The Crucible - Act 4

The final act, this is also a very powerful act, depicting the difficult choice of Proctor between what is right and what is easy. In this act, Proctor is asked to confess to the crime of witchcraft, in order to save himself. He does this to start with, but when asked to name others, he refuses to name anyone, arousing the suspicion of the judges. Finally, when asked to sign a confession note, he does, but will not give it over. In order to save and honour his friends, he rips the note, and is hanged for witchcraft.

This scene is mostly about the important theme of truth over ease. Rebecca Nurse and Martha Corey have decided that they will honour the truth, and die for it. Proctor initially chooses the opposite because he will gain nothing from upholding the truth; he is, in his mind, already a sinner, so he cannot be a saint by going to his death. Upon confession he realises that he will blacken the name of those who hanged for the truth by lying. He therefore chooses to uphold the truth, and is hanged with Rebecca and Martha. The theme of truth over lies recurs many times through the play as each of the character that are accused make the choice to lie, and save themselves, or to remain truthful, and die. While some of the characters choose to remain truthful because they refuse to sin, other make the choice because of implications for others. Most of those accused choose to name others as witches, and save themselves. At the beginning, Abigail and the other girls make the same choice, denounce others for witchcraft, rather than to accept their actions and be punished appropriately.

The Crucible - Act 3

This act is the most eventful of the four, and the act in which the most powerful events happen. The act opens with the accusation of Martha Corey who insists she is not a witch and does not know what they are. It then unfolds to the accusation against the girls, stating that they are lying. From here, the act proceeds through Danforth’s attempt to figure out the truth, ending with Elizabeth lying in order to protect her husband, or so she believes.

Mary Warren is yet again a dynamic character in this act, once she turns away from being an accuser in the court; she becomes more passive and ‘small’. But, once she returns to the side of the line, and accuses Proctor of Witchcraft, she is, yet again, more authoritative and forceful.

This act also has the most examples of rhetoric of the play. An example such as: “do you know that near four hundred are in the jails from Marblehead to Lynn, and upon my signature?” shows that the courts do not rely on real evidence to convict people and then say they are correct because they have jailed so many. This is a clear example of rhetoric, as the number of people that they have jailed does not make them any more correct or incorrect in their judgment.
In this act, the connection that this play has to McCarthyism becomes evident, with people being accused for all manner of reasons, being threatened with death, unless they name others.

Another important part of this act is that although Elizabeth proctor supposedly cannot lie, she lies to save her husband’s face. Lying and telling the truth over the consequences is an important part of the play, and comes out here.

The Crucible - Act 2

This is the second part of the play. It begins after Abigail declares many citizens of Salem to be witches. The second act takes place in the Proctor's house, first in a discussion between Elizabeth and Proctor. In the early section of this act, we find out more about the relationship between proctor and Abigail. We also learn about the tension between Elizabeth and Proctor, since the affair.

In this act, two characters in particular a demonstrated to be dynamic, both John Hale and Mary Warren. In the start of the play, and even when he first enters the scene, Hale is determined to find and destroy the ‘devil’ where ever he may be present within Salem. However, once Elizabeth is accused of being a witch, something that hale cannot agree with, he flips sides on his position in the trials, becoming a proponent for the accused and challenging the accusations and the methods of the court for the remainder of the play. Mary Warren is also dynamic; she goes from being a “mouse” in the first act, not willing to stand up for herself and submitting to anyone, to being significantly more forceful. She resists Elizabeth Procter telling her not to leave the house, and even threatens the Proctors with accusations. This change she exhibits is mostly due to the effect of being powerful and being heard in court.

The act has an ironic moment when Proctor, who is being questioned and has been asked to recite the Ten Commandments, can remember them all, except the seventh: “Thou shall not commit adultery”. This is ironic because he himself is guilty of that crime and cannot remember the only commandment that he has violated.

The Crucible - Act 1

This is the first part of the play, and as such, serves as a build-up to the events that will occur in the play. In this section of the play, it is reported that Parris caught the girls are dancing in the forest, attempting to make a love potion. It also includes the accusation of Tituba, and Abigail and Betty accusing many of the members of the town are accused of being witches.

This Act has the most authorial intrusion of the play. Throughout the act, the author will step in. He will do this either to explain characters, describe other events, either in the past or the future of the play, or, he may even draw direct parallels between the events in the play, and the current events of the time, McCarthyism and anti-communist hilarity. This authorial intrusion in this act is used to transform the story from a historical recount into a Parable, as a reminder of the problems if fear and hilarity remain unchecked. The events that happen in this part of the play also have to do with irony, because although the girls and Tituba where the ones performing the ‘witch-like’ activates, they become the accusers at the end of the act, and others are accused in their place.

It is interesting to view the character foil between Betty and Abigail in the early part of this act. Whereas Abigail admits to having participated in the event and dancing, Betty claims to have been possessed and will not respond to any of the characters.
Within this act, none of the characters act dynamically, with the possible exception of Abigail, who changes from denying that there was any witchcraft going on to accusing others of witchcraft.

