Close Reading #4

Mike Adams: A Queer Need for Rejection

http://www.afa.net/Blogs/BlogPost.aspx?id=2147529920

            These days, Gay rights are obviously a much-disputed issue. In “Mike Adams: A Queer Need for Rejection,” Adams focuses in on homosexual activism. He argues that homosexuals are activists who only try to join religious organizations for their own political benefit, and that they’re trying to repress peoples’ freedom of speech, among other things. Adams develops his scathing message about homosexuals through his use of details, diction, and syntax.

            Adams is careful in the details that he chooses to include. Specifically, he chooses to talk about the civil rights movement, and relate that to the Gay rights movement that is going on today. He writes that the civil rights movement “has become little more than a mechanism used to suppress political speech,” and then writes “redefining homophobia now serves the same function.” By choosing to relate the civil rights movement to homosexual activists, Adams strengthened his message because it provides people with an example to compare this current issue with. Plus, the whole idea of suppressing “political speech” makes the homosexual rights movement seem unconstitutional, which further makes the movement seem like a bad thing to readers.

             Perhaps Adams biggest ally in creating his message was diction. First off, he never once refers to the homosexual activists as people. Adams uses words like “they,” “homosexuals” and “activists,” but never once as even “these people.” This helps to de-humanize homosexuals, which makes readers sympathize a whole lot less with Gay people. This divide grew even wider when Adams appealed to the readers, writing “isn’t that similar to what we have seen…” This strengthens Adams message because it makes homosexual activists seem like these aliens, these things that simply don’t belong with “us.” At that point, it would be easier for readers to believe Adams’ message.

            Finally, the author uses a lot of sentence variety to lend more legitimacy to his writing. For example, Adams writes “so they become targets of homosexual activism. Paradoxically, homosexual activists also target conservative Christians because being rejected by them is an important part of the process…” It is sentence structure like this that makes him come across as more educated, and therefore as having more of a legitimate opinion. Because of this, readers are more likely to believe the message, no matter what the message actually is. If someone were to read one opinion in a People magazine, and an opinion on the same issue by a Harvard professor, they would be more apt to believe the Harvard professor, no matter what either of the opinions said.

            In other words, Adams’ opinion/message is helped greatly by his use of these three techniques. His view that the homosexual rights movement is completely stupid and even repressive is obviously extremely strong. However, he gets that message across easier and more persuasively to readers through his almost clever use of details, diction, and syntax.

Open Prompt #4

1990. Choose a novel or play that depicts a conflict between a parent (or a parental figure) and a son or daughter. Write an essay in which you analyze the sources of the conflict and explain how the conflict contributes to the meaning of the work. Avoid plot summary.

Conflicts between parents and their children are a common occurrence. However, a conflict that spans many years and continuously deepens is more unusual and significant. In Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman, such a conflict arises between Willy and his son, Biff. Their conflict begins with Biff catching his father having an extramarital affair, and deepens as the play continues. This conflict contributes greatly to the overall theme of illusions versus reality present in Death of a Salesman.

The conflict between Biff and Willy begins when Biff catches Willy having an affair with another woman in Boston. This event is when Biff loses his innocence and is forced to open his eyes to who his father really is. Before, he looked up to and worshipped Willy. After this event, however, Biff never again looks up to his father in the same way. Willy is also drastically changed by this event. He is terrified that he has lost his son’s love and respect. This change in their once almost lover-esque relationship is what begins the conflict.

                  Their conflict deepens as Willy tries to live his own dreams through Biff, and Biff refuses. Throughout Death of a Salesman, Biff expresses his desire to move out west and live on a farm. He does not want to stay in the city and become a salesman like his father. However, for Willy, living out west isn’t good enough. In his mind, Biff needs to go into business and become wealthy and respected. This dream that Willy has for Biff stems from his own shortcomings. Biff represents this savior for Willy, his last hope for true success. Biff tries to appease his father for a short time, but then decides to live the life he wants instead. Biff’s decision to refuse his father’s wishes stems back to when he caught Willy having the affair in Boston. Before that event, had Willy told Biff to go into business, Biff probably would have gone along. Perhaps that might be the biggest reason for their conflict: Willy wants to control Biff, but he no longer can.

