Paul Bunyan's Manliness

Eli Pardue
3/31/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

Paul Bunyan

Paul Bunyan is the quintessential folktale told to little boys. Why? Because Paul Bunyan represents everything that a little boy wants to be: big, strong, trouble causing, nice, and big-eating. Paul Bunyan was brought to his parents by five cranes because he was so big. He needed to be fed ten barrels of porridge every two hours so that his rumbles of hunger didn't shake the house down. When he rolled around during his nap one day, he cleared 4 square miles of timber. When his parents got fed up, they sent him off the Maine coast, where he fell out of his cradle and created a tidal wave seventy five feet high. when he didn't wake up, the British navy had to fire their cannons for seven hours straight to wake him up. And that was just the story of his birth. Later on, Paul befriends a giant blue ox. and Ox, one of the biggest mammals in North America, that just happens to be blue, the stereotypical favorite color of little boys.
So we have established that Paul Bunyan is a tale targeted at little boys for several reasons. But what does he represent about males? Paul Bunyan is represents everything a man was supposed to be in the colonial era, minus his enormous size. He was a hardworking lumberman and a loyal companion. He was soft spoken, kind, and caring. And he was prine to making little mistakes (shown in his accidental creation of the Grand Canyon by dragging his pick along the ground), which is a theme that has transcended time. Overall Paul Bunyan represents males as what "every little boy" wants to grow up to be. In other words, he was created to be a role model of what men are supposed to be.

Emerson's "Nature"

Eli Pardue
3/26/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

Emerson’s “Nature”

In Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Nature,” Emerson presents many ideas and beliefs of man’s role in the natural world. He obviously writes this piece as an ode to nature, but makes man a much more invasive aspect of nature, saying how nature “deifies us” so that we might shape it to our needs. He also writes about man being an integral part of nature.
“The shows of day, the dewy morning, the rainbow, mountains, orchards in blossom, stars, moonlight, shadows in still water, and the like, if too eagerly hunted, become shows merely, and mock us with their unreality. Go out of the house to see the moon, and 't is mere tinsel; it will not please as when its light shines upon your necessary journey. The beauty that shimmers in the yellow afternoons of October, who ever could clutch it? Go forth to find it, and it is gone: 't is only a mirage as you look from the windows of diligence.” In this lengthy passage, Emerson speaks of nature’s beauty. He is presenting the idea that if one goes out to search for nature’s beauty, be it the rainbow, orchards in blossom, the moon, or the stars, one will not find it because it cannot be found if directly searched for. In order for one to really appreciate nature’s beauty, one must be working in harmony with nature. When speaking of the moon, Emerson says, “it will not please as when its light shines upon your necessary journey.” This means that the moon’s light will be more appreciated and therefore more beautiful when its light is a necessity to light your way.
I think that this passage holds a lot of truth, but I think that it also contradicts his previous statements. Seeing nature through the “windows of diligence” is possible if one is a solitary man like Emerson, or Thoreau, because they have chosen that path. But it is not possible if one has been deified by nature, because one would then go about altering nature to his own needs, such as paving the land with railroad tracks. Such actions do not help people appreciate the beauty of nature, because if they did, the people would not cover that beauty with tracks. I do agree with Emerson, however, that flowers are more appreciated when planted and cared for, and that the light of the moon and the stars is more appreciated when it lights your path.

The World Through Art

Eli Pardue
3/19/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

I was very excited when I learned that our next blog would be the explanation of art and how it speaks to us. I am a fan of art in general, and i have definite preference for certain pieces that speak to me personally about something that either I have experienced or that i know about. For this reason, I chose The Olive Trees by Vincent Van Gogh. The picture shows an orchard of olive trees, presumably in the south of France. Not only do I love this painting, But I can take a great deal out of the way that Van Gogh distorts the image in order to show that all things are shaped by their environments and their creators. The creator, in this case, is Van Gogh himself, who was mentally unstable when he made this painting. The environment would be the mountains, whose rocky terrain warps and distorts the branches and trunks of the trees. The same applies to humans. Who we are is in part determined by the environment in which we lived in. Also, the image is distorted to show that art is not reliant upon an exact photograph image, but can be more expressive than an exact picture. This is also true for life in general. The relation is cliche-that not everything is necessarily the way it seems-but nonetheless true.

