revised essayy

Marriage when defined by Webster’s is classified as “the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments.” But that is just all that it defines it as, the definition ends there. It never once mentions love or any feelings. It simply puts it as a “decision to live” with each other; it never once says that it is an act of love and loyalty. When in fact the reason to wed a person is being of the said feelings of love it not just an impulse act that you wake up on morning and do. In John Donne’s poem “A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning” and Judith Minty’s poem “Conjoined” the differing views of marriage and what it entails is illustrated through the use of similes, metaphors, and diction to created two completely contrasting perspectives.


The use of similes was very profound in the depicting the meaning of the poem. For example, beginning in the seventh stanza of Donne’s poem, he compares the love between the two in his poem to be “as stiff twin compasses”. The twin compasses are described as two, but only in the sense that there are two legs joined permanently at the top. Donne uses the "twin compasses" as a metaphor, stating that the souls of the couple are joined as one and will navigate through their life together in one direction. However, if and when they do part, they will become two souls, but the arms of their compasses will forever point toward each other, and the path they lead will never be strayed from. This symbolizes spiritual love, and recognizes that true love never dies. One leg of the compass, which is often referred to as the “fixed foot”, is “in the center sit”. Meaning that it remains planted firmly in the center. The other leg of the compass travels in a perfect circle, returning to its exact point of origin. This is all along depicting that although the poem is about parting lovers, it is showing how even in mathematics things return, without harm; as they do in love. Thus the speaker explains that the person who remains in the center makes positive that the absent lover returns back to form a complete circle because of its firmness. It is not square or a heart because there are sharp edges that can be broken, but a circle is continuous and fluid and everlasting, like a marriage and like the love that bonds the marriage and forever keeps it vibrant and refreshed. Donne’s take on love is that it can forever endure and remain compassionate. In Minty’s poem she explains to the reader that love is like "an accident, like the two-headed calf rooted in one body, fighting to suck at its mothers teats; or like those other freaks, Chang and Eng." Minty believes that marriage should not be seen as an accident; instead it should be something that is meticulously planned out and held off for the right moment. For after all a two-headed calf did not choose to live its life the way it is; her path was chosen for her and now she must live with her decision. Alike to marriage, it is seen as a decision one must live with. Struggling for a bare essential of survival explains a couple's conciliation over concerns. One person may want something different from the other, but because they have been bonded together, the compromise must take place whether or not if it results in happiness. Take the Siamese twins Chang and Eng. They are two separate individuals who both have different wants, needs and desires from life and their surroundings, but under their medical conditions and according to Minty are forced to remain together and make decisions and sacrifices based on the others needs, wants and desires.



Diction was a major contrasting element between the two poems that really set them apart from each other and utilized the correct mood and tone that was attempted to be revealed by each author. The titles of each poem clearly mark themselves certain to be interpreted between a positive and a negative connotation. Minty used degrading and demeaning words such as "deformed, accident, doomed, freaks, and cannot escape" while Donne shows his side through a much different choice of words, such as "joys, love, innocent, refined, soul, and grows". Each explains the mood of the poem and reveals what the author was thinking during his or her composition. The words create contrasting reflections of one another and once again show a lack of comparison between the two poems.



Marriage is indefinite; meaning that it is not something that every person can agree on the meaning of. Donne sees marriage as a bond of love and happiness. On the other hand, Minty sees marriage as a restriction, which is often lonely and trapped. Although it is portrayed in very different ways the actual bond that it entails never diverges. Marriage follows the lines of, “what you put into it, it what you get out.” You make it into what it is and to you that is all you need. There is no definition of marriage but the authors Minty and Donne tried to decode the meaning of marriage through similes, metaphors, and diction.