                  Willy and Biff’s conflict contributes to the meaning of Death of a Salesman because it contributes to the overall theme of illusions versus reality. When Biff sees his father having an affair, Biff suddenly stops believing all of his father’s lies. His eyes are opened to the reality that his father is not perfect, and that he’s not an amazing salesman. As Biff and Willy’s conflict later deepens, Willy continuously tries to pull Biff back under this illusion that Biff was great in business and has these connections. Biff, on the other hand, tries to pull his father out of the illusion that he could still be this great businessman. He tries to open his father’s eyes to the reality of their situation.

                  Overall, the fracture in Willy and Biff’s relationship is extremely deep. What begins as a fight between Biff and Willy when Biff catches his father cheating turns into a bitter, irreconcilable conflict between the two of them. Biff’s refusal to appease Willy’s illusions contributes to a theme of illusions versus reality that is very much present in the play. 

Death of a Salesman Analysis

Author Arthur Miller

Setting 1940s, post-World War 2. The majority of the play takes place in the Loman’s house, which is located in New York. Willy’s “flashbacks” occur somewhere in the 1920s.

Characters

-Willy Loman: salesman, married to Linda. Has as affair with “the woman.” Willy is extremely proud and refuses to accept reality. Has flashbacks throughout the play.

-Linda: Extremely loyal to Willy. Treats Willy like he’s her baby, and blames Biff for what’s happening to him.

-Biff: Son of Willy and Linda. Has Jesus-like qualities, but considered “expired” because he’s 34, not 33. Wants to be a farmer, but Willy doesn’t approve.

-Happy: Son of Willy and Linda. Neither parent really cares about him.

-Bernard: Charley’s son. Worked hard throughout school and is now a successful lawyer.

-The Woman: woman that Willy has an affair with.

-Charley: Willy’s neighbor. Offers Willy a job, and helps him out financially.

-Uncle Ben: Willy’s extremely successful brother. Dead. Often appears in Willy’s flashbacks.

Plot

The play opens with Willy returning early from a business trip. Linda comes in, worried that Willy smashed the car again. Willy and Linda talk about Biff, and Willy makes it clear that he thinks Biff should be in business (not farming). Meanwhile, Happy and Biff are conversing in their own room. They talk about sleeping with women, jobs, and their concerns for Willy. Biff says he wants to buy a ranch and work on a farm. During this, Willy has gone down to the kitchen and is having a flashback. In this scene, Biff and Happy both worship Willy. However, it is clear that Linda and Willy are in debt, and that Willy is insecure with his abilities as a salesman. The scene then switches to Willy in a hotel room with a woman. They kiss and he gives her stockings. The scene switches back to the previous flashback, and Willy gets angry with Linda for mending her stockings. Then he gets mad that Biff is flunking math and “rough with the girls.” Willy comes back to the present, and notices Happy is now in the kitchen. He’s dismissive of Happy’s attempts to comfort him, and then Charley enters the scene. Charley and Willy play cards, and Willy begins having a conversation with an imaginary Ben mainly about Ben’s financial success. Charley and Willy fight, and Charley leaves. Willy flashes back again and worries that he isn’t raising his boys correctly, and asks Ben for his approval. He walks out of the house, past Linda, and continues talking with himself. Biff and Happy come down and notice that something is wrong with Willy. Linda admits that Willy has been trying to kill himself. Willy enters the house, angry at Biff. Biff tells him that he’s going to see Bill Oliver tomorrow to go into business, and Willy becomes excited. After some more talk, everyone goes to bed.

