Assignment #10 - Oedipus

Not always in life the blindness or darkness is a literal state. In Sophocles play “ Oedipus the King” while Tiresias may be literally blind, he “sees” the truth and delivers it to others in the form of prophecy. Oedipus is not physically blind, but, as it is said in the story, Oedipus with his “precious eyes” is “blind” to the “corruption of [his] life”, meaning he does not pay attention to what should be obvious details. This is full of irony by the fact that he was made famous for by solving the riddle of the Sphinx. Here the prophecy is misunderstood not once, but twice: first by Oedipus father and then by Oedipus himself. Oedipus's father, upon hearing the prophecy, orders Oedipus murdered. Since he was a baby when he was to be murdered and delivered to the parents who raised him, Oedipus after hearing about the prophecy was completely “in the dark”, and since his adoptive parents didn't tell him they weren't his biological parents, he assumed they would be those who he would kill. Without the information withheld from him, he could not make an informed decision and, instead, made the wrong choices. Ignorant Oedipus attempts to make the correct decisions based off of the information he collects, but without all the information before acting, makes decisions that lead to him fulfilling the prophecy. He could have chosen to stay with his adoptive parents and watch for the signs of prophecy and correct them as they arose. Instead, being ignorant, he chose to leave which led him to murder his biological father and be married to his mother as the prophecy dictated. When Oedipus finally sees the terrible truth of his life, he stab out his own eyes. He is doing it because he no longer can’t stand what he created. By doing this he becomes form metaphorically to literally blind person.

Assignment #9

Since it is free choice I decided to post summary of conference which I attended. I hope that some of you also attended it and can give me same feedback on it. Thank you

On Wednesday April 21^st, we, as a whole class, attended one of four parts of the symposium titled “The Resilient City”, which examined the current recession, its urban origins, and its overall effect on America’s cities. The part that we attended was called “Food and Hunger in New York City” and it showed different approaches of dealing with hunger.

The director of The Food and Nutrition Programs at LaGuardia Community and College Professor Bette Cohen and Minerva Delgado, the director of Agency Resources at the Food Bank For New York City introduced the subject of the conference. Professor Cohen talked about history and hunger statistic in America, where as Professor Delgada focused more on New York City today, and how to resolve the problem. She also talked about the organization for which she works.

According to Professor Cohen’s sources in November 2009 there were forty-nine millions of hungry Americans of which seventy millions were children. That means every sixth person did not have food to eat. She said the history of a hunger in U.S. took roots in the early 1920’s and progressed through the decades. Cohen introduces different approaches of the government to the problem - from the concept of providing free school lunches, and creating the first food stamps by president Frank Delano Roosevelt and then taking them away. Finally she spoke about the welfare reform where the food stamps were drastically cut, and then brought back by president Clinton. She concluded her presentation with a statement that hunger is mostly caused by government policies, and that hunger these days has become platform for glamour charity events.

Professor Delgado focused her presentation more on the New York City problem with hunger, and on her work for the Food Bank For New York where she is the Director of Agency Resources. According to Delgado we, as a country, are very close to resolving the problem of famine - it is only a matter of changing political will and putting resources in right places. In her opinion, food should become a basic human right. Delgado also talked how the Food Bank works, how they obtain food from different institution, the restaurants, the government and how it is distributed among people in need. She also said the agency provides income support, free tax assistance and food stamps for people with low income. Finally, she talked about the major increase in demand for services in connection with the ascendant recession, yet, at the same time, she said they were receiving concerned response from the government as well as from the private sector. For example the government established the stimulus package, improvements in food stamps program, and the private donors donated bigger amounts of money then they normally would have. All of the above helped New York City a lot in the recent year.

Assignment #8--Poems

In my opinion reader response is the best way to criticize the poem of Robert Frost “The Road Not Taken”. Even if the poet spoke of the poem as very tricky, I think, it still leaves a room for interpretation by readers. It is quite possible that readers can read “The Road Not Taken” in theirs 20's with an entirely different perspective than they would when they reach 80. Very often this poem is interpreted as a serious poem about the idea of life as journey or the metaphor of the road of life and about the decisions we make in life, and for those who read it in this way it may be valid. But it is possible to rise some other questions, for example: is it worth questioning or theorizing at the end of our life what may have happened if we have had chosen a different path in life? or is it beneficial for some to claim that the path, which they chosen, was the hardest as well as the most outstanding? As well as many more question. Because this poem rise more questions then it answers I think the reader response is the best approach. By applying this type of response we gain deeper appreciation of the multiple uses of language and a better understanding of how transformations of meaning are initiated and sustained during literary reading. We also learn how text affects the reader intellectually and affectively.