essay

Marriage when defined by Webster’s is classified as “the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments.” But that is just all that it defines it as, the definition ends there. It never once mentions love or any feelings. It simply puts it as a “decision to live” with each other; it never once says that it is an act of love and loyalty. When in fact the reason to wed a person is being of the said feelings of love it not just an impulse act that you wake up on morning and do. In John Donne’s poem “A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning” and Judith Minty’s poem “Conjoined” the differing views of marriage and what it entails is illustrated through the use of similes, metaphors, and diction to created two completely contrasting perspectives.
The use of similes was very profound in the depicting the meaning of the poem. For example, beginning in the seventh stanza of Donne’s poem, he compares the love between the two in his poem to be “as stiff twin compasses”. The twin compasses are described as two, but only in the sense that there are two legs joined permanently at the top. Donne uses the "twin compasses" as a metaphor, stating that the souls of the couple are joined as one and will navigate through their life together in one direction. However, if and when they do part, they will become two souls, but the arms of their compasses will forever point toward each other, and the path they lead will never be strayed from. This symbolizes spiritual love, and recognizes that true love never dies. One leg of the compass, which is often referred to as the “fixed foot”, is “in the center sit”. Meaning that it remains planted firmly in the center. The other leg of the compass travels in a perfect circle, returning to its exact point of origin. This is all along depicting that although the poem is about parting lovers, it is showing how even in mathematics things return, without harm; as they do in love. Thus the speaker explains that the person who remains in the center makes positive that the absent lover returns back to form a complete circle because of its firmness. It is not square or a heart because there are sharp edges that can be broken, but a circle is continuous and fluid and everlasting, like a marriage and like the love that bonds the marriage and forever keeps it vibrant and refreshed. Donne’s take on love is that it can forever endure and remain compassionate. In Minty’s poem she explains to the reader that love is like "an accident, like the two-headed calf rooted in one body, fighting to suck at its mothers teats; or like those other freaks, Chang and Eng." Minty believes that marriage should not be seen as an accident; instead it should be something that is meticulously planned out and held off for the right moment. For after all a two-headed calf did not choose to live its life the way it is; her path was chosen for her and now she must live with her decision. Alike to marriage, it is seen as a decision one must live with. Struggling for a bare essential of survival explains a couple's conciliation over concerns. One person may want something different from the other, but because they have been bonded together, the compromise must take place whether or not if it results in happiness. Take the Siamese twins Chang and Eng. They are two separate individuals who both have different wants, needs and desires from life and their surroundings, but under their medical conditions and according to Minty are forced to remain together and make decisions and sacrifices based on the others needs, wants and desires.
Diction was a major contrasting element between the two poems that really set them apart from each other and utilized the correct mood and tone that was attempted to be revealed by each author. The titles of each poem clearly mark themselves certain to be interpreted between a positive and a negative connotation. Minty used degrading and demeaning words such as "deformed, accident, doomed, freaks, and cannot escape" while Donne shows his side through a much different choice of words, such as "joys, love, innocent, refined, soul, and grows". Each explains the mood of the poem and reveals what the author was thinking during his or her composition. The words create contrasting reflections of one another and once again show a lack of comparison between the two poems.
Marriage is indefinite; meaning that it is not something that every person can agree on the meaning of. Donne sees marriage as a bond of love and happiness. On the other hand, Minty sees marriage as a restriction, which is often lonely and trapped. Although it is portrayed in very different ways the actual bond that it entails never diverges. Marriage follows the lines of, “what you put into it, it what you get out.” You make it into what it is and to you that is all you need. There is no definition of marriage but the authors Minty and Donne tried to decode the meaning of marriage through similes, metaphors, and diction.

I want a Ford Raptor!

So I hope everyone had a great Valentine's Day! I sure did :) Well writing this blog means that the weekend is officially over, so that is why I'm having a hard time sitting down and actually writing it! But here I go...I guess I'll give it a try now.


The article that Jim Neilson write about The Things They Carried gave me a whole new understanding on how to look at this book. Neilson provides clear examples for why O'Brien takes his different approach to telling made up war stories is a great way to explain the conditions and trials that the soldiers go through during the war. After reading this article I now realize how effective this method is, because I now know why he is writing in such a way. Neilson says that even with O'Brien writing this way, he "has been faithful both to Vietnam and to the stories told about it".
The stories are then told to only cope with what he went through in Vietnam and "like many veterans, [O'Brien's] effort to make sense of war-time experience and memory is a continuing struggle. These are burdens O'Brien will forever carry."
O'Brien takes these burdens he has left from the war and brings it back to a "more" normal world to share his experiences with people that do not know exactly what he went through.He is then left to discover what truth really is and if the war stories are real or just something to tell people so it is out of his system, but a re-happening begins and he relives the moments and tries to piece himself back together with these stories. I believe that veterans are one big discourse in the postmodern world. It is "discourse of postmodernism [that] is replete with a radical-sounding rhetoric concerned with opposing tyranny and giving voice to the marginal and the oppressed." Their world is the psyche mind pulling itself back together, figuring out what really happened and what is the truth of the matter. They pick up the pieces. Moreover, then there was the discourse of historical texts making the war seem that "Most revised in the recent historical record has been how horribly destructive the war was for the Vietnamese," when in reality it was just as bad as the Americans that had fought in it. In conclusion, the ideas and insight that were put into the article gave me a greater understanding of the book. Goodnight!

Its way too early :/

Well this discussion in class on Friday helped clarify a majority of my questions. I would have to say that I have enjoyed reading these short stories far more than I have enjoyed reading the bizarre books that take you into another dimension or world. Well as for a main theme in this new book I could have to say and idea that stuck out to me from our class discussion was silence. Which a few of you might be thinking I’m crazy for saying this only because this book is focused on a war and we all know wars are far from quiet, but still I believe that is a central theme. An example is when in the author writes “[he] was a coward. [He] went to the war” (61). Although this theme does not jump out and bite you, it is still there. That quote ties into silence because it shows how he acts as a coward. He did not have the courage to stand up for himself and say that he did not want to fight in the war. Instead he just went along with the plan and remained silent. Another theme I see is truth. In the beginning of the book I read a quote that went, “This book is essentially different…Those who have had any such experience as the author will see truthfulness at once, and to all other readers it is commended as a statement of actual things by one who experienced them to the fullest". This means, that the entire book is being written from the authors perspective and although these stories seem far-fetched and unreasonable, we must remember that we were not there and these are written from the perspective of somebody who was. Well that’s all for now! Byeeeee 

its way tooo late! dont remember what i titled this.