The following day, Willy wakes up happy and drives into the city to talk with his boss, Howard. He asks to be transferred to a job in the city that wouldn’t require travelling. Howard refuses, and fires Willy. Willy lapses back to the time when Ben offered him a job in Alaska. Meanwhile, he walks to Charley’s work building, and runs into Bernard. He asks Bernard why Biff threw his life away, and Bernard pins it back to when Biff visited Willy in Boston. Charley comes out and gives Willy money for the week. Willy admits that he’d be worth more dead than alive.  The scene switches then, with Happy and Biff waiting in a restaurant for their dad. Biff says Oliver didn’t even remember him, and asks Happy to help him tell Willy the truth. Willy arrives, but refuses to listen, so Biff lies and says that he has lunch with Oliver tomorrow. Willy exits to the bathroom, and Biff angrily leaves the restaurant. Happy follows with two women. Willy flashes back to the hotel room and the woman. Biff walks in to talk about failing math, and discovers that his father is having an affair. Willy comes back to the present, and leaves the restaurant to go buy seeds. The scene changes, and Happy and Biff enter the house. Linda yells at them for leaving Willy in the restaurant. Biff goes out to talk with Willy. They fight, and Biff ends up crying to Willy, begging him to let him go. Willy is thrilled to realize that Biff “likes” him. Everyone goes to bed except Willy, who leaves in his car and kills himself.

In the requiem, Biff, Linda, Charley, Happy and Bernard attend Willy’s funeral. Biff reveals he’s leaving the city, but Happy decides to stay in the city.

Style

-There is no narrative voice in this piece because it is a play.

-Miller apparently has a negative point of view towards the capitalistic system in the United States. I didn’t get this as much from reading the play, so much as from reading the outside interviews.

-He doesn’t use imagery that often, which might be why this play isn’t as impactful as, say, The American Dream.

-There is definitely symbolism throughout the play. Two prime examples of this are Willy and Linda. Because what Willy Loman sells is never specified, Willy himself becomes this universal character that symbolizes the plight of the working businessman. Linda comes to represent the “Madonna” that men of the time period married.

Quotes

1.     “Attention, attention must be finally paid to such a person” (Miller 56). –Linda, referring to Willy

v Comment on how people in general have a duty to one another. Also a comment on how business has discarded Willy (read: capitalism/business=cold and bad)

2.     “He’s a man way out there in the blue, riding on a smile and a shoeshine” (Miller 138). –Charley, referring to Willy

v This line simply intrigues me, because it doesn’t sound like something Charley would say. It also makes Willy seem like this helpless, lost ship. This furthers Biff’s point that Willy was always “lost” in the sense that he never had the right dreams.

Theme

Capitalism=bad.

This is a central theme Miller explores in DOS. One main way he develops this theme is through plot. Obviously, Willy lives in the USA, and therefore lives in a capitalistic society. Throughout the novel, he tries to appeal to peoples’ emotions and sentiments. However, he fails every time. For example, when Willy pleads with Howard for his job, Willy tries to bring up how he’s known Howard since he was a baby. However, this has zero effect on Howard. The fact of the matter is that business is cold, impersonal and cut-throat. Miller furthers this theme with the dialogue/character development of Linda. Linda constantly comments on how attention must be paid to Willy, that society and her sons need to help him because Willy is a human. Like Willy, she tries to get people in this capitalistic society to realize that people have a duty to help each other. However, this is lost on a lot of people. Happy and Biff don’t help much with supporting their own father, Howard treats Willy like dirt, and business itself helps drive Willy towards his death. All of this business and greed is a comment on capitalism itself. Miller portrays this capitalistic society as completely void of empathy.

Response to Course Material 12/2

In these past few weeks, we have pretty much 1.) wrapped up Death of a Salesman, and 2.) started Hamlet.

First off, I must say that, after working with this DOS so much in class, my opinions on certain characters have changed. I still strongly dislike Willy and Linda. If anything, my hatred for them has grown. In my opinion, Willy and Linda are two terrible human beings. Willy always sucked at being a salesman, yet his pride kept him from switching to being a carpenter. I can't stand how proud he is. It's one of my pet peeves. However, I've come to like Biff, Charley, and Bernard. I also sympathize with Happy, because his parents treat him like utter crap, and he really only wants their approval.