Being that this is a blog in which we are relating and explaining art, I woule like to choose a different artist to speak of as a side note. Tonight, I was fortunate enough to see Bruce Springsteen play at the Fieldhouse. It was truly a fantastic display of musical talent from the E-Street Band, but what i wish too linger on is the way the Bruce and the Band epitomize the essence of American music. the guitar is greatly influenced by the Blues, the saxophone and certain piano bits are taken directly from Jazz, the lyrics relate to the bohemian style of Bob Dylan and other poets from that era, and the lyrics and vocals derive from classic Rock'n'Roll.
The only way i could explain how this relates to life is if i focused on one song. But I merely wanted to comment on the way that Bruce has transcended the role of performer, and gone above the music, and is now literally an American working man's hero and a part of America culture as a whole.

Richard's realization

Eli Pardue
3/18/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

At the end of part two of Black Boy, Richard realizes that the best-if not only-way for him to truly connect with people is through his writing. We can see this in Richard's relationship with the Communist party. He is, in fact, a writer for the party, publishing poems and short stories idealizing the Communist philosophies in creatively immature but straightforward ways. His entire purpose behind being a writer for the party is to connect with the masses. He does go into depth about he public response from his writings, but he realizes that he had no true connection with the communist party because they oppressed intellectuals and the expansion of the mind-even though they consistently spoke about educating the masses. He realizes that even though he had no true connection to the party, he still felt as if he could connect with individuals through his writing.

The only way that Richard can continue to educate himself and expand his own mind is through his writing. The only way that he can find the answers for unnecessary suffering and his hunger for a new, better way of life is through his writing. I think that Richard made the best choice in deciding to bring words out of his emotions and continuing to write. Even though we know he does not turn into a wildly successful author, he would not have been able to live with those questions unanswered.

artists and politicians

Eli Pardue
3/17/08
AP Lang. Comp.
LaMags

In certain examples, artists and politicians can be at the completely different poles. The most striking example is that of the Communist party. the Communist artists are all about analyzing the quality of life of the people they are trying to help and figuring out what the party can do to further educate and improve the lives of these people. They approach educating and improving the people through their art. Politicians of the Communist party, on the other hand, influence people on reforming societal values to be more in accordance with their beliefs. They do not focus on analyzing life structure for the best interest of the people. The Communist politicians are more likely to throw you out of the party if you so much has speak the fact that there are other plausible forms of government. Politicians and artists are on completely different poles on how to sway the masses. However, a distinction must be made in that they are usually striving towards the same goal.

Richard's use of parenthesis

Eli Pardue
3/11/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

In part two of Black Boy, Richard Wright uses parentheses as a rhetorical device. However, he does not use parenthesis in the conventional sense. Usually, parenthesis are used to explain minor details in a sentence or paragraph to provide further reasoning or explanation for something in the story. Richard creates multiple parenthetical paragraphs. He does not explain trivial bits of information, he provides insight to his mindset and observations he made about life in Chicago. In the paragraphed portions, he speaks of the struggle he and all blacks have in the North and the South, and his struggle in finding a reason for them. He speaks of waitresses in Chicago who he works with and how he pities them. He pities them because all they have to think about or worry about are trivial things like sex life, parents, and other skin-deep problems. They never have the opportunity to enlarge their mental capacities with issues that matter, and for that reason they will never comprehend Richard.