Assignment #7

Katarzyna Urbanska

ENG 102 – 0826

Dr. Lykourgos Vasileiou

4/29/10

Louise Mallard's intertwined identity.

In her tale, “The Story of an Hour”, Kate Chopin critiques the oppression of wives in late 19^th century by introducing readers to the character of Mrs. Mallard, who progresses from repression to self rediscovery as the end of the story gradually nears. At the beginning, she is a big mystery for the reader, and then we see her transformation, from a grieving wife to a liberated and finally dead woman, whose life ends in a surprising way, or was it?

At the beginning of the story, the author introduces to us the main character referring to her as Mrs. Mallard or “she”, and till the moment where we learn about her husband’s death we don’t even know her name. Chopin initially portrays her in a way that the readers have an image of an old, tired, fragile and weak woman with a troubled heart. The phrase “troubled heart” could be seen to have a double meaning – one portraying a physically weak heart or one filled with emotional fatigue. In a sense, Mrs. Mallard is a complete enigma as much to the reader as she is to herself at the unset of this intense story. Nevertheless, and thus, her sister reveals her husband’s death to Mrs. Mallard in the most gentle way “…in broken sentences; veiled hints that revealed in half concealing.”(516) At the same time, when she learns about her husband’s death we learn a little bit more about her true features and finally her name. Now we know that her name is Louise and she is quite a young woman.

Louise Mallard’s reaction to the news about her husband’s death also marks the beginning of her initial transformation. She starts the grieving widow reacting in typical expected way, as a wife should, to the message about the deadly accident that took her husband’s life, then immediately and sincerely “She wept at once, with sudden, wild abandonment, in her sister’s arms.”(516) But her grief is short, just as sudden her husband’s death was. And then, as she is alone in her room, at once far apart, yet feeling the tentacles of the world trying to touch her, something starts to change as a veil of her grief begins to lift and the fatigue in her heart turns onto joy. She is not sure what is happening with her, “ There was something coming to her and she was waiting for it, fearfully. She did not know; it was too subtle and elusive to name”(517) It was the beginning of another stage of her transformation when “She was beginning to recognize this thing that was approaching to possess her.”(517) It was the moment when she realizes that from powerless woman she is now becoming a liberated one, “…a little whispered world escaped her slightly parted lips. She said it over and over under her breath: “free, free, free!””(517) For some Louis Mallard’s change from the grieving wife to a monstrously joyful woman can be seen as distasteful, yet it is apparent she is not happy about the fact of her husband’s death, rather her happiness comes from the realization of freedom which has come from his death. She sees “…a long procession of years to come that would belong to her absolutely.”(517) Mrs. Mallard appears to be transforming from a weak individual to someone who gains a distinct, no longer dependent of another, self image. But again, this time her joy, as the grief before, vanishes rather quickly.

When Mrs. Mallard earns the knowledge of her husband’s death, we see the final stage of her transformation- her death. Whereas initially her new identity transforms Mrs. Mallard onto Louise, with the surprising sight of her husband she transcends back to Mrs. Mallard, and greeting her final moment as the doctor diagnoses her death as “…heart disease – of joy that kills.”(517); however, we could also assume it was aggravated by the realization that her newly discovered freedom was suddenly gone, and so was the life from her heart once again strongly besieged by the weight of another. Her new identity evaporates and so does her life!

This story is an impressive literary piece; it touches the reader’s feelings as well as his/her mind. There are many questions that could be posed and many aspects to be considered. We might want to know, and could speculate about Mr. Richards relationship to Mrs. Mallard or what could Louise do with her newly found freedom given the nature of those times. But in this short story the only thing essentially clear and evident is the transformation of Mrs. Mallard onto Louise. She is both the main character and the protagonist of this story, or perhaps she is Kate Chopin herself? It is an interesting question since Chopin lived and wrote in the same time frame as the story she tells. It is known that her husband died prematurely and at that time women authors were often looked upon with a frown. Chopin had the need to show how women were portrayed by the 19^th century society, particularly wives by their husbands- as weak creatures who were not able to take care of themselves, who didn’t have many rights which now we consider basic.