The reading dealing with DOS that Ms. Holmes assigned us was actually very useful. When I first heard about the assignment, I groaned because it was yet ANOTHER thing to read and analyze. However, I actually enjoyed it. One thing that surprised me was how much I hated Arthur Miller. I honestly had no idea that someone could come across as so pompous in a 5-some page interview! It also surprised me that I didn't interpret the play at all how Miller did.

Anyways, that play is behind us and we're now on Hamlet. I must say that Shakespeare has never been my favorite. In the past, I've struggled deciphering what the freak characters are actually saying. I also generally dislike the stories (ESPECIALLY Romeo and Juliet). I've liked Hamlet so far, though. The plot is interesting, and the text hasn't been as hard to read. Hopefully things continue like this.

Close Reading #3

50 Years of Progress Should Not Be Erased With One Ruling        

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rev-al-sharpton/50-years-of-progress-shou_b_1939774.html

Whether affirmative action among higher education institutions is legal or not is an issue that is currently being debated. This is partly due to the upcoming Supreme Court case, Fisher v. University of Texas. Reverend Al Sharpton makes his position on the matter quite clear in his article “50 Years of Progress Should Not Be Erased With One Ruling.” He argues that affirmative action is crucial; that the case must uphold it. Fischer creates this strong message through his use of diction, details, and syntax.

Fischer is careful with his use of diction to frame the issue of affirmative action. First off, he makes sure the upcoming Supreme Court case seem important to everyone, by saying it will have “national repercussions.” This appeal to the people is even more apparent with his use of the word “we.” For example, Fischer writes “we cannot allow,” “it’s vital for us,” and “we cannot blame” throughout the article. Using the pronoun “we” instead of “I” obviously sounds more inclusive, and makes readers feel like they have a connection with the issue, that maybe it’s more important to them than they initially thought. Another important point is how Fischer associates the words “inclusion and diversity” with affirmative action. Obviously, those words make the opposite (getting rid of affirmative action) seem like exclusion/racism/conformity. Since “inclusion and diversity” is what most strive for in this melting pot nation, the diction here paints affirmative action in a very favorable light.

Fischer’s choice of details also helps affirmative action seem like a very important issue. For example, Fischer open with a story about James Meredith, “the first black student to enroll at the [University of Mississippi].” He argues that the progress Meredith made will be erased with this one ruling. This creates anxiety and urgency among readers because almost no one wants to return to the days of segregation. Meredith later includes the fact that there is a danger of “black and Latino students [falling] behind.” This also lends a feeling of urgency to affirmative action because certain ethnic groups are already poorer on average than whites; it would obviously be very bad for these gaps to worsen. Blacks and Latinos being less educated would lead to them being less financially successful, which would lead to these worsening gaps.

Finally, Fischer’s use of syntax helps him create a stronger argument for keeping affirmative action. First off, his sentence structure is well thought-out and scholarly. For example, he writes “That’s precisely why it’s vital for all of us to be there in Washington, D.C. next week and let our voices be heard.” These longer sentences make up the majority of the writing. This style makes Fischer sound much more educated than if he had written his article using sentence fragments or short, choppy phrases. Writing in a more educated style makes Fischer’s argument sound more credible, and therefore stronger. All of this is not to say that there is no sentence variety. There are some shorter sentences interspersed, which helps to emphasize some of Fischer’s bigger points. For example, he writes, “far too much is at stake for us to remain silent.” This comparatively shorter sentence helps his point that people need to take action stand out, which therefore makes Fischer’s message stronger.

Overall, Fischer uses diction, details, and syntax to create a message that is both urgent and powerful. Even if one had no idea what affirmative action was before this article, it would be impossible to come away from reading it without at least believing that it was an important, relevant issue. 

Open Prompt #3

1996. The British novelist Fay Weldon offers this observation about happy endings. "The writers, I do believe, who get the best and most lasting response from their readers are the writers who offer a happy ending through moral development. By a happy ending, I do not mean mere fortunate events -- a marriage or a last minute rescue from death -- but some kind of spiritual reassessment or moral reconciliation, even with the self, even at death." Choose a novel or play that has the kind of ending Weldon describes. In a well-written essay, identify the "spiritual reassessment or moral reconciliation" evident in the ending and explain its significance in the work as a whole.

