Dr. Pelletier commented on the Realism novel. She stated that during this time period, change came so fast that writers used the novel to describe something they didn’t quite understand. After reading Flaubert’s Sentimental Education, I certainly empathize.
At the novel’s conclusion, I was left questioning its significance. I felt bombarded with historical context that I did not fully understand as well as a plethora of characters whose names and individual representations I would not be able to remember. There was just too much going on. Dr. Pelletier mentioned that Flaubert wrote slowly. This is certainly evident in the richness of this text in terms of quantity of detailed information. To fully grasp this novel, I would have to spend a great deal of time doing research and filter through the abundance of description. Therefore, I feel I did not understand the novel to the extent that Flaubert, perhaps, had hoped.
I believe Flaubert was successful with his notion that his literature should not be “entertaining” and “available for all.” Though a bit of a pompous statement, it was true in my case as I am an ignorant fool who does not appreciate the genius of Flaubert.
If reading this novel reveals my true character, much like a personality test, I guess I am a simple-minded dope who gets bored when people talk too much.
Oh and I must make one more comment in regards to Frederic. I became rather annoyed during a particular part of the novel. It has to do with the scene near the end where Frederic finally admits his love for Madame Arnoux. The narrator comments on her grey hair, which causes Frederic to question his love for her. God forbid that a woman grow old! I mean, without beauty, what good is a woman? And I am sure Frederic is just the hottest guy in all of France. I got a bit upset at that remark as my eyes rolled in the back of my head numerous times.
Perhaps this reveals even more of my character… or maybe I was just ticked off that day because I was told women shouldn’t be president because we are too “emotional,” particularly in regards to war. After all, men have done such a great job… women might ruin it! But I digress.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Thursday, February 8, 2007
“We all know Romanticism”
… says Dr. Conway. I couldn’t agree more! Dr. Conway tells us to think of Romanticism as a temperament, as an attitude. I have to say that I feel that attitude on a daily basis, and I love it!
Wordsworth’s “Lines Written A Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey” was a wonderful introduction to this liberating, yet humbling, sentiment. Every line that Wordsworth wrote evoked flashbacks of places I had been… the sights, the smells, the sounds. It left me with an overall feeling of being completely awe-struck and humbled by nature.
I think of the rolling hills of Ireland, inhabited by sheep and surrounded by rocks that used to be cottages. I hear the waves crashing on the steep shores of Chile, feeling the cool breeze on my skin. I smell the Flamboyant flowers (Poinciana), hear the coquí and feel the waters of the Yunque Rainforest as I dip my feet in its river. I recall the ruins of one of the world’s grandest empires and see what humans and the ravages of time have made of it. I think of a simple sunset and all the colors that are thrown across the sky and marvel in its grandeur. (see pics)
How many of us can deny simply looking at the ocean in all its glory and not being blown away by its vastness? How many of us, by a simple whiff of perfume, have retreated into our innermost memories and recalled emotions that we thought we had forgotten? And how many of us have seen first-hand a natural disaster such as a hurricane, an earthquake, a volcano or a tornado, and not realized how powerful nature can be… and how helpless a human is against it?
For me, this is Romanticism. Nature is passionate and alive… and it cannot be controlled! We acknowledge it, we admire it, we revel in it and ultimately, we respect it. It’s a marvelous thing!
Wordsworth’s “Lines Written A Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey” was a wonderful introduction to this liberating, yet humbling, sentiment. Every line that Wordsworth wrote evoked flashbacks of places I had been… the sights, the smells, the sounds. It left me with an overall feeling of being completely awe-struck and humbled by nature.
I think of the rolling hills of Ireland, inhabited by sheep and surrounded by rocks that used to be cottages. I hear the waves crashing on the steep shores of Chile, feeling the cool breeze on my skin. I smell the Flamboyant flowers (Poinciana), hear the coquí and feel the waters of the Yunque Rainforest as I dip my feet in its river. I recall the ruins of one of the world’s grandest empires and see what humans and the ravages of time have made of it. I think of a simple sunset and all the colors that are thrown across the sky and marvel in its grandeur. (see pics)
How many of us can deny simply looking at the ocean in all its glory and not being blown away by its vastness? How many of us, by a simple whiff of perfume, have retreated into our innermost memories and recalled emotions that we thought we had forgotten? And how many of us have seen first-hand a natural disaster such as a hurricane, an earthquake, a volcano or a tornado, and not realized how powerful nature can be… and how helpless a human is against it?
For me, this is Romanticism. Nature is passionate and alive… and it cannot be controlled! We acknowledge it, we admire it, we revel in it and ultimately, we respect it. It’s a marvelous thing!
Monday, February 5, 2007
Warning: I still don’t understand Humanism… at least I hope I don’t.