So what is postmodernism exactly? I thought that it was a term that was so broad and wide in its meaning that it could never tie down a set definition, but I guess I am wrong. Well to be honest, all of the postmodernist ideas that we have been discussing in class have in short, been going over my head. I cannot seem to wrap my mind around something that is so vague but endless. It just does not make any sense to me. But if I were to sum up all the aspects of the idea that I actually understand, I would classify postmodernism as being how your upbringing, background and discourse affects the way that you think and perceive things. Being it is our train of thought that makes use unique in our own ways.
I know we only skimmed the surface of what the postmodernism really is in class, but I did not always understand even the beginners' information. The books that we have read in class have all been relatable and relatively close to the point that there Postmodernism book is trying to accomplish. What I think the central part of postmodernism is the theory of narratives and the truth of lies. The part that appeals to me the most is the idea that religions are only narratives that people choose to believe in order to have some meaning or direction in life. I don't completely understand what we learned about postmodernism, but from what I have been able to comprehend, the central part to me would be the idea of narratives and meta-narratives since they are rooted everywhere, in every culture throughout history.

What I think the central part of postmodernism is the theory of narratives and the truth of lies. The part that draws me in the most is the idea that religions are only narratives that people choose to believe in order to have some meaning or direction in life. I don't completely understand what we learned about postmodernism, but from what I have been able to comprehend, the central part to me would be the idea of narratives and meta-narratives since they are rooted everywhere, in every culture throughout history.

Titles aren't really my thing.

Okay, well good morning everyone! Hope you slept well and your weekend was a good one! Well I’m not really sure exactly which prompt I will be answering, it might be in-between but I guess we’ll see as I start writing, so here we go!
I just want to start out my saying that the video we watched on Friday was crazy! All this statistics they presented us, made me think about how, as a society, we really are moving into a new era. One statistic presented was “Today, the number of text messages sent and received everyday exceeds the total population of the planet.” That number is just absurd, although I am one of those “crazy teens” who spend a majority of their time texting, it never hit me the number of texts sent and received daily was that large. Also, I never knew how effective the internet was and really how much people used it to do. Like the statistic that “1 out of 8 couples married last year met online.” It’s almost like if someone really cannot find something or in this case, someone then they look online because you can find “everything” on the Internet, I just never knew how undefined the “everything” was. It is sort of scary to see how much people rely on the Internet for.
According to Dr. Alan Kirby’s the new era we are about to enter into is called Pseudo-modernism. Kirby states that “In postmodernism, one read, watched, listened, as before. In pseudo-modernism one phones, clicks, presses, surfs, chooses, moves, downloads.” His insight is just further confirming that we are on our way to becoming completely dependent on technology and such other things. America has transformed drastically and so has the lifestyle. Like if you ask any teenager to just give up their cell phone, computer, Internet and television I think they would have a heart-attack, myself included. We as a society have become so dependent on technology and I just hope we don’t turn into a Brave New World society at this rate.

Cat's Cradle

Hello and Good morning everyone! Well I really like Cat’s Cradle so far. It’s interesting, easy to read and is not about little 5 year olds doing the nasty so it is way better to me than the other books we’ve read so far. It is not about anything out of the ordinary; like babies being made on a factory line or a dictator watching very closely after everyone so it doesn’t creep me out and I like it! Haha so yeah here’s my blog…

Despite Cat’s Cradle being completely different from any of the other books that we’ve read so far this year; it does have its similarities. One thing that stood out to me was how alike Brave New World, Cat’s Cradle, also has a “group”. In BNW it was all the social classes that they were born into and in Cat’s Cradle they have a “karass” which comes from the Bokonon religion; “We Bokononists believe that humanity is organized into teams, teams that do God’s will without ever discovering what they are doing. Such a team is called a karass by Bokonon...” This reminds me of how in BWN they were born into a class based on what they could accomplish and what type of person they were and to me the groups in Cat’s Cradle seem to be pretty darn similar.
Also, it is like Postmodernism because it seems to view religion as being fake and not real. For the entire beginning of the book Jonah is saying that he was Christian until he came upon the Bokonon way. The Bokonon religion more or less is a sarcastic approach of Kurt Vonnegut to make up his own imaginary religion, in a way mock people. In Bokonon’s religion it is said that we are connected through a specific karass but in Christianity we are connected by groups of people who form together to grow and learn about their religion. The way he talks about religion seems to me like he is commenting that no religion is truthful and the only thing that is true is Science and Research.