Most people would think of a man marrying a woman he does not love, and allowing the love of his life to leave, as a very sad ending. This is what occurs in Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence, a story that centers on a man named Newland Archer living in upper class New York society during the 1870s. While this might not be a classic fairytale ending, it can nonetheless be deemed happy. This is due to the moral growth that Newland goes through, and due to the fact that the event highlights the brighter aspects of New York society.

 During the story, Newland is not the most honest person. He has a conflict of interests—he’s married to a proper woman named Mary, yet he is not in love with her. On the other hand, he is extremely attracted to her cousin, Countess Ellen Olenska (who happens to be married to a Polish Count). At one point he lies to Mary about having to go on a business trip, and instead goes to Boston to see Countess Olenska. After a while, Ellen agrees to begin an affair with Newland. However, she then decides that New York Society isn’t for her and makes plans to return to Europe. By this point, Newland has lost all interest in maintaining any form of a relationship with Mary, and informs Ellen that he too is leaving New York to come with her to Europe.

                  

Despite this intention, Newland ultimately decides to stay in New York and remain married to Mary. A huge factor in his decision is his discovery that Mary is pregnant. Obviously, him remaining in New York is not the desired ending. He does not love Mary, even hates her at times. Plus, he forces himself to let go of Ellen, the love of his life, for good. However, it shows a great amount of maturity and moral development. By remaining with Mary, Newland is finally acknowledging that his actions have consequences, and that he has a duty to support his wife and unborn child. After all, nobody forced him to marry Mary. However, it is not until the conclusion of the book that he truly takes responsibility for these actions.

                  

This moral reconciliation is significant because it finally shows the better aspects of the New York society. Throughout The Age of Innocence, the reader becomes disillusioned with the society just as Newland does. After all, Newland feels pressured to marry Mary because of this society. On top of that, Mary, who is seen as a true upper class New Yorker, is extremely boring and unimaginative. However, it is this same society that helps lead Newland to the right choice at the end of the book. In fact, it was Mary who got Ellen to return to Europe (in hopes of separating the two) to remove the temptation. Most of the women in this society knew about these actions, and approved of them. Manipulative, yes, but Newland was manipulative too when he was trying to have an affair with Ellen. Removing this temptation helped lead Newland to his decision to end the affair once and for all. New York society helped lead him to this decision. While the values might be old and the crowd stuffy, the book finally revealed that not all their values need change.

                  

Over all, Newland is a dishonest man, unwilling to take responsibility for most of Edith Wharton’s The Age of Innocence. While he chooses to let go of the woman he truly loves in the end, the moral growth and reconciliation he finally achieves makes the ending happier. This conclusion is significant to the work as a whole because it highlights the better side of New York Society, after the author has disillusioned readers from it from the very first page. So, the ending might not be a storybook, idealistic ending, but it is happy nonetheless.

Response to Course Material 11/4

If possible, the characters in Death of a Salesman are frustrating me even more than the characters did in The American Dream. First off, the mom tries to pretend everything is okay and puts up with her husband's crap, and the sons are slackers who never grew up. By far and large, however, Willy is the person who I hate the most. I mean, HE FREAKING CHEATED ON HIS WIFE. There is no excuse for that. He's so fragile, and unable to accept the fact that he's not the most rich or successful person in America. It's like he never grew up, which is ridiculous. I mean, he turns down a job offer or two because he feels it's "beneath him." He needed to put his big-boy pants on and DEAL WITH IT. I don't view him as a victim; I believe what happened to Willy was his own fault.

Anyway, I noticed that this play is still very much focused on capitalism and the american dream, just like The American Dream. I guess this is different, though, because the Loman family is struggling financially and aren't tearing children apart. This coursework is starting to feel a little repetitive, though. Even the reading in our textbooks dealt with similar topics. I understand that I'm gaining different perspectives on capitalism, and this idea of the "american dream," but I would like to move on to a different issue, please.