Richard's good decision

Eli Pardue
3/7/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

Richard made a great decision at the end of part one in moving farther north to Chicago. His life in Memphis was much, much better than it was in Jackson, but it did not fulfill his hunger. He had that constant hunger to make his life unrestrained by the standards of society (specifically racism), also the hunger to find the answer to unnecessary suffering, something that was prominent in the racist south. In leaving his job in Memphis, Richard lied to his boss. He told him that he had to leave because his family was leaving. Richard lied because he was afraid of being in danger if he told his boss (a white man) that he was leaving the south to better himself. Richard might have told the truth because there was not as much racism in Memphis, and his boss was fair and kind.

Richard stealing

Eli Pardue
3/7/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

Explain Wright's moral dilemma in stealing. Is he justified in his decision?

When Richard contemplates stealing, he feels that if he steals, he will only reinforce the stereotype that had been placed upon blacks by the whites. He would only acknowledge the subservience that he so hates so much. By playing into exactly what they expect him to do, he justifies all of their suspicions of black worker boys stealing. More than that, he falls into the system that he has tried to escape for his entire socially conscious life. When he finally makes the decision to steal, he feels guilty, and promises only to steal until he has enough money to leave the south and head north.
Richard is both justified and not justified in making his decision to steal. He figures that at his current wages, minus the cost of living, it would take him two years to save up enough money to move north. With the scam that he took part in at the movie theatre, he made that money in less than a month. However, Richard also reinforces that black stereotype and creates more grounds for prejudice in the south. Despite this fact, Richard did the only thing he could do to further his social status and improve his quality of life.

Go to school

Eli Pardue
2/20/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

To what extent do you agree that we don’t really need to go to school?

I do not at all agree with Gatto. I think that school is on of the most important parts of a child’s social, mental, and physical development. Gatto explains his view through frustration at the school system he worked in. This is not how all school systems work. It is certainly not how University High School works. He does not like the school systems because he believes that they are too government controlled and reliant. I think that this is a valid point, but he does not suggest a way to make the system better.
Schools expose children to other children, which forms social habits that are an absolute necessity in everyday interaction with others. Without social interaction that all children are exposed to in school, everyone may as will portray symptoms of autism due to lack of social development. I think that the education that is provided is also invaluable. Teachers are necessary to fill the minds of the students with information that is relevant to the topic at hand.
Without schools, I think that our society would lose almost all of its organization. Children would not have been exposed to a rigid schedule, and they would not be used to one in the workplace. And in the future, if nobody had any exposure to how work is supposed to be done, how will the work place operate? Society would fall into anarchy without school.

living in the south

Eli Pardue
3/4/07
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

What does Griggs mean by ‘learn how to live in the south’?

Throughout his childhood, Richard established a mindset that he would not let others tell him what was right or wrong, and he would not let others boss him around or treat him unfairly based on his race. This is clearly portrayed by his hostility towards getting punished by his mother, grandmother, Aunt Addie, and Uncle Tom. Also, and more pertaining to the particular question, it is shown in Richard’s naivety towards the social status of white people when he was young.
When Griggs says that Richards needs to “learn how to live in the South,” he means that Richard needs to through out all of the moral and ethical rules that he has set up in his own head and play along with the demands of society. In other words, he needs to recognize that, in the South, white people are superior to blacks, and he needs to act accordingly. Richard’s contempt at the ludicrous societal standards of his childhood explains why he was unable to hold a job over the summer.
The last part of learning how to live in the South is shown at the end of the chapter. Through Griggs, Richard obtains a job with a Yankee stenographer, Mr. Crane. Richard was treated fairly by the Northern man, and he also acted “appropriately” as a black man working for white men. However, Richard was still subjected to the cruelty and hate of the southern white man by one of the men who worked for Crane. Richard did not give him a formal title when addressing him once, and was punished by being scared out of his job. The last par of learning how to live in the south is taking the white man’s hate in stride.

speech

Eli Pardue
3/3/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

Is Wright justified in refusing to say the speech?

