attract more customers because of the duel purpose.

Can you spot any logical fallacies in this ad? If so, what are they?

The logical fallacy in this is a "false cause". A "false cause" is when something says what the outcome will be if you do something else, this prediction is usually false. What this image is implying is that if you use this hair dye/ moisturizer, you will look as beautiful as the woman in the picture.

What is the source of the ad (who is paying for it)?



1. What is the purpose of the ad?

The main purpose of the ad is to get women to buy this sort of hair dye.

2. Who is the target audience and how do you know this?

Women would pay for this because of the female image on the front of the box and the word use like "gorgeous" and "superior".

3. What is the subtext of this ad?

The part at the bottom in small print that reads: 100% grey coverage! permanent, 1application.

4. What part of the story is not being told?

It hasn't told the buyer about any after effects.

5Is there a group that is empowered and/or disempowered by this ad? How can you tell?

Women would probably be empowered here because there is no sign of putting down any type of person (weight -wise, ethnicity, class), but it is simply an ad that's purpose is to get any type of woman to buy their product.

Sexist BMW poster

Usually, sexism is found in older commercials, but, this is proof that sexism in media is far from gone. In this recent BMW commercial, the company uses this attractive woman who is laying down (presumably naked) and flirtatiously staring at the camera as the main picture for the commercial. Not once did this poster mention anything that it is advertising.  This poster has a small, white box in the lower, right-hand corner with microscopic writing that reads: "BMW Premium Selection, Used Cars." If it wasn't for the BMW logo in the corner, one would never know what this poster is an advertisement for used cars. If the un recognizable product wasn't enough, there is the small subtext that is near the woman's chin. It says "You know your not the first." This statement is implying, both, that  the woman has had more than one husband, boyfriend, or tryst in her lifetime, because, when you look at her, "you know that you are not the first". This also translate to: these cars have been used, therefore, they have been driven already. And this woman has also been used, therefore she too has been (insert dirty joke here _______). This advertisement is encouraging men to buy these used cars by pasting an attractive woman's face on their poster. This disempowers the woman by making her look like more of a sexual object than just a regular person ,which here, is portrayed by the pose she is in. It is also comparing her to a car which symbolizes her to be even more of an object. Probably the worst thing though, is the fact that they are implying that since she is so attractive, she must have had more than one lover.

Satirical AllState commercial

In this AllState commercial, they used 5 out of the 6 possible elements of satire. First, starting with Parody. When the woman is talking (sarcastically) to the man about how men are better drivers an women, she pulls out the check she received from AllState which, soon after, made her voice imitate that of the deep-voiced actor (Dennis Haysbert) who plays in the Classic AllState commercials. This obviously causes this man's eyes to widen. The parody in this commercial also leads to the reversal and incongruity. There is something clearly out of place in this video because, the once semi- high-pitched voice of the woman sitting at the table has now changed to that of a man. Again, since her voice has changed into a mock of a deep, male's, burlesque has now become a part of he commercial because burlesque is the ridiculous exaggeration of language. And once again (don't worry, this is the last time I am saying this), since the lady's voice has turned into that of a guy's, the element: caricature has been introduced as well. Caricature is when a feature or trait (in this case, the voice) has been greatly exaggerated. This commercial was clearly aimed at people who want to save money on car insurance because that is what AllState does. They needed to add some sort of comedic twist or satirical element into it or else it would just be boring.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qQR8rj2BO-8

Does the ending of Merchant of Venice have a reason to end that way? And does the ending match up with the normal comedy endings?

2) Why do you think that Shakespeare ends this comedy with lover's spats between Jessica and Lorenzo, Portia and Bassanio, and Nerissa and Gratiano? Does this fit in with what we expect from a comedic ending?

This ending didn't even come close to ending how a normal comedic play should end. Comedic plays end with parties, weddings, and birth. This play ended with a big fight. If someone was to think deeper into it, you could come to the conclusion that this might be a comedic play with a tragic ending involving the death of a leading role in the story. Love could be considered the leading role in this play since the entire story is circling in and out of romantic relationships. Love is starting to crack like glass in the end of this story. Lorenzo was fighting with Jessica, and all of the others were talking about sleeping with people other than the person they are married to right infront of their wife or husband. Even with this theory though, the ending of this play definitly did not match that of a normal comedy. But, I think Shakespear ended the play this way because it is still a comedy and it is supposed to be funny. It is funny when married couples start quarreling like this (sometimes).

Who is the merchant of Venice?

2) Who is the merchant of Venice, and how does our understanding of this color how we think about the play? Use textual evidence to support your answer.

There is a good amoun of characters who might be the merchant of Venice. For starters, I always thought of a Merchant as being a seller of goods, food, etc. I also always thought that the merchants would be of the lower class in this day and age making them poorer. This theory knocks out characters like Portia (who is definitely not poor), Nerissa (who we hear talking and hangs around Portia but is not an important character), and Bassanio ( who is more of a borrower and buyer because of all of the money he took from Antonio leaving him broke). 

First person up would be Antonio. Antonio was refered to in the court scene as "the merchant" by Portia when she asks: "which is the merchant here and which the Jew?". By "Jew" she meant Shylock because he is the only Jewish character in that scene and it narrows it down even more, when the Duke says: "Antonio and old Shylock, both stand forth.". Shylock is therefore labeled as "the Jew" and Antonio is labeled as "the merchant". This was just a thought that came to mind listening to the reenactment of this scene as portrayed by Mr. Gonzales and the class. He pointed to Isabella who was playing Antonio every time he said "merchant".