Science of Oryx and Crake

Having now finished reading the book, i come to realize that the rate at which scientific progression happen was the downfall of the society. Scientists are always happy to advance in whatever way they can, and put no limits on this advance. While on it's own, this is not a problem, the issue lies in using these advances before we have developed the mentality to be able to. Morals are always behind, as morals cannot possibly be created ahead or even at the same rate as scientific advance. we don't develop morals around things we cannot do, simply because we don't need to. Morals cannot even be parallel in development, because the idea for something always is thought of before the implications of it.

In Oryx and Crake, the major scientific revelation is genetic modification. The people of the story have learned how to modify almost any creature, in to anything that they need. This ability sparks great innovation, but at the cost of becoming an unstoppable rolling stone. The people go from making pigoons, which are simply pigs that grow extra organs, to making genetically modified chickens that no longer even have a brain, and are simply meat that grows.

This ultimately leads to the downfall of the human race, when Crake decides that humans should be replaced with his enhanced version of humanity, The Crakers. Because of genetic modification, Crake is not only able to make people, but kill the current ones.

All of this was able to happen because of the lack of moral ability. Human morals had not yet caught up with the ideas behind genetic modification, and so, science could keep stretching things farther and farther.



A blue strawberry. While this may seem benign, what harm is a blue strawberry? The people of the book probably asked themselves the same question. What harm is a pigoon? and on and on from there.

Literature Web for The Veldt

The Quality is rather bad, but hopefully it is still readable

Character Devolpment

All of the three primary characters, Snowman or Jimmy, Crake, and Oryx are quite different in the way that they are developed in the book.

The character development of Snowman is rather typical. As “Oryx and Crake” is told from an almost first-person view (with the character being referred to in a third person perspective, but having the characteristics of a first person perspective), either by flashbacks to Snowman's former life, or by a direct story of his current life. The development is a complete story of Snowman's life, with no parts left to mystery. Also, there is complete knowledge of Snowman's thoughts throughout the novel. This method means that we feel as if we are snowman, we see the world as snowman does (or did). Snowman hides nothing from us, and therefore, we feel as if we know him.

Crake is developed differently. The only knowledge of Crake is that which Snowman knows, and is learned from Snowman's perspective. We do, however, learn a lot about Crake, from his habits to his opinions on how society and life should be. We also learn of how Crake changed things about the world that affect the current time. This also, is from Snowman’s memory. The way that the character of Crake is developed leads us to know about him, but not to see from his perspective. He becomes a known person with unknown thoughts and motives, which makes him a mystery, but only on an internal scale.

Oryx is completely different. We learn snippets of her past, as remembered by Snowman, but other than that, we know nothing of her, other than offhand comments made by Snowman about her. We also learn about Oryx through Snowman’s fantasies of her, in which she talks. Because of this, Oryx remains a mystery character to be speculated upon. We know nothing of her, and she has never appeared in any of the flashbacks.



The Picture I have is of Donald Rumsfeld. While this may seem slightly odd, I chose this image because of a quote of his:

There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know.

All of the characters if into one of these areas: Jimmy is a known known, we know everything about him that we need to. Crake is an unknown unknown, as the things we don't know about him, we don't know that we don't know. Oryx however, falls into the other section, she it a known unknown, we don't know much about her, but we know there are things about her we don't know.

Dystopian Word Cloud

My dystopian word cloud

The original file can be found at: http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2567996/Dystopia

Billy Budd has Met His End

We have finally stopped studying Billy Budd, so I now feel free to comment on what a terrible book it was. It was terrible! there was no events in a great deal of the chapters, just the author going off on random tangents for entire chapters at a time (sometimes more). Also, for the most part, the book was written in such a terrible way that I could rarely read more then two chapters before having to put the book down. I hope I never have to read such a bad book again.

Comment

I commented on IAmSpecialized's blog here.

Response 4

Question 2

Claggart is given a traditional military funeral and burial. The event is quite honourable and respectful of a man who served the country. The burial has little grandeur and special events, but is held in perfect military custom. This event is quite ironic, as it is very opposite of Claggart's life. Typically, funerals are representative of the life of the person, but in the case of Claggart's funeral, it represents what John Claggart should have been, rather then what he was.

Claggart had a rather dishonest life, as he spoke and acted in trickery, and was never trying to achieve the best for anyone. By contrast, his burial represented the traditional sailor's life, one of honour and servitude of a country.

Question 4

Billy's last words, before his death by hanging, are; "God bless Captain Vere". They are primarily symbolic of the conflict in Captain Vere. He likes Billy as a person and a sailor, but he has to follow the rules of his code, and have Billy hanged. The statement also demonstrates that Billy understands Captain Vere's predicament and agrees with his decision. It shows that Billy is a good person and will stick with his captain until the end.


http://www.fraternityofshadows.com/Mausoleum/Miniatures_Images/As_HangedMan.jpg

A hanging man, usually a gruesome affair, but in billy's case, quite peaceful.