Very important preface: I was absent last class when Dr. Ivanova spoke on Humanism. After reading Mann’s “The origins of humanism” as well as various required poems, I feel like I really missed out as I am a bit bored out of my mind and here is why:
OK, so it is Saturday morning and I am making breakfast. In the meantime, I decide to flip on the T.V. to see what is on. I begin perusing the different channels until I see a program showing some people biking in some sort of competition. As I love mountain biking and was hoping to get some cool tips, I continued watching and realized that this was the X-Terra men’s and women’s triathlon in Hawaii. So here I am, really into this competition, watching and hearing all of the stories of these people and shaking my head in amazement. Many of them could not make it, due to the rough terrain. A few people had to go to the hospital from broken legs, wrists, etc. They interviewed this one woman, who was still running, and she said her bike broke and she just decided to run the rest. Sure, she was injured and had almost 20 miles ahead of her, but was her spirit broken? No way! She kept smiling and said it was a beautiful day and she was going to enjoy it. Honestly, I don’t know if I would have the same attitude. So anyways, the winner of the women’s competition was Canadian and won the race 2 times before. Wow! Then they showed all of these older men and women in their 60s and even 70s who were in the race. Needless to say, I was amazed and completely inspired. Here was the ultimate expression of the human spirit! Here was a group of people with the determination and discipline to achieve a lifetime goal… who knows what their stories were? Who knows what inspired them? Who knows what tribulations they had to overcome? Nevertheless, there they were… all different races, all different nationalities, all different religions, all different ages, etc. I admit I teared up (so what?) from this glorious demonstration of humanity! OK, so now, after watching this incredible race, I am totally pumped up to read about Humanism! (seriously)
So here I go…reading….. Mann’s…… article… on the origins……… of……………………humanism. *yawn*
What happened? Where was the fire? I realize that I am only a novice when knowing anything regarding Humanism, and I also realize that I may be insulting my Italian ancestors, but after reading Mann’s article, I really do not have a very pleasant taste of Humanism. (This is particularly strange as I am a fan of the Renaissance.) I was hoping for the human spirit and instead I got a long and detailed explanation on how certain people thought it wise to look back on the past and imitate it. Well, no offense, but is that so profound?
What I understand from the article is that Humanism is a return to the classics. My question is what, exactly, is a classic and whatever it may be, is it not inevitable that eventually we will return to it? In other words, is not any sort of literature, or style, or movement based on something else? Is not everything simply a modified version of something else that preceded it? I suppose I am one that thinks everything goes in cycles.
I think it is unavoidable to return to some sort of prior structure or idea and as “different” as some authors try to be, I still say they have the framework of something that has already been done… maybe just modified a bit. Besides, who’s to say what the “original” classic was? I am certain that any “classic” was based on a previous “classic.”
I am really hoping that I am totally off-base and that Humanism is a genuine representative of the human spirit much like the X-Terra competition!!! (But I doubt it)
OK, so it is Saturday morning and I am making breakfast. In the meantime, I decide to flip on the T.V. to see what is on. I begin perusing the different channels until I see a program showing some people biking in some sort of competition. As I love mountain biking and was hoping to get some cool tips, I continued watching and realized that this was the X-Terra men’s and women’s triathlon in Hawaii. So here I am, really into this competition, watching and hearing all of the stories of these people and shaking my head in amazement. Many of them could not make it, due to the rough terrain. A few people had to go to the hospital from broken legs, wrists, etc. They interviewed this one woman, who was still running, and she said her bike broke and she just decided to run the rest. Sure, she was injured and had almost 20 miles ahead of her, but was her spirit broken? No way! She kept smiling and said it was a beautiful day and she was going to enjoy it. Honestly, I don’t know if I would have the same attitude. So anyways, the winner of the women’s competition was Canadian and won the race 2 times before. Wow! Then they showed all of these older men and women in their 60s and even 70s who were in the race. Needless to say, I was amazed and completely inspired. Here was the ultimate expression of the human spirit! Here was a group of people with the determination and discipline to achieve a lifetime goal… who knows what their stories were? Who knows what inspired them? Who knows what tribulations they had to overcome? Nevertheless, there they were… all different races, all different nationalities, all different religions, all different ages, etc. I admit I teared up (so what?) from this glorious demonstration of humanity! OK, so now, after watching this incredible race, I am totally pumped up to read about Humanism! (seriously)
So here I go…reading….. Mann’s…… article… on the origins……… of……………………humanism. *yawn*
What happened? Where was the fire? I realize that I am only a novice when knowing anything regarding Humanism, and I also realize that I may be insulting my Italian ancestors, but after reading Mann’s article, I really do not have a very pleasant taste of Humanism. (This is particularly strange as I am a fan of the Renaissance.) I was hoping for the human spirit and instead I got a long and detailed explanation on how certain people thought it wise to look back on the past and imitate it. Well, no offense, but is that so profound?
What I understand from the article is that Humanism is a return to the classics. My question is what, exactly, is a classic and whatever it may be, is it not inevitable that eventually we will return to it? In other words, is not any sort of literature, or style, or movement based on something else? Is not everything simply a modified version of something else that preceded it? I suppose I am one that thinks everything goes in cycles.
I think it is unavoidable to return to some sort of prior structure or idea and as “different” as some authors try to be, I still say they have the framework of something that has already been done… maybe just modified a bit. Besides, who’s to say what the “original” classic was? I am certain that any “classic” was based on a previous “classic.”
I am really hoping that I am totally off-base and that Humanism is a genuine representative of the human spirit much like the X-Terra competition!!! (But I doubt it)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