Second and last person would be Shylock. Shylock is a merchant to his own personal gain, by gain, I mean that he is so bent on revenge and on getting this poun of flesh from Antonio that he would spend almost every waking moment to kill him. He also cared more about his money and jewels than his daughter when she ran away with a good amount of his life's savings. These would be the two characters that would be winning either 1st or 2nd place as he merchant of Venice. 

Merchant of Venice, is it a tragedy, comedy, or a tragicomedy?

1) So far, do you think that The Merchant of Venice is a comedy, a tragedy, or a tragicomedy? (We will visit this same question after we finish the play as well.) Support your position with evidence from the text.

I feel that The Merchant of Venice is a tragicomedy. Because it has elements from both tradjedy and comedic plays. First to prove he comedic traits, in a comedy, the characters can adjust well to change or a shift in their life story. This holds true for the leading female Portia when she is forced to be wedded to whichever man picks the chest that holds her portrait in it. The two first princes failed at attempting this and the winner was Bassanio who she we'd and seemed to accept. Portia's reaction to her new husband wasn't so shocking because she was talking with Narissa about how much she didn't like prince Morrocco's skin tone, but when he came to her, she seemed flirty, like she was getting along with him. The second example of the comedic side to this play is Shylock who is the villain and how mean he seems to be to everyone. The story isn't even at an end yet and it already seems that he is being punished for his actions. His cruel acts to everyone was paid back with his daughter Jessica deciding to steal his money and jewels, ditch her father, and run off with a Christian boy whom her dad doesn't even like. Shylock's life is beginning to take a downward spiral. The tragedy in this play seems to be linked up with the two main male roles, Bassanio and Antonio who seem to have a sort of homosexual relationship going on. At least Antonio does. Antonio seems to like Bassanio but he is a bit frustrated and distressed because the affection he is putting out towards Bassanio is not being given back in any way, shape or form. Bassanio wants Portia because she is beautiful and she has lots of wealth. So, in order to travel from their current location which is Venice to go all the way to Portia's domain in Belmont, he needs Antonio's money which Antonio gives to him. Because of the major money withdrawal that Antonio has now done in order to benefit his friend, he is very near broke. 

How is Belmont different from Venice? (using green world vs city world theory)

Belmont and Venice are both perfect examples of the green world and the city world. Venice would be the city world, and the green world would be Belmont. Belmont embodies the green world because of it's well known inhabitants. The majority of the characters introduced in Belmont were all women. The green world is a feminine place where females reighn and nature is their second in command. The green world serves it's purpose as being the problem solver for all things that have happened in the city world. It deals with these issues in a childlike manner that usually ends up helping. It is a calm, peaceful, and fantastical enchanted forest that relates itself to intamate relationships. For example, Portia is trying to find a husband, one that is perfect in every way. She has absolutely no control of the husband. She cannot turn him away, or keep him, the decision in completley up to the man. In location 2810, "First, forward to the temple;after dinner", this line is spoken by Portia as she instructs the prince Morrocco to go to the temple after the dinner they have. This temple is the the Game Center for the little contest Portia has put together to determine her husband. This is all a perfect example of how the green world deals with things.

The city world is Venice. Venice is home to all of the male characters in the book so far. It is a place where problems are already starting to grow. Antonio is trying to gather money from Shylock which starts a small dispute between them. Shylock is already bullied and offended by others in Venice only because he is Jewish. Men from other places than Venice or Belmont come to claim Portia's hand in marriage so that they can succeed in gaining a wife. So, in order to claim this prize, they will travel to the green world in order to make everything better. This is the way of both the city world and the green world. The city world sends their problems to the green and the green then sends it back fixed and perfect once again.

Is Shakespeare's Work Related At All To Us Today?

Shakespeare's work has inspired many things and remains famous among the world today. Almost anyone would spit out Shakespeare's name as soon as they are asked who is the most famous English writer. All of his plays have inspired movies such as Lion King, Romeo + Juliet, and Scotland PA. These three being a new theme, time period or just over all twist on the classic tales of Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, and Macbeth. I personally believe that the majority of love stories in general are slightly related to Romeo and Juliet or possibly related to the romantic relationship between Tatiana Queen of fairies and Bottom the donkey man in A Midsummer's Night's Dream. The story of Romeo and Juliet involves a doomed relationship between a man and woman, the woman inadvertently kills herself or is extremely close to killing herself when the man comes along to save her or prove his love to her is true and dies with her. The relationship between Bottom and Tatiana, her being a beautiful pixie and him being part donkey shows that she saw something deeper than just his looks to make her fall madly in love with him, I saw this as being in a similar tie to a Beauty and the Beast story. Famous lines from the plays have been used in film and other books as well. The famous line " boil, boil, toil and trouble" has been used in association with Hollywood witches for years. This line was used by the witches in Macbeth as they were spell crafting over their cauldron. Not only are these plays and stories shared by visual media, but it is taught to students in schools all over the place. The vast majority, if not all of the language arts teachers you will meet would probably tell you that they had their class read a play by Shakespeare. Even if Shakespeare ever stops inspiring work done today, it will definitely never be forgotten.