Comment

My latest comment is Here.

Self Respect

Self respect is an interesting and rather important issue. The idea that you can not like yourself, but sill respect yourself is queer, I had not thought about not liking myself before. I'm not sure if this is the point at which you lose innocence, as the author says. I think that there are many people who like themselves who are no longer as innocent as they wish they where or would claim. She says that you must fail at something, or be beaten at it to achieve self respect. I wonder if this is true? Can you not respect yourself for not having failed as well? I understand how failing would allow you to gain self respect, If you admire yourself for pulling through and moving on.

On another point that is brought up later in the reading, that without self respect, you are nothing. I'm not sure if I agree with this, sure your life is not very pleasant, but I think that it is possible to be happy without respecting yourself, even to some degree. I do wonder though, what would it be like to have no respect for yourself?

I'll leave it on that note.

Response 3

Question 1

After going to the forechains, Billy is confused. He is unsure if he did the right thing by telling the man to return to his post. He wrestles with this concept of what had happened, and also why, before asking the Dansker.

I think this tells us that billy is so nieve and inoccent that he cannot even understand why people would want to disobey rules. This meeting is Billy's first real experience with something dark, and (from his point of view) not good-natured. While he notices this, he cannot really grasp it, because he has no evil motivations himself. He is also not sure what to make of the bribe, as he does not think that money should be a factor in if something is right or not.

Question 2

When Billy confides in the Dansker about the indecent, the Dankser states that it could be another example of how Claggart "has it in for him". Billy, who no longer states that he blatantly disbelieves that Claggart has something against him, asks why the Dansker says this, but gets no answer. He does this, I think, because he is confused. Before, when the speaks to the Dansker, he knows what (in his mind at least) is going on, and therefore, contradicts what is told to him. In this instance however, he does not really understand what happend and why, and so, is willing to listen to what the Dansker has to say. He also realizes that what happened was not honest and straight forward, but in trickery and dishonesty.

Comment

I have commented on someone else's blog Here.

Response 2

Question 1

John Claggart is the almost the complete opposite of Billy, he is older, higher ranking, and described as wicked. Unlike Billy, who is a simple, straight forward person, he has motives and uses deception and second meanings that Billy can't even begin to comprehend. Throughout the book, he speaks in a kind manner to Billy, despite the fact that he has no such kind feelings for him. I think that because he hides his true feelings and motives from people all of the time, he believes that others do the same, and therefore, reads unintended meanings in the actions or statements of others. A good example of this is when Billy spills the soup on the newly cleaned floor, Claggart seems to think that Billy directed this act as an insult toward Claggart himself, and therefore insults him (in a way that Billy does not understand). I believe that Claggart is motivated to dislike and even hate Billy out of envy, Billy represents the ideal person in the story, and Claggart is envious of this perfection.

Image: http://jasonsgrainofsalt.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/envy.jpg

Whilst this image is rather simple, It coveys Claggart’s point of view: Destroy those who have what you can’t.

Question 4

The Dansker is the person whose job is to show/teach Billy about hidden meanings and deception. He repeatedly suggests that Claggart is working against him, and is unfriendly toward Billy. Billy, however, flatly denies this, refusing to believe it. The reason, I think, that he refuses to believe it, is because he cannot believe it, he is a simple person, who does not “deal double meanings”. I think that the Dansker’s task in the story is to help Billy survive the ship, by providing someone for him to confide in, and giving advice.

Comment

My comment on another blog can be found here.

Response 1

This is my first response. (Yay?)

Question 4

The names of the two ships have quite different meanings; Rights of Man refers to freedom to do whatever one likes and to be safe from harm. Bellipotent means the power of war, referring to the fact that it is a warship and that it's goals are destruction and glory. Melville could be demonstration how Billy's former life could be changing from one of freedom and peace to following orders and war.

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/civil-war/1861/may/loading-war-ship.jpg

This picture show the loading of a warship, in preparation for battle. It demonstrates the change that will occur in billy's life, from one of calm to one of rush.

Question 5

I believe that this implies that while he may be a nice, good looking person, he is quite innocent and perhaps not even very clever. Also, this could mean that he is the type of person who does not use trickery or speak any meaning beyond the literal one, a straight forward person.

Goals for English 20

I have two main goals for english 20:

• Improve my essay writing skills, as most of the essays I end up writing are too short and below average quality.
• Get an 80%+ in the English 20 course.

I will achieve these goals by working harder than I normally would on assignments and dedicating more time to essay writing, so that I am not rushed when working on them.

When I have achieved my goals I will have a mark higher than 80% at the end of the course and I will not have a problem writing good essays longer than 3 pages.

Farxodor

The First Post

I'd like to wecome everyone to my blog. As you could have guessed from the name, the Empty Journal is, well, a Journal that is Empty (not really). I will be posting on this blog whenever I want, about whatever I want and I will stop, guess what, whenever I want.

Enjoy,
Farxodor