I think that Richard is indeed justified in refusing to give the speech written for him, but I also think that he was foolish for not reciting it. The principle wrote the speech for Richard not just because he wanted Richard to look intelligent as the class valedictorian, but also because he wanted his school to look professional in the eyes of the superintendent. However, it does not make sense to me why he asked Richard to write a speech of his own if he did not plan on letting his recite it. I think that the only reason the principle would ask him to write his own is to prevent him from feeling like a tool for the principle from the get go. This way, he was able to retain some dignity before throwing it to the dogs. I think Richard was right in essentially telling the principle “screw you” because it is his right to speak his own words at his graduation because he is celebrating his own academic accomplishments, not the accomplishments of the principle. It was also foolish to refuse the speech written for him because it put his future in jeopardy. He had the sensible option of working as a schoolteacher on wages that he could use to support a family. Instead he threw that opportunity away because of pride.

gratified in writing

Eli Pardue
2/27/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

Why does Wright feel gratified after sharing his writing?

Richard was forced to pray and pray every day for an hour. Granny and Aunt Addie constantly berated him on the state of his soul. They said that God would look poorly on them if they had a non-believer in the house. Richard did not care for church. He had never felt God before, and was convinced that he never would feel God. Richard problem with believing is summed up in his quote, “If laying down my life could stop the suffering in the world, I’d do it. But I don’t believe anything can stop it.” Richard felt compelled to write a hymn of his own in hope that it would be good enough for Granny to stop tailing him on the subject of his soul, and forgive him for his misdoings. He was not adept at writing verses and hymns, he soon learned. Richard had an Indian girl from a book on his mind, and wrote of her. He felt gratified in his writing because it was the first thing that he had created that was completely his, and more than that, and extension of himself and his emotions. He had the young woman next door read it. She did not understand the depth of his writing and looked at him with a confused and amused face. Richard felt gratified because she could not fully comprehend the emotion and felling that he had put into his writing.

cultural heritage

Eli Pardue
2/25/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

Wright says it was his ‘cultural heritage’ to dislike Jews. Relate that to his own experiences.

Richard had a predisposed cultural hatred towards Jews that was ingrained in his cultural philosophy by society. He has a hatred for them because all the students were taught in school that Jews were Christ killers. This singled the Jews in his neighborhood out, making them easy targets for ridicule. It is also worth noting that this time period is when the stereotypes of Jews being rich and wealthy began to come forth. Jews were mainly immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe, and, as immigrants are “supposed” to do, they worked very hard to get ahead, and oftentimes became prominent lawyers and bankers. I think this fact may have been a reason for Richard resentment of them.
Richard had felt much of the same hatred from white people that the Jews felt from the black residents of the neighborhood. Much as it was the cultural heritage of Richard to ridicule the Jews, it was the cultural heritage of the white people to ridicule Richard. All the way back to the root of slavery, an animosity between blacks and whites had existed. There is also a distinct relation to the way Richard is treated by his parents and the way he treats Jews. His was of treating Jews was with mocking and taunting, but it is the same way that he looks down upon them as his mother looks down upon him when he is being beaten.

Uncle Tom

Eli Pardue
3/2/08
AP Lang Comp
LaMags

Why is Wright so angry with his Uncle Tom?

Richard’s anger with Uncle Tom is provoked by Uncle Tom’s anger with Richard. He said that Richard was being insolent, how I did not understand, but he proceeded to threaten Richard with a terrible beating. Richard was dumbfounded by his Uncle’s reaction to something as simple as telling him the time. He did not believe that his Uncle would really beat him, just threaten to do so. Thinking logically, Richard could not believe that his uncle would be so insulted by his simple answer, but was set that he would not let his uncle beat him. He concluded this on the grounds that his Uncle was not at all his guardian, he did not live with his uncle, he had only known his uncle for a few days, and his uncle had never had any say in his rearing. He was a contributing member of the household, paying some of his earnings to his grandmother, and he had dome absolutely nothing to merit that kind of behavior from his uncle. Richard was upset with his uncle because his uncle had no authority to beat him. In addition, after Tom had given up on Richard, he symbolized the way his white employers looked down at him as someone deserving of pity and contempt. This is why Richard continued to berate his uncle as nothing more than one who makes chairs for white people